- 67 -
to be made within 10 working days of petitioner’s calculations.
In her letter dated February 15, 1989, to Watson,
petitioner’s chief financial officer enclosed a copy of
petitioner’s tentative calculation reflecting, as of January
1989, a $92,358.03 positive balance of cumulative net income from
the direct mail campaign. As petitioner had not received all
invoices of mailing expenses in connection with the January 1989
mailings, petitioner’s chief financial officer asked that
petitioner be paid $75,000, which would leave another $17,000 to
cover any additional mailing expenses. Her letter stated that if
W&H had any questions regarding any of this, petitioner should be
contacted, otherwise petitioner would expect to receive its
requested check for $75,000 no later than February 21, 1989.
In her letter dated May 9, 1989, to a W&H executive,
petitioner’s chief financial officer noted that there was a
substantial discrepancy between petitioner’s and W&H’s respective
computations of cumulative housefile net income, as of December
31, 1988. Petitioner’s chief financial officer stressed that
petitioner’s figures were audited. Petitioner computed that, as
of December 31, 1988, its cumulative housefile income was
$1,930,909, its cumulative transfers from the Escrow Account
amounted to $2,078,200, and there was a resulting deficit of
$147,291. In contrast, W&H computed that the cumulative transfers
were only $1,973,000, but there was a deficit of $540,711. W&H
prepared a status report dated July 1, 1989, in which it took the
Page: Previous 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011