- 39 - Verified shrinkage allocated to stub period on basis of percent of sales in stub period 1983 1984 1985 1986 Total Parent $23,829 $42,755 $41,125 $60,842 $168,551 Kuhn's 3,280 5,263 3,910 4,724 17,177 Edwards 1,939 2,191 1,982 2,665 8,777 Total 29,048 50,209 47,017 68,231 194,505 We now compare the stub period estimates for each year to the verified shrinkage allocable to the stub period as it was reflected in the previous table. Comparison of Verified Shrinkage to Shrinkage Estimates (in thousands of dollars) Verified shrinkage allocated to stub period on basis of percent of sales in stub period 1983 1984 1985 1986 Total Parent $23,829 $42,755 $41,125 $60,842 $168,551 Kuhn's 3,280 5,263 3,910 4,724 17,177 Edwards 1,939 2,191 1,982 2,665 8,777 Total 29,048 50,209 47,017 68,231 194,505 Stub period shrinkage estimated 1983 1984 1985 1986 Total Parent $27,983 $33,996 $54,178 $60,197 $176,354 Kuhn's 4,059 4,056 5,777 5,339 19,231 Edwards 1,556 2,151 2,185 2,364 8,256 Total 33,598 40,203 62,140 67,900 203,841 Over (Under) Estimated 1983 1984 1985 1986 Total Parent $4,154 $(8,759) $13,053 $(5,707) $2,741 Kuhn's 779 (1,107) 1,867 615 2,154 Edwards (383) (40) 203 (301) (521) Total 4,550 (9,906) 15,123 (5,393) (4,374) As illustrated in the second table, our retrospective allocation of the shrinkage verified by physical count results in higher or lower shrinkage for each stub period than the shrinkage estimates at issue herein. We believe that this should be expected, however, because Wal-Mart did not have the benefit ofPage: Previous 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011