- 31 -
that once Scherer was in the same business, it would become an
effective competitor over time. He did not adequately explain
the premises behind the foregoing figure. Moreover, Dr. Schutte
stated that the most likely scenario involving possible
competition by Scherer was for the company to introduce one or
more competing products in select niche markets. However, Dr.
Schutte appears to have calculated the possibility of competition
in all of the products. This, of course, results in an overall
reduction in projected revenues. We do not think that Dr.
Schutte's assumptions, in this regard, result in a consistent and
accurate computation.
On the other hand, respondent's expert, Wildt, provided
significant detail and insight in his analysis of the 1989
transaction although there were some problems with his testimony
and report. For example, he was, in some respects, unfamiliar
with New Lorvic's business or the nature of its operations. He
did not interview any of the principals or visit New Lorvic's
management and operation facilities in an effort to ascertain the
background and circumstances behind Scherer's sale of Old
Lorvic's assets. Moreover, Wildt compared the company with
unnamed publicly traded companies in the dental supply market.
However, his report does not indicate the comparable companies,
the date, or sources of information.
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011