- 38 -
($599,117 for 1995, $485,966 for 1996, supra tables 4, 5) are
substantially greater than the numbers that Hakala tells us would
result from the RMA 75th percentile data that Hakala suggest are
too great.
Hakala does not direct our attention to any other data that
focus on the mobile homes retail sales industry.11
On this record, the RMA ratios leave much to be desired as a
foundation for decision-making. We nevertheless use those ratios
as a starting point, because they are the only statistical
information we have that deals with mobile home retailers. In
other words, the RMA ratios are “the only game in town”. See,
e.g., United States v. Borum, 584 F.2d 424, 434 (D.C. Cir. 1978)
(MacKinnon, J., dissenting).
The years in issue, 1995 and 1996, were good years for the
mobile home retailing industry and even better years for
petitioner.12
11 In his rebuttal report, Hakala states as follows:
The single best evidence of reasonable compensation can be
found in the three subsequent offers to acquire the assets
and business of BQH [petitioner] found in the exhibits to
Ms. Ding’s report.
However, Hakala relies on these offers only to the extent of
contending that, in reality, the offers amount to less
compensation for Jack than the approach that Hakala uses. In
effect, then, Hakala rejects the lessons of the evidence that he
describes as “The single best evidence”.
12 Petitioner’s sales increased proportionately more than
(continued...)
Page: Previous 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011