- 17 -
According to petitioner, Dooskin and his associate Sacco reported
favorably on the memorandum. Petitioner claimed 20 years later
that he remembered Dooskin’s saying “that they had reviewed a lot
of deals in this time and this was certainly a lot better than
many, if not most, of those they had looked at”. They added,
according to petitioner, “that the issue of the value that was
assigned to the machines was something to look at more
carefully.”
After discussing the investment with Miller and Dooskin, and
then further with Cohen and Feinberg, petitioner was ready to
invest in SAB Resource. When petitioner tried to invest in SAB
Resource, however, Feinberg informed him that the investment
opportunity had closed.
On January 14, 1982, the limited partners of SAB Resource,
including Cohen and Feinberg, received a letter from SAB
Management, the general partner of SAB Resource. The letter,
signed by Becker, stated that the transaction contemplated by SAB
Resource was complete and distributed a modest initial royalty.
On June 7, 1982, SAB Management sent a memo to the limited
partners purporting to update the status of their investment in
SAB Resource.
In 1982, Feinberg again approached petitioner with an
investment opportunity. This time the proposal related to SAB
Foam. Petitioner again forwarded the memorandum to Dooskin, who
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011