- 66 -
produce a $750,000 increase in his final blended value as well,
from $6 million to $6,750,000. Mr. Hitchner’s error in computing
excess cash affected only his income-based value, inflating it by
$400,000. As noted earlier, Mr. Hitchner did not disclose the
precise weight he attributed to his income-based value when
blending it with his asset-based values to reach a final blended
value of $7 million (exclusive of insurance proceeds), except to
point out that he gave greater weight to his “adjusted book
value” asset value and lesser but equal weight to his “modified
adjusted book value” asset value and income value.
In these circumstances, while the precise impact on his $7
million blended value of a $400,000 decrease in his income-based
value cannot be ascertained, we are satisfied that the impact
would move Mr. Hitchner’s $7 million blended value significantly
closer to our corrected $6,750,000 value for Mr. Fodor. We
accordingly find that $6,750,000 is a reasonable point in the
range of values derivable from the two experts’ analyses and
conclude that this is the correct figure for BCC’s fair market
value, exclusive of the impact of the life insurance proceeds
received with respect to decedent.
D. Effect of Redemption Obligation on Insurance
Proceeds
We turn next to the question of how to account for the
$3,146,134 million in life insurance proceeds BCC was due to
Page: Previous 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011