CMA Consolidated, Inc. & Subsidiaries, Inc. - Page 110

                                       - 76 -                                         
          user lessees.22  Although Svoboda has over 25 years of appraisal            
          experience, he had relatively little experience valuing residual            
          interests in equipment with useful lives of 10 years or less.               
                              (a) Svoboda’s Opinions as to the Fair Market            
                                   Values and Estimated Residual Values               
               Svoboda concluded that, as of September 28, 1995, the K-Mart           
          and Shared equipment had the following fair market values and               
          estimated future residual values:                                           
                                   Estimated Future Residual Value On:                
                                                                                     
          Equipment Fair Market Value  2-24-97   3-13-97  6-30-97   7-31-97  5-1-00  11-1-02
          K-Mart                                                                      
          No. 32     $116,844          –-       --       --      $50,076    --     $8,346
          No. 33      473,452          –-       --       --      295,908    --     29,591
          No. 34    1,215,504          –-       --     $759,690    -–       --    151,938
          Shared                                                                      
          No. 5       567,521          –-    $133,471    --        –-      -0-      --
          No. 6       143,052       $30,654     -–       --        –-      -0-      –-
               Svoboda primarily used the sales comparison approach to                
          value the Shared computer equipment.  His opinion was based on              
          published market data on this equipment, including reports                  
          published by respondent’s expert, Daley.  Svoboda concluded that            
          the Shared computer equipment would have no residual value by May           
          1, 2000, the date when petitioner’s over lease residual interest            
          in that equipment began.                                                    






               22Svoboda also assumed that petitioner was contractually               
          entitled to income from the over lease residual interest periods,           
          a fact that is not supported by the operative documents.                    





Page:  Previous  66  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  74  75  76  77  78  79  80  81  82  83  84  85  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011