Ernest I. Korchak - Page 12

                                       - 12 -                                         
               The POM included a marketing report by Stanley Ulanoff (Mr.            
          Ulanoff), a marketing consultant and professor, and a technical             
          opinion by Samuel Z. Burstein, a mathematics professor.  The POM            
          also included a tax opinion by the law firm of Boylan & Evans               
          concerning the tax issues involved in the plastics recycling                
          program (general partner opinion).  The general partner opinion             
          was addressed to Richard Roberts (Mr. Roberts), the general                 
          partner of Madison, and stated that it was intended for Mr.                 
          Roberts’s “own individual guidance and for the purpose of                   
          assisting prospective purchasers and their tax advisors in making           
          their own analysis, and no prospective purchaser is entitled to             
          rely upon this letter.”  The general partner opinion also warned            
          that the projected investment and energy credits would be reduced           
          or eliminated if the partnership could not demonstrate that the             
          price paid for the recyclers approximated their fair market                 
          value.  The general partner opinion did not purport to rely on              
          any independent confirmation of the fair market value of the                
          recyclers, however.  Instead, the opinion relied on Mr. Ulanoff’s           
          conclusion that the purchase price to be paid by F&G was                    
          reasonable and on representations by PI, ECI, F&G, and Madison              
          that the prices paid by ECI and F&G and the terms of the lease              
          were negotiated at arm’s length.  The opinion concluded that the            
          basis upon which the partnership’s aggregate investment and                 








Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011