The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1914-03-13
BRIEF FILED BY COMPANY.
Consumers Concern Claims That
Profits From Gas Are Not Large.

Profits From Gas Are Not Large.
The brief filed by A. r. Pfau. Jr..
in behalf of the Consumers Power
company is in part as follows:
1.-THE expert for the city, Mr.. Jack
son, upon whom rests the entire
showing. whatever 1t be, made on
behalf of the city, furnished to the
commission the inventory and ap-
nraisal, in which he has listed and
valued the eompany's property, aside
from goodwill, going value, and real
estate. ' ... ..
"His valuation of gas property, ex-
cepting the above items, shows a
total of s216,671 IS, from which he
has made a deduction for deprecia-
tion s46,14s.s2, leaving the net pres
ent value Of the property, $780,
521 SO.
In his amended Inventory, Mr..
Jackson has increased these figures
as follows:
Total valuation ........ 1927 .239 81
Depreciation ......... 47,32S So
Present value .......... 1890. "a
Consequently, according to his
opinion the company's gas property
at Mankato, exclusive of intangible
property is of the value of s1I9,-
go "a. .. -.
"Mr. Braun, the expert for the
company, appraised the property, less
discarded items at 1882, 420 Is, with
a depreciation of S4S,347 so, and net
present value. s314,o72 .3s. There Is
a difference therefore of s134.161 a.
"Deducting from this difference
the development valuation OF Mr..
Braun, which we viii term good
will, and which is in the sum Of
s16.43o 90, and which Mr.. Jackson
has not appraised at all, although
he states in his written, communities
ton to the city that 1t should be
considered, there still remains dis
crepaney of s117,731.44.
Claims Lack Of Experience.
mr. Jackson is a very young man,
just about entering upon his profess
sion. He is but thirty-one years of
age, and has never appraised any
gas properties, excepting those here
in question. He never designed nor
constructed, nor assisted in the des-
ignGtion or construction of a gas
plant, and never appraised such
property. This was his maiden eff
fort along these lines. Having had
no experience whatever in these
matters. 1t should go without saying
that his evidence is not entitled to
equal weight with that of an ex-
perienced man.
"on the other hand, Mr.. Braun Is
experienced in the appraisal and
construction OF public utilities OF
various kinds. including gas proper
ties. He has held, for years, re-
sponsible positions over properties
of considerable magnitude, has APP
praised, for various purposes, many
public utilities. including gas plants,
and his testimony demonstrates that
he Is thoroughly familiar with the
subject matter of this investigation.
His opinion is necessarily more
weighty and conclusive than that Of
Mr.. Jackson.
!. Expert Employed BY Company.
Each of these parties is an ex-
pert witness in this investigation.
The worst that can be said of Mr..
Braun is that he is an expert hired
and paid by the Consumers Power
company, and IL can be said, with
equal truth, that Mr.. jackson Is an
expert hired and paid by the city
of Mankato. Therefore these wit
nesses stand upon parity as far
as this phase OF the question goes.
The thoroughness with which Mr..
Braun made his appraisal. and the
basis of actual facts and actual
costs which he adopted, as compared
to arbitrary standards and assump-
lions such as we're employed by Mr..
jackson, furnishes an explanation for
large portion OF the difference In
the figures OF the two.
For instance In the appraisal OF
buildings and structures Mr.. Jack
son gives these as present value,
s9.202. So: Mr.. Braun, $4,000 50.
/ mr. Braun has actually appraised
these buildings, while Mr.. Jackson