Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...

Page: 335
[1262] Mr. Van Leeuwen prepared pro forma no. 2 upon the same basis as pro forma no. 1, for the
same time frame, with the exception that he excluded the investment of some $3 - $4 million. He
assumed that the money that was available for the completion of Phase 2, in the amount of $14.5
million, would have been spent on “new dry kilns, a planer mill and a wood fuelled co-generation
plant as planned”.
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)
[1263] In the more restricted projections for pro forma no. 2, Mr. Van Leeuwen projected the
EBITDA as $42,469,973. He projected the EBT for pro forma no. 2 as $30,069,973. His report
provides the following summary with respect to pro forma no. 2:
Summary of Financial Projection #2:
• Projected 10 year unrealized EBITDA earnings from 2001 to
2010 equal $29.1 million. Projected 10 year unrealized EBT
equals $22.7 million;
• Projected 10 year unrealized EBITDA for the 2 megawatt cogeneration
facility from 2001 to 2010 equals $13.4 million.
Projected 10 year unrealized EBT equals $7.34 million, and
• Total SYFC unrealized EBITDA for 2001 to 2010 equals
$42.5 million. Projected unrealized 10 year EBT equals $30.1
million.
[1264] Exhibit P-15 contains charts showing the calculations that Mr. Van Leeuwen made.
[1265] His assumption that the Plaintiffs would have invested approximately $3 to $4 million to
make a number of improvements in 1999 was based solely on the advice of Mr. Oulton to Mr. Van
Leeuwen. There is no other evidence in this regard. In the circumstances, in my view it is more
prudent to rely on pro forma no. 2 as prepared by Mr. Van Leeuwen.