In Seeley v. Seymour (1987) 190 Cal. App. 3d 844, the court did not, as defendant suggests, hold that the plaintiff's financial sophistication was a third factor to be considered after the reprehensibility of the defendant's conduct and the ratio of punitive to compensatory damages. Instead, the court stated that the fact that the parties were sophisticated businessmen of equal bargaining strength was an indication the defendant's actions were not sufficiently reprehensible for the amount of punitive damages awarded. (Ibid.)