Ace Technologies, Inc., wants to issue securities for sale to the public. With respect to this issue, the essential purpose of the Securities Act of 1933 is to

while setting up his new office, an attorney ordered thick, frieze carpets for the floor. however, the building inspector had him remove the expensive carpeting. the building inspector stated that according to federal regulations, the office must be wheelchair accessible as it is a public area. he further explained that since wheelchairs do not maneuver well in thick, frieze carpeting, the carpets had to be removed and be replaced with smooth-textured carpets that do not restrict wheelchair maneuverability. this scenario illustrates how a company is influenced by the component of its specific environment.

He set of companies a product goes through on the way to the consumer is called the a. economic utility b. cottage industry c. market saturation d. distribution chain

Alandowner entered into a written agreement with a real estate broker whereby the broker would receive a commission of 10% of the sale price if he procured a "ready, willing, and able buyer" for the landowner's property and if the sale actually proceeded through closing. the broker found a buyer who agreed in writing to buy the property from the landowner for $100,000, the landowner's asking price. the buyer put up $6,000 as a down payment. the agreement between the landowner and the buyer contained a liquidated damages clause providing that, if the buyer defaulted by failing to tender the balance due of $94,000 at the closing date, damages would be 10% of the purchase price. the landowner included that clause because she was counting on using the proceeds of the sale for a business venture that would likely net her at least $10,000. the buyer became seriously ill and defaulted. when he recovered, he demanded that the landowner return his $6,000, and the landowner refused. the broker also demanded the $6,000 from the landowner and was refused. the broker and the buyer filed separate suits against the landowner, with the buyer pleading impossibility of performance. the two cases are consolidated into a single case. how should the court rule as to the disposition of the $6,000?