Opening Statements: +These are very difficult circumstances and unfortunately todays world terrorism warnings and alert

levels have become a part of life. We understand that this is not an ideal situation for the State or its members. It is never good to feel helpless. We/the hotel want to provide the State with the best possible experience without resort. +Terror can be countered when people assume the proper mindset and take basic security measures and practice relaxed awareness. These elements work together to dispel paranoia and to prevent the fear of terrorism from robbing people of the joy of life.

+ Fact is these reports are strategic and they are used to communicates to the attackers that their attack has been detected if not penetrated. The hotel has taken precautions by increasing security and the.

Questions for the State: +Do they want to find a way to hold the convention or do they want to go the cancellation route? +Would they consider rescheduling the date? + Are they going to honor their contract or threaten to go to court for impracticality of performance. Arguments: +Government has taken measures by increasing security personnel, +Unfortunately Terrorist threats have become a part of everyones life, but life has to go on. +The Contract -Impossibility clause lets the hotel cancel is not there for the Association to cancel. -Hotel believes the Contract allocates the risk of a terrorist threat to the Association. -Hotel knowingly signed the contract containing the clause. -Reasonable Apprehension of Impossibility relating to danger of life or death

-Even if Association believe it can exercise the cancellation clause this is not a case of impossibility. Impossibility would be an actual terrorist attack or an imminent threat of terrorist attack. Rights: + Impossibility clause lets the hotel cancel and is not there for the State to cancel. + Hotel believes the Contract allocates the risk of a terrorist threat to the State. Issues: + The postponing the date of the annual conference. + The Cancellation clause in the contract $225,000 -Bargaining Zone (Currently $225,000; Goal $170,000 RP $100,000) *Concessions. 1st $48,000=$177,000; 2nd $5,000=$172,000; 3rd $2,000=$170,000 + Renegotiate Room Attrition (Amount of the Association has to pay for empty rooms) -Bargaining Zone (Currently 85%; Goal 75%; RP 50%) *Concessions. 1st 10% = 75%; 2nd 5% = 70%; 3rd 68% Hotels Interests: +Good relations with the executive director and State circles. +Receive the $225,000 from the cancellation clause +Go ahead with the conference +Fill the most rooms possible +Maintain precedent of not letting people out of contract +Hotel is unwilling to lower the room rates because it has matching provisions in several other contracts.

Hotels BATNA: +Take the State to court and get the $225,000. However, we are concerned with the contract language that it will no uphold in court. Impracticality argument will not work because it is

based on the idea that its an unexpected event at the time of the contracting. However, it was no unexpected because the Hotel included such a provision.

Associations Interest: +BATNA -Take the Association to court and get the $225,000 owed and argue impracticality of Impossibility Clause together with the Attrition Clause. +Associations RP on the Cancellation: $170,000 +Associations RP on the Room Attrition: 70% w/ a postponed date. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Impracticability One is excused under impracticability doctrine provided that (1) an event unexpected at the time of contracting makes ones performance commercially impracticable, and (2) one ought not to bear the loss from the occurrence of the event.