body: Paul Davies. [*JC Smith's The Law of Contract* (2018 2 ed)](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Smiths-Law-Contract-Paul-Davies/dp/0198807813/ref=dp_ob_title_bk). p. 6.
  
  
  
  > 
  > On a slightly diﬀerent tack, but in a similar vein, Judge Richard Posner has written:17
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > > 
  > > Suppose I sign a contract to deliver 100,000 custom-ground widgets at $.10 apiece to A, for use
  > >  in his boiler factory. After I have delivered 10,000, B comes to me, explains that he desperately
  > >  needs 25,000 custom-ground widgets at once since otherwise he will be forced to close his pianola factory at great cost, and oﬀers me $.15 apiece for 25,000 widgets. I sell him the widgets
  > >  and as a result do not complete timely delivery to A, who sustains $1000 in damages from my
  > >  breach. Having obtained an additional profit of $1250 on the sale to B, I am better off even
  > >  after reimbursing A for his loss. Society is also better off. Since B was willing to pay me $.15
  > >  per widget, it must mean that each widget was worth at least $.15 to him. But it was worth only
  > >  $.14 to A—$.10, what he paid, plus $.04 (**$1000** divided by **25,000**), his expected profit. Thus the
  > >  breach resulted in a transfer of the 25,000 widgets from a lower valued to a higher valued use.
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > 
  > 
  > 17 R Posner, *Economic Analysis of the Law* (8th edn, Aspen, 2011) 151.
  > 
  > 
  > 
  
  
  1. Pls see the emboldenings. Whence did the $1000 hail?
  2. Whence did the 25,000 hail? This is B's quantity demanded, not A's?
  
  
  
title: Why's A's expected profit $.04?