#4: Explain whether each of the following transactions results in a valid negotiation: a. Arnold gives a negotiable check payable to bearer to Betsy without indorsing it.
b. Golden indorses a negotiable promissory note payable to the order of Golden, “Pay to Chambers and Rambis, (signed) Golden.”
c. Porter lost a negotiable check payable to his order. Kersey found it and indorsed the back of the check as follows: “Pay to Drexler, (signed) Kersey.”
d. Thomas indorsed a negotiable promissory note payable to the order of Thomas, (signed) Thomas,” and delivered it to Sally. Sally then wrote above Thomas’s signature, “Pay to Sally.”
e. Margarita issued to Poncho a negotiable promissory note payable to the order of Poncho. Poncho indorsed the note “Pay to Randy only, (signed) Poncho” and sold it to Randy. Randy then sold the note to Stephanie after indorsing it “Pay to Stephanie, (signed) Randy.”

The new york times (nov. 30, 1993) reported that “the inability of opec to agree last week to cut production has sent the oil market into turmoil . . [leading to] the lowest price for domestic crude oil since june 1990.” why were the members of opec trying to agree to cut production? so they could save more oil for future consumption so they could lower the price so they could raise the price why do you suppose opec was unable to agree on cutting production? because each country has a different production capacity because each country experiences different production costs because each country has an incentive to cheat on any agreement the newspaper also noted opec’s view “that producing nations outside the organization, like norway and britain, should do their share and cut production.” what does the phrase “do their share” suggest about opec’s desired relationship with norway and britain? opec would like norway and britain to keep their production levels high. opec would like norway and britain to act competitively. opec would like norway and britain to join the cartel.