Stamping Out a Living

I'd be lying if I told you I understood all the implications of this ruling. At heart was GMs attempt to get suppliers to assume all the input cost variations in multi-year deals. Although, if I read this correctly, it fell through not on the underlying issues but on the fact that the letter awarding the work was not a proper contract, implying that had the contract been properly formulated, it might have been possible for GM to force Steel Dynamics to honour it despite the fact that it was no longer a viable proposition.

TradingMarkets.com
Steel Dynamics received a favorable ruling that a certain January 2003 GM multi-year 'award letter' issued to Steel Dynamics was not in fact an enforceable contract and that GM could not compel Steel Dynamics to sell GM steel throughout 2004 at January 2003 prices.