For this question only, assume that BallCo sent SportCo its 2009 catalog but not the one it published in 2019. When BallCo insists that SportCo must buy the baseballs, SportCo agrees and stands ready to pay $288 per gross. BallCo demands $319, the price set forth in its 2019 catalog. All other facts are as originally set forth. Probably, BallCo is entitled to be paid
A.$288, because that is the price it has repeatedly charged SportCo, and SportCo had no notice that the price had been changed.
B.$288, because it is unreasonable for a seller suddenly to publish a higher price to a long-time buyer who has customarily and in good faith paid a lower one.
C.$319, because under these circumstances a buyer should reasonably expect to pay according to a seller's published price list.
D.nothing, because a buyer need not pay a price to which he has not agreed.