Well even though the agreement says there is no “specified”...

Well even though the agreement says there is no “specified” remedies if the minimum agreed $80m first year orders is not met. That doesn’t mean that a remedy can not be sought or agreed on in the event the agreement was not met. If based on the agreement JAT goes out and hires more staff and supplies and then the sales don’t materialise, JAT would still have strong recourse to expect compensation. It is still a binding contract agreement even if no “specific” remedies are noted. Not specifying a remedy might work out in JATs favour... as determined by the courts by the merits of a claim. It all depends on your perspective.