71750 For any product, it is important to undertake a cost-benefit analysis at every stage of its development. In Green Move, the problem is related to product safety and it is the company’s responsibility to ensure product credibility. Hence, the company should undertake a cost-benefit analysis of the product related to the problem. The major risks associated with the problems are cost disadvantages and restrictions from the government. It is possible that changes may result in increased production cost and if the government intervenes, then they may restrict product sale until the problem is solved. Nonetheless, according to the strict liability convention of the consumer protection act, if a manufacturer is producing products with circumstantial defects or problems, he must incorporate future external cost in the current internal cost (Keating 1285-1291). It is important to note that payment of $5000 to buyers for placing the product on his selves is firstly a wrong approach as this will open an avenue for the buyer to repeat such claims in the future. Secondly, the practice of bribing for business expansion purposes in the United States is illegal under the anti-bribery provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, 1977. The company, being a reputed one operating in the production of sustainable products, must consider sustainability and transparency in the transactions made as well. Paying the buyer will result in a breach of the FCP act as well as the code of corporate governance of the company. In addition, it will also imply that the company is not sufficiently confident about its products and prefers buying a shelf area from the retailer. After considering all these factors, as a responsible employee of Green Move, I would not recommend payment of the special fee to the particular buyer as the move is unethical and illegal (“Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977”).