Create response to #1 and 2 discussions. 1 & 2 are separate topics, don't put them together

1.

What should Skip do? I believe that Skip should look into other options. This place may seem significant, but the reviews are very clear about what type of company they are and what they are willing to do to their clients. In my experience, when something seems too good to be true, it typically is too good to be true, and something always happens. Does it seem as though Syndicated follows unethical lending practices? Syndicated does follow unethical lending practices. Customers complain about bank charges and increased interest rates that they were never warned about beforehand. Typically, if multiple people say the same thing, there is an issue, and there must be some truth behind the allegations. Is it unethical to use "bait and switch" tactics like those Syndicated accuses other institutions of using? Using the "bait and switch" tactics that Syndicated accuses other institutions of using is unethical. Syndicated is the one that has the underlining problem with its ethical beliefs and is manipulating its clients. When doing this, Syndicated is taking a huge risk of getting a bad reputation and losing its company. Treating its clients like this and lying to them, changing the interest rates, and adding in bank charges, is only showing the clients that the company does not value their business but that it only cares about getting away with getting more money from its clients and not caring how it is done.

Should interest rates be posted on the company's website? I believe the interest rates should be posted on the company's website, but should also note that rates may change based on the criteria of each client. I believe that a company should be up front and honest about all of its criteria so that clients can do their research and find the place that best fits their needs. People need to know what they are getting into so that they don't end up hurting themselves in the long run and cannot afford to pay back the loan.

2.

Staci might not face an ethical dilemma. The information she received from a friend and a coworker is unconfirmed, and therefore might not be correct. Staci has not had time to confirm or deny the evidence.If an ethical dilemma exists, it might be that Mr. Baker is willing to permit an IPO to carry a higher price than it should because he is a friend of ProTech's CEO. Such a decision would not make rational business sense, especially in

investment banking where a company's reputation is extremely important. Personally, I would continue with the IPO as planned and let

the market determine the value of any information about ProTech that is in the public domain. In the end, I believe the stock market will determine the price anyways.