On December 1, Petroleum Inc. sent Quito & Rosa (Q&R)a letter, via overnight delivery, offering to employ Q&R to review Petroleum's tax situation for the current year for $10,000. In the letter, the company stated that Q&R had ten days to accept. On December 5, Q&R sent an e-mail message that stated, "The price for the tax analysis seems too low. Would you consider paying $15,000?" Petroleum received the message without responding immediately. The next day, Smith & Taylor, a Q&R competitor, offered to conduct the appraisal for $8,000. On learning of this offer, Q&R immediately e-mailed Petroleum, agreeing to do the work for $10,000. Petroleum received this message on December 7. Explain why Q&R and Petroleum do, or do not, have a contract.

Q&R and Petroleum have a contract. Q&R effectively accepted Petroleum's offer to perform a review of the corporation's tax situation.
An attempt to change the terms of an offer rejects that offer, terminates it, and makes a counteroffer. Here, however, the fax did not indicate an intent to reject the offer, and a reasonable person in Petroleum's position would not conclude that the fax was a rejection. Q&R's fax was simply an inquiry about the offer. Q&R was still considering the offer. Learning of Smith & Taylor's offer did not act as a revocation of Petroleum's offer to Q&R (although the offer would have been revoked if Q&R had accepted Smith & Taylors's offer, and Q&R had learned of this acceptance).
In accepting Petroleum's offer, Q&R used a medium that was reasonable under the circumstances because Petroleum did not expressly specify any particular method of acceptance. Thus, Q&R's acceptance was timely sent and received. Consequently, the acceptance was effective on dispatch.