Business Law 5th Edition by David Twomey ,Marianne Jennings ,Stephanie Greene

Exercise 13

Advent purchased ink from Borden. On the labels of the ink drums delivered to Advent, Borden had imprinted in one-sixteenth-inch type in all caps:
SELLER MAKES NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, CONCERNING THE PRODUCT OR THE MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS THEREOF FOR ANY PURPOSE CONCERNING THE ACCURACY OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY BORDEN.
This language was printed beneath the following:
BORDEN PRINTING INKS-"ZERO DEFECTS: THAT'S OUR GOAL"
All of the printing was in boldface type. The disclaimer was also printed on the sales invoice and on the reverse side of the Borden form, but there was nothing on the front to call attention to the critical nature of the terms on the back because there were simply capital letters reading "SEE REVERSE SIDE." All of the terms on the back were in boldface and although the disclaimer was the first of 19 paragraphs, nothing distinguished it from the other 18 paragraphs of detailed contract terms.
Advent said that Borden failed to age the black ink that it purchased with the result that the ink separated in Advent's printing machines. Advent refused to pay for the ink and wrote to Borden explaining that it would not tender payment because the ink was defective and demanding that Borden reimburse it for its lost profits from the downtime of printing machines. The trial court held that Borden had disclaimed any and all warranties on the ink and Advent appealed. What would you decide about the disclaimer and why [Borden, Inc. v Advent Ink Co., 701 A2d 255 (Pa Sup)]