Case Scenaro Law 421

At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? After, reading the scenario there seems to be a great deal of situations involved in the deal between BTT and Chou. One thing that is obvious is that there has not been a written contract between the two parties, where the two agreed about terms of a written contract. There was an oral agreement between the two parties where BTT and Chou agreed upon, BTT paying $25,000 for exchange for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90 day period. In the event that there would have been a contract, it the contract was voided when the new management informed Chou that they were not interested in distributing his product.
What fact may weight in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties objective intent to contract? The facts that may weight in against Chou may be the fact that he was willing to go into contract with BTT and accepting the $25,000, which may have to be returned because of the new management. Also, there really wasn’t a contract that exist between the two parties so, therefore there is nothing that shows that there was a commitment by BTT to commit to Chou.   The emails that were addressed to Chou expressed the terms that BTT would like to have put into the contract but this was not considered the contract, simply they were terms that should be agreed upon by both parties.  
Does the fact the parties where communicating through email have an impact on your analysis in Questions 1 and 2?   The fact that the parties where communicating through email does not change or impact the analysis because the parties only where discussing the terms that should be put in the contract. Another fact that is obvious is the there was not a signature from Chou or the company that would seal the deal between the two parties.   By not having the contract signed the two parties are not responsible to each other and there for have no legal ties except the fact that they oral agreements.  
What role does the statue of...