Does the fact that this was a commercial lease negotiated by seasoned business entities, not a consumer lease between unsophisticated individuals, have any bearing in the result?

The fact that this was a commercial lease negotiated by seasoned business entities, not a consumer lease between unsophisticated individuals, has no bearing on the result. The court in Ridgley v. Topa Thrift & Loan Assn., supra, 17 Cal.4th 970, 73 Cal.Rptr.2d 378, 953 P.2d 484, addressed the suggestion that "a different set of rules [should] apply because [it] was an `arm's-length commercial transaction.' [Citation.]" (Id. at p. 981, fn. 5, 73 Cal. Rptr.2d 378, 953 P.2d 484.) It dispelled that notion, stating, "That [the obligors] are ... business owners rather than consumers, however, does not deprive them of

[132 Cal.Rptr.2d 412]

section 1671's protection against unreasonable penalties...." (Ibid.)