In November 2007, Shirley Bolden entered into a conditional sales contract, which was assigned to M&T Bank, for the purchase of a Mercedes-Benz automobile. Bolden took physical possession of the car, and M&T retained a security interest in it. Bolden defaulted on the loan, and the car was repossessed in March 2011. Bolden received notice of M&T Bank’s intent to sell the car at private sale. The car was sold at the private sale in April 2011 for \($3,900.\) The balance due on the loan at the time of the sale of the car was \($15,668.86.\) The sales agent placed the car in a “dealers only” sale in which only car dealers can attend and purchase vehicles. There was no evidence as to how the sale was advertised or conducted, how many bidders were present, how many people actually bid on the car, or that the sale was done in accordance with the accepted industry practices. At the time that the car was sold, the trade-in value of similar automobiles in good condition was \($6,100.\) However, Bolden’s car was in below average condition. M&T Bank sought recovery of the \($11,768.86\) deficiency balance left after reducing the total amount due on the loan by the sales proceeds. Bolden contended that the sale was commercially unreasonable. Did the private nature of the sale and surrounding circumstances render the sale commercially unreasonable? Why or why not?