ABC Builders contracted to build a summer home for the Smith's. The contract specified the installation of "galvanized, lap welded, standard grade pipe, manufactured by Oaks Co" for all of the plumbing. ABE substituted another brand of galvanized pipe which was just as strong and durable, and cost the same. When the Smith's found out, they refused to pay the $35,000 balance due on the contract, unless ABC replaced all of the pipe. To replace the pipe would have cost ABC $40,000-$50,000/ When ABC sued Smiths for the $35,000 balance, Smiths argued that ABC breached the contract because they failed to fully perform the exact terms of the contract. How will the court rule? Why? Please discuss and explain what analysis the court will employ to decide if ABC has substantially performed the contract.