This will be my final question.
If we go back to the genesis of this fund, when the cable giants were allowed a massive bump-up in subscriber fees and deregulation to compete against the satellite competition, fundamentally they did not want to have to compete. They wanted their markets protected, so they were given a major bump-up in subscriber fees. Then, when the original cable production fund was initiated, the compromise was that they were allowed to keep 50% of the extra profit that they were given because of this, and the other share would go into television production. If now they want to renege on this compromise contribution, would it not be fair to say that they have made massive amounts of money over the last 10 to 12 years on the 50% share that they've kept as an extra profit?