These opportunities are wonderful, but I think they should be the starting point of the discussion, because these are complex issues. As Trish mentioned in the beginning, no one is absolutely certain where all of this is going. Some of the things we are certain of, through consumer trends, are where people are turning to, and your children, as you say, are an example of that. People are absolutely turning to these new devices in order to enjoy their content. The economics behind those models are different from traditional TV and film production. The cost of distribution is different, and it will continue to change as the technology changes. We're entering into a phase--some people call it Internet 2 and some people call it Internet 3--where the cost of delivery content through that pipe to the home is different.
To be very on point with your question with respect to resources, I think more money is always better, because it will allow us to address those more quickly and in a better fashion. However, long term, it might be that they'll need fewer resources as we go forward, depending on how those models suss out. We're not there yet, and it's not us. The industry is not there yet because it's still unclear as to how those business models will eventually suss out. But the indications are, certainly with respect to distribution, that the cost will continue to drop.
The answer would be two parts. Right now, more money would be good. Long term, it might be a readjustment that there's not. There could be a decrease in the money required because we could have set up a model that is more efficient.