Thank you.
Mr. Engelhart, I'm going to get an answer from you on that question. Maybe I didn't explain myself well enough.
The broadcasters have made a couple of positions. One is that they must have fee-for-carriage in order to make their businesses sustainable. That's what they're saying. They're losing money; they must have fee-for-carriage; their model is broken. But they're saying it need not necessarily be a tax on consumers. They're saying you're making a lot of money, and why do you have to pass it along? Nobody says it has to be passed on to consumers.
By the way, they did say they did extend a $3 cap, and that is something the CRTC did not indicate. I haven't heard otherwise. I don't know if either they did or they are prepared to extend a $3 cap, but I am concerned that once a fee is established it can be gradually ratcheted up if there is a bidding war on programming and so forth.
That said, why do you have to pass on a fee for carriage? Why couldn't we take it out of all the money that Rogers is making and give it to the broadcasters? What's wrong with that?