Okay. Thank you for confirming that.
We've heard a lot of talk about due diligence, but when it comes to identifying the beneficial owners and the legal structure, the fact is that it was a real estate shell company, the WE Foundation, rather than the WE Charity. When we look at governance, we see that the board of WE Charity was in a state of chaos, with the chair of the board and more than half of the board resigning proximate to the time of the contribution agreement. Also, then, there's the fact that there was no understanding whatsoever of the financials and no understanding that the WE Charity had been in breach of their banking covenants.
Could you not argue that this is a sort of textbook case of what not to do when it comes to due diligence?