With respect to the ambiguity around what notice we gave them, I suppose if somebody wanted to cast it that way, they could, but from our perspective--and I can speak first-hand to much of this--there was very little ambiguity in the discussions we had with the representatives of the university. The reason we would deal with the university in a matter like that as opposed to dealing with the board of directors of the CCFI is that it is the university that would be left holding the bag, shall we say, if the funding to the CCFI didn't come from ACOA. Then the university would have to somehow deal with that, because there'd be ongoing expenses and that sort of thing. So that's why we would have discussed it with the university.
Clearly, the identification of the last package of money, the $1.5 million, came after a great deal of working with the institutions to try to find a way around all of this. So it wasn't like one day somebody got a letter and that was it. This was over a period of time and with a lot of interchange back and forth.
As far as ambiguity goes, in my view, there's very little ambiguity. There may have been some disbelief or non-acceptance, but I don't think there was ambiguity.