Absolutely. I agree that it was done for the Olympic Games as well, but there's a second point I was going to make. I just wanted to explain that we hear three days all the time, but it's much longer than that, and the more important point is that we're securing a conference or a summit here for the world leaders, all the leaders of the world, high-level-security people requiring high-level packages of security, as opposed to the Olympic Games, which is athletes in a sporting event. For us, this was a pure security event that had the highest level of vulnerability.
With the Olympics, if you think back now, do you remember who came? Do you remember what leaders came? Do you remember what day they came on? Do you remember when they left?
But for the G-20 and the G-8, everyone in the world that has an Internet site or a newspaper knows when the leaders are coming, who is coming, how long they're staying, where they're staying, and where the meetings are. The vulnerability on that is extreme because it's open to everyone. That's why it is so much harder to secure and why, even though it's a shorter period of time—and I totally agree with you on what you said—the concentration for that shorter period of time is what drives up the cost.