As we noted in the report, absolutely the criteria were identified to be very restrictive in nature, and as we mentioned in the report, it was highly unlikely that any other participant in the process could have been the successful bidder other than GC Strategies, because as we noted in the report, they heavily relied on the three sole-source contracts that they had provided to CBSA as justification for complying with the mandatories. When you look at the uniqueness of the mandatories, that's why we were able to say, on its face, that these mandatories were overly restrictive.
In terms of your second question, could we say that this was still competed? It was competed, however these mandatories made it very difficult for any other participant to participate in that process.