Yes. The offering here is to monetize one's performance at an all-candidates meeting. It's something that we couldn't disagree with more. There's no way that you could add a value to one's performance, one's exposure to it. I can't imagine what the market value of that would be. I can't imagine how we'd assess the variations of that, whether it's a small community group that's having an all-candidates meeting, or if there are two candidates or 15--wildly varying--and the size of the crowd, and then the paperwork that would have to go into it. It would be nuts.
At the same time, what you'd also see is that this would have an influence on the groups in the local ridings that are putting on these events; that is, candidates would say no. They'd say, “If I go to your all-candidates meeting, that's $100 off my ceiling”. So they're going to wait for the bigger one, the chamber of commerce, where they're going to do one debate; that's going to be $1,000, and that's it for their debates. I don't think that would serve electors well and I think it would be impossible both to, first of all, monetize all-candidates meetings, and then to police them afterwards.