I think the Globalive saga just demonstrates the unworkability of a qualitative test like control-in-fact. That is in addition to the concrete elements of the tests that exist today and the problem of two regulators interpreting a subjective test in succession. It's not the first controversial instance. We had one when we were Unitel that was similarly decided by the control-in-fact test. So I think that more than right or wrong or new or unusual, it just demonstrates that with a qualitative, subjective test, you are constantly going to have this possibility in front of you.
On April 15th, 2010. See this statement in context.