The context is.... I mean, what they're measured on primarily is job creation. That's not just DFATD. I think that many arms of government are really just looking at that as the sole metric to measure themselves against. That may be relevant when you're talking more about old industry, about factories with how many workers inside that factory, etc., whereas when you're dealing with stuff like intellectual property with content-based industries, that's not necessarily true.
You missed the story I gave about a company in Finland that, with 125 workers, was able to sell half the company for $1.5 billion after having games that generated a million dollars a day of revenue. They paid a tax bill of $345 million. It's not comparable. It's apples and oranges.
I'm on the advisory board of DFATD on their ICT practice, and when we go into an advisory board meeting, everything is driven towards jobs, jobs, jobs. I'm trying to say, well, listen, we should find and create opportunities where these kinds of companies are able to generate that level of revenue to create new intellectual property, to have a higher degree or volume of start-ups, so that we can have those kinds of hits, let's call them. It's not just workers in the factory.