That's an excellent question.
Again, I want to be clear and we've been clear with our proposal up front. The way the global isotope market works right now, the establishment of these types of facilities is not a money-making proposition. The way the medical isotope business has evolved is that there's a series of research reactors around the globe, basically government-sponsored, that provide the raw material to the industry. The revenue that's realized from those doesn't fully occupy the cost.
So what our business case was predicated on was producing approximately four times the Canadian market: so producing enough for the Canadian domestic market and producing for export. With that, we believed it would cover about 15% of our operating cost of the facility. In other words, the facility, even with that plan, would still require 85% of its funding to come from the public purse.
So on your question, then, if you have these other sources and they impact share, then it would reduce that 15% accordingly. Again, I think that it would come back somewhat to public policy objectives, and I think this is a valid question for that expert panel to include: does Canada want to purchase its medical isotopes on the open market, rely on others, and see that science go outside the country? Does Canada just want to basically procure that in the market? I think that's an important public policy question.