I regret that my translation didn't work perfectly for the first half of your comments, but I'll do my best.
Certainly we can understand the needs and concerns of all stakeholders in this matter. As I said, we all understand the implications of the delays. It was certainly our goal, very clearly, to have the NRU back in service before the Petten reactor went down. That was a very strong consideration in our earlier scheduled plan. But we also have to be realistic about what's required to effect the repairs. I think you can see the complexity we're dealing with.
The latest end-of-July guidance was prepared with input and advice from a very qualified panel of experts, and it does include what we consider a prudent contingency. It is my sincere hope that will be the last scheduled guidance revision that we have to make.
We've done our level best to be straightforward, to be transparent, and to base our scheduled forecast on the evidence we have at hand. The changes in this situation have been ones that have compelled us to make the revisions we did.
With respect to restoring confidence, I suspect that confidence will come from us producing isotopes. And from our point of view, we can't wait for July to happen.