I think that's the heart of the matter. This is a commercial dispute, and contract law would dictate that you can't take any one provision of a contract and look at it in isolation. There are several other provisions that reference this real estate incentive and how it's funded. I think that's the proper way to look at it.
I'm not suggesting that anybody has to agree with me. I'm just suggesting that we have a very solid foundation for our interpretation of the contract. There was the same interpretation in 2002 and in 1998.