We are certainly examining very carefully the economics of owning, because as you look at a business case on paper, when you want a long-term occupancy, it would often point to the advisability of owning.
On the other hand, as you get into the 25-year journey and you don't make the investments to upgrade your building, you end up at the end of 25 years with a building you really have to tear down. So the original case, if you like, hasn't proven out in practice. We have many buildings of that kind in our inventory. Part of the reason for it is that we get annual funding, and there are other anomalies that occur on the journey. So as we look at it, we are re-examining what really in practice does happen, how we can fix it, what options we have, and so forth.
In other words, we haven't said we're going to shift the balance in order to save money. The steps we are taking are independent of that and can be executed and achieved whether or not we change the mix. But we are looking at it.