There are two parts to your question, I think. One is why do we have so many agreements, and then the second part is why do we have different agreements. We have a large number of agreements in some cases because we respond to the accountability requirements of the client with whom we're dealing. Some clients we work with have a very decentralized way of doing business, and they didn't want us to have one macro agreement with the entire department; they wanted us to enter into agreements with each of the major units that make up that department. So we responded to their request of us in that fashion. Of course we would like nothing better than to have these reduced to a more sensible number than a hundred, or whatever the figure was in the report, which seems excessive.
The other problem we're working on is that we've also had different clauses, and that's partly because historically we sat down and lawyers would respond to the individual needs of each client and work out something that was tailored to their needs. Then when you tried to roll it out, of course, you'd have a wide variety, and that's not efficient and effective. We're trying to reduce that. One of the major projects that the new law practice management division is working on is uniform agreements that we can roll out so we won't be into the business of negotiating a wide variety of different clauses every year.