I have just a brief observation, Mr. Jones. It comes back to the issue of liability claims, etc. Again, I don't mean any malice by the question, but I'm wondering whether the waiver clauses are the cause of fewer claims being brought forward or whether in fact these activities are as dangerous as we say or could imagine them to be.
What if there's a legal chill brought on by that waiver? What if someone goes before his or her own lawyer and asks what the chances are of pursuing a claim against the operator, and the lawyer says he or she doesn't know, but because the waiver is there, it's going to cost them a little bit more? The client weighs how much it's going to cost to get compensation and is unsure about going that route, because it's a minimal amount if he or she is successful, whereas the operator has probably built it into his insurance indemnification as well as representation in court, so it doesn't cost him anything.
I'm wondering whether the numbers being presented to us as a basis for taking one position or another are really valid in the absence of this kind of analysis.