I agree with what the other two companies have said. In essence, you can apportion risks between the private sector and the government in a way that you transfer the risks to the party that can carry them the best, so acquisition of land has to be within the realm of government. For the construction of the system, the design of the system, and the equipment supplied, those risks can be allocated to the private sector more efficiently. Those are things that can be handled by the private sector better, and then in terms of ridership risk, generally that's carried by the government, at least initially, much as for a highway project. You get a lot more, as a government, if you establish what the base line is of the ridership and then you sell that operational value to an operating company than if you try to do that when you haven't proven any ridership at all.
If you look at this kind of model, you can break it into the fundamental project itself, structuring that. Then you allocate a project for actual construction and design to the private sector. Then for operational, you can have an operating contract. You can have three major pieces to it.