Absolutely. As Shelly pointed out, the big carriers have no interest in going to the smallest of communities, but they do have an interest in going to what we'll call the northern hubs. That's probably where we're at a little bit of disagreement with them. I think there's a win-win situation for the regional carriers to be feeding the mainline carriers, but more so in the southern gateways than in the northern hubs.
I can certainly understand why they're perhaps reticent to welcome new competitors, if you want to call them that, because throughout their history, every time there's a new competitor start-up, it's “I have two airplanes this year, and I'm going to have 20 next year”, and the only place they're going to get business is out of the prime east-west routes.
I think what we have to do is a better job of convincing the big guys that we're not out to cut their grass. If growth were a priority for Air North, we would not be based in the Yukon; we'd be based in the south. There absolutely is a win-win scenario out there, but we haven't been able to make a good case for it.
That's where some cleverly crafted policy may be helpful in that regard, and it would create a better situation for regional air service, as well as for all of the carriers. It wouldn't be to anybody's detriment.