You know, I was visiting one of our ports, and they have an interesting story. They have enough land to have the capacity to handle the next 50 years. They don't need to physically expand the footprint of the port, but they need to move some things around. They have an opportunity to relocate, for example, some of where their cruise operations are. That would be an expensive part of the project, because it would entail a physical building that passengers could flow through, but that would open up container capacity.
Now, the costs associated with container capacity are quite minimal, but that's where the value is. You get the value from a financial perspective on the container capacity. The costs are on the passenger side. The borrowing limits don't allow them to finance this as a complete project, which they would be able to do if they operated like an airport authority and had the financial flexibility of an airport authority.
The national trade corridors fund only funds the movement of goods, so they couldn't use that for the cruise facility. They're in this strange situation in which they have all the capacity they need, but the constraints of the model make it challenging for them to move forward to do what they need to do.