The second issue was one of intellectual property. The original bill, effectively, gave the intellectual property of the industry to the TAB. Now, the intellectual property of the industry is not necessarily owned by the codes or anyone else. The intellectual property of the industry is, effectively, owned by every sector of the industry, because the breeders have a portion of the intellectual property, the racing clubs have a portion of it, as do many other people—from the trainers to the jockeys to whatever. They all "own" the sector of that intellectual property. The challenging thing for the industry was, it was, effectively, under the bill, granted to the TAB. Now, if you looked at the larger racing clubs in New Zealand, for example, it could be that they may have wanted—if the TAB doesn't survive—to contract themselves out individually. If they didn't own their own intellectual property, they wouldn't be able to do that. So that was resolved, and, actually, was resolved thanks, to a large extent, to the tenacity of my colleague Andrew Bayly, who understands intellectual property better than I certainly do and better than most people do. He had some very strong views on that. So I think that that was a good outcome, and I think it's an outcome that the TAB now accepts and fully understands.