the asmer's power to approve or disapprove of rating change, rating methodology changes. we do indeed believe this would be a negative development. it would -- first of all it would lead to, or be considered undue regulatory influence into the substance of the rating into the true analytics rather than the processes surrounding the ratings which is actually something that the current regulation of rating agencies precludes. there was a clear division of labor between regulation and analytical work. i think this clear demarcation would fall by the wayside. it would also lead to unintended consequences potentially that what you seem to be worried about, that the rating agency speaks with one voice and why is there three of you or certain of many, if asmer were in a situation to prove certainly methodologists. chances are that the methodologies would be very similar and lead to less diversity of opinions and more allient ratings across the competition, which i think would be negative for investors, because it would reduce the information available to them. it could also pote