come to the conclusion of the stress test, the method they used was different than what we do or cheiron does and focused on the local economy, local jurisdiction, their economy's ability to pay. i won't say that's a wrong question, but it's not the way we phrase the question. the question is, what is our ability to collect contributions and earn investment returns to meet our contribution goals? that's how we invest. i won't say it's a fair or smarter way of doing it, but sometimes i see another headline, it has a way of blanketing, making it look like all public pension funds are doing something wrong, and that analysis, i think, was incorrect the way they did it and i would say in case anybody challenged you on it, be prepared to stand up and show what cheiron and our own process has done to prove why, particularly -- not typically the city of san francisco, but the taxpayers in san francisco, the methodologies we use and the stress tests that we use going way out into the future shows that we're running a very solid firm and we're not taking the wrong kind of risks, not doubling down