is it damaging to the reputation of kliner perkins? is it even not helpful to have this discussion if indeed this is the case of someone who was a crony investor as opposed to someone who was sexually discriminating? >> basically every one of these cases you have the same situation. you have the employee saying that they've been retaliated against. bad things have happened and the employer saying that there was the case of someone a legitimate business reason. so that's a given. all the investigations, what is really striking to me is the fact that the case is actually going to trial because there's going to be a lot of inquiry into the way the company does business. no one likes to look at the way you make slamie. on the other hand, with respect to ms. pao a lot of personal issues are going to come out about her life, about her relationship with her husband, her motivations. so it's really nobody wins. i think this case is less about money and more about vindication and position in the industry and trying to not sort of accept each ot