John, it's Tom. First of all, I'll get to your NAF question. I may have misstated something there. We prior to the pandemic bought back $800 million worth of stock, 12 million shares, average about $67, just to make sure everybody has that. So in terms of NAF, I think prior to COVID, we absolutely wanted to make sure what -- we spent what we collected, and that's what we did. Clearly, COVID caused the disruption in 2020, was the first period, as you know, all the reasons for -- that we spent more than we collected to really jump start the marketing after a period of temporary store closures. And then 2021 as well. 2022 is a different -- we're still in the pandemic, as we all know. And it has continued to cause some disruptions, including the softer January. So our collections were not ultimately where we thought they would be. But also, the agency change has caused some incremental expenses that we didn't expect to pay. And we thought, taking the long view that it was the right thing to do, to incur the expenses that arose, but also to -- and make sure we fund the national sales that we want to fund, but also to appropriately transition to the new agency back to the former agency, Barclay. So our intent is, once this thing is in the rear-view mirror, absolutely, the collections, we intend to match the collections to the spend unless there's some unusual circumstance. But I think still being in the pandemic, going through an agency transition, that clearly had its challenges, as Chris articulated. We thought, playing the long game, it was the right thing to do because we got to move forward, still invest to drive membership. And no matter what, the -- as you've heard us talk about, the lifetime value of a membership far exceeds the cost even with some temporary overspends and NAF. It's orders of magnitude difference between the 2.