Right. That's my impression. Number two, we were quite surprised, Matt, to see a – I don't know if it's a single trade at market, allegedly in the 40s, who would sell in the 40s, somehow is factored into the valuation of the entire company. You couldn't go by that first lien at 40. Go out there and try it. You couldn't buy it at 50 or 60 or 70 or 80 – well, we're told, you can't buy it at 100. No, I haven't conducted my own investigation, but that's what I've been told. And then number three, there is a reason for concern, but it's not those two things. It's the fact that Google is a very big portal, has been, I think – Grier, was it 18% or 20% of the revenue? And I forget the EBITDA. And Google now has a new stricture that allegedly does not allow company, credit repair companies, to advertise through Google, a paid advertisement. But if you go on Google, you'll see plenty of paid ads by credit repair companies. So you wonder, well, what is this stricture? And is it only impacting Progrexion? Further, if you go on Google, you'll notice that Progrexion comes up on the first page in the non-paid area. So what is the impact? And what we've heard is it – the impact is yet to be seen. It's not going to be positive. It's not clear how impactful or how long any impact will occur. But in my mind, Matt, that is the substantive reason. Well, that is a – how would I put it, a proper reason for concern, whereas these other – this market thing is absolutely, in my mind, is not. And then as far as this CPFB claim, from what I've been told, that is of a lesser concern as well. So it's this Google item. And Grier, do you want to comment more on this Google item?