Well, I'm happy to do so. I guess, the thing I'd like to just maybe start out with is for people who maybe not as familiar as you are, Marshall, with our history, is to tell people that so far sort of from the time this management got involved in the company, we've given back to shareholders in either the forms of dividends or buybacks over $1,225,000,000 going way back of which, probably without having a calculator to do it, I would guess 2/3 of it was in buybacks and 1/3 of it was in dividends. We believe in both mechanisms as ways of returning excess cash to shareholders. There's times in which it's more opportune from our perspective to do so through buyback, and other times, which is more opportune to go through the dividend route. At this point, as you know, we have had a dividend, which we instituted in 2004. I think we were among the very first of the service companies, especially that time, smaller service companies, to reinstitute a dividend just as a follow-up of a change in national tax policy. That dividend went up, as you know, pretty lockstep. Unfortunately, we didn't have a sense that the market necessarily rewarded us, as well as we hoped it would. We think that now, with a much stronger company and a much -- that was obviously the point of the comments that I made in the prepared remarks, that we think that and are hopeful that the increased dividend will be appreciated by the shareholders. And if so, we wouldn't rule out the possibility of thinking about additional increases.
J. Marshall Adkins - Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Research Division: Awesome. Great to hear. Andy, one quick one for you. The cost side went down this quarter. Is that a function of more throughput, better utilization? Is it a mix issue? Or is some of that the biofuel stuff? If I'm right, 50 rigs or something, by the end of this year, you'll have this biofuel or nat gas? Help me understand why the costs went down, I guess.