By that point he was the bidder that the Thomson organisation had decided to sell to. That was a fait accompli. That was a decision made by the board of Thomson, and it wasn't a decision made by the board of Times Newspapers.
However, by that stage there was no point in trying to resist Mr Murdoch's success in taking over the papers, and there were two reasons for that. One, since the papers were clearly going to him if -- if -- if he satisfied us on the editorial guarantees, if he satisfied us on the editorial guarantees, he was indeed, I agree with the Thomson organisation that he, of the others, was probably the most suitable person to deal with very difficult trade unions.
Our own management consortium, which had the support of the former Prime Minister and, for a time, the support of the print unions, did intend to tackle the abuses of the print unions, but to give him his due, I think Mr Murdoch was a better operator in that sense. So to that extent we felt that the advantages for him -- we wouldn't have felt that way if Mr Murdoch had not been prepared to swear the guarantees, to have them written into the criminal law and to be guaranteed by the British government.
In fact, I -- you know -- go on, next question, sorry.