There is new information. The LCY lawyer letter is new, and it renders your prior arguments invalid. At least any other ones I can remember, as "affirming", "Visolis", "Upfront", "under seal", etc all were an argument toward the other side of the JV "affirming" the deal by way of a giant increase on the "upfront" payment. We now know that isn't happening, or alternatively, are interested in your position as to why the new information does not confirm this.