Still confused? I'm not.

I don't think you understood Liddy's post properly.

Her point was that initially Elmer said Teck had two choices: walk away or full buyout. That was when he was in Smithers recently.

The other day he said Teck had two choices: walk away or earn-back.

Her point is valid, why the change? Is it significant or was he just speaking directly about the contractual choices that Teck has versus a more casual conversation in which he was expressing his opinion that Teck would either walk or buy us out completely.