Some of it may just be that the Viagogo team found ways to have a higher ROI on that ad spend than the legacy team had. Maybe it took a little time even after the 2022 integration was complete for that to play out, and it wasn't really a point-in-time shift in strategy. That's the first area I'd like to discuss.

The more buyers you attract to your platform, the more sellers come chasing those buyers. You get the seller share, open up more access and distribution for the buyers, and it becomes a self-reinforcing mechanism. One of the thought processes is that in a marketplace business, those tend to be winner-take-most. I hear what you're saying, but think about an Uber versus a Lyft. There were probably 100 other competitors in New York City.

Ultimately, Eric Baker makes the decision. He has equity backers who have supported him for a long time. Bessemer, for instance, has been invested in Viagogo for more than a decade. He has control, but he must be somewhat responsive to them. I'm unsure if he's being pressured to pursue the IPO. He seems like someone who prefers to run the business privately with control, which would be the best outcome for him. I'm trying to figure out who is actually pushing this. The year-end mark for StubHub's equity is $193 a share, which translates to about $12 billion in equity value, or call it $15 billion of enterprise value. I would be surprised if they could achieve that valuation based on EBITDA metrics or other comparisons. Ultimately, the public markets will decide. There's a trade-off between going public at a certain valuation and whether Eric can maintain voting control. That's what I'm trying to understand from your perspective.

If I had to share my personal opinion, I'd say Eric will probably retain control in the near term. Mechanically, I think that's how it will play out.