I don't know the company well, but I had a look at them this morning. I wouldn't touch them at this point. They do have some net debt, but not as much as FLT do now. The trouble with lending covenants is that most companies won't generally disclose them to the public, so we usually only hear about them after they've been breached. I know that they do vary a lot. Some even stipulate minimum market capitalisation, which really means that if the share price falls below a certain level they can breach that particular lending covenant. I hope most companies don't have one of those covenants. Most of them do centre around revenue and earnings levels, and that can be a big worry when earnings are going to be hit as much as they are with companies in this particular sector - even if it does turn out to be a short-term hit. Companies with higher overheads such as FLT - with their bricks-and-mortar stores as well as their web presence - are likely to see earnings hit harder - because of higher fixed costs - but WEB will still be hit. They might be hit less, due to lower fixed costs, but they'll still be hit. And we don't know by how much yet, and nor do they, which is why they've withdrawn their earnings guidance. In this environment - with lending covenants largely unknown (by us at least), it pays to tread very carefully with smalls and mid-caps that have net debt and are going to see earnings hit significantly. In my opinion.