No. This isn't looked at as a loss. If that seems strange to you, look at it this way: When we give R&G their "loss in value," we're making sure they get all the value they would have received if the contract had been performed. In order to get that value (i.e., the estate), they would have had to spend the 100,000 kroner (and a 700,000 more). So if we give them their loss in value as well as the money they spent, we're really compensating them twice.

Do you follow this or would you like a more detailed explanation?