1. Simple reproduction of GATS commitments; (ii) improvements over GATS without implying actual liberalization; (iii) improvements over GATS with liberalization effects implemented on an MFN basis; and the former scenarios with preferential liberalization extended under (iv) liberal rules of origin and (v) restrictive rules of origin. 64 In the light of the preceding discussion at least one, but possibly three additional options might need to be added: RTAs with (vi) GATS-minus commitments that are only on paper; (vii) GATS-minus commitments that, in the form of 'negative preferences', are actually enforced; and (viii) GATS-minus commitments that are implemented on an MFN-basis, implying that relevant GATS obligations are disregarded. In addition, attention could be given, again, to the restrictiveness of the RTAs' rules of origin and, more importantly in the current context, the existence of third-party MFN clauses, or equivalents, that would 'import' any more favourable GATS commitments into the RTA. From a merely technical perspective, it would be relatively easy to eliminate any GATSminus commitments and the associated uncertainties in the PTAs concerned or to renegotiate relevant GATS commitments. However, there is no silver bullet. Otherwise, we might have seen such initiatives in the past or, at least, a gradual diminution of GATS-minus elements over time;Mortimer;Get out of here! D'ya wanna be poisoned? D'ya wanna be murdered? D'ya wanna be killed?" A. Adjustments in RTAs or renegotiation of 'poisoned' GATS commitments? In discussing the preferences extended under current services RTAs, current studies tend to distinguish between the following scenarios: (i)