95% SLA for the Growth Plan and not 99.99% SLA? Because even if all of your Growth Plan Subscribers went down at the same time in your Cloud Tenant, 0.05% downtime risk (to move those pods into your 99.99% tenant temporarily), would be such a tiny amount of downtime and cost that I would think you would still offer 99.99% uptime guarantee on all of the plans. Not trying to bash you, but the nature of uptime monitoring means that your uptime monitoring service should be better than my own uptime in most cases, so that on the off chance that my services/site(s) go down, your monitoring solution doesnt happen to be down at the same time and I'm flying blind. I just want to understand the concept here of having the Growth plan with less of an uptime SLA than the rest of your plans? (I get that the likelihood should be insanely small of an outage, but thats also my point, why charge more for ensuring 99.99% uptime when in the VERY slim chance you do have an outage, you can just move those client temporarily into more resilient infrastructure temporarily.) Thanks in advance.