A recurring puzzle in the study of animal signaling is why displays of quality are not simply faked. If a peacock's train advertises health, why do unhealthy birds not grow equally splendid trains and cheat? The influential answer holds that reliable signals are costly in a way that only high-quality individuals can afford: a lavish train is a handicap that a sickly bird could not sustain. But the argument has a subtle requirement often glossed over. The cost need not be large in absolute terms; it must merely be steeper for low-quality signalers than for high-quality ones. A signal cheap for everyone would indeed invite deception, yet so, paradoxically, would a signal ruinously expensive for all, since it would exclude the honest and dishonest alike. With which of the following statements about signal cost