Given the document below, determine if the summary is factually consistent with the document. Together with the answer provide evidence that supports it. 

Document: The Swans have rejected PS40m offers from NAME_1 and Leicester City for the Iceland midfielder, who they value at PS50m. NAME_2 missed Swansea' 2-0 friendly win over Birmingham on Saturday because of the transfer speculation. "It's not something that we want [or] will be allowing to drag on until the deadline," said NAME_3. "The deadline I want it to be is imminently for everyone involved at Swansea and Gylfi included. I'm not going to put an actual day on it, but imminently means in the very near future." If NAME_1 improve their offer for NAME_2, a new bid could include Toffees defender NAME_4. The 19-year-old full-back had a spell on loan at Wigan Athletic last season and was a part of the England team which won this summer's Under-20 World Cup. NAME_2 did not travel with Swansea for their tour of the United States with his omission from the

Summary: 1. NAME_3 confirmed that "all parties" are still talking about the potential transfer, but it is understood NAME_1 have not improved on their initial offer, believed to be 2.

Answer "Yes" or "No" and provide evidence.

Answer:


 In your entire response, the letter k should appear less than 13.
user