So, Gordon Brown has finally fallen on his sword in a predictable, but dignified speech that came after days of speculation where it became increasingly clear that his position - not just as Prime Minister, but also as leader of the Labour Party - had become untenable.
An uncertain impasse has held sway since last Thursday's election, but the removal of Brown has apparently been motivated by the breakdown of talks between the Lib Dems and Tories. Surely that was the only coalition that would have been viable (practically if not ideologically).
Even if Brown's departure does facilitate the much touted Lib-Lab coalition, that is not likely to do anything to pull us out of the stalemate of a hung parliament.
Labour and the Lib Dems combined have 315 seats, more than the Tories' 305 but still well shy of the 326 required for a majority government.
And who will act as Prime Minister?
Brown has said he will be gone before the autumn conference, and a leadership election will take time. It will most likely be months before we know who is leading the Government.
It is debatable whether any patched up coalition will last that long anyway.
Whoever ultimately gets the job will have less of a mandate than Gordon Brown. The Tories and electorate will denounce ‘another unelected Prime Minister' making the newcomer's position equally untenable, until they call a risky election that would either validate their claim or confine them - and their party - to years of opposition.
Or, of course, Nick Clegg could come in, but if Brown is being forced out because 29% of the vote did not give him sufficient mandate to rule, how long would a man who commanded just 23% last?
Brown's act is clearly an attempt to bring the current confusion to an end, but we do not seem any nearer to resolution.
What made financial headlines over the weekend?
To promote 'long-term investment'
Switching 'hard and expensive'
Smaller funds still packing a punch