Given the document below, you have to determine if "Yes" or "No", the summary is factually consistent with the document.

Document:
The British supermarket giant, the world's third largest retailer, has been looking to dispose of its loss-making US food chain for some time. Around 4,000 of Fresh & Easy's 5,000 employees are to transfer to the new business as part of the deal. Tesco said in a statement that this is an "orderly and efficient exit from the US market". Under the terms of the deal, Tesco will loan the new business around APS80m. Fresh & Easy, which operates 200 stores across California, Nevada and Arizona, has lost money since opening in 2007. Tesco did not specify which stores are being transferred to Yucaipa, but it is understood the remaining 50 shops will be closed. It will cost Tesco APS150m to dispose of the Fresh & Easy brand, but part of that is a loan which may be paid back. Also, if Yucaipa is sucessful and the business becomes profitable,

Summary:
1. Tesco has agreed to sell its US food chain Fresh & Easy to Yucaipa in a deal worth about PS 150 m, the BBC understands.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
Start your answer explicitly with "Yes" or "No", and if you answer no, explain which sentence is inconsistent and why.
