One of the most active debates in the VP-ellipsis (VPE) literature revolves around two types of analysis. Information structure theories (Merchant, 2001, inter alia) posit that ellipsis is essentially a radical form of deaccenting: latent syntactic structure exists at the ellipsis site which can be phonologically deleted in cases where a form of semantic identity (e.g., Merchant's e-givenness) holds between the ellipsis and antecedent clauses. Referential theories, on the other hand, consider VPE to be a type of proform, and hence predict that it will exhibit behaviors resembling other proforms (e.g., 3rd-person entity-referential pronouns). In this paper, I highlight new arguments for referential theories, based on the fact that VPE, like reference but unlike deaccenting, (i) allows for cataphoric reference, and (ii) gives rise to anaphoric dependencies that license sloppy readings. Furthermore, I argue that the primarily source of evidence used to argue for syntactic structure at the ellipsis site — trace effects — is actually equivocal, and demands a distinct explanation in both theories. I conclude with some thoughts about the role of information structure, as well as future directions.