Well, they were very correct about the need for feed, as well as the reluctance of passengers to fly on small turboprops circa 1999 (the "Scary Mary" Schiavo era). Detractors point to SWA's lack of feed but SWA essentially only flies routes that don't require feed to operate profitably.

The interesting thing is that they immediately jump from "we need feed" to "we must approve this outsourcing immediately." Those are two very different subjects and there was little to nothing said about the link between them. It was simply assumed that because the turboprops had been outsourced, the RJs would be too. You can see a very direct progression over the years from the earliest commuter codeshares when they were flying navajos, to small turboprops, to 30 seat turboprops, to 35-50 seat RJs, to 70 seat RJs, to 75-88 seat small mainliners. Slippery slope arguments are generally considered logical fallacies but in this case the slope was slippery indeed.