Here's some more data I ran across.



Now if you look at this... http://www.team.aero/files/aviation_..._guide_crj.pdf... the one thing you'll see there is that on page 66 they show the CASM for a CRJ-900 running at the max we would allow (at least for 85% of their flights) to have a fuel burn of about 2 cents per ASM.

So even if the Skywest 5.3 CASM number for their CRJ-900 doesn't include fuel, just add 2 cents. Maybe 3. And you're still hovering around MD-88 territory. Thus, same cost plus a whipsaw. I think it's as clear as day as to why they keep asking us to give up scope on these jets.

I mean all we have to do is hold the line on 3 things with outsourcing: number, size and range. We're giving up on the number until the next time they need it raised. Winning.