He makes a good argument for no. But it does seem based on a savings to the company of 2 to 2.5 billion dollars. I won't argue the 2-2.5b figure what I will contest is that the figure is a "savings" to the company. In my mind, that money is going to be spent on either refurbishing the 50's or buying the 70 larger RJs (35m X 70=2.45b). Not going into the companys coffers. Either way it doesn't look like a savings to the company.

Can someone show me where I'm wrong?

Denny