Well, if the cost if getting your respect is to agree that this contract is cost neutral or better to the company, then the price of admission is too steep. And the membership is liable to consist of liars and the mathematically challenged.

There is no way the company spends less per pilot under this deal, or that individuals are worse off as a result if the TA. There were some concessions made to staffing, some gains made in workrules, and obvious gains in compensation.

The only valid question is whether we got enough in this early TA.

The cheerleaders say we got everything, the DPA guys say we got nothing. Neither is true.

I voted for it based partly on the TVM argument, and mostly because of the up-gauging. I gladly banked the 12+% so far, and have been looking forward to advancement that hasn't materialized yet, and the results whispers about large follow-on pieces that would give us one or two great new opportunities.

I'm beginning to wonder if we were played in terms of a(one or more) follow-on transaction(s), but it's hard to say just yet. That's the problem with working under NDA's (a practice I'm increasingly skeptical of). I'll judge advancement by the next two AE's as we get closer to 717 deliveries (so far, I'm disappointed), and I'll judge our ability to negotiate additional improvements on getting a very respectful amount of LHR flying from VA. Based on what I expect to happen on the existing JV %, I'm skeptical about our ability to negotiate enforceable deals, as well as our willingness to enforce negotiated deals.

Can you respect that opinion, or do I have to buy into this theory of neutral-minus first?