Wasn't it the CFO who was quoted? Since companies always tout cost neutral contracts (else they would say "it costs us an extra $1.67 billion, but we have it covered via increased revenue, profits, and efficiencies company-wide.") you could most certainly read it both ways, but it's just as likely it is neutral as they want to reassure investors there will not be a material impact on the company.

Does anyone know when the next required SEC disclosure takes place as they have to lay it out there?