Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : Crj550


SilentLurker
02-06-2019, 09:23 AM
Interesting development. The 50 seater revolution kept alive by United. New CRJ550 announces and United will be launch customer. 50 aircrafts on order. 18ft longer, bigger baggage compartments, performance, etc.

As we all know, AAG is reactionary, they can flip the switch on our CRJ700. Letís stay tuned.

Were is scope choke going?

Will Embraer compete by creating another 50 seater?

https://hub.united.com/more-comfort-for-more-customers-were-the-first-airline-in-the-world-to-welcome-the-revolutionary-bombardier-crj-550-to-our-fleet-were-also-adding-more-than-1-600-united-polaris-and-united-first-seats--2628146859.html

https://airwaysmag.com/manufacturer/bombardier-launches-crj550-united-orders-50-planes/

Edited for clarity: https://commercialaircraft.bombardier.com/en/news/bombardier-welcoming-new-innovative-50-seater-aircraft

Itís a new hull.


in2deep
02-06-2019, 09:25 AM
I donít even know why it got a new name. They literally just reconfigured the cabin. Usually manufacturers have to at least change the avionics or engines to rebrand something that already exist.

NoValueAviator
02-06-2019, 09:32 AM
Isn’t the “140” just a 135 with a reconfigured cabin basically?

Edit: Nvm it’s a different length


MD-11Loader
02-06-2019, 09:32 AM
Interesting development. The 50 seater revolution kept alive by United. New CRJ550 announces and United will be launch customer. 50 aircrafts on order. 18ft longer, bigger baggage compartments, performance, etc.

As we all know, AAG is reactionary, they can flip the switch on our CRJ700. Letís stay tuned.

Were is scope choke going?

Will Embraer compete by creating another 50 seater?

https://hub.united.com/more-comfort-for-more-customers-were-the-first-airline-in-the-world-to-welcome-the-revolutionary-bombardier-crj-550-to-our-fleet-were-also-adding-more-than-1-600-united-polaris-and-united-first-seats--2628146859.html

https://airwaysmag.com/manufacturer/bombardier-launches-crj550-united-orders-50-planes/

Itís a new interior on the 700 not new hulls. Just a way around scope by Kirby and it allows Republic to place some of the 175ís that they ordered.

kaputt
02-06-2019, 09:34 AM
I donít even know why it got a new name. They literally just reconfigured the cabin. Usually manufacturers have to at least change the avionics or engines to rebrand something that already exist.
Marketing. It will likely only be called that on the United website. Frequent flyer passengers have become wise to associating seating configurations with particular aircraft types. To them, CRJ-550 will stand out vs CRJ-700.

Mesabah
02-06-2019, 09:37 AM
Itís a new interior on the 700 not new hulls. Just a way around scope by Kirby and it allows Republic to place some of the 175ís that they ordered.
They are new hulls apparently, you wouldn't need to work with Bombardier to reconfigure a current 700.

SilentLurker
02-06-2019, 09:48 AM
They are new hulls apparently, you wouldn't need to work with Bombardier to reconfigure a current 700.



Itís a new Hull people... launched by Bombardier... 3 class cabin. Bigger overhead bins, performance, etc.


Take a quick read and view.... https://airwaysmag.com/manufacturer/bombardier-launches-crj550-united-orders-50-planes/

Check our Bombardier Commercial website... https://commercialaircraft.bombardier.com/en/news/bombardier-welcoming-new-innovative-50-seater-aircraft

BigZ
02-06-2019, 10:01 AM
It is not a new hull. It's a new type that falls under the good ole CL-65.
Current GoJet 700s are getting reconfigured, not much to see here.

Phoenix21
02-06-2019, 10:32 AM
Interesting development. The 50 seater revolution kept alive by United. New CRJ550 announces and United will be launch customer. 50 aircrafts on order. 18ft longer, bigger baggage compartments, performance, etc.

As we all know, AAG is reactionary, they can flip the switch on our CRJ700. Letís stay tuned.

Were is scope choke going?

Will Embraer compete by creating another 50 seater?

https://hub.united.com/more-comfort-for-more-customers-were-the-first-airline-in-the-world-to-welcome-the-revolutionary-bombardier-crj-550-to-our-fleet-were-also-adding-more-than-1-600-united-polaris-and-united-first-seats--2628146859.html

https://airwaysmag.com/manufacturer/bombardier-launches-crj550-united-orders-50-planes/

Edited for clarity: https://commercialaircraft.bombardier.com/en/news/bombardier-welcoming-new-innovative-50-seater-aircraft

Itís a new hull.

Looks like PDT will be merging with PSA in the future instead of Envoy now ;)

SilentLurker
02-06-2019, 10:33 AM
It is not a new hull. It's a new type that falls under the good ole CL-65.

Current GoJet 700s are getting reconfigured, not much to see here.


Your saying this is the same hull as a crj700 but with 50 seats?

Old airplanes sent to bombardier to get new cabin configurations?

MD-11Loader
02-06-2019, 10:45 AM
Your saying this is the same hull as a crj700 but with 50 seats?

Old airplanes sent to bombardier to get new cabin configurations?

Thatís exactly what it appears to be. They want them in the second half of 2019, thereís no way Bombardier could get a new type built, and certified that quickly. The renderings look pretty cool, but it seems like it will bleed cash.

BigZ
02-06-2019, 10:49 AM
Your saying this is the same hull as a crj700 but with 50 seats?

Old airplanes sent to bombardier to get new cabin configurations?

Yup. With the 175s coming to ExpressJet 25 CRJ700s from GoJet had to be parked. Then someone came up with this brilliant idea.

havick206
02-06-2019, 11:05 AM
Itís a new Hull people... launched by Bombardier... 3 class cabin. Bigger overhead bins, performance, etc.


Take a quick read and view.... https://airwaysmag.com/manufacturer/bombardier-launches-crj550-united-orders-50-planes/

Check our Bombardier Commercial website... https://commercialaircraft.bombardier.com/en/news/bombardier-welcoming-new-innovative-50-seater-aircraft

Ever heard of an STC?

TransWorld
02-06-2019, 11:15 AM
Why does this seem to be reposted on almost every folder I am looking at? Wouldnít one general post be adequate?

KSCessnaDriver
02-06-2019, 11:19 AM
They are new hulls apparently, you wouldn't need to work with Bombardier to reconfigure a current 700.

It's not a new hull. Bombardier has to be involved to create the STC to re-certify the aircraft to only 50 seats for scope.

ninerdriver
02-06-2019, 12:32 PM
Why does this seem to be reposted on almost every folder I am looking at? Wouldnít one general post be adequate?

Because:
- The announcement came from left field.
- The announcement instantly removed one (maybe two?) regionals from death row and instantly put one (maybe two?) other regionals on it.
- AA and DL probably will play copycat. Who knows how that will change the regional playing field?

The announcement is a game-changer. Everyone flying for a regional ultimately is playing that same game. We're all taking notice.

MD-11Loader
02-06-2019, 12:48 PM
Because:
- The announcement came from left field.
- The announcement instantly removed one (maybe two?) regionals from death row and instantly put one (maybe two?) other regionals on it.
- AA and DL probably will play copycat. Who knows how that will change the regional playing field?

The announcement is a game-changer. Everyone flying for a regional ultimately is playing that same game. We're all taking notice.

The question is whether AA can afford to play copycat and fall further behind an already expanding revenue gap between DL and UA.

ninerdriver
02-06-2019, 01:06 PM
The question is whether AA can afford to play copycat and fall further behind an already expanding revenue gap between DL and UA.

That's the point when Parker buys another airline, amirite?

pitchattitude
02-06-2019, 01:55 PM
It sounds like it is NOT a new type as it has commonality with the others. But it sounds like these are new purchase aircraft. They may be a change of 700s that weíre already on order. Whether or not any others get reconfigured is yet to be seen.

And for what itís worth, when RW was talking about getting rid of the CRJs, he said AA was looking for a new 50 seater, but there was nothing out there unless Bombardier did something else with the CRJ. Maybe he was speculating, maybe he knew something.

KodiakRS
02-06-2019, 04:43 PM
Not the first time this has happened. There's a 70 seat max version of the CRJ 900 out there known as a CRJ 705. Now there's a 50 seat max version of the CRJ 700/701/702 known as the CRJ 550.

Apparently ALPA once successfully argued that removing seats and arbitrarily restricting MTOW doesn't qualify for being a smaller airplane with regards to scope. But if you take the airplane and get it re-certified as a type with lower MTOW and max seating capacity it does.

Also, AirCanada is currently having bombardier convert their 705s to 900s with an appropriate change in type. So it's reasonable to believe the FAA would let Gojets get some of their 700s re-certified as 550s.

RawHide
02-07-2019, 02:48 AM
The question is whether AA can afford to play copycat and fall further behind an already expanding revenue gap between DL and UA.

The issue here is Unitedís scope clause is different than Americans. At United a 700 is equal to a 175 so they are parking 700s to get new 175s. Now they figured out a way to reconfigure them into 50 seaters that some bean counter thinks will make a profit.

zondaracer
02-07-2019, 04:44 AM
The issue here is Unitedís scope clause is different than Americans. At United a 700 is equal to a 175 so they are parking 700s to get new 175s. Now they figured out a way to reconfigure them into 50 seaters that some bean counter thinks will make a profit.
^^^^ this.

AA scope is 50-65 seats is a small RJ, hence why PSA, Envoy, and SkyWest already have 63 and 65 seat CRJ700s.

Soxfan1
02-07-2019, 06:56 AM
Because:
- The announcement came from left field.
- The announcement instantly removed one (maybe two?) regionals from death row and instantly put one (maybe two?) other regionals on it.
- AA and DL probably will play copycat. Who knows how that will change the regional playing field?


The announcement is a game-changer. Everyone flying for a regional ultimately is playing that same game. We're all taking notice.

As far as the 1-2 saved and 1-2 screwed, other than GoJet in the first catagory, who do you place in the other 3 spots?

Jersdawg
02-07-2019, 06:59 AM
The issue here is Unitedís scope clause is different than Americans. At United a 700 is equal to a 175 so they are parking 700s to get new 175s. Now they figured out a way to reconfigure them into 50 seaters that some bean counter thinks will make a profit.

Seems like an awful lot of financial risk to put that many premium seats in a 50 seat aircraft. Lots of variability there.

NoValueAviator
02-07-2019, 07:14 AM
Maybe they'll get the premium dollar that currently faces single class aircraft w/ the competitors into many of these markets.

3GreenKSNA
02-07-2019, 07:15 AM
This works when oil is cheap, CPASM will go through the roof on these if oil spikes.
If they are filling up all the premium seats with full fare passengers then the above may be a moot point.

-Keep the dirty side down

FlyPurdue
02-07-2019, 08:25 AM
This works when oil is cheap, CPASM will go through the roof on these if oil spikes.
If they are filling up all the premium seats with full fare passengers then the above may be a moot point.

-Keep the dirty side down

This website is blowing up with CRJ-550 (and don’t come to Atlas threads). Having spent 5 years in commercial planning at AA, I think it is worth mentioning that nothing in this industry gets approved without mountains of data, scenarios, models, stress tests, and other department stakeholders poking holes in your strategy to find ways to make your analysis even more conservative.

That being said, although seating density is the best way to minimize CASM, it is often not the best way to maximize RASM, and the real gold standard of profitability...RESM. Why do you think AA flys around a 77W with 304 seats in a tube that can easily fit 546? From an outsider, the business case of the CRJ-550, is as follows:

Attract consultants whom are buying near full fare flexible economy tickets, (whom are elite tier upgradeable) to UA, thus maximizing aircraft RASM/RESM. Additionally, I bet the analysis showed that the marginal revenue upside of flying the same CRJ7 tube with 65 seats vs. 50 seats was not worth the lost opportunity being able to add E175s elsewhere in the system. At the end of the day, system profitability is more important than route profitability.

Overall I think this is a very clever strategy, but one I don’t see AA following in the short term.

pitchattitude
02-07-2019, 09:04 AM
It sounds like it is NOT a new type as it has commonality with the others. But it sounds like these are new purchase aircraft. They may be a change of 700s that weíre already on order. Whether or not any others get reconfigured is yet to be seen.

And for what itís worth, when RW was talking about getting rid of the CRJs, he said AA was looking for a new 50 seater, but there was nothing out there unless Bombardier did something else with the CRJ. Maybe he was speculating, maybe he knew something.
I stand corrected.

https://www.bloombergquint.com/business/united-air-plans-upgrade-of-regional-jets-in-luxury-travel-push#gs.PJde4QPF

(Bloomberg) -- United Continental Holdings Inc. is revamping some of its regional jets to add more first-class seats and amenities as part of a wider push to attract more business travelers. The airlineís remodeled short-haul aircraft, dubbed the CRJ550, will be an adaptation of a plane made by Bombardier Inc. that typically flies with 70 seats. Thatís 20 more than in Unitedís new configuration.

From ALPA Daily. And specifically say remodel and revamp, so not new airframes, but not to say you couldnít get a new one in the configuration.

uavking
02-07-2019, 12:25 PM
This website is blowing up with CRJ-550 (and donít come to Atlas threads). Having spent 5 years in commercial planning at AA, I think it is worth mentioning that nothing in this industry gets approved without mountains of data, scenarios, models, stress tests, and other department stakeholders poking holes in your strategy to find ways to make your analysis even more conservative.

That being said, although seating density is the best way to minimize CASM, it is often not the best way to maximize RASM, and the real gold standard of profitability...RESM. Why do you think AA flys around a 77W with 304 seats in a tube that can easily fit 546? From an outsider, the business case of the CRJ-550, is as follows:

Attract consultants whom are buying near full fare flexible economy tickets, (whom are elite tier upgradeable) to UA, thus maximizing aircraft RASM/RESM. Additionally, I bet the analysis showed that the marginal revenue upside of flying the same CRJ7 tube with 65 seats vs. 50 seats was not worth the lost opportunity being able to add E175s elsewhere in the system. At the end of the day, system profitability is more important than route profitability.

Overall I think this is a very clever strategy, but one I donít see AA following in the short term.

Oh, hey, look at that: someone finally looked at the C-550 from a mgt/revenue perspective instead of a ďI just donít feel like itíll workĒ pilot perspective.

Like he said, contrary to what we might think at our operational level, there isnít a single decision that isnít made without money on a spreadsheet to back it up. Someone at the Willis Tower has already demonstrated the revenue upside to this configuration. Itís probably also a partial admission by Kirby that heís not going to get scope concessions anytime soon from his pilot group.

Cyio
02-07-2019, 01:23 PM
This website is blowing up with CRJ-550 (and donít come to Atlas threads). Having spent 5 years in commercial planning at AA, I think it is worth mentioning that nothing in this industry gets approved without mountains of data, scenarios, models, stress tests, and other department stakeholders poking holes in your strategy to find ways to make your analysis even more conservative.

That being said, although seating density is the best way to minimize CASM, it is often not the best way to maximize RASM, and the real gold standard of profitability...RESM. Why do you think AA flys around a 77W with 304 seats in a tube that can easily fit 546? From an outsider, the business case of the CRJ-550, is as follows:

Attract consultants whom are buying near full fare flexible economy tickets, (whom are elite tier upgradeable) to UA, thus maximizing aircraft RASM/RESM. Additionally, I bet the analysis showed that the marginal revenue upside of flying the same CRJ7 tube with 65 seats vs. 50 seats was not worth the lost opportunity being able to add E175s elsewhere in the system. At the end of the day, system profitability is more important than route profitability.

Overall I think this is a very clever strategy, but one I donít see AA following in the short term.

Any chance you could explain what the CASM and such mean?

BigZ
02-07-2019, 01:31 PM
Any chance you could explain what the CASM and such mean?

Cost of available seat mile, revenue per the same etc.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Available_seat_miles

FlyPurdue
02-07-2019, 02:24 PM
CASM is the cost to fly one seat, one mile, normally expressed in cents. RASM is the revenue earned by flying that same seat one mile. In very basic terms, RASM-CASM=Profit. It is important to note that there are many different metrics that have to be considered when calculating or evaluating flight, network, and overall company profitability.

The traditional thinking is, the more seats you have on a plane, the more revenue opportunity you have, and concurrently more seats means more passengers, and thus more opportunity to offset the flight's cost. Most of an individual flight's overall cost is fixed and not related to how many passengers are actually onboard, such this idea makes sense.

That being said, what is becoming more and more apparent across the industry, is that some people are willing to pay a lot (sometimes $10,000+) more for their ticket, whether they desire added flexibility, more room, or a gourmet meal - the notion of just maximizing the seat count is not necessarily the best practice anymore in maximizing revenue. Thats what I think United sees in the CRJ-550. They know that people flying to Bentonville are not purchasing basic economy fares, and are betting on the CRJ-550 in shifting high yielding passenger market share from DL/AA - and that loss of seating density is just the cost of doing business. Additionally, UA gets to add EMB175s, which will further increase system profitability. Finally, whoever mentioned that Scott is using this to show Wall Street that there will be no scope relief I think is spot on too.

I saw this video earlier - this could help explain some of these concepts too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzB5xtGGsTc

Cyio
02-07-2019, 04:01 PM
CASM is the cost to fly one seat, one mile, normally expressed in cents. RASM is the revenue earned by flying that same seat one mile. In very basic terms, RASM-CASM=Profit. It is important to note that there are many different metrics that have to be considered when calculating or evaluating flight, network, and overall company profitability.

The traditional thinking is, the more seats you have on a plane, the more revenue opportunity you have, and concurrently more seats means more passengers, and thus more opportunity to offset the flight's cost. Most of an individual flight's overall cost is fixed and not related to how many passengers are actually onboard, such this idea makes sense.

That being said, what is becoming more and more apparent across the industry, is that some people are willing to pay a lot (sometimes $10,000+) more for their ticket, whether they desire added flexibility, more room, or a gourmet meal - the notion of just maximizing the seat count is not necessarily the best practice anymore in maximizing revenue. Thats what I think United sees in the CRJ-550. They know that people flying to Bentonville are not purchasing basic economy fares, and are betting on the CRJ-550 in shifting high yielding passenger market share from DL/AA - and that loss of seating density is just the cost of doing business. Additionally, UA gets to add EMB175s, which will further increase system profitability. Finally, whoever mentioned that Scott is using this to show Wall Street that there will be no scope relief I think is spot on too.

I saw this video earlier - this could help explain some of these concepts too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzB5xtGGsTc
Thank you for the very informative post.

uavking
02-07-2019, 05:15 PM
CASM is the cost to fly one seat, one mile, normally expressed in cents. RASM is the revenue earned by flying that same seat one mile. In very basic terms, RASM-CASM=Profit. It is important to note that there are many different metrics that have to be considered when calculating or evaluating flight, network, and overall company profitability.

The traditional thinking is, the more seats you have on a plane, the more revenue opportunity you have, and concurrently more seats means more passengers, and thus more opportunity to offset the flight's cost. Most of an individual flight's overall cost is fixed and not related to how many passengers are actually onboard, such this idea makes sense.

That being said, what is becoming more and more apparent across the industry, is that some people are willing to pay a lot (sometimes $10,000+) more for their ticket, whether they desire added flexibility, more room, or a gourmet meal - the notion of just maximizing the seat count is not necessarily the best practice anymore in maximizing revenue. Thats what I think United sees in the CRJ-550. They know that people flying to Bentonville are not purchasing basic economy fares, and are betting on the CRJ-550 in shifting high yielding passenger market share from DL/AA - and that loss of seating density is just the cost of doing business. Additionally, UA gets to add EMB175s, which will further increase system profitability. Finally, whoever mentioned that Scott is using this to show Wall Street that there will be no scope relief I think is spot on too.

I saw this video earlier - this could help explain some of these concepts too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzB5xtGGsTc

To stem off of this, it would appear that UA is willing to chase higher revenue passengers. Spend money to make money, if you will. They realize that if you satisfy a corporate customer headed to a project at a secondary city, this translates into a. higher revenue on that segment b. revenue from a high dollar connection (see premium intl traffic from SFO and EWR).

AA has shown that they are fundamentally more concerned about leveraging marginal revenue. That is, fill airplanes with bodies, irrespective of value, and grab incremental revenue through credit cards, etc. We compete with Spirit for discretionary travel in a bottom feeding segment simply to boost load factors and grab whatever dollars we can. The competition leverages high revenue passengers who have loyalty to a solid, competitive product. This business is much more dynamic than D-0/T-0, but I guess my MBA isn't as good as higher.

MD-11Loader
02-07-2019, 05:49 PM
Any chance you could explain what the CASM and such mean?

CASM is the cost per average seat mile ie the more seats to sell the less cost there is per seat per mile to operate the airplane.

3GreenKSNA
02-08-2019, 08:46 AM
Thanks for all the great info.

-Keep the dirty side down

ninerdriver
02-08-2019, 01:29 PM
As far as the 1-2 saved and 1-2 screwed, other than GoJet in the first catagory, who do you place in the other 3 spots?

GoJet is saved. Maybe Mesa could be saved, too, depending on whether you thought they were toast in the first place.

Air Whiskey is on notice - if the 550 is UA's 200 of the future, then having a fleet of UA-painted 200s and no other potential partners can't be a good thing.

TSA might be in the same bucket as Whiskey, but the 145 isn't as obviously obsolete as the 200 when compared to the 550.

Soxfan1
02-08-2019, 03:32 PM
GoJet is saved. Maybe Mesa could be saved, too, depending on whether you thought they were toast in the first place.

Air Whiskey is on notice - if the 550 is UA's 200 of the future, then having a fleet of UA-painted 200s and no other potential partners can't be a good thing.

TSA might be in the same bucket as Whiskey, but the 145 isn't as obviously obsolete as the 200 when compared to the 550.

Figured thatís about where you were at. I can totally see that point. Look - as an AW pilot I have thought hard about what this means and I have concluded that I donít know if this is terrible news, no news at all, or great news.

If itís the death of the all Econ 50 seater ERJ/CRJ, so be it. United - say they love it and want more of these. Scope would allow 300. So in this market no one company could take them all. So new contracts come up. AW has a slight leg up over ERJ companies being the common type rating. Maybe.

Or United kinda loves it but canít justify 300 of them. Why? There are some markets that have too short a stage length or 0 premium demand. So maybe they want a mix. So some 50 seat regionals are still needed and others bid this ďnewĒ jet. The all Econ 50 seater goes back to its Turboprop roots and routes. More ORD to CWA/GRR/CID less ORD to HPN/SAV/CHS.

Or itís a total and complete failure. And that is very possible too.

So there are many senerios off of each of these senerios above I canít say what this means, yet.

AW has 2.5 to 4.5 years left on current contract. United still wants to grow 6% the next year or two, is still scoped out on 70/76 seaters, still has NO 100-130 seater on order and most of their 50 seater airlines canít even staff the current demand (CA, half way to 60/EXJ not over 100 erjs, not at 20 CRJs yet and 0 out of 25 175s, plus AW not flying all 65 200s yet)

So short term and maybe even medium term, Iím not worried. UA will take any 50 seater that can be staffed right now.

So Iím still TBD on what I think about this. Could be the best or worse thing for us, or nothing at all.

ninerdriver
02-08-2019, 04:00 PM
Figured thatís about where you were at. I can totally see that point. Look - as an AW pilot I have thought hard about what this means and I have concluded that I donít know if this is terrible news, no news at all, or great news.

If itís the death of the all Econ 50 seater ERJ/CRJ, so be it. United - say they love it and want more of these. Scope would allow 300. So in this market no one company could take them all. So new contracts come up. AW has a slight leg up over ERJ companies being the common type rating. Maybe.

Or United kinda loves it but canít justify 300 of them. Why? There are some markets that have too short a stage length or 0 premium demand. So maybe they want a mix. So some 50 seat regionals are still needed and others bid this ďnewĒ jet. The all Econ 50 seater goes back to its Turboprop roots and routes. More ORD to CWA/GRR/CID less ORD to HPN/SAV/CHS.

Or itís a total and complete failure. And that is very possible too.

So there are many senerios off of each of these senerios above I canít say what this means, yet.

AW has 2.5 to 4.5 years left on current contract. United still wants to grow 6% the next year or two, is still scoped out on 70/76 seaters, still has NO 100-130 seater on order and most of their 50 seater airlines canít even staff the current demand (CA, half way to 60/EXJ not over 100 erjs, not at 20 CRJs yet and 0 out of 25 175s, plus AW not flying all 65 200s yet)

So short term and maybe even medium term, Iím not worried. UA will take any 50 seater that can be staffed right now.

So Iím still TBD on what I think about this. Could be the best or worse thing for us, or nothing at all.

That all makes sense. I'm just prognosticating, myself. I mean, hey, I'm a pilot. That's what I'm supposed to do. ;)

Soxfan1
02-08-2019, 04:16 PM
That all makes sense. I'm just prognosticating, myself. I mean, hey, I'm a pilot. That's what I'm supposed to do. ;)

I hear you. Did the same myself. Donít disagree that you could very well be spot on.



Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1