Sure, if you are going apply a standard of absolute replacement, ie it needs to be one for one, the same number, then I can't argue with what you said. Of course, I don't think any path leads to that unnecessarily narrow standard. And, yes cost did play a role in the discussion. You stated "cheap" replacements, or what was it, "cheap" options to replace the production. Cost is central to that point, and dropping the one for one requirement, I think a "cheap" approximate is close enough to warrant consideration and discussion.