^ The fanboy factor in that Retail Insider post is hilarious.

However, I will agree that it would be nice to see YYZ get spruced up a bit more... there is some significance to that airport as an entry point into Canada, and as such it should be designed with that in mind. That said, Canada's major international gateways (YYZ, YUL, YVR, YYC) stack up reasonably well on the whole.

The retail is a nice to have, I posted the article more for the PAX stats at the end.

Pearson is on an absolute roll.

Canadian airports sometimes feel a bit small and compartmentalized because the domestic, international and transborder traffic are all segregated. So even if you have one large terminal, there are clear and discrete zones and walls you cannot cross. As a result, it becomes difficult to attract major retailers or build a gigantic food court with more variety, because you have to build a separate one for each area. Usually, bland, mid-market options - like Tim Hortons and a Hudson News - can make a go of it, but any specialty retail and food has a tough time.

I appreciate the idea of US border pre-clearance, so maybe that will always have to be segregated, but there's no reason we can't integrate domestic and international departures in the future*.

*EDIT: I remember Dorval has this, so maybe segregation between international and Canadian departure gates isn't a rule.

All 4 of Canada's major airports are on a roll.

A few mistakes/manipulations in that article btw.

First of which, its restaurants, parking and retail that account for 30% of YYZ airport's revenue, not just retail. (which of those do you think brings in the most money ! I doubt it's retail.)

Second, those PAX stats are to be taken with a grain of salt. 60% and 80% are littered in that article and paint a false picture. It paints a real doom and gloom picture for YVR, YUL and YYC, when that is clearly not the case. Let me elaborate. Only comparing absolute passenger growth between an airport serving 40 million passengers and one serving half that is a bit ridiculous.

Last year, Pearson handled 38.6 million passengers, up 2.5 million or 6.8 per cent from the year before. YVR handled 19.3 million, up 1.4 million. Comparing the 2.5 million of YYZ to the 1.4 million of YVR is a bit misleading considering the underlying premise of double the traffic at YYZ. You need to compare growth percentages as well, in order to have a more accurate feel of which airport is growing at a faster rate. And in that aspect, YVR lead the way in 2014, with a 7.7 % growth, compared to Toronto's 6.8%.

Anyone can manipulate stats. Here's me....."YUL's passenger count grew 100% since 2003, whereas YYZ's only grew by 60%". (This is true btw)

Bottom line, all 4 of Canada's major hubs are doing just fine, with growth rates in the 5 to 8% range a year.

As for the whole retail bit, no one really gives a damn that a rich guy bought a 20,000$ Omega from the airport. Since when does having high end retail stores at an Airport of Entry say anything about Canada and who we are ! Frankly, this article is a farce.

Given that the article is primarily meant for the retail industry (and attracting additional retailers to YYZ) - absolute growth numbers paint more of a story than growth percentages.

Either way, realistically (and others will hate me for this) AC really has one hub - it's Toronto. They're even pretty explicit about it in their strategy. YYZ is the global key hub (YUL and YVR are specialized). YUL would be the DUS of Canada and YVR the mini-MUC if we are to compare to a similar non-centralized country.

Also again, given the context of the article (and the source), someone dropping $20k on a watch is a big deal, a very big deal.

YVR is seriously on fire with all the recent news and more just keeps coming! :cheers:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...AS_2013_01.jpg

Decent analogy, actually. In that sense, YYC and its 18-plus-month-overdue International terminal can represent BBI, then....:D

And Klazu, isn't it true that it'll actually be a loss of a frequency and fewer seats? If so, lipstick, pig, all for prestige.

Cyeg It says right at the bottom of the link he quoted:

Even if it was a decrease in seats, I'd gladly take it for a daily A380 gracing the skies. I see them landing at Pearson from time to time while driving up the 400, such an incredible sight.

Another A380 that could potentially divert to YYC one of these days!

Daily A380 for Vancouver wow that's the most in Canada! YVR is definitely on a roll there's constantly something new being added!

Well to be fair if EK had daily rights they'd probably be flying the A380 into YYZ every day of the week too.

If EK had the rights, they'd probably be flying into Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Calgary daily, Ottawa and Edmonton could be a few times a week and maybe also Winnipeg, Halifax and Quebec City.

Now you're making me laugh!

Wouldn't Edmonton be a more likely one as the YVR-LHR flight path is north of Edmonton. Sorry to disappoint. :)

And why are some people saying that this will be a reduction in seats? :shrug: Johnny was saying:

I cannot believe that we will be seeing more A380 action than YYZ! :runaway:

We've had days where YYC gets diversions from YVR when the weather is bad. So yes, it can happen. Or flights from YVR-Europe that may be routing not as far north at first due to jet stream location can pass close by us. Flight paths are not set in stone, and can change daily to take advantage of/avoid upper winds.

Remember Klazu when Vancouver succeeds it's considered bad news to every other location in the country. I've seen it in several threads over several years. That's why most Vancouver posters stay out of the Canada section.

They are not maintaining 12 weekly , it has been reduced to daily A380 only.

Edit: Whoops, I see the 772 flight has been dropped.

Seems that the original source got edited after Johnny posted his message.

This is still such a superior product compared to the tired 747. I only fly to Europe around Christmas, so for me personally this is only great news. :)

I don't have too much concern over the reduction in capacity with the loss of the daily 772.

European growth at YVR has been nothing short of astounding this year (8.5% increase in PAX) and loads on the UK runs have been more or less full all year. I would expect BA to add another plane to pick up the un-served demand or another airline (possibly Virgin Atlantic to return) to pick up the slack.

That or BA could know something we don't about additional planned services, such as an AC 789 to India or something silly like that, which would cut into the YVR/LHR market.