Canadian Airport Thread II

[hehehe]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Yes, it’s pretty clear they don’t know/don’t care what the west wants. Meanwhile they think there’s a huge demand from Montreal to Naples?

Ok this is kind of ridiculous. Italy (and Southern Europe in general) is a booming market right now for AC/WS/DL/UA/AA who have all added a lot of capacity and have said that this market is growing substantially.

YVR-DXB/BKK/SIN have all been added post covid on AC. How does that signify that AC doesn't 'care' what the west wants? Financially AC had one of their best years in 2023 too, it seems like they know what their doing no?

[nname]

Originally Posted by Dominion301

That's kinda unfair. Not much has been cut out of BC except for the summer seasonal YCD/YKA-YYZ pre-pandemic rouge routes, while YVR-BKK & SIN and 789s getting permanently added to YVR-YOW have been added.

YVR-China/India is entirely outside of AC's control.

YVR-CDG/MEL/TPE/ZRH and the second daily LHR.

Both MEL and TPE are planned to restart "as soon as equipment are available" since early 2023 as per various news sources, but seems like AC have higher priority.

But base on the current plane assignment, it would be harder to build a new route out of YVR though. All 220 and 788 are at YYZ and YUL base, meaning the smallest medium-haul plane at YVR is the 7M8, and the long haul is 789.

Originally Posted by Dominion301

Probably nothing. There's new 7M8s, a 789 and 2 more 333s coming into the fleet and new-used widebodies with the pair of 763s getting reactivated. What's the frequency of all of these?

Need to watch YYZ-KIX and YUL-ICN. Both are last-minute addition this summer, where AC have extra capacity available (from cutting low-performing routes and frequency), but not enough lead time to start a new destination. Both routes are still not available for S25 yet.

Remember, AC was one aircraft short this summer after the initial schedule release. But then they get "lucky" by not able to operate to TLV, which save them exactly 1 aircraft.

And as of this update, the highest route number for European route is 934. I guess we should begin to see all of the 900s series Mexican route being kick to a new number?

Now I really need to update my script to handle the new AC website, since the old one is no longer working...

[Dominion301]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Yes, it’s pretty clear they don’t know/don’t care what the west wants. Meanwhile they think there’s a huge demand from Montreal to Naples?

Naples and surrounding areas is booming for tourists. Was just there this past May myself.

[Calfan12]

British Airways in last week’s schedule update filed initial changes to North America service during Northern summer 2025 season, including service increase between London Heathrow and Vancouver.

London Heathrow – Vancouver
eff 30MAR25 777-20ER replaces A350-1000XWB
eff 05APR25 Increase from 7 to 11 weekly (Overall service for Vancouver increases to 18 weekly by 29APR25, when seasonal London Gatwick – Vancouver service resumes)

BA087 LHR1420 – 1555YVR 777 x357
BA085 LHR1715 – 1850YVR 777 D

BA086 YVR1745 – 1105+1LHR 777 x357
BA084 YVR2050 – 1410+1LHR 777 x5
BA084 YVR2055 – 1415+1LHR 777 5

https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/240826-bans25lhr

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

I think AC had bigger plans for YVR under Rovinescu. They certainly seemed much more focussed on serving the western half of the country.

Meanwhile I don't think Rousseau could find BC on a map.

All three of AC's hubs grew significantly under Rovinescu.

Rousseau started during COVID. That had repercussions, moreso for YVR than YUL/YYZ. I don't think if Rovinescu was still at the helm, that would have changed. And let's not pretend its the CEO that decides what routes are launched. He isn't the one making those calls.

This being said, if AC's stock price stays this low, and the AC pilots go on strike in 3 weeks, I think Rousseau's days as CEO are numbered.

If that doesn't get a smile on your face, I don't know what will, besides AC launching YVR-CDG/FCO/ZRH, obviously....

Originally Posted by nname

YVR-CDG/MEL/TPE/ZRH and the second daily LHR.

Let's face it. YVR-Secondary Europe routes are a tough sell at the moment. For one, 3 out of those 4 routes have direct competition. And i'll say it again, those WS 787s out of YYC draw a significant amount of crowd from YVR. That doesn't help.

And as you said, MEL should resume. Not sure about TPE. They'd be the third airline on that one.

Originally Posted by nname

Need to watch YYZ-KIX and YUL-ICN.

They specifically mentioned these two routes in their last quarterly update. Apparently they are both doing well.

But it's not as if only YVR has lost long haul routes. YUL-HNL/CAI are recent examples as well. Neither of these had any direct competition either. So it wouldn't be unheard of for AC to shuffle around new routes that aren't performing as planned.

Originally Posted by whatnext

Yes, it’s pretty clear they don’t know/don’t care what the west wants. Meanwhile they think there’s a huge demand from Montreal to Naples?

1. You're underestimating the demand from Montreal to Italy, and that includes Naples.

2. Why do you think they picked YUL to Naples, and not YYZ? Why do you think they picked this route over say YVR-FCO, CDG or ZRH?

Here's why. It's a shorter route than all those others above. It's also the shortest route to Naples from any of their hubs. It has no direct competition. There is huge demand to Italy and the whole Mediterannean region at the moment. Not only will they be able to serve the local demand on the route, but they will be able to leverage their easternmost hub to capture all North American traffic headed to Naples, including from Vancouver and Toronto, but more importantly, from all points in the US. They are making sure they will be able to fill that plane, all the while keeping costs (highest of which is fuel) in check. This is where total distance is important, and why YUL was chosen, and not YYZ, or more YVR-Europe.

Clearly they don't feel the same way about Prague. They're launching that one non stop from YYZ. Clearly they think serving it from YYZ will yield better. So there is a method to this madness. Just because you can't see it, doesn't mean AC is cuckoo ! This is also why they moved YYZ-MXP over to a YYZ-YUL-MXP, and also why they started YUL-DEL. It's now the shortest route from one of their hubs to Delhi, what with the Russian detour.

You need to come to terms with the fact that YVR will never be able to sustain what YYZ/YUL can to Europe. YVR is a Pacific hub. YYZ/YUL are Atlantic hubs. 6th freedom traffic is extremely important to AC. They have 3 hubs they can individually leverage to make sure international routes perform at their best. Demand to the Mediterranean is extremely strong at the moment, and if AC is choosing to send more planes from YYZ/YUL to that region, it's because they believe they will make more money that way compared to more YVR-Europe. 2023 financial results were proof the strategy is working. It's as simple as that. It's very anti-cuckoo emoji, if you ask me.....

Pretending like this is some kind of anti-west thing is silly. If that was the case, you wouldn't have gotten SIN, BKK or DXB. If you want to blame someone, blame WS. Fairly certain if they didn't launch all those routes from YYC to the Mediterranean, AC would have done so from YVR by now. Unless you somehow think Calgary on its own can sustain flights to Barcelona and Rome.

[nname]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Let's face it. YVR-Secondary Europe routes are a tough sell at the moment. For one, 3 out of those 4 routes have direct competition. And i'll say it again, those WS 787s out of YYC draw a significant amount of crowd from YVR. That doesn't help.

And as you said, MEL should resume. Not sure about TPE. They'd be the third airline on that one.

Well, all 3 airlines from the Taiwan side want to add/increase service to Canada, but they cannot do so due to bilateral restriction. TPE-YVR/YYZ had been consistently be one of the top 5 performing long-haul route in term of LF for every month for the last 2 years or so. The only other route that had been consistently perform well is TPE-SEA.

Again, maybe AC can just codeshare with BR like they do now, but seems like the arrangement only last until Dec 31, at least for now.

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

They specifically mentioned these two routes in their last quarterly update. Apparently they are both doing well.

But it's not as if only YVR has lost long haul routes. YUL-HNL/CAI are recent examples as well. Neither of these had any direct competition either.

Perform well in comparison to expectation, but we don't know if it perform well compare to other routes. As mention before, both routes are last-minute addition with 2-3 months lead time, so I don't think the expectation will be high. Maybe if the route is perform better than CAI, or having the plane stay on ground as spare, then it's already good enough for them?

Looking at the previous posts.. AC opened YOW-LHR with 7 months lead time, and NAP/OPO/PRG with 9 months. SIN was also around 9 months as well.

According to what I heard, AC mainly use those routes to feed passenger into China. So maybe AC still waiting to see what happen in the next few months, or they are thinking of a new creative way to serve Chinese passengers?


And... just updated my script to fetch from the new AC system. Seems like the "new" AC schedule and flight status database no longer have the most up-to-date schedule as it still don't have any of the new routes added other than YOW-LHR announced weeks ago.

[Alexcaban]

And we'll continue to see those last minute additions if TLV doesn't operate next summer as well.

Those extra flights to ATH and CDG this summer came directly from the 787 that was to operate TLV.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Dominion301

That's kinda unfair. Not much has been cut out of BC except for the summer seasonal YCD/YKA-YYZ pre-pandemic rouge routes, while YVR-BKK & SIN and 789s getting permanently added to YVR-YOW have been added.

You must be joking. AC has slashed YVR and not just because of Covid. Look at the seats from YVR to Europe from 2022!



A couple pretty easy to see trends, every airline is going up except AC and their JV partner Lufthansa, who are down HEAVILY. Even when you factor in Edelweiss *A is down massively.

So strange everyone else can make money on YVR Europe except Air Canada.

It's almost like Rousseau (and his entire executive team) can't find BC on a map....

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

This being said, if AC's stock price stays this low, and the AC pilots go on strike in 3 weeks, I think Rousseau's days as CEO are numbered.


If that doesn't get a smile on your face, I don't know what will, besides AC launching YVR-CDG/FCO/ZRH, obviously....

Please don't toy with me. I can only get so excited.

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

1. You're underestimating the demand from Montreal to Italy, and that includes Naples.

I tink you're underestimating the demand from YVR to European destinations that aren't Germany or the UK.

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

You need to come to terms with the fact that YVR will never be able to sustain what YYZ/YUL can to Europe. YVR is a Pacific hub. YYZ/YUL are Atlantic hubs.

No one is asking for that. Literally no one. People are perplexed why AC is making massive cuts to Europe from one of it's alleged hubs, when they claim Europe is the key growth place right now.

As an example, AC sends over 7,000 seats to Italy per week from YUL alone, they send exactly 0 from YVR. Do they think people from Vancouver haven't heard of Italy? Don't go there? Or is it that they don't care about this hub and would rather send the customer many hours out of their way or lose the customer entirely.

Then when they get some spare capacity what does AC do? Add it to YVR-Europe because Europe is where all the action is? No! They add capacity from Eastern Canada to Asia!

It's almost like the guy running the ship is as incompetent as the guy who was in charge of the finances at Hudson's Bay.

Oh wait....

[nname]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

You must be joking. AC has slashed YVR and not just because of Covid. Look at the seats from YVR to Europe from 2022!

A couple pretty easy to see trends, every airline is going up except AC and their JV partner Lufthansa, who are down HEAVILY. Even when you factor in Edelweiss *A is down massively.

So strange everyone else can make money on YVR Europe except Air Canada.

It's almost like Rousseau (and his entire executive team) can't find BC on a map....

Well, at least LH expands during the winter and turn MUC year-round. Maybe ZRH is next as currently daily service is scheduled through to the end of the S25 season, instead of reducing to 4x weekly like this year. Codesharing with AC for HNL service through YVR will probably help too.

I guess AC leaving ZRH service to Swiss/WK is not necessary a bad thing. When both airlines operated the route, neither can operate the route daily. And you often see 2 flights operates on the same day while no flight for the next day. The overall capacity is not that far down from the peak 9x weekly pre-pandemic with a mix of 343/788/789.

For Italy, I'm pretty sure AC looked at YVR-FCO at some point in the past, but the plan may be shelved for now partially thanks to WS. Maybe AC will just leaving it to ITA now once it joins the LH group, which is inline with it's Europe strategy to let LH fly most of the routes outside of YYZ/YUL (AC codeshare with LX/WK for their YHZ-ZRH right away, so they're definitely involved in the planning). And the last time I check the merger condition, YVR should be able to operate without restriction, again thanks to the competition provided by WS

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Please don't toy with me. I can only get so excited.

I tink you're underestimating the demand from YVR to European destinations that aren't Germany or the UK.

I'm not. I think you're overestimating the demand.

Let's look at west coast hub airports in North America and how much domestic hub carrier capacity they have to the Mediterranean.

SEA: zero flights, by anyone in fact, foreign or domestic.
LAX: zero flights. (All the capacity to the Mediterranean is on foreign carriers.)
SFO: UA, only very recently, started seasonal service to BCN and FCO.

That's it. Tens of millions of people live in the US west coast. These are all markets far larger (and wealthier) than Vancouver, and yet, all American carriers can do to Spain, Italy or Greece from the west coast is 2 measly seasonal flights.

What does that tell you? Because it tells me US carriers are happy to have those folks connect at their midwest or east coast hubs, in order to fly to Spain, Italy or Greece.

BTW, AA, UA and DL all serve Naples, and all of them from their east coast hubs, and they chose to do that over flying LAX-FCO. Not one American carrier flies LAX-FCO ! How is that any different than what AC is doing?

It isn't. Are AA/DL/UA somehow neglecting California and Seattle? I don't think they are.

WS at YYC is in a unique position to try these routes. However,

1. We don't even know if they are making any money on these routes, as WS is a private company.
2. If it wasn't for the draw from YVR and the US west coast, it probably wouldn't be working, assuming it is.

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

No one is asking for that. Literally no one. People are perplexed why AC is making massive cuts to Europe from one of it's alleged hubs, when they claim Europe is the key growth place right now.

As an example, AC sends over 7,000 seats to Italy per week from YUL alone, they send exactly 0 from YVR. Do they think people from Vancouver haven't heard of Italy? Don't go there? Or is it that they don't care about this hub and would rather send the customer many hours out of their way or lose the customer entirely.

Then when they get some spare capacity what does AC do? Add it to YVR-Europe because Europe is where all the action is? No! They add capacity from Eastern Canada to Asia!

Did you ever think that maybe AC's runs to CDG and ZRH didn't meet expectations, and that it was maybe too much capacity from a west coast hub? I'm not saying they weren't able to fill the seats, but if you're operating at a loss, or aren't making as much money as you could elsewhere, the prudent thing to do would be to reorient the capacity elsewhere no?

YVR is already very well served to Europe, when you factor in all carriers. This, along with WS expansion at YYC, certainly has a role to play in why AC isn't growing YVR-Europe. There are a lot of variables at play here, most of which play against YVR getting more European service by AC. Based on your chart, Air Canada, even with the reductions, is still the leading carrier to Europe from YVR. That's still something. That's all I'm trying to say.

[Calfan12]

KOREAN AIR SEP 2024 787-10 LONG-HAUL OPERATIONS – 26AUG24

Korean Air in recent schedule update filed Boeing 787-10 long-haul service, currently scheduled on limited time basis in the second half of September 2024.

The 787-10 is currently scheduled on following service.

Seoul Incheon – Vancouver 21SEP24
KE071 ICN1850 – 1240YVR 781
KE072 YVR1430 – 1750+1ICN 781

https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/240827-kesep24781

[casper]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

I'm not. I think you're overestimating the demand.

Let's look at west coast hub airports in North America and how much domestic hub carrier capacity they have to the Mediterranean.

SEA: zero flights, by anyone in fact, foreign or domestic.
LAX: zero flights. (All the capacity to the Mediterranean is on foreign carriers.)
SFO: UA, only very recently, started seasonal service to BCN and FCO.

That's it. Tens of millions of people live in the US west coast. These are all markets far larger (and wealthier) than Vancouver, and yet, all American carriers can do to Spain, Italy or Greece from the west coast is 2 measly seasonal flights.

What does that tell you? Because it tells me US carriers are happy to have those folks connect at their midwest or east coast hubs, in order to fly to Spain, Italy or Greece.

BTW, AA, UA and DL all serve Naples, and all of them from their east coast hubs, and they chose to do that over flying LAX-FCO. Not one American carrier flies LAX-FCO ! How is that any different than what AC is doing?

It isn't. Are AA/DL/UA somehow neglecting California and Seattle? I don't think they are.

WS at YYC is in a unique position to try these routes. However,

1. We don't even know if they are making any money on these routes, as WS is a private company.
2. If it wasn't for the draw from YVR and the US west coast, it probably wouldn't be working, assuming it is.



Did you ever think that maybe AC's runs to CDG and ZRH didn't meet expectations, and that it was maybe too much capacity from a west coast hub? I'm not saying they weren't able to fill the seats, but if you're operating at a loss, or aren't making as much money as you could elsewhere, the prudent thing to do would be to reorient the capacity elsewhere no?

YVR is already very well served to Europe, when you factor in all carriers. This, along with WS expansion at YYC, certainly has a role to play in why AC isn't growing YVR-Europe. There are a lot of variables at play here, most of which play against YVR getting more European service by AC. Based on your chart, Air Canada, even with the reductions, is still the leading carrier to Europe from YVR. That's still something. That's all I'm trying to say.

AC has a joint venture with Lufthansa. Between the two of them they have no shortage of options.

Best hope for Vancouver is to get another European airlines that is not part of such a match up. Perhaps Scandinavian or TAP Air Portugal. However they both probably have other more profitable routes to deploy aircraft onto.

[Dominion301]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

You must be joking. AC has slashed YVR and not just because of Covid. Look at the seats from YVR to Europe from 2022!



A couple pretty easy to see trends, every airline is going up except AC and their JV partner Lufthansa, who are down HEAVILY. Even when you factor in Edelweiss *A is down massively.

So strange everyone else can make money on YVR Europe except Air Canada.

It's almost like Rousseau (and his entire executive team) can't find BC on a map....

Alright now do YVR to Asia excluding China/India which is outside of AC's control. AF has taken over YVR-CDG, WK has taken over ZRH, LH MUC & FRA. Why would AC do TPE with their *A partner on the route? YVR's big growth with AC will be when the 781s start showing up.

AF/KL's overall push into Canada since 2022 has been huge. Just like YYC (and YHZ to the east), most cities in YVR's size range of around 2.8 million would give anything to have the global breadth and depth of service YVR sees.

[nname]

Originally Posted by casper

AC has a joint venture with Lufthansa. Between the two of them they have no shortage of options.

Best hope for Vancouver is to get another European airlines that is not part of such a match up. Perhaps Scandinavian or TAP Air Portugal. However they both probably have other more profitable routes to deploy aircraft onto.

I was looking at LEVEL for BCN, but doesn't seems like they are too interested in the Canadian market. They had license to operate, but was recently suspended.

But maybe we'll just look at the Pacific side, as multiple carriers are looking to enter or expand the market in the very near future.

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

You must be joking. AC has slashed YVR and not just because of Covid. Look at the seats from YVR to Europe from 2022!

A couple pretty easy to see trends, every airline is going up except AC and their JV partner Lufthansa, who are down HEAVILY. Even when you factor in Edelweiss *A is down massively.

Not to add insult to the injury.. I think you're overestimated AC Europe capacity by quite a bit?

This is what I got for S25 so far. The correct number should be 5,906?

AC 4	789 (298)	D	NRT - YVR
AC 8	789 (298)	D	HKG - YVR
AC 20	789 (298)	2467	SIN - YVR
AC 22	789 (298)	135	HKG - YVR
AC 24	789 (298)	2467	KIX - YVR
AC 26	789 (298)	1357	PVG - YVR
AC 34	77L (300)	D	SYD - YVR - YYZ
AC 36	789 (298)	D	BNE - YVR
AC 64	77W (400)	D	ICN - YVR
AC 838	789 (298)	D	YVR - FRA
AC 860	77W (400)	D	YVR - LHR
AC 918	788 (255)	1357	YVR - DUB

DUB might be replace by 789 later on, as currently its rotate with the YUL route and they probably need that 788 for the new routes

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by nname

Not to add insult to the injury.. I think you're overestimated AC Europe capacity by quite a bit?

This is what I got for S25 so far. The correct number should be 5,906?

AC 4	789 (298)	D	NRT - YVR
AC 8	789 (298)	D	HKG - YVR
AC 20	789 (298)	2467	SIN - YVR
AC 22	789 (298)	135	HKG - YVR
AC 24	789 (298)	2467	KIX - YVR
AC 26	789 (298)	1357	PVG - YVR
AC 34	77L (300)	D	SYD - YVR - YYZ
AC 36	789 (298)	D	BNE - YVR
AC 64	77W (400)	D	ICN - YVR
AC 838	789 (298)	D	YVR - FRA
AC 860	77W (400)	D	YVR - LHR
AC 918	788 (255)	1357	YVR - DUB

DUB might be replace by 789 later on, as currently its rotate with the YUL route and they probably need that 788 for the new routes

Lol you're right, it's even worse than I've shown.

Continued annual declines from their hub to their main growth region.

What a joke.

[Zmonkey]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Please don't toy with me. I can only get so excited.




I tink you're underestimating the demand from YVR to European destinations that aren't Germany or the UK.



No one is asking for that. Literally no one. People are perplexed why AC is making massive cuts to Europe from one of it's alleged hubs, when they claim Europe is the key growth place right now.

As an example, AC sends over 7,000 seats to Italy per week from YUL alone, they send exactly 0 from YVR. Do they think people from Vancouver haven't heard of Italy? Don't go there? Or is it that they don't care about this hub and would rather send the customer many hours out of their way or lose the customer entirely.

Then when they get some spare capacity what does AC do? Add it to YVR-Europe because Europe is where all the action is? No! They add capacity from Eastern Canada to Asia!

It's almost like the guy running the ship is as incompetent as the guy who was in charge of the finances at Hudson's Bay.

Oh wait....

AC can easily pull Americans and Italians to connect through Montreal. Geogrpahy helps here.

Its a much harder sell in Vancouver since you have substantially fewer cities to pull from. That is why Montreal is seeing growth. Their Connection numbers are soaring.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Zmonkey

AC can easily pull Americans and Italians to connect through Montreal.

No they can't, its incredibly out of the way and should not be the defacto routing for trips to Europe. It adds several hours to each journey.

And yes, I understand how hubbing in airports works, hency why I've said several times I don't think YVR should be anywhere near YUL or YYZ's europe numbers.

But for the seats to be going consistently and significantly down in an airport where they supposedly have a hub, where they want to win over frequent fliers, and build their business seems like a losing strategy to me.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

Did you ever think that maybe AC's runs to CDG and ZRH didn't meet expectations, and that it was maybe too much capacity from a west coast hub?

No I don't think so.

It's quite clear. I've shown that every single other European carrier has shown consistent increases in capacity. AC has shown consistent and at times significant capacity decreases.

Clearly there is demand there for YVR-Europe, AC just doesn't care about its customers east of Mississauga.

[nname]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

No I don't think so.

It's quite clear. I've shown that every single other European carrier has shown consistent increases in capacity. AC has shown consistent and at times significant capacity decreases.

Clearly there is demand there for YVR-Europe, AC just doesn't care about its customers east of Mississauga.

I think ZRH should be doing fine. WK increase the frequency on the same day that AC suspending the route, so it's obvious AC/LH/LX are coordinating this change. Overall no loss in frequency, but slightly increase in capacity due to WK 343 holds more passengers than AC 789. WK picked YVR as one of the first routes to put their new 359 should also be a sign that the route is doing well.

The same applies to AC transferring YYC-FRA route to LH. The changes happened on the same day, so they most be coordinating. AC have JV for both routes, so they don't really care who is flying it.

CDG... that might be a different story. Maybe people in BC just don't care about France? Or maybe it's too hard to compete with WS who are selling connection through YYC at around half of the price even during peak season? Seems like even AF is having a hard time for making the route daily year-round.