YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion - Page 139

trofirhen · #**2761** Posted **Jun 24, 2010, 8:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpongeG

yes so as an example since air canada never picked up the paris route air france after 2 years should be able to pick up the route since air canada didn't - i think thats what he is saying should be done

we all know that can never happen but its a nice idea

Yes. I think you have the meaning. However, more importantly than that example, is Vancouver being reduced from an emerging HUB into a spoke for Toronto. The contact at YVR himself said that senior management and sales are all aware of this potentially happening. And if it does, it will mostly be the Ministry of Transport that deliberately caused it to happen.

Important to remember that Toronto is the principal Canadian city in just about every context, but their share of destinations is enormously larger than ours.

Go to the WIKIPEDIA entries for the airports YVR and YYZ, and compare; you'll understand what is happening if you look there.

twoNeurons · #**2762** Posted **Jun 24, 2010, 9:15 PM**

If you're a small country like Japan, Korea, Holland or the United Kingdom, it can make sense to make one city your hub... but Canada is so huge, it doesn't make any sense to do this.

MalcolmTucker · #**2763** Posted **Jun 24, 2010, 11:46 PM**

Vancouver should be much more concerned about the Calgary - Asia flights, the pledges for more when the 787s come than Toronto flights. Toronto flights to most of Asia make sense since the range is there, the market is there, and due to circle routes if you can get a high enough load factor you save a set of landing fees and somewhere around 800 miles.

The Calgary flights skim off higher fare customers that could contribute to more Vancouver flights. The Toronto flights are there in their own right, as Air Canada tries to prevent eastern Canadians from connecting into international hubs that have flights to almost everywhere, like New York.

Flights to New Delhi for example, with the circle route Vancouver only has a 300 mile advantage. Why should the air line waste money by routing them through YVR? Very different for Tokyo (YVR advantage 1800 miles) where the transfer only adds 300 miles, or Seoul (YVR advantage 1500 miles for a transfer penalty of only 500 miles.

You need to think of the globe as a sphere, not a flat map before proclaiming it logical to hub through Vancouver.

big T · #**2764** Posted **Jun 25, 2010, 12:12 AM**

Regarding the YVR-CDG situation, I believe AC's code share agreement with LH entitles them to a share of revenue of the YVR-FRA run (plus they have their own LHR run), so there's little incentive to dilute that with a direct flight. I'm not sure whether Van can really support that much traffic from Europe -- and before someone retorts that AF is/was interested in flying from CDG, please bear in mind that as a competitor they would actually be interested in cannibalizing the current Star Alliance routes.

SpongeG · #**2765** Posted **Jun 25, 2010, 12:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Yes. I think you have the meaning. However, more importantly than that example, is Vancouver being reduced from an emerging HUB into a spoke for Toronto. The contact at YVR himself said that senior management and sales are all aware of this potentially happening. And if it does, it will mostly be the Ministry of Transport that deliberately caused it to happen.

Important to remember that Toronto is the principal Canadian city in just about every context, but their share of destinations is enormously larger than ours.

Go to the WIKIPEDIA entries for the airports YVR and YYZ, and compare; you'll understand what is happening if you look there.

no no no

if air canada does not offer Vancouver - to Paris flights and refuses to do so - than put a time limit on it and say okay listen to us Air Canada you offer Vancouver - Paris service in two years -if you don't do it - we will let Air France step in and do it

we all know toronto is the centre of the universe especially when it comes to air Canada - I knew someone who worked for Air Canada and he said he can't advance much as long as he remains in Vancouver - if he moved to Toronto he would get more shifts and better routes etc. but he likes living here and takes it on the chin to avoid moving to Toronto - where he was originally from many years ago

anyway carry on

jlousa · #**2766** Posted **Jun 25, 2010, 1:00 AM**

*sigh* we seem to go over this YVR-CDG ever couple of months, there is nothing stopping flights from YVR to Paris except for demand. Personally I'd love to connect via Paris instead of Amsterdam or Frankfurt but there isn't enough demand for the airlines to provide such a flight. Air Transit used to fly it seasonally and they have lower overhead then the major airlines and even they had to cancel it as it wasn't profitable. Let's leave the conspiracy theories alone and realize Toronto covers an population ~3x ours. We do extremely well for our size and should be happen we get the amount of flights we do.

whatnext · #**2767** Posted **Jun 25, 2010, 1:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpongeG

...I knew someone who worked for Air Canada and he said he can't advance much as long as he remains in Vancouver - if he moved to Toronto he would get more shifts and better routes etc. but he likes living here and takes it on the chin to avoid moving to Toronto - where he was originally from many years ago

anyway carry on

That's true for any large company that's based in Toronto. Too bad so sad. Career or lifestyle, make the choice.

Gordon · #**2768** Posted **Jun 25, 2010, 2:51 AM**

Transat Has 3x weekly service between YVR & CDG

jlousa · #**2769** Posted **Jun 25, 2010, 2:58 AM**

Thanks just saw that, happy to see that they brought it back and it appears to be straight thru w/o stopping in calgary either, impressive. I just snapped up a couple of tixs.

Looks like I got lucky with my dates though, looking at their schedule closer it appears most of their flights do in fact stop in Calgary but not all of them.

Hourglass · #**2770** Posted **Jun 25, 2010, 5:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

Vancouver should be much more concerned about the Calgary - Asia flights, the pledges for more when the 787s come than Toronto flights.

Yeah, good point. And Calgary Airport has announced a huge expansion as well, including a new parallel runway. Having said that, Vancouver's larger population base and demographics likely favor YVR for any new Asian routes first. Anyone know how AC's new Calgary-Tokyo flights are doing?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

The Toronto flights are there in their own right, as Air Canada tries to prevent eastern Canadians from connecting into international hubs that have flights to almost everywhere, like New York.

Montreal (YUL) is also an AC hub, albeit more for European routes. But yes, as a business traveler, I prefer to do a short hop to a hub and then transfer for a long-haul flight rather than do a longer hop and then transfer. Generally, I have more flexibility and options with the short hop if there is ever a problem.

trofirhen · #**2771** Posted **Jun 25, 2010, 9:56 PM**

Here's an interesting article critiquing Canada's not-so-open skies from the Calgary Herald. Very much worth a look.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/travel/Study+calls+Canada+open+skies+competition/3199378/story.html

Gordon · #**2772** Posted **Jun 25, 2010, 10:22 PM**

The Federal Government is supposed to be bringing in a travel policy later this year.

As far as losing Asian flights to Calgary, Vancouver's population is roughly twice that of Calgary's & has a far largerAsian population that CAlgary does.

VAncouver's population is supposed to be increase by 1,000,000 in the next 20 years that alone wil keep the airport growing.

trofirhen · #**2773** Posted **Jun 25, 2010, 10:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gordon

The Federal Government is supposed to be bringing in a travel policy later this year.

As far as losing Asian flights to Calgary, Vancouver's population is roughly twice that of Calgary's & has a far largerAsian population that CAlgary does.

VAncouver's population is supposed to be increase by 1,000,000 in the next 20 years that alone wil keep the airport growing.

Thanks for your support. However, whatever travel / air destination policy the Feds bring in, you can bet your boots it will serve the interests of Toronto (and maybe Montreal) but leave Vancouver and Calgary out in the cold.

Emirates wanted to fly to Vancouver and Calgary, but were denied. Jet Airways was to have started service from Vancouver to India, and Vancouver to Brussels, but Toronto is the only city with that airline and route.

If you check out the YVR thread, plus the news, you'll see how the West (mostly Vancouver and Calgary) gets screwed by Air Canada, The Federal Ministers of Transport (always from Ontario) and how Toronto rakes in all the lucrative (or most of the lucrative) destinations.

It angers many people, and even YVR officals are getting worried about Vancouver being reduced to a spoke serving the humungous hub of YYZ Toronto.

Oh, and here's another link to look at. It examines the high cost of flying within Canada, and in and out of Canada.

Read it and weep. (or get pissed off, anyway)!!

http://www.edmontonsun.com/comment/columnists/mindelle_jacobs/2010/06/25/14514741.html

MalcolmTucker · #**2774** Posted **Jun 25, 2010, 11:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Here's an interesting article critiquing Canada's not-so-open skies from the Calgary Herald. Very much worth a look.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/travel/Study+calls+Canada+open+skies+competition/3199378/story.html

The issue the government liberalization isn't that - the study misses the point. Who pays for the equivalent of NavCan and CATSA in other nations? The national tax payers. In Canada the airport user not only pays for those things, but for airport rent to the federal government aswell.

Canadians also like things like entertainment and free pop and juice on flights which I doubt were available on the European and American flights, along with two checked bags.

What Milke and his organization want is cabotage, and I doubt you would like that. Certainly only one of Seattle or Vancouver would end up as a true hub under that situation and I doubt it would be the Canadian option given our higher fees.

As the counter point in the article says:

Quote:

Airline consultant Rick Erickson, of Calgary-based R.P. Erickson & Associates, said foreign carriers would still face the higher tax burdens of operating in Canada.
"I don't see them showing up and all of a sudden revolutionizing the Canadian airfare game," he said.
"They are going to find the costs here are higher, and that Air Canada and WestJet are very competitive competition."

usog · #**2775** Posted **Jun 26, 2010, 12:22 AM**

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/C...flight_china_100625/20100625?hub=Toronto

Bleh, nothing really to say it stands by itself. On that note I haven't seen any Air Canada promotion/sale from YVR in forever, nothing but stuff from Toronto, especially sales promoting the new routes Air Canada added recently...from Toronto.

trofirhen · #**2776** Posted **Jun 26, 2010, 10:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by usog

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/C...flight_china_100625/20100625?hub=Toronto

Bleh, nothing really to say it stands by itself. On that note I haven't seen any Air Canada promotion/sale from YVR in forever, nothing but stuff from Toronto, especially sales promoting the new routes Air Canada added recently...from Toronto.

Thank you for that!!
It's time more people woke up and smelled the coffee. Vancouver is losing its prominence as a hub for the Pacific, and this will be eroded even further. A YVR marketing official contact told me that senior YVR staff are concerned about YVR being relegated to a "spoke."

People who sanguinely think otherwise are kidding themselves. Thanks again.

dubsH · #**2777** Posted **Jun 26, 2010, 3:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Thank you for that!!
It's time more people woke up and smelled the coffee. Vancouver is losing its prominence as a hub for the Pacific, and this will be eroded even further. A YVR marketing official contact told me that senior YVR staff are concerned about YVR being relegated to a "spoke."

People who sanguinely think otherwise are kidding themselves. Thanks again.

I'm pretty sure most people (on here) are aware; they just aren't losing any more sleep than you are over this.

Hourglass · #**2778** Posted **Jun 26, 2010, 3:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Vancouver is losing its prominence as a hub for the Pacific, and this will be eroded even further.

A couple of years ago, Vancouver had something like 120 flights a week from Asia during the peak summer months. This summer? Around 92 flights per week.

What's concerning as well is that a number of new Asian routes have opened up from Seattle, including Beijing and Osaka.

Vancouver still has way more nonstops to Asia than Seattle does, but Seattle is gradually creeping up...

Gordon · #**2779** Posted **Jun 26, 2010, 4:54 PM**

One reason for the decrease in the number of Asian Nonstops is that massive recession over the last year or so.

With the range on the new jets an Pacific gateway is not as necessary as it once was.

Roughly how many Asian non stops does Seattle have?

jsbertram · #**2780** Posted **Jun 26, 2010, 6:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatnext

That's true for any large company that's based in Toronto. Too bad so sad. Career or lifestyle, make the choice.

I have a friend (not in the airline business) who has said for years he would take a promotion & transfer to Toronto only if he knew that one of the next promotions after that would bring him back to Vancouver (where he was born & raised and one branch of his family has been here since the 1850s gold rush).

His mindset is that a promotion is a step up the corporate ladder, but moving to Toronto was a necessary evil to get further into the top management. If the company really wanted him to stay with them, they would lay out a promotions 'path' to let him get back to Vancouver after a few moves while moving up the management ladder and he'd be happy to stay with the company.

I don't see that he's frustrated with 'being stuck' in Vancouver or 'being stuck' in his job, but I won't be surprised if he changes companies to take a position in Vancouver similar to what in his current company would require a move to Toronto.