YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[mezzanine]

^ interesting article.

The airline's Chinese passengers will no longer need a transit visa to change planes in Vancouver on their way to the US. Chinese passengers enroute to the US via Vancouver typically need the visas for their stop in Canada.

Currently Air China has a daily flight into Vancouver, but Holloway anticipates more service will be added once passengers learn about the streamlined process.
....

Only a handful of flights from China to the US are direct flights. All the others require connecting flights within the continent. Solloway says with four million passengers travelling between the two countries yearly, even getting a small fraction to make connecting flights in Vancouver would be very lucrative.

This change looks like is was mainly due to visa changes, but the planned upgrades will enhance transfers and dovetail nicely with this. air china is star alliance.

Perhaps china eastern will also apply for this too.

[ACT7]

Originally Posted by whatnext

On the other hand, Air China just annoucned they will increase flights to YVR:
http://www.news1130.com/news/local/artic...ine-plans-to-double-service-to-vancouver

The article says that they could see increased flights in the future -we'll see. Hopefully that leads to actual traffic flow increases because as I said in a previous post, if you look at the numbers, Asia Pacific traffic has been more or less flat since 2002. The increased frequencies, capacity, carriers, etc have had more of a redistributon effect rather than increasing pax numbers substantially.

[usog]

Looks like YVR is foregoing domestic/short-haul flights for long-haul international ones. Probably a good idea since those seem to be maxed out for now anyways, the people who fly through Bellingham or Seattle are usually Vacationers who aren't willing to pay much it seems and who YVR will never win over.

[ACT7]

Originally Posted by usog

Looks like YVR is foregoing domestic/short-haul flights for long-haul international ones. Probably a good idea since those seem to be maxed out for now anyways, the people who fly through Bellingham or Seattle are usually Vacationers who aren't willing to pay much it seems and who YVR will never win over.

Bellingham, yes. Seattle, maybe not so much. Seattle has a number of long haul routes that compete directly with YVR, plus EK now which will pull some of the sub-continent destined traffic away from Vancouver. Long haul may be the focus for YVR but it won't work well without domestic and transborder feeder traffic - O&D traffic at YVR is probably not strong enough to focus solely on long haul international flights.

[SpongeG]

they talked to listeners on news1130 a couple nights ago, i only heard a few comments on air but the ones i heard all said they haven't used YVR in years and when they fly they fly out of seattle, even if they have to pay for a night in a hotel down there its still a couple hundred bucks cheaper than flying out of YVR and this new fee is only going to reinforce their choice to use seattle or bellingham

[PaperTiger]

Originally Posted by ACT7

The article says that they could see increased flights in the future -we'll see. Hopefully that leads to actual traffic flow increases because as I said in a previous post, if you look at the numbers, Asia Pacific traffic has been more or less flat since 2002. The increased frequencies, capacity, carriers, etc have had more of a redistributon effect rather than increasing pax numbers substantially.

I think that there is also a few lost routes that are being compensated for with some of these new destinations. Singapore and Osaka come to mind. I think if we start to see a couple of new destinations with no other losses we would start to see overall increases in international pax.

[teriyaki]

If Air China advertises this right in the mainland, this new change in visa requirements could potentially bring us a lot more traffic when you consider the potential there is in China for new pax.

It does kind of worry me that this is another star alliance route being upgraded. Hopefully it does become successful, and skyteam and one world members will try their hand at cracking the yvr star alliance stronghold.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by teriyaki

If Air China advertises this right in the mainland, this new change in visa requirements could potentially bring us a lot more traffic when you consider the potential there is in China for new pax.

It does kind of worry me that this is another star alliance route being upgraded. Hopefully it does become successful, and skyteam and one world members will try their hand at cracking the yvr star alliance stronghold.

Quite a few Mainland Chinese news sources have already taken note of this.

And while this is good news, I question how much this really benefits Vancouver. Air China already flies into three large American gateways, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York. And while Vancouver is the closest North American destination than all three of these cities, our coverage of the United States is also substantially less than these other North American gateways. Three factors come into play:

1. Destinations: Our transborder network unfortunately doesn't have many regular destinations.
2. Frequency: Aside from San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle, and Portland (in other words, cities on the West Coast), there aren't too many routes with a high frequency.
3. Flight Scheduling: Many of the transborder destinations served by American carriers have an unusual schedule that does not yet work well with any of the flights Air China flights.

Chinese carriers are going to be expanding everywhere as soon as they have the infrastructure. They have the lowest cost of operation in Asia right now, and they can afford to expand to many more destinations soon. So in the short-term, it may benefit Vancouver to some extent, but in the long-term, as Chinese carriers add more destinations to their route map, Vancouver will become less of a transit airport city.

Vancouver will be a Star Alliance stronghold for a long long time: other airlines will not be able to use Vancouver as a transit destination unless there is reciprocal agreements made with other North American airlines. WestJet has failed to capture the regular traveller business for their North American flights, and until they can do this, expand their Vancouver network, and have many more regular flights from Vancouver, Chinese carriers will be looking into flying straight into the United States, where there short-haul transit network can support their demand.

As for the discussion about Bellingham, I feel this is often misrepresented and overreported in the media. Those who are choosing Bellingham over Vancouver are those only flying for recreation and leisure purposes, and often to vacation destinations only within the United States. And while there is a market for vacationers (hence the existence of charter carriers such as Transat and Thomas Cook), the majority of the market is the business and international/legacy market. There is little the Vancouver Airport Authority can do to lower costs to become as competitive as Bellingham, it's just not economically possible, nor do I think it makes any sense either.

Seattle is a bit further from Vancouver. But are costs necessarily cheaper? Yes if it's within the United States, but for international flights, Seattle, specifically the Asia-Pacific flights, can often be more expensive than Vancouver. That being said, Seattle is a big competitor for Vancouver, and Seattle has the United States domestic network that can support transiting passengers from foreign carriers, which is something Vancouver will never be able to compete with. Asiana Airlines from Seoul and Hainan Airlines from Beijing, are the carriers Vancouver don't have right now (Korean Air flies to both Vancouver and Seattle). All Nippon Airways is also expected to add Seattle to its international route map with their new 787s. In terms of Asia-Pacific flights, since geographically, there's little difference between the two cities, Vancouver's advantage over Seattle is the final-destination demand and perhaps the West Coast Canadian transit network, while Seattle's advantage is the American transit network.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by deasine

Quite a few Mainland Chinese news sources have already taken note of this.

And while this is good news, I question how much this really benefits Vancouver. Air China already flies into three large American gateways, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New York. And while Vancouver is the closest North American destination than all three of these cities, our coverage of the United States is also substantially less than these other North American gateways. Three factors come into play:

1. Destinations: Our transborder network unfortunately doesn't have many regular destinations.
2. Frequency: Aside from San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle, and Portland (in other words, cities on the West Coast), there aren't too many routes with a high frequency.
3. Flight Scheduling: Many of the transborder destinations served by American carriers have an unusual schedule that does not yet work well with any of the flights Air China flights.

Chinese carriers are going to be expanding everywhere as soon as they have the infrastructure. They have the lowest cost of operation in Asia right now, and they can afford to expand to many more destinations soon. So in the short-term, it may benefit Vancouver to some extent, but in the long-term, as Chinese carriers add more destinations to their route map, Vancouver will become less of a transit airport city.

Regarding this point - the lack of a comprehensive Transborder route coverage -- is there not therefore a niche market to fill? If, for example West Jet were to become ever more ambitious, could they not increase routes and frequencies from YVR to major US destinations, and adding a couple more that would largely cater to Asian businness travellers; they already have a scad of online agreements with other carriers. Or ... aha ... could they do that out of Calgary, steal business away from YVR? Hmmm.

Anyway, my major point is that there be, if $$$ permits, a higher, denser transborder network. Is there the demand? Could it be achieved? Pray yes.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Regarding this point - the lack of a comprehensive Transborder route coverage -- is there not therefore a niche market to fill? If, for example West Jet were to become ever more ambitious, could they not increase routes and frequencies from YVR to major US destinations, and adding a couple more that would largely cater to Asian businness travellers; they already have a scad of online agreements with other carriers. Or ... aha ... could they do that out of Calgary, steal business away from YVR? Hmmm.

Anyway, my major point is that there be, if $$$ permits, a higher, denser transborder network. Is there the demand? Could it be achieved? Pray yes.

The problem is, WestJet is not yet able to capture any of the regular Transborder business, it's mostly the leisure. Though this is something I believe they will try to change over the next few years, and them gaining slots at LGA (New York) is already a sign of this (note: Air Canada Express will begin flying to JFK (New York) from Toronto soon, meaning they will have flights to all three airports of New York). Air Canada and United have a monopoly and pretty much dominate the entire transborder market. And while WestJet has had much success in breaking apart monopolies, it's still going to take a lot of work to break this one apart.

[TransitJack]

I didn't realize that AC Jazz changed their name to Express.. but now I see it has been like that since April.

So much to learn from this forum.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by TransitJack

I didn't realize that AC Jazz changed their name to Express.. but now I see it has been like that since April.

So much to learn from this forum.

Technically, Jazz, a subsidiary under Air Canada, still exists. Air Canada added the "Express" name as a brand classification for all its short-haul regional flights because Air Canada also contracts other short-haul regional flight routes to other companies (i.e. Chorus Aviation operates Air Canada flights from Toronto City Airport).

[mezzanine]

anyhoo, the new YVR pipeline is under review, with the new change in its route - it will follow hwy 99 away from residential areas.

Comments are open at the EAO. I would encourage those who want an efficient airport and moving ++ tanker trucks off the road to write in a quick note.

If you don't like it, well, i guess you can write in too.

http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pcp/forms/VAFD_form.html

[s211]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

anyhoo, the new YVR pipeline is under review, with the new change in its route - it will follow hwy 99 away from residential areas.

Comments are open at the EAO. I would encourage those who want an efficient airport and moving ++ tanker trucks off the road to write in a quick note.

If you don't like it, well, i guess you can write in too.

http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/pcp/forms/VAFD_form.html

But it's a pipeline!

Pipelines = Hitler, or so the media would like me to believe.

[jlousa]

Ironically there is a gas pipeline to almost every single building in Metro area. Perhaps we should remove them and return to have fuel delivered by truck and we can go down the road and pick it up ourselves.
I don't see the reason to be so much against the pipe line, it'll be less dangerous then our main natural gas lines, and in the proposed environment any leak will be identified immediately and the line shut down almost instantly. Worst case scenario is you have localized spill which will get cleaned up.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by deasine

Technically, Jazz, a subsidiary under Air Canada, still exists. Air Canada added the "Express" name as a brand classification for all its short-haul regional flights because Air Canada also contracts other short-haul regional flight routes to other companies (i.e. Chorus Aviation operates Air Canada flights from Toronto City Airport).

Nope.

Jazz is not a subsidiary of Air Canada. It is wholly owned by Chrous Aviation. Chorus does not operate Air Canada Express flights from YTZ, that was contracted out to a completely different company, Skyregional. You have to think that must have pissed Jazz off, I noticed the maple leaves have come off their hangar in Richmond:



Jazz also operates Thomas Cook 757 charter flights to the Carribean

[deasine]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Nope.

Jazz is not a subsidiary of Air Canada. It is wholly owned by Chrous Aviation. Chorus does not operate Air Canada Express flights from YTZ, that was contracted out to a completely different company, Skyregional. You have to think that must have pissed Jazz off, I noticed the maple leaves have come off their hangar in Richmond:

Totally mixed up the names. You are right:

Jazz is the original regional brand, but as Air Canada added additional routes, it needed to change its regional brand to reflect other companies adding in.

Sure Jazz lost business to another company, but at the same time, Chorus Aviation took on business with Thomas Cook Canada. Goes both ways.

[Hot Rod]

Great to see the new agreement, it should open up Vancouver as an even stronger Star Alliance hub particularly when you consider the size of Beijing - soon to be the world's largest passenger airport (domestic and/or international). Having Vancouver as a strong hub is great for the city and far surpasses anything that my home city (Seattle) has; as Hainan is filling a niche (the ONLY airline with nonstop PEK-SEA service) and most of that capacity is premium.

One other point, Air China ALREADY has twice daily service (or something like 12 weekly flights) on the PEK-YVR route; I've flown both times of day (departure roughly 3am and departure roughly 1pm), I think they are or have moved the 3am departure earlier to the evening now but Im not sure if it runs daily or 5 times weekly in addition to the daily 1pm flight.

One final thought regarding the CA-Canada expansion, this could be an an assault on Cathay Pacific that could move pax away from HKG-YVR over to PEK-YVR. But I would be interested if they apply for the agreement, and if China Southern will (CAN-YVR) and China Eastern (PVG-YVR). There was news in China that Xiamen Airlines wants to start non-stop Xiamen-YVR service, and I believe Sichuan Airlines wants in the game with CTU-YVR. We'll have to wait and see what solidifies as airlines get 787's and move older planes from 'legacy carriers' Air China/China Southern/China Eastern to the smaller/now regional ones Sichuan Airlines/Xiamen Airlines/Hainan Airlines.

Personally, I find it hard to believe $5.00 would make a difference for somebody flying from YVR. I think there is more to it, such as SEA's vast/cheap national connection since it is not a fortress hub for any alliance. Those pax going from Vancouver to SEA are doing so for this reason, and not for International. I think it only makes sense for YVR to focus on what it is good at - International, particularly since SEA has added capacity that should have gone to YVR (thinking of Star Alliance's ANA NRT-SEA 787 service this year - however, I suspect this will replace United's current NRT-SEA 777 ops, which is always half empty). It is weird to see flag carriers at SEA, particularly any Star Alliance.

Will be interesting to see how it all plays out. I honestly dont think SEA has been the major competitor for YVR that some on here think, I think Toronto Pearson's Air Canada fortress and its demand for service/routes helped by the Federal Government protection is the real thing holding up Vancouver, regardless of YVR's Star Alliance fortress (for evidence, see X carriers who are non-star that are/were interested in adding routes but did not due to Air Canada/Toronto/Federal Govt).

[ACT7]

Originally Posted by Hot Rod

Having Vancouver as a strong hub is great for the city and far surpasses anything that my home city (Seattle) has; as Hainan is filling a niche (the ONLY airline with nonstop PEK-SEA service) and most of that capacity is premium.

There was news in China that Xiamen Airlines wants to start non-stop Xiamen-YVR service, and I believe Sichuan Airlines wants in the game with CTU-YVR.

I honestly dont think SEA has been the major competitor for YVR that some on here think, I think Toronto Pearson's Air Canada fortress and its demand for service/routes helped by the Federal Government protection is the real thing holding up Vancouver, regardless of YVR's Star Alliance fortress (for evidence, see X carriers who are non-star that are/were interested in adding routes but did not due to Air Canada/Toronto/Federal Govt).

See, but you hit the nail on the head with your first point. Hainan is predominantly premium capacity, which generally means higher yields - making it a very viable flight.

I'd be very curious to see how long Sichuan Airlines and potentially Xiamen Airlines will last in the Vancouver market. The Chinese carriers may be flooding a saturated market with all these flights. Yes, Vancouver has a large Chinese population but it is the fourth or fifth largest in N.A. and has been discussed at length on this and other threads, point-to-point traffic to YVR will only last for so long. As far as I know, Sichuan Airlines and Xiamen Airlines do not have agreements with other carriers within Canada or the U.S. for onward traffic out of YVR. Might not be that diffiicult to establish but is YVR the most practical stop-over considering SFO, LAX, JFK, YYZ all have larger Chinese populations and more business traffic. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Regarding your last point, I don't see the federal government supporting YYZ at all. In fact they milk so much rent out of YYZ that one could argue they are hampering its growth. Yes, Air Canada will likely focus on YYZ for the rest of its corporate life (population, cachement, and business traffic have everything to do with that), so that's why I think YVR has a tough road ahead. SEA is competition, no doubt, but really it's technology that has hampered YVR's growth (i.e. Ultra long range aircraft). As someone pointed out earlier of this thread, YVR's location is potentially its disadvantage as airlines can fly over Vancouver easily and enter the far larger markets to the east and to the south of it.

[Hot Rod]

Hainan is premium because it is the only flight from SEA-PEK. Im not sure how yields are doing, but it is the ONLY choice to China from SEA, nonstop. YVR has China Southern, Eastern, Air China, and Air Canada to mainland (likely more soon), and Cathay to HK. I've been very satisfied with flying from YVR to China (or connecting via YVR from SEA using Star Alliance).

I am pretty sure ANA is NOT adding capacity to the SEA-NRT route but likely are just taking over with their new/more efficient/smaller 787 what United is currently doing with 'empty' 777. I honestly couldn't believe the United flight is still in operation since they can't be making any money and SEA is not a Star hub, and the flight is significantly discounted given SkyTeam/Delta has more of a stronghold on the Japan market from SEA (767 flights to NRT and KIX).

The only other Asian competitive market like NRT-SEA is Seoul-SEA, which is served by Asiana and Korean; though Im not sure if it is daily on both. China Air got out of SEA, Eva remains for the SEA-TPE route. That's it for Asia from SEA.

Again, Im don't see how SEA is giving YVR competition internationally. Certainly not to Asia and both airports are quite comparable to Europe (particularly if you consider YVR's many charters).

SEA provides competition to YVR in US Domestic (YVR transborder) and BLI provides comp to HI and LAS, but that makes sense to me since SEA/BLI are US (and BLI specifically is targeting Canadian pax to justify its existence), this should not surprise Canadians just like I'd think/hope that YVR has better handle on Canadian domestic than SEA's few flights to Canada.

Again, it is nice to have choices and not be stuck with a monopoly one way or another.