YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion - Page 297

Johnny Aussie · #**5921** Posted **Jun 2, 2014, 7:42 AM**

According to these two articles, The Philippines and Canada have successfully renegotiated their air agreement allowing double daily flights from Canada to the Philippines for both sides.

Interesting comment that PAL has been "eager" for the conclusion of Canada-Philippine bilaterals in order to commence Manila-New York via Vancouver.

Both articles mention PAL is planning 14 flights per week to YVR with some continuing on to YYZ and some to NYC.

I actually doubt they would use all of their allotments all at one go. There appears to speculation of AC starting MNL as well, but I will leave that only as speculative.

Seems like a lot of capacity. I realise that PAL couldn't make MNL-YYZ nonstop work so perhaps all flights may go via YVR if this all happens. Interesting articles nevertheless.

I guess we will have to wait and see what transpires over the next few months...

http://www.philippineflightnetwork.com/2014/05/philippine-airlines-increase-flights-to-canada.html

http://www.philippineflightnetwork.com/2014/05/philippine-airlines-canada-flights.html

trofirhen · #**5922** Posted **Jun 2, 2014, 9:07 AM**

Great news; thanks Johnny! I wish a European Airline, Lufthansa, Turkish, whatever, would start one or two fifth-freedom incursions into Vancouver, too, and extend YVR's reach into Europe

twoNeurons · #**5923** Posted **Jun 2, 2014, 5:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

All good except ANA. That route is still going to be a 763 for the foreseeable future.

Which is one reason we decided JAL over ANA for our next trip to Japan.

Zassk · #**5924** Posted **Jun 2, 2014, 5:19 PM**

Quick note about the outlet mall. No pics because I was caught offguard while driving over the Arthur Laing Bridge, but I was surprised to see lots of progress on the mall. The steel frame is up for the whole section closest to (parallel to) the North Arm of the river. The foundations are all in place for the rest of it. I'm not totally clear on what's being built first, but this may be just a first phase rather than the entire mall. Seems like the section closest to Templeton is going up right now. I thought the overall project would stretch all the way to the Arthur Laing bridge, but the current layout only goes halfway.

deasine · #**5925** Posted **Jun 2, 2014, 6:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

There appears to speculation of AC starting MNL as well, but I will leave that only as speculative.

I do not see AC being able to operate in this market competitively. The Philippines is a low yield market, and any high yield traffic there is would be highly competitive. AC does not also have the market awareness nor the premium brand compared to its Asian competitors. Unless AC will go Rouge over this route, I do not think AC will be do well on this one.

Johnny Aussie · #**5926** Posted **Jun 3, 2014, 6:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by deasine

I do not see AC being able to operate in this market competitively. The Philippines is a low yield market, and any high yield traffic there is would be highly competitive. AC does not also have the market awareness nor the premium brand compared to its Asian competitors. Unless AC will go Rouge over this route, I do not think AC will be do well on this one.

I agree. I would be very surprised if this route (either YVR-MNL or YYZ-MNL) would ever be launched by AC. There are plenty of other more lucrative routes the 777s/787s can be put on. I would guess YVR/YYZ-MNL would have to wait for the 789 anyway.

Also, I don't see any other market in Canada that could support a route to Manila either. Despite what many Winnipeggers might think. The two largest Filipino VFR markets by far in Canada are YYZ and YVR and even then I doubt PAL is rolling in huge profits on the Canadian routes.

Johnny Aussie · #**5927** Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 8:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

But with the winter scheds all showing all the above mentioned additional rouge flying + bigger birds on AC to LHR, HKG, PVG and NRT (however, still not showing 787 yet) for the entire winter next year + the new ANA flights to HND + bigger birds on LH to FRA + EVA Air continuing with 4 weekly year-round + DL new flights to SEA + Sunwing additional flying + I expect more to come anyway.... did I miss anything?

And here is another.

Effective 26 October - 26 March AC is replacing the daily 77L with a 77W on the YVR-SYD route. That is a huge increase in seats.

http://airlineroute.net/2014/06/04/ac-syd-w14/

But I didn't think the 77W had the legs to do this westbound nonstop without weight restrictions.

Johnny Aussie · #**5928** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 7:44 AM**

First flight departs at 0630 on an E75.

4 daily - 3 CR9s and 1 E75.

And a silence falls over YVR ;-)

trofirhen · #**5929** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 2:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

First flight departs at 0630 on an E75.

4 daily - 3 CR9s and 1 E75.

And a silence falls over YVR ;-)

Interestingly (in Wikipedia, anyway), SEA-TAC's number one transborder destination is Vancouver.
YVR's number one transborder destination, apparently, is LAX.
Differences in cosmopolitanism, here.

Valley_Refugee · #**5930** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 4:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Interestingly (in Wikipedia, anyway), SEA-TAC's number one transborder destination is Vancouver.
YVR's number one transborder destination, apparently, is LAX.
Differences in cosmopolitanism, here.

How is this a difference in cosmopolitanism? Where else would SEA's number one transborder come from? Toronto? Calgary? No.

deasine · #**5931** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 4:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

And here is another.

Effective 26 October - 26 March AC is replacing the daily 77L with a 77W on the YVR-SYD route. That is a huge increase in seats.

http://airlineroute.net/2014/06/04/ac-syd-w14/

But I didn't think the 77W had the legs to do this westbound nonstop without weight restrictions.

I didn't think it was possible either. Oh those 777 HDs seem even more probable now!

On a more serious matter, I think it would be worth considering operating some three-class configuration planes to Australia with W Cabins. Australia, for the most part, generally has a high average expenditure on travel and W Cabins to Australia do pretty well for most carriers.

PaperTiger · #**5932** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 4:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valley_Refugee

How is this a difference in cosmopolitanism? Where else would SEA's number one transborder come from? Toronto? Calgary? No.

... and I suspect if you looked at SEA - LAX traffic it would exceed SEA-YVR as well.

Denscity · #**5933** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 7:10 PM**

I think Trof is just saying that with Seattle's number one transborder destination is Vancouver then it should be the same vice-versa. But no Vancouver's is Los Angeles.

PaperTiger · #**5934** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 7:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denscity

I think Trof is just saying that with Seattle's number one transborder destination is Vancouver then it should be the same vice-versa. But no Vancouver's is Los Angeles.

Yes, but that's just because Canada doesn't have a Los Angeles, if you get what I'm saying.

It speaks more to the draw of LA than to the links between our two cities. If you included other forms of transportation then I’d wager that Seattle -Vancouver Link would be the largest OD pairing for both.

As it is I think more Seattleites and Vancouverites fly to LA than fly to either city.

Denscity · #**5935** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 8:16 PM**

^^^ Hmm you could be right. I would also mention the film industry for providing quite a bit of traffic between LAX and YVR.

s211 · #**5936** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 8:51 PM**

Could it be cruise ship passengers from the US connecting through Seattle on the way to Vancouver?

trofirhen · #**5937** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 9:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denscity

I think Trof is just saying that with Seattle's number one transborder destination is Vancouver then it should be the same vice-versa. But no Vancouver's is Los Angeles.

Thank you. That's rather it.
A little dated perhaps, but still indicative.
In particular, look at destinations # 2, 7, and 10.

Busiest international routes from Seattle/Tacoma (2012–13)[40] Rank City Passengers Carriers 1 Narita International Airport 409,119 All Nippon Airways, Delta, United 2 Vancouver International Airport 382,818 Air Canada, Alaska 3 Amsterdam Airport Schiphol 248,356 Delta 4 Incheon International Airport 248,198 Asiana, Korean Air 5 London Heathrow Airport 195,951 British Airways 6 Beijing Capital International Airport 195,625 Delta, Hainan 7 Victoria International Airport 168,031 Alaska 8 Frankfurt Airport 165,265 Condor, Lufthansa 9 Dubai International Airport 160,933 Emirates 10 Calgary International Airport 148,956 Air Canada, Alaska

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle%E2%80%93Tacoma_International_Airport

Canadian74 · #**5938** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 9:59 PM**

What's LAX busiest transborder route then?

PaperTiger · #**5939** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 10:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canadian74

What's LAX busiest transborder route then?

According to Wikipedia :

#7 Vancouver, Canada 753,972 Increase 1.3%

Only Canadian City in their top 10.

nname · #**5940** Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 10:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canadian74

What's LAX busiest transborder route then?

For international:

1. London (Heathrow) 1,339,445
2. Tokyo (Narita) 1,180,227
3. Sydney 1,067,179
4. Seoul (Incheon) 998,932
5. Taipei (Taoyuan) 881,530
6. Mexico City 769,068
7. Vancouver 753,972
8. Guadalajara 740,325
9. Paris (Charles de Gaulle) 579,311
10. Toronto (Pearson) 560,059