YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[Johnny Aussie]

Just looked at UK pax stats and unsurprisingly, LGW has surged and LHR also a healthy increase. In July YVR-London almost hit 100,000 pax!!

July stats (GLA and MAN not available yet):

http://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/CAA/C..._Intl_Air_Pax_Traffic_Route_Analysis.pdf

June stats - all four routes showing increases... Especially LGW and LHR:

http://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/CAA/C..._Intl_Air_Pax_Traffic_Route_Analysis.pdf

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

I have explained this numerous times... Here it is again... Transport Canada allocates capacity based on O&D. YVR-IST, YVR-DXB, YVR-AUH have very small O&D. Therefore no flights. It's irrelevant to Transport Canada how many pax would be transiting.
SEA-DXB no restrictions based on O&D, hence flights full of transiting pax.

What it boils down to are wide differences in American and Canadian aviation law, if that's the correct terminology. Much different, but simple to understand. Thank you

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Yes, I saw that comment.

People forget, and yes we have brought this up many times before.

Transport Canada (Government of Canada) tends to grant access based on O&D and not based on transfer traffic to a particular country.

If you all recall, and I'm too lazy to dig it up again, somebody posted the market size of YVR-IST in comparison to other North American markets. The local O&D was tiny. However, the potential for transit passengers was much larger of course. Same argument against EK and EY. The local market from YVR-DXB or YVR-AUH is minute. But, like IST, the amount of potential transit traffic is so much larger. That's the crux of the Government's approach. Like it or lump it... that's their model.

So to summarise, Transport Canada would be unlikely to grant further access to Turkish despite the lobbying of various groups (eg Turkish Airlines and local Turkish community groups). Unless someone can prove the YVR-IST market is large enough to support a direct service based on the local market only..... Even though they are a Star Alliance member, Air Canada may also lobby against further access as it may (will) hurt their business model. It has nothing to do with favouring YYZ or YUL, this has more to do with Air Canada... their global hub just happens to be at YYZ.

I would agree that Turkish may reduce the ability for YVR to have more non-stops, foreign or with AC. YVR-IST would draw traffic away from the AC/LH JV, and compete with YVR-DEL. LOT may have reduced interest in YVR. YVR-IKA would have better metrics if a foreign airline applied, as the O+D is significant and the present lack of a competitive continuing network at IKA would not put pressure on AC.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

I would agree that Turkish may reduce the ability for YVR to have more non-stops, foreign or with AC. YVR-IST would draw traffic away from the AC/LH JV, and compete with YVR-DEL. LOT may have reduced interest in YVR. YVR-IKA would have better metrics if a foreign airline applied, as the O+D is significant and the present lack of a competitive continuing network at IKA would not put pressure on AC.

Sounds as if we're going to remain (year-round) with the 4 that we have (LHR, AMS, CDG and FRA) ... and that's it. Not bad. Could be worse for sure.
Sounds as if Vancouver had better rule out getting any more. Other than summer holiday flights, I doubt it'll happen, so why mull over the Tooth Fairy?

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

I would agree that Turkish may reduce the ability for YVR to have more non-stops, foreign or with AC. YVR-IST would draw traffic away from the AC/LH JV, and compete with YVR-DEL. LOT may have reduced interest in YVR. YVR-IKA would have better metrics if a foreign airline applied, as the O+D is significant and the present lack of a competitive continuing network at IKA would not put pressure on AC.

Any idea what the O&D actually is from YVR-IKA? The Iranian population in Vancouver area is fairly large but do we have numbers about the O&D?

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Sounds as if we're going to remain (year-round) with the 4 that we have (LHR, AMS, CDG and FRA) ... and that's it. Not bad. Could be worse for sure.
Sounds as if Vancouver had better rule out getting any more. Other than summer holiday flights, I doubt it'll happen, so why mull over the Tooth Fairy?

And LGW year-round on TS! Don't forget LGW.

Yup YVR-Europe still very seasonal nothing has changed! Until AMS and CDG become daily unlikely other routes will go year-round. The four largest markets are covered year round. We have a saying downunder... She'll be right mate!

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

Any idea what the O&D actually is from YVR-IKA? The Iranian population in Vancouver area is fairly large but do we have numbers about the O&D?

Short answer: no exact numbers.

Long answer: the actual numbers are a proxy for the ability for foreign airlines to poach from canadian airlines and/or draw traffic away from canadian airports - which IMO is very, very low for iranian carriers. Iran's sanctions-affected airlines and airports likely will not pose a threat to poach traffic from say, AC, for some time. Maybe in the future, but not now.

and if AC looks at a route, i suspect O+D is less important and competes with the 6th freedom potential from the USA and other transfers from canada. the fact that 90% of AC's YYZ-CPH traffic is connecting illustrates this. TC has to negotiate a bilateral that makes iran satisfied, but due to the sanctions there is more asymmetry going in that puts more at play.



.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

Short answer: no exact numbers.

Long answer: the actual numbers are a proxy for the ability for foreign airlines to poach from canadian airlines and/or draw traffic away from canadian airports - which IMO is very, very low for iranian carriers. Iran's sanctions-affected airlines and airports likely will not pose a threat to poach traffic from say, AC, for some time. Maybe in the future, but not now.

and if AC looks at a route, i suspect O+D is less important and competes with the 6th freedom potential from the USA and other transfers from canada. the fact that 90% of AC's YYZ-CPH traffic is connecting illustrates this. TC has to negotiate a bilateral that makes iran satisfied, but due to the sanctions there is more asymmetry going in that puts more at play.
.

But that is the difference between O&D and the ability to fill a plane with connecting traffic.
You mentioned YVR-IKA O&D is significant. However, maybe you meant YVR-IKA would be a popular route due to the ability to capture connecting traffic.
Two different things.
I was hoping somebody had the actual O&D numbers as I am curious how big the market really is.

Back to Turkish... I am pretty sure the chart somebody posted about YVR-IST was something like 16ppdew (passengers per day each way). Probably not enough to have Transport Canada grant further access to TK.

[Johnny Aussie]

Saw on Twitter a tweet from airlineroute.net

It looks like Sichuan will in fact start YVR - CGO - CTU afterall twice weekly starting Nov 11. This will replace two of the three weekly YVR - SHE - CTU.

Edit... Flight details

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airl...hengzhou-vancouver-sector-from-nov-2016/

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

But that is the difference between O&D and the ability to fill a plane with connecting traffic.
You mentioned YVR-IKA O&D is significant. However, maybe you meant YVR-IKA would be a popular route due to the ability to capture connecting traffic.
Two different things.
I was hoping somebody had the actual O&D numbers as I am curious how big the market really is.

Back to Turkish... I am pretty sure the chart somebody posted about YVR-IST was something like 16ppdew (passengers per day each way). Probably not enough to have Transport Canada grant further access to TK.

I wonder what the rationale is behind Transport Canada's rule of only allowing flights with sufficient O&D ?? Allowing flights with great transfer potential seems logical.
The USA does it. Why doesn't Canada?

[Denscity]

Wow Vancouver is the undisputed king of flights to China!

[YVR Bruce]

Hawaiian: I can't recall a discussion about the Islands route(s) and whether HA has a potential place at YVR. Their A330s can't compete with WS?

[Cage]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I wonder what the rationale is behind Transport Canada's rule of only allowing flights with sufficient O&D ?? Allowing flights with great transfer potential seems logical.

The USA does it. Why doesn't Canada?

It's not logical for the Canadian economy to allow foreign airlines to poach traffic between Canada and third country. Take the ME3 example, they are not interested in serving just Canada-Dubai, they need transfer to traffic to/from India, Pakistan, and Africa to make their flights work.

The USA and Europe got hoodwinked by the ME3 into agreeing to open skies. In defence of the USA negotiators, at the time of signing the open skies agreement there was no equivalency of lopsided bilateral route rights.

[casper]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I wonder what the rationale is behind Transport Canada's rule of only allowing flights with sufficient O&D ?? Allowing flights with great transfer potential seems logical.
The USA does it. Why doesn't Canada?

Australia also does it. The end result is their national airlines has had to drop many of the formerly profitable routes between Australia and Europe. Many of the European airlines have abandoned routes to Australia.

If the ME3 were given open access into Vancouver we likely would lose some of the other foreign routes we currently have.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by casper

Australia also does it. The end result is their national airlines has had to drop many of the formerly profitable routes between Australia and Europe. Many of the European airlines have abandoned routes to Australia.

If the ME3 were given open access into Vancouver we likely would lose some of the other foreign routes we currently have.

Thank you for the explanation, but I still have a question:
If Turkish were allowed YVR-IST, would that bleed off traffic from other routes, and shut down flights, say, to LGW, CDG, AMS, FRA? I'm not talking ME3. I'm talking Turkish.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Denscity

Wow Vancouver is the undisputed king of flights to China!

And more to come soon!

[nname]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

And more to come soon!

NKG? or something from AC?

China's CAAC released a list of approved route from July-Sept over the last weekend, which showed all 3 YVR routes had received the approval. The KMG-NKG-YVR route is one of the most recently approved route, probably have something to do with NKG being penalized for low on time reliability...

Interestingly I did not see AC's name on the list of foreign airlines.. not even the YUL-PVG route... different approval process?

[casper]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Thank you for the explanation, but I still have a question:
If Turkish were allowed YVR-IST, would that bleed off traffic from other routes, and shut down flights, say, to LGW, CDG, AMS, FRA? I'm not talking ME3. I'm talking Turkish.

Turkish is not going to start by fling a A380 into Vancouver. (I don't even think they own any). It would be something much smaller and it would only be a few days per week. When/If they come it will take traffic away from existing routes. However if the amount of capacity they introduce is limited it will have a limited effect. After all the total market size is growing. That also helps in limiting the impact on other airlines.

Given they are in Star Alliance and Air Canada codeshares on most of their flights into Canada I would expect them to impact Star Alliance partners more than other airlines for business related travel.

For leisure travel (and much of the visit family in India traffic falls into this camp) I am not certain alliances are all that important anymore. You earn fewer points, they are harder to spend and you don't have elite benefits. It may have a bigger impact on other airlines.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by casper

Turkish is not going to start by fling a A380 into Vancouver. (I don't even think they own any). It would be something much smaller and it would only be a few days per week. When/If they come it will take traffic away from existing routes. However if the amount of capacity they introduce is limited it will have a limited effect. After all the total market size is growing. That also helps in limiting the impact on other airlines.

Given they are in Star Alliance and Air Canada codeshares on most of their flights into Canada I would expect them to impact Star Alliance partners more than other airlines for business related travel.

For leisure travel (and much of the visit family in India traffic falls into this camp) I am not certain alliances are all that important anymore. You earn fewer points, they are harder to spend and you don't have elite benefits. It may have a bigger impact on other airlines.

Again, thank you for the explanation.
However, I never ever mentioned an A380 !!
I was thinking maybe an A330 four times a week, or such.
*And I cannot help wondering if the 2x daily EK flights out of Seattle bleed a lot of traffic from DELTA. If what you say is true, then surely EK must be bleeding other traffic from Seattle.
If most of the EK traffic froim Seattle is connecting traffic (and I think it is) then I can only assume that a hypothetical YVR-IST on Turkish would also be mostly for connecting.
That being the case, would they be bleeding connections from Frankfurt (*A). I guess they would, or Transport Canada wouldn't be so uptight about them flying here.
Nevertheless, it still has that good ol' Canadian protectionism flavour to it.

[Johnny Aussie]

Apparently the following routes have been approved by the CAAC for this quarter:

1) YVR - CGO - CTU on 3U (as already mentioned a few posts ago)
2) YVR - NKG - KMG on MU (as speculated a couple of months ago)
3) CAN - YVR - MEX on CZ (as speculated a couple of months ago)

The link was in Chinese which I can't read but I was given the English translation.

Will await to see the schedule info for 2 & 3.

Still more to come

[casper]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Again, thank you for the explanation.
However, I never ever mentioned an A380 !!
I was thinking maybe an A330 four times a week, or such.
*And I cannot help wondering if the 2x daily EK flights out of Seattle bleed a lot of traffic from DELTA. If what you say is true, then surely EK must be bleeding other traffic from Seattle.
If most of the EK traffic froim Seattle is connecting traffic (and I think it is) then I can only assume that a hypothetical YVR-IST on Turkish would also be mostly for connecting.
That being the case, would they be bleeding connections from Frankfurt (*A). I guess they would, or Transport Canada wouldn't be so uptight about them flying here.
Nevertheless, it still has that good ol' Canadian protectionism flavour to it.

To IST an A330 may work. I would not be over concerned with Turkish. They tend to grow slowly and are less disruptive. They also have a local partner in the form of Air Canada.

EK is a different story, to get to Dubai it is a 777 or A380. I have been told (but have no way of confirming it) that there is a lot cargo between Seattle and Dubai. Much of that cargo being Boeing parts for maintenance of a large fleet of aircraft based in Dubai. Seattle is a weird airport. It is a major hut for Alaska that has no overseas traffic, so it likely happy to feed EK connection. I believe Delta is dropping its interline agreement with EK.

In the case of Vancouver, who is going to provide the local feed to EK? Air Canada not going to want to play nice. WestJet perhaps? However they also have a longer term interest in partnering with Air France, KLM, and Delta.