Ottawa Macdonald-Cartier International Airport (YOW/CYOW) 1.0

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Dominion301

Compared to YOW's peer group, namely YWG, YHZ, YEG and even YQB, the YOW Airport Authority has done nothing to gain new routes/frequency/capacity. The others have fared quite well the past couple of years with new service announcements.

...
Compared to YOW's peer group, namely YWG, YHZ, YEG and even YQB, the YOW Airport Authority has done nothing to gain new routes/frequency/capacity. The others have fared quite well the past couple of years with new service announcements, even though all of them have also suffered from transborder losses.
...

Another: New Leaf serve YWG, YHZ and YEG, which are all within YOW's peer group, yet YOW's the only one not there. WHY?

Except for maybe YQB, I'm not sure I would agree that those airports are YOW's peer group. They are all regional hubs that funnel traffic from the local hinterland to larger hubs. YOW has no air hinterland except may Iqaluit. Those airports also do not have competition from a significant airport as close as YUL.

I have no particular affection for the Airport Authority - I think they have overbuilt and driven up costs unnecessarily (which has probably hurt their competitiveness). But I'm not sure the Authority is to blame because Ottawa is not a hub.

The Airport Authority is not mandated to maximize the number of destinations and spending money and staff time trying to get flights to Maine or North Bay or some other largely irrelevant destination makes little sense.

[RomanR27]

Wednesday draws the end of the codeshare between Canadian North and First Air, thus 5T will be departing within a few minutes of 7F once again. On Thursday, FRA service resumes once again.

[YOWflier]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The Airport Authority is not mandated to maximize the number of destinations

Yes. It is. That's the mandate of every Authority everywhere, always and forever.

I'll repost the Airport Authority's own strategic directions, as I did for you weeks ago, but you keep pounding the same goofy message:

Originally Posted by https://yow.ca/en/about-yow/mission-and-strategic-directions

Strategic Directions

To grow strategically
To increase the economic footprint of the airport within the National Capital Region
To optimize operational performance, ensuring safe and secure operations
To pursue excellence
To provide additional flight frequencies and destinations

and spending money and staff time trying to get flights to Maine or North Bay or some other largely irrelevant destination makes little sense.

True, we don't want irrelevant destinations. We want relevant ones. The Authority is failing miserably at route development.

[Dominion301]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Except for maybe YQB, I'm not sure I would agree that those airports are YOW's peer group. They are all regional hubs that funnel traffic from the local hinterland to larger hubs. YOW has no air hinterland except may Iqaluit. Those airports also do not have competition from a significant airport as close as YUL.

I have no particular affection for the Airport Authority - I think they have overbuilt and driven up costs unnecessarily (which has probably hurt their competitiveness). But I'm not sure the Authority is to blame because Ottawa is not a hub.

The Airport Authority is not mandated to maximize the number of destinations and spending money and staff time trying to get flights to Maine or North Bay or some other largely irrelevant destination makes little sense.

YEG, YWG and YHZ are definitely in YOW's peer group in terms of pax totals. Yes YHZ is the regional hub of the Maritimes and YWG is to a lesser extent the hub of Manitoba and the Kivalliq region of Nunavut. However, at no time did I ever say Ottawa should be a hub. It has the potential to be a secondary/regional hub à la YHZ, but that wasn't my point. My point is, air service development at YOW has been lacking for many years, while (YTZ aside given it's slot controlled) the other 10 biggest airports in the country have all fared quite well, even excluding the 4 big hubs in Canada.

I don't see how you can say Northern Ontario is irrelevant to YOW's position. Isn't it sad that the second biggest city in Ontario has had zero air service to Northern Ontario for the past 2 years? Isn't it sad that there's less capacity to very "relevant" destinations (e.g. YWG, YEG, YYC, etc.) than there was five years ago?

As for YHZ-PWM, while PWM is indeed irrelevant to YOW, the point is the YHZ thought outside of the box to attract new air service. I also see you didn't make reference to my Munich citation. In other words, that's clearly a relevant destination that YHZ has.

Originally Posted by ac888yow

Yes. It is. That's the mandate of every Authority everywhere, always and forever.

I'll repost the Airport Authority's own strategic directions, as I did for you weeks ago, but you keep pounding the same goofy message:

True, we don't want irrelevant destinations. We want relevant ones. The Authority is failing miserably at route development.

Just because someone personally may not have used it, does not make it an irrelevant destination. Every additional dot that YOW is connected to is 'relevant'. The only 'irrelevant' destination I can think of that's ever existed post-deregulation at YOW was CP's Ottawa-Kingston route...and that only existed so that CP could rotate ATRs from their Ontario to Quebec ops...and that last existed circa 1999. AC's Val D'or route +30 years ago or the mandatory Syracuse stop for US/Piedmont/etc. when USA flights were regulated until 1995 don't count in my books.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by ac888yow

Yes. It is. That's the mandate of every Authority everywhere, always and forever.

I'll repost the Airport Authority's own strategic directions, as I did for you weeks ago, but you keep pounding the same goofy message:



True, we don't want irrelevant destinations. We want relevant ones. The Authority is failing miserably at route development.

The vision and strategic directions are not the mandate. The mandate is:

• to manage, operate and develop the Ottawa Macdonald-Cartier International Airport, the premises of which will be leased to the Authority by Transport Canada, and any other airport in the National Capital Region for which the Authority becomes responsible, in a safe, secure, efficient, cost effective and financially viable manner with reasonable airport user charges and equitable access to all carriers;
• to undertake and promote the development of airport lands, for which it is responsible, for uses that are compatible with air transportation activities; and
• to expand transportation facilities and generate economic activity in ways which are compatible with air transportation activities.

http://ar2014.yow.ca/corporate-governance.php

In fulfilling the mandate it makes little difference whether a passenger flies to North Bay directly or transfers in Toronto to get to North Bay. If an airline wants to fly to North Bay then that's great, but if the Authority has to offer incentives or discounts to get an airline to do so then it makes little sense.

[YOWflier]

Originally Posted by Dominion301

Just because someone personally may not have used it, does not make it an irrelevant destination. Every additional dot that YOW is connected to is 'relevant'. The only 'irrelevant' destination I can think of that's ever existed post-deregulation at YOW was CP's Ottawa-Kingston route...and that only existed so that CP could rotate ATRs from their Ontario to Quebec ops...and that last existed circa 1999. AC's Val D'or route +30 years ago or the mandatory Syracuse stop for US/Piedmont/etc. when USA flights were regulated until 1995 don't count in my books.

Yeah, my comment was about the silly notion of "relevance", not about any particular destination (North Bay or otherwise). If North Bay is a relevant destination, then it's, well, relevant.

Originally Posted by acottawa

...

The third bullet covers what we are talking about.

It doesn't make "little difference" at all whether a passenger flies directly to North Bay or via some other place. I outlined a dozen or more not-so-little differences weeks ago.

Stop defending it and holding us back in the process.

[Dominion301]

Originally Posted by ac888yow

Yeah, my comment was about the silly notion of "relevance", not about any particular destination (North Bay or otherwise). If North Bay is a relevant destination, then it's, well, relevant.

The third bullet covers what we are talking about.

It doesn't make "little difference" at all whether a passenger flies directly to North Bay or via some other place. I outlined a dozen or more not-so-little differences weeks ago.

Stop defending it and holding us back in the process.

Yeah I know North Bay was the example. The fact of the matter is Sudbury existed forever and is the largest city in Northern Ontario with no nonstop link to YOW for the past 2 years.

Fully agree that bullet point #3 covers off air service development.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by ac888yow

The third bullet covers what we are talking about.

But if the airport authority has to offer discounts or incentives or make deals favourable to specific airlines then it is not fulfilling the first bullet. I take Dominion's point that the OAA doesn't run a very informative website or very good social media, but I think the departure bearskin or the loss LGA, ATL, DEN or SJC had a lot more to do with the underlying economics than social media failures.

Originally Posted by ac888yow

It doesn't make "little difference" at all whether a passenger flies directly to North Bay or via some other place. I outlined a dozen or more not-so-little differences weeks ago.

You outlined one reason a few weeks ago, which was the loss of aircraft movements, which is a very niche loss (mostly on the airside services side) and could be a benefit to other passengers (shorter lineup for de-icing, etc).

Originally Posted by ac888yow

Stop defending it and holding us back in the process.

I think your Melissa enthusiasm may be causing you to be watching too much Fox News.

[YOWflier]

Loss of aircraft movements, and everything that goes with that, and more importantly worse service for the community. Fringe consequences in your mind...

Apathy is an anchor, as is non-accountability. Your mentality is obviously very prevalent at the Authority, and sadly, is systemic in this city.

Not sure what Fox News has to do with any of this, but then again this isn't the first time I've become lost in your nonsensical "argumentation".

It takes a "special" mind to make a positive case for loss of air service by citing improved user experience due to shorter deicing lines. Wow.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by ac888yow

Not sure what Fox News has to do with any of this, but then again this isn't the first time I've become lost in your nonsensical "argumentation".

Your Fox-like habit of resorting to insults when somebody disagrees with you.

Ottawa travelers have been voting with their asses for years. Ottawa has a disproportionate number of leisure travelers, and most leisure travelers chase lower prices, which means larger aircraft, hubs, and considering other airports. Ottawa also has a disproportionate number of public service travelers, who are obliged (and pressured by the Government's travel agent) to seek the lowest fare, which means they are often channeled through hubs over direct flights. There are a few destinations where there are enough senior officials, politicians, and business travelers to support direct flights even when transfers are cheaper (DCA being the most obvious, but also to some extent LHR, YTZ and some of the provincial capitals), but other destinations, particularly trans-border regional jet destinations, there isn't that pressure and those flights don't last long when airlines introduce them from time to time.

You can blame the Airport Authority for not chasing mom and pop airlines, or not offering subsidies or not marketing on behalf of airlines enough, but I am not convinced that these would be an efficient use of the Airport's resources (you obviously disagree). Until the Government changes its travel policies, or the private sector travel market picks up, or Ottawa is more successful at attracting conventions or tourists then the Airport Authority can change little.

I think there are opportunities. I could see Porter or Westjet offering a JFK service at some point to code-share with any number of dozens of international airlines (although I think JFK construction will discourage new service for the next few years). I could see a discount European airline setting up shop (WOW for example), but those would be a hub-based business model as well. More point-to-point services will require more travelers who could fill larger planes or more travelers who are not price sensitive willing to pay for smaller planes.

[daud]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think there are opportunities. I could see Porter or Westjet offering a JFK service at some point to code-share with any number of dozens of international airlines (although I think JFK construction will discourage new service for the next few years). I could see a discount European airline setting up shop (WOW for example), but those would be a hub-based business model as well. More point-to-point services will require more travelers who could fill larger planes or more travelers who are not price sensitive willing to pay for smaller planes.

If westjet could offer transborder service out of Ottawa via a US hub with a codeshare/partner like JetBlue, that would be awesome. Why it hasn't happened I believe is because the 2 airlines, while partnering on some level, are not as operationally integrated as they need to be from what I was told. But long-term, that would be something that could really benefit YOW transborder travellers and give us better options.

[YOWflier]

I don't even know what Fox-like insults are, but you seem to be an expert in them. Who's watching Fox again?

I come down hard on issues, especially/only those I'm well versed in, or goofy ideas. Sorry if your delicate sensibilities were offended, but your valid arguments are buried in a lot of nonsense (I pointed out examples of that earlier).

Here's another one:

Originally Posted by acottawa

but I am not convinced that these would be an efficient use of the Airport's resources (you obviously disagree)

So the Authority has resources tasked with air service development. If you don't think developing air service is an efficient use of their time, what should they be doing instead? Serving coffee at Tim's?

Ottawa travelers have been voting with their asses for years. Ottawa has a disproportionate number of leisure travelers, and most leisure travelers chase lower prices, which means larger aircraft, hubs, and considering other airports.

Price sensitivity is true but hardly unique to Ottawa. On what hub routes are the larger aircraft again? Last I checked every.single.hub.route from Ottawa has seen down gauging of aircraft, or worse, down gauging of aircraft and frequency reduction.

Ottawa also has a disproportionate number of public service travelers, who are obliged (and pressured by the Government's travel agent) to seek the lowest fare, which means they are often channeled through hubs over direct flights.

Have you ever used HRG/STS? The flight prices are corporate and users can book any option as long as it's within policy. In fact, users can frequently book out-of-policy trips as long as they adequately justify and obtain management approval for it in their Travel Authorization. This happens A LOT.

In my (vast) experience HRG/STS frequently first presents hub connections in the web interface vs. direct (or more direct), which are often buried lower in the list of options (IF AT ALL, and despite the fact that price is comparable ... certainly within policy). This tells me that the algorithm employed by HRG is biased toward hub connections. As an example I often fly to the States to destination ZZZ. By far the easiest and most practical way to get there is YOW-ORD-ZZZ. Every single time I use the online booking tool I am presented with multi-stop itineraries via YYZ or YUL first (i.e. YOW-YYZ/YUL-ORD-ZZZ), instead of the 1-stop and despite the fact that the options are similarly priced (and definitely within policy). It's infuriating and I circumvent it by doing manual searches and booking my own travel. The average user doesn't know any better though, so they (or more likely, the admin booking their travel for them) end up choosing flights that plug seats to ORD on YYZ/YUL flights instead of our own. The conspiracy theorist in me says airlines like AC are in bed with HRG and forcing them to plug hub routes, thus increasing load factors.

The Authority knows about all of this about because I've told them (in fact they claimed awareness). If I was them I'd be busting down HRG's door to pursue this. But hey, probably not an "efficient" use of resources either.

[Dominion301]

YOW's April pax numbers are out and they're actually pretty good...however, with the huge May capacity cut to Rapidair, I do not expect May to show the same thing.

Sector / Apr-16 / Apr-17 / % Change
Dom: 273,680 / 295,104 / +7.8% - by far the busiest April ever - almost 14k above 2012's record (when domestic grew 10% that month!). That's what an A32x-heavy Rapidair schedule will do. May + onward's 95% E90 schedule will not yield the same.
TB: 61,514 / 59,098 / -3.9% - least bad month in eons. DL's new LGA no doubt helped - cheers to 1997 transborder pax numbers with pre-open skies flight frequencies!
Int'l: 30,313 / 34,132 / +12.6% - best month in eons.
TTL: 365,507 / 388,334 / +6.2% - matches 2012's record (like 20 pax higher, lol)

Sector / YTD 2016 / YTD 2017 / % Change
Dom: 1,079,447 / 1,124,578 / +4.2%
TB: 268,513 / 246,685 / -8.1%
Int'l: 208,897 / 202,398 / -3.1%
TTL: 1,556,857 / 1,573,661 / +1.1%

12 Months Rolling / % Change vs Year End 2016
Dom: 3,724,363 / +1.2%
TB: 651,606 / -3.2%
Int'l: 383,926 / -1.7%
TTL: 4,759,895 / +0.4%

[YOWhopeful]

Originally Posted by daud

If westjet could offer transborder service out of Ottawa via a US hub with a codeshare/partner like JetBlue, that would be awesome. Why it hasn't happened I believe is because the 2 airlines, while partnering on some level, are not as operationally integrated as they need to be from what I was told. But long-term, that would be something that could really benefit YOW transborder travellers and give us better options.

FYI: Westjet now codeshares with Delta on its flight to Detroit

[FFX-ME]

Originally Posted by YOWhopeful

FYI: Westjet now codeshares with Delta on its flight to Detroit

Yea but they aren't a member of Skyteam; at least not yet. They really should.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I think there are opportunities. I could see Porter or Westjet offering a JFK service at some point to code-share with any number of dozens of international airlines (although I think JFK construction will discourage new service for the next few years). I could see a discount European airline setting up shop (WOW for example), but those would be a hub-based business model as well. More point-to-point services will require more travelers who could fill larger planes or more travelers who are not price sensitive willing to pay for smaller planes.

I can't see that being particularly attractive.. transiting through the United States is a huge pain. Whenever I go to Europe I always make sure to pick itineraries that travel directly between Canada and the Schengen Area.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I can't see that being particularly attractive.. transiting through the United States is a huge pain. Whenever I go to Europe I always make sure to pick itineraries that travel directly between Canada and the Schengen Area.

For me it's really 50-50. Frankfurt and especially London aren't exactly easy transfer points either. Don't forget South America and Africa where a US transfer can save a ton of time. IAD works for a lot of destinations now but JFK would really add a big chunk of the world in one stop. Big problem with NYC transfer is frequent delays into all NYC airports.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

For me it's really 50-50. Frankfurt and especially London aren't exactly easy transfer points either. Don't forget South America and Africa where a US transfer can save a ton of time. IAD works for a lot of destinations now but JFK would really add a big chunk of the world in one stop. Big problem with NYC transfer is frequent delays into all NYC airports.

Frankfurt is better than London, mostly because Lufthansa is a Star Alliance partner. British Airways is Oneworld, so connecting via Heathrow or Gatwick involves more of a hassle.

Connecting at JFK would be an option, but there's already United at Newark, so I'm not sure that the number of possible destinations would increase that much. I'm not sure it would be any more pleasant than Pearson, to be honest.

If there was an option that would work, I'd encourage Icelandair/WOW to set up shop in Ottawa. It would provide some much needed competition on European routes - pretty much everywhere in Europe is accessible from Keflavik airport. Both those airlines use smaller planes (757s and A321s), so filling them is easier than a wide-body aircraft. I think the only limitation they have is space at Keflavik airport.

Also, I'm hopeful that the logistical challenges of ramming everybody through Pearson will start to encourage AC/Westjet to re-evaluate that strategy and provide more point-to-point domestic service.

[YOWflier]

Maybe someone's finally started listening.

https://twitter.com/FlyYOW/status/864863529312165889

https://www.facebook.com/FlyYOW/photos/a...0079565/1595426860499899/?type=3&theater

[RomanR27]

Originally Posted by ac888yow

Maybe someone's finally started listening.

https://twitter.com/FlyYOW/status/864863529312165889

https://www.facebook.com/FlyYOW/photos/a...0079565/1595426860499899/?type=3&theater

That's awesome!! Big fan of Christoph Schubert in the pictures, Go Sens Go!