Calgary International Airport II

[YYCFlier]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

That none of the cuts are at Canadian airports likely speaks to how well the routes have been doing. AeroMexico just upped this winter's schedule to 15 flights per week at YVR, definitely showing some confidence in the market.

Which makes me wonder why WS couldn't make this work.

[nname]

Originally Posted by YYCFlier

Which makes me wonder why WS couldn't make this work.

I wondered the same thing. At least they could've hold until the end of peak winter season before pulling out... It was performing so badly that they couldn't suffer another month of break-even or loss before they can milk this?


(originally posted at YVR thread)

At least at YVR, it is like this ($1500+ round-trip) for pretty much the entire month. Interjet also operate 2 flights on the day I selected I believe, and they're both sold out.

For the short term, this looks much more profitable than all the new routes that the dreamliners bring.

Notice how AM doesn't code share with WS on those busiest period

[Johnny Aussie]

With regards to YYC-MEX and YVR-MEX.

AM couldn’t make YYC-MEX work.

WS set up its YYC-MEX flight perfectly timed to have connections from all over Western Canada. Whereas WS’s YVR-MEX was clearly aimed at YVR originating pax. YYC’s flight was most likely yield challenged due to the volume of connections required to fill the flight. In YVR’s case up against daily AC and double daily AM plus the 4 weekly (increased to 7 weekly during peak periods) on 4O probably didn’t make the route viable.

Regardless obviously neither route was meeting their objectives therefore easier to pull the plug.

Depending on what WS does with other Sky team airlines, YVR is well served by many SkyTeam carriers (9 in total to be exact) to work that in their favour as well.

[Tobuz]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

With regards to YYC-MEX and YVR-MEX.

AM couldn’t make YYC-MEX work.

That’s more to do with their ridiculously awful flight timing than the viability and potential profitability of the route. People will tolerate redeyes on overseas flights (since your time zones get messed up anyways), and since geography kinda makes redeyes unavoidable for long haul east-west routes.

But a straight-shot south operated as an overnighter? About the least appealing flight I could think of.

When AM operated the YYC route nonstop, I still booked daytime flights with connections via IAH. No way in heck I’d ever have done their silly southbound flight, so I stuck with UA even though it required a connection, double-customs-clearance and more travel time.

[Johnny Aussie]

^
I took that all into consideration when I made my comment.

AM was unwilling to tweak the flight... downguage.. reduce frequency... alter flight times.

They chose not to do anything to try and make the route work. They probably saw any option wasn’t viable... therefore chose to pull the plug rather than try and make it work. An airline that pulls a route that quickly usually means it didn’t see a viable option.
And then WestJet tried.... perhaps not a viable route.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by Acey

As usual, a person's dislike of a particular flight has zero correlation to the actual loads on the flight. In reality, people tolerated the redeye just fine. The flight went out full the last 3 nights before it was cut and had strong loads up till the end. The problem was yield, and the arrival missing the WS 2300 bank. Apparently this has not been stated enough times.

The other thing that's obvious but is sometimes forgotten is the simple economics of opportunity cost of the frame used for MEX by WS or whomever. MEX doesn't necessarily have to be unprofitable to be cut, just less profitable than some other use of that frame.

Where is that like button.

[zahav]

Originally Posted by Tobuz

That’s more to do with their ridiculously awful flight timing than the viability and potential profitability of the route. People will tolerate redeyes on overseas flights (since your time zones get messed up anyways), and since geography kinda makes redeyes unavoidable for long haul east-west routes.

But a straight-shot south operated as an overnighter? About the least appealing flight I could think of.

When AM operated the YYC route nonstop, I still booked daytime flights with connections via IAH. No way in heck I’d ever have done their silly southbound flight, so I stuck with UA even though it required a connection, double-customs-clearance and more travel time.

I don't think that's true about the flight timing being the reason. You are right in that it might be unappealing, but those routes are operated out of YVR too and lots of other cities and they work (lots of people like red eyes as it gives two full days). YYC didn't work becomes to demand wasn't strong, period. Two airlines, including a YYC home based one, pulled the plug quickly, so framing it as a departure time issue is not right

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by zahav

I don't think that's true about the flight timing being the reason. You are right in that it might be unappealing, but those routes are operated out of YVR too and lots of other cities and they work (lots of people like red eyes as it gives two full days). YYC didn't work becomes to demand wasn't strong, period. Two airlines, including a YYC home based one, pulled the plug quickly, so framing it as a departure time issue is not right

Exactly. I didn’t want to mention YVR but you nailed that analysis too. YVR’s AM service started as a red eye and was successful enough they expanded to double daily and are now further increasing. Also Interjet same thing - red eyes and expanding.

Anyway... regardless neither airline saw YYC-MEX as viable enough to maintain direct flights. Airlines rarely pull successful routes as we all know full planes don’t necessarily make routes successful. In YVR’s case WS was probably fighting too much capacity on the route.

[Mazrim]

I ended up enjoying the AC 789 more than I expected given all the horror stories of economy class seating I had read on the internet. After a total of 18 hours on the plane I was pretty comfortable as a taller guy. I have the large rear galley to thank for that though, as I was going back there to stand and stretch every couple hours. I'm not a regular enough traveler to know if the improved cabin air pressure and humidity made much of a difference, but I can anecdotally say that air quality and noise levels were better than the ANA 763 I also experienced.

On the first 787 leg the windows couldn't dim enough to block the view completely, but on the return leg it was a new livery 787 and the windows definitely dimmed way more. Didn't even realize the sun had come up until a couple people adjusted their windows before landing. The return leg was also maybe 70% full at best which surprised me considering it was a codeshare flight with seemingly every other Star Alliance partner. Lots of empty seats in the far back part of the cabin where I was!

I wish I could sleep on planes.

[BlaineN]

Glad you enjoyed it. I feel like it wasn't just me who has enjoyed a flight on a 787.

Originally Posted by Mazrim

I ended up enjoying the AC 789 more than I expected given all the horror stories of economy class seating I had read on the internet. After a total of 18 hours on the plane I was pretty comfortable as a taller guy. I have the large rear galley to thank for that though, as I was going back there to stand and stretch every couple hours. I'm not a regular enough traveler to know if the improved cabin air pressure and humidity made much of a difference, but I can anecdotally say that air quality and noise levels were better than the ANA 763 I also experienced.

On the first 787 leg the windows couldn't dim enough to block the view completely, but on the return leg it was a new livery 787 and the windows definitely dimmed way more. Didn't even realize the sun had come up until a couple people adjusted their windows before landing. The return leg was also maybe 70% full at best which surprised me considering it was a codeshare flight with seemingly every other Star Alliance partner. Lots of empty seats in the far back part of the cabin where I was!

I wish I could sleep on planes.

[Johnny Aussie]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

The return leg was also maybe 70% full at best which surprised me considering it was a codeshare flight with seemingly every other Star Alliance partner. Lots of empty seats in the far back part of the cabin where I was!

What was your routing? If it was in/out of Western Canada in October.... welcome to the low (borderline shoulder) season!

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Johnny Aussie

What was your routing? If it was in/out of Western Canada in October.... welcome to the low (borderline shoulder) season!

YYC-YVR-NRT (and the same going back) was the routing with Air Canada. It was nice! If could know when the flights are less likely to be full I would probably try to book those more often.

On a related note, seat-back IFE is still really nice and I would rather use that than my own device.

[hollywoodcory]

http://www.yyc.com/en-us/media/factsfigures/passengerstatistics.aspx

September passenger stats are out.

September Overall = 6.3%.
Domestic = 6.8% (2018 overall: 7.38%)
Transborder = 7.2% (2018 Overall: 6.47%)
International = 0.7% (2018 Overall: 5.82%)

2018 Overall to date (January-September) 7.04%
Year to date: 13,188,277

Still on pace to do 17.1 million for the whole year.

[BlaineN]

Very solid numbers.

Originally Posted by hollywoodcory

http://www.yyc.com/en-us/media/factsfigures/passengerstatistics.aspx

September passenger stats are out.

September Overall = 6.3%.
Domestic = 6.8% (2018 overall: 7.38%)
Transborder = 7.2% (2018 Overall: 6.47%)
International = 0.7% (2018 Overall: 5.82%)

2018 Overall to date (January-September) 7.04%
Year to date: 13,188,277

Still on pace to do 17.1 million for the whole year.

[Canadian74]

7% YTD is awesome

[BlaineN]

Originally Posted by Canadian74

7% YTD is awesome

And 17 Million. With this economy I wouldn't have expected to reach it so soon.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by BlaineN

And 17 Million. With this economy I wouldn't have expected to reach it so soon.

What's wrong with the economy?

Economic growth in Alberta will reach 2.4% this year. Second best in the country. Recent increase in oil prices have a role to play, of course.

2019 looks promising as well. Alberta is forecast to lead the country in terms of growth. YYC's numbers reflect this rebound.

[BlaineN]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

What's wrong with the economy?

Economic growth in Alberta will reach 2.4% this year. Second best in the country. Recent increase in oil prices have a role to play, of course.

2019 looks promising as well. Alberta is forecast to lead the country in terms of growth. YYC's numbers reflect this rebound.

Even though it's picking up, it's still been slow going. It's only begun to pick up in the last year or so. Back when the economy first started to tank YYC was topping only 16M. I thought it would have taken a lot longer to hit 17M.

[Canadian74]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

What's wrong with the economy?

Economic growth in Alberta will reach 2.4% this year. Second best in the country. Recent increase in oil prices have a role to play, of course.

2019 looks promising as well. Alberta is forecast to lead the country in terms of growth. YYC's numbers reflect this rebound.

Have a look at Calgary's unemployment numbers and the price of WCS

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by Acey

6 hours and 38 minutes block time for the WestJet 737 enroute to Hawaii right now. RIP

Eek! That is longer than the 6h12 for my YYZ - LGW flight last week!