Canadian Airport Thread

[Rogie]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

There's been no hint of that thus far, has there?

Any proposal has to go to the Transport Minister who then has 45 days to decide whether to initiate a full review with the Competition Bureau's support and advice. The ministry is already hinting there would be a public interest review, based on the size and scope of the Air Canada/Air Transat merger.

So, yes, politics would become a factor (to what degree, I don't know) if and when they get an application.

[thenoflyzone]

Even with all the politics that will inevitably be involved, barring certain unforeseen circumstances, this merger will most likely get approved.

TS is virtually non-existent on the domestic front. They have some token domestic flights to feed their European ops out of YYZ/YUL, and that's it.

Where the flying public will feel the pain is to/from Europe. This is where AC will gain a monopoly on some key routes. However, Canada and the EU have an open skies agreement, which mitigates some of the effects. European or other Canadian carriers are free to start competition on those routes if they so wish. I'm pretty sure the route planning department at WestJet is looking on how to take advantage of the competiton void this merger will create. They just launched YYZ-BCN, so YYZ-FCO/ATH/MAD can very well get some WS long haul metal as well. WS should also look at what they can do at YUL. Yes, Montreal will become a fortress hub, but with the right strategy, maybe this is exactly what WS needs to re-establish a decent presence at YUL.

This being said, there will be some positives from this merger as well. This will cement YUL as AC's second busiest hub, both by passengers carried and number of daily departures.

YUL is congested during peak times. This merger opens up several slots during that time for AC. Also, several of TS's A310/A330s are parked at YUL during the day, especially in winter. AC can better utilize those frames and so passenger numbers and transit traffic should keep increasing for the short to medium term because of this merger.

[CityTech]

I wonder if YUL might lose some low frequency routes to YYZ as part of that merger. For PRG, for example, there is a 3x weekly from YYZ on AC and a 1x weekly from YUL on TS. It might make sense to scrap that YUL route and add a 4th trip to YYZ-PRG instead.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by CityTech

I wonder if YUL might lose some low frequency routes to YYZ as part of that merger. For PRG, for example, there is a 3x weekly from YYZ on AC and a 1x weekly from YUL on TS. It might make sense to scrap that YUL route and add a 4th trip to YYZ-PRG instead.

I dont understand your logic. Care to explain?

Why did AC start a low frequency YUL-LIM? They already serve YYZ-LIM.
Why did AC start a low frequency YUL-TLV? They already serve YYZ-TLV.
Why is AC starting a low frequency YUL-GRU? They already serve daily YYZ-GRU.

These last few examples should answer your question about flight consolidations.

[CityTech]

YYZ-TLV and YYZ-GRU are already daily though. Having flights only a few days a week is risky because you lose business from people who want to travel other days of the week. Because AC does not have any daily routes to PRG, it means AC can't offer service there on every day. With TLV, it can through YYZ. It makes sense to have at least one hub offer daily service before offering service from any other hubs.

For routes like PRG where both YYZ and YUL service are low frequency, scrapping a TS route to YUL to bring YYZ closer to daily makes sense.

[nname]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

I dont understand your logic. Care to explain?

Why did AC start a low frequency YUL-LIM? They already serve YYZ-LIM.
Why did AC start a low frequency YUL-TLV? They already serve YYZ-TLV.
Why is AC starting a low frequency YUL-GRU? They already serve daily YYZ-GRU.

These last few examples should answer your question about flight consolidations.

Rouge can be different. But for mainline long-hual, AC usually don't start a route from a different hub unless it already have at least daily service to the city from another hub. This seems to be the case for DUB, ICN, TLV, GRU, DEL, etc. I can almost guaranteed the next European destination that AC will start out of YVR is the one that already receive daily service from YYZ. Meanwhile, it is less likely for AC to start another Asian route from YYZ because the only Asian destination that's served daily from YVR but have no service from elsewhere is BNE..

For non-leasure mid/short-hual/mainline domestic/express, if they can't run the route daily at least during the peak season, they won't bother with it at all.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by nname

Rouge can be different. But for mainline long-hual, AC usually don't start a route from a different hub unless it already have at least daily service to the city from another hub. This seems to be the case for DUB, ICN, TLV, GRU, DEL, etc. I can almost guaranteed the next European destination that AC will start out of YVR is the one that already receive daily service from YYZ. Meanwhile, it is less likely for AC to start another Asian route from YYZ because the only Asian destination that's served daily from YVR but have no service from elsewhere is BNE..

For non-leasure mid/short-hual/mainline domestic/express, if they can't run the route daily at least during the peak season, they won't bother with it at all.

You said it.

Rouge is different.

PRG is a leisure destination. Similar to ATH.

Back in 2013, AC launched both YYZ-ATH and YUL-ATH at the same time, both less than daily.

When AC takes over Transat, they wont treat PRG any different than ATH or BCN or VCE.

As for YVR-Europe, FCO is the next logical destination. Dont know if that is going to happen in the short/medium term. So yes, your reasoning is sound for mainline long haul.

Originally Posted by CityTech

For routes like PRG where both YYZ and YUL service are low frequency, scrapping a TS route to YUL to bring YYZ closer to daily makes sense.

It doesn't make sense, not for PRG.

If TS flies YUL-PRG, it's because they are making money with the O&D from YUL to PRG. Forcing those folk to backtrack to YYZ just for the sake of capturing a limited amount of business opportunity from Toronto with a daily flight will mean those people from YUL might connect elsewhere in Europe to go to PRG. So you're losing revenue, and the business traffic isn't there to make up for the difference out of Toronto.

This is the same reason why AC launched ATH from both YYZ and YUL at the same time with less than daily service to both. To capture the O&D from both cities.

Also, as far as 6th freedom traffic is concerned, YUL and YYZ can be complementary, not mutually exclusive.

ex. A person wanting to fly from Pittsburgh to PRG can get there via YYZ and then return via YUL.

YYZ doesn't have to be the only hub with PRG service, as both YYZ and YUL have service to PIT.

So by leaving the flights as is, you're capturing the higher yielding O&D from both YYZ and YUL to PRG, and you're still capturing 6th freedom traffic to/from the US with complementary (up to) daily service to PRG from both YYZ/YUL (as an example)

win/win

[nname]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

As for YVR-Europe, FCO is the next logical destination. Dont know if that is going to happen in the short/medium term.

Hmm... For YVR-Europe, I actually put BCN and MAN before FCO...

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by nname

Hmm... For YVR-Europe, I actually put BCN and MAN before FCO...

I was thinking more along mainline service. BCN is definitely Rouge territory and TS already flies YVR-MAN, so technically, once the merger is finalized, AC will already be flying YVR-MAN. I think Manchester will stay TS/Rouge as well.

That's why I went for Italy instead.

[CityTech]

Originally Posted by thenoflyzone

You said it.

Rouge is different.

PRG is a leisure destination. Similar to ATH.

Back in 2013, AC launched both YYZ-ATH and YUL-ATH at the same time, both less than daily.

When AC takes over Transat, they wont treat PRG any different than ATH or BCN or VCE.

As for YVR-Europe, FCO is the next logical destination. Dont know if that is going to happen in the short/medium term. So yes, your reasoning is sound for mainline long haul.



It doesn't make sense, not for PRG.

If TS flies YUL-PRG, it's because they are making money with the O&D from YUL to PRG. Forcing those folk to backtrack to YYZ just for the sake of capturing a limited amount of business opportunity from Toronto with a daily flight will mean those people from YUL might connect elsewhere in Europe to go to PRG. So you're losing revenue, and the business traffic isn't there to make up for the difference out of Toronto.

This is the same reason why AC launched ATH from both YYZ and YUL at the same time with less than daily service to both. To capture the O&D from both cities.

Also, as far as 6th freedom traffic is concerned, YUL and YYZ can be complementary, not mutually exclusive.

ex. A person wanting to fly from Pittsburgh to PRG can get there via YYZ and then return via YUL.

YYZ doesn't have to be the only hub with PRG service, as both YYZ and YUL have service to PIT.

So by leaving the flights as is, you're capturing the higher yielding O&D from both YYZ and YUL to PRG, and you're still capturing 6th freedom traffic to/from the US with complementary (up to) daily service to PRG from both YYZ/YUL (as an example)

win/win

I agree for leisure, but I think PRG is more of a business destination than people think. Surprising amount of corporate activity there and it is part of the "Emerging Europe" area. Some market research would be cool to see.

[thenoflyzone]

Originally Posted by CityTech

I agree for leisure, but I think PRG is more of a business destination than people think. Surprising amount of corporate activity there and it is part of the "Emerging Europe" area. Some market research would be cool to see.

If that were the case, AC would be sending a mainline aircraft to PRG. The fact that the route is summer seasonal Rouge B763 tells me that corporate activity on the route is very minimal.

[nname]

More routes got Rouged this week:
YYZ-PBI
YUL-PBI

Also service will increase from 2x to 4x weekly for YUL-NAS

Lots of small changes for Rouge and non-MAX sun flying, most gain or lose 1x weekly, or upgauge from Rouge 319 to 320/321.

[Alexcaban]

Originally Posted by nname

More routes got Rouged this week:
YYZ-PBI
YUL-PBI

Also service will increase from 2x to 4x weekly for YUL-NAS

Lots of small changes for Rouge and non-MAX sun flying, most gain or lose 1x weekly, or upgauge from Rouge 319 to 320/321.

From Rouge to mainline.
YUL-PVR
YUL-CUR

[Dominion301]

Originally Posted by Glacier

One huge factor to consider is that Victoria is a lot closer to Vancouver or Seattle than Kelowna is. My relatives in Victoria take the ferry over to Vancouver and fly out from there (because it's a lot cheaper). By contrast, we fly out of Kelowna because the 6 hour drive to Vancouver is too costly to make up for the price difference.

One other thing to consider is that YLW has a bit (not much, but probably 2%) of connecting traffic given its geography, whereas YYJ has pretty much none as every connection would involve backtracking.

[rakesh]

Flying into Edmonton from Toronto on Monday June 2. Will be in Edmonton and Calgary for a week vacationing and attending a couple of interviews. If I get both the jobs I am interviewing for then I will have to choose between Edmonton and Calgary. Kinda over Toronto after 10 years of living here. I mean it's a great city but the real estate prices are crazy and I don't intend to rent for the rest of my life. Btw, first time in Alberta, should be fun.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by rakesh

Flying into Edmonton from Toronto on Monday June 2. Will be in Edmonton and Calgary for a week vacationing and attending a couple of interviews. If I get both the jobs I am interviewing for then I will have to choose between Edmonton and Calgary. Kinda over Toronto after 10 years of living here. I mean it's a great city but the real estate prices are crazy and I don't intend to rent for the rest of my life. Btw, first time in Alberta, should be fun.

Edmonton is a beautiful city and less of the go-go-go work attitude. That would be my choice.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

Edmonton is a beautiful city and less of the go-go-go work attitude. That would be my choice.

I was going to say that, unless you work on Bay St, Edmonton would offer a more familiar "feel" to a Torontonian than would Calgary. Just my opinion.

[MountainView]

Originally Posted by Dominion301

One other thing to consider is that YLW has a bit (not much, but probably 2%) of connecting traffic given its geography, whereas YYJ has pretty much none as every connection would involve backtracking.

I flew YOW-YVR-YYJ last year... and upon landing in YYJ on my flight from YVR, there was an announcement telling people how to connect to YUL from that flight. So some people do back-track. Probably people who are looking for the cheapest fares possibly. (Just my opinion).

[rakesh]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I was going to say that, unless you work on Bay St, Edmonton would offer a more familiar "feel" to a Torontonian than would Calgary. Just my opinion.

Thanks guys. Fingers crossed for the interviews. I really like Edmonton as well. More artsy and gay friendly than Calgary from what I hear. But honestly cannot wait to move and make new friends (which is gonna be hard I guess since I am in my 30s now). I also hear that the food scene in both cities is pretty great these days. Foodie here. So excited about that

[Pavlov]

Originally Posted by rakesh

Thanks guys. Fingers crossed for the interviews. I really like Edmonton as well. More artsy and gay friendly than Calgary from what I hear. But honestly cannot wait to move and make new friends (which is gonna be hard I guess since I am in my 30s now). I also hear that the food scene in both cities is pretty great these days. Foodie here. So excited about that

I'm not sure that the bolded is true any longer (although it likely was once). Anyway, both cities provide a pretty solid quality of life.