YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Rusty Gull

Ok, WhatNext, why don't you come forward and reveal your affiliation with Air Canada. Seriously, you are the one who is full of knee-jerk remarks in defence of your beloved AC.

Have you ever even flown on an Embraer jet (this is the 'net, why do I even bother asking). The 2+2 seating arrangement is far better than Westjet's 3+3 737 (or Air Canada's 3+3 Airbus' for that matter)

This whole "Central Canada's out to get us" parochialism is tireseome.

And sorry, I don't work for Air Canada.

[Chikinlittle]

Love the Embraer jets (90 and 150 versions alike). No middle seats please!

Ever since WS switched reservation systems back in the fall (which was a nightmare!!), AC and WS have pretty much switched places. AC customer service has drastically improved, with staff actually wanting to find solutions for problems. And meanwhile, Westjet has lost the plot behind the scenes.

[Yume-sama]

I think coincidentally the layoffs Air Canada had may have particularly laid off those grumpy 90 year old women who were usually the flight attendants on any AC flight I was on.

Now they are young and attractive, and haven't been jaded by working for Air Canada for 30 years

Which, emergency landing or not does improve service! Kind of.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

If you're in the market to visit Japan this Summer, Air Canada is having an unadvertised seat sale up to 30% off (depending on day) today from YVR only.

I just booked for September~!

It'll be my first time flying AC to Japan since their A330's kicked the bucket a couple of years ago. Looking forward to flying on a plane that isn't falling apart, their 777's.

Air Canada's A330's didn't kick the bucket. Found this photo of one on airliners.net and the interior looks nice. I assume you'd ride up front, as always?
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Air-Canad...74/&sid=e1655ed05f76c0734731e29a3d83d2fe

[Yume-sama]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Air Canada's A330's didn't kick the bucket. Found this photo of one on airliners.net and the interior looks nice. I assume you'd ride up front, as always?
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Air-Canad...74/&sid=e1655ed05f76c0734731e29a3d83d2fe

Well, they don't use the A330's for the YVR - NRT run anymore, they use the 777. They are in the midst of retiring all 330's and 767's (will be fully replaced with the 787).

And the last time I was on an A330 it was in the pre-retrofit days. It's my version of a war story to tell my grandchildren.

I have not been in the First Suite yet, but I will in September. As most North American flights (except Vancouver - Toronto) don't have them.

And by the way, I usually don't pay for Business Class. It's usually empty on every flight that doesn't originate in Toronto, and I ask nicely 24 hours in advance

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Have you ever even flown on an Embraer jet (this is the 'net, why do I even bother asking). The 2+2 seating arrangement is far better than Westjet's 3+3 737 (or Air Canada's 3+3 Airbus' for that matter)

This whole "Central Canada's out to get us" parochialism is tireseome.

And sorry, I don't work for Air Canada.

I agree with you that the 2+2 seating on the Embraer is nicer than the 3+3 seating on a Boeing. I've flown on an such a plane with Air France.

But calling this "Toronto's out to get us" (which it isn't) attitude you accuse YVR of being 'PAROCHIAL' is rather like the pot calling the kettle black.

Excuse me, but your unbending defenses of restrictive Air Canada airspace-hogging, Toronto-hubbing, and market restrictions are parochialism at its most obvious.

It can only seem that you have an interest somehow, somewhere, even if not an Air Canada employee. Your bias is blatantly noticeable to many forumers.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Chikinlittle

Love the Embraer jets (90 and 150 versions alike). No middle seats please!

Ever since WS switched reservation systems back in the fall (which was a nightmare!!), AC and WS have pretty much switched places. AC customer service has drastically improved, with staff actually wanting to find solutions for problems. And meanwhile, Westjet has lost the plot behind the scenes.

Could I ask you a favour? I'd like to know about the "plot behind the scenes." I'm sure there is one!!! But what is it, what would it be, and is it a surreptitious thing or what? You've piqued my curiosity, and I wonder what Air Toronto is up to, if anything. Thanks.

[phesto]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

Well, they don't use the A330's for the YVR - NRT run anymore, they use the 777. They are in the midst of retiring all 330's and 767's (will be fully replaced with the 787).

And the last time I was on an A330 it was in the pre-retrofit days. It's my version of a war story to tell my grandchildren.

I have not been in the First Suite yet, but I will in September. As most North American flights (except Vancouver - Toronto) don't have them.

And by the way, I usually don't pay for Business Class. It's usually empty on every flight that doesn't originate in Toronto, and I ask nicely 24 hours in advance

I say why pay for Business Class? I flew NRT-YVR on AC last week and the flight was only half full...an empty middle row is just as good as a lie-flat seat.

[Yume-sama]

For some reason the return flights are always much much emptier than the flights to NRT. You can't hope for this on the way there.

Likely because YVR isn't a hub like NRT is A good % of people on the flight to Tokyo are not staying in Japan.

[trofirhen]

Has anybody read this? If you are interested in the issue of YVR's role as a "hub", protectionism, airline chauvinism and propoganda, the "threats" to our airline industry, comparative studies with another country in the same situation, then this read is a must.

Source: Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation, 16 March, 2010

http://www.centreforaviation.com/news/20...sm-vs-liberalism-whos-got-it-right/page1

.... some feedback would be nice, too......

[Millennium2002]

Reading both sides of the story tells me that there's heavy bias on both sides... but anyway...

The fact that there's almost no competition here (other than WestJet which only operates locally) is somewhat problematic as it means that Air Canada can't and is unwilling to adapt to the world market.

On the other hand, that adaptation may cause them to lose revenue and jobs, which is the excuse that they're putting forward.

In the end... I say... open up the markets... because Vancouver will surely benefit from increased tourism if there were more airlines operating here to more destinations. Also, if in the longer term Air Canada is able to adapt to this challenge, then maybe it itself could expand all over the place.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by allan_kuan

Reading both sides of the story tells me that there's heavy bias on both sides... but anyway...

The fact that there's almost no competition here (other than WestJet which only operates locally) is somewhat problematic as it means that Air Canada can't and is unwilling to adapt to the world market.

On the other hand, that adaptation may cause them to lose revenue and jobs, which is the excuse that they're putting forward.

In the end... I say... open up the markets... because Vancouver will surely benefit from increased tourism if there were more airlines operating here to more destinations. Also, if in the longer term Air Canada is able to adapt to this challenge, then maybe it itself could expand all over the place.

Thanks for reading that, Allan. I think it's important that people are as informed about all this as possible. I hope others will read it, too.
The whole thing addresses a vitally important, for Canada, its airlines, policies, and of course YVR above all.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

If you're in the market to visit Japan this Summer, Air Canada is having an unadvertised seat sale up to 30% off (depending on day) today from YVR only.

I just booked for September~!

It'll be my first time flying AC to Japan since their A330's kicked the bucket a couple of years ago. Looking forward to flying on a plane that isn't falling apart, their 777's.

Actually I really like their 777s to Tokyo.

Ever since being forced to fly through Tokyo ( enroute to Osaka ) I've flown on their 777s. Although I prefer JAL's 747s ( their upper deck is nice to be in... feels like a smaller plane )

Yume, I'm guessing your Aeroplan points status allows you to more easily get free upgrades. Are you elite status?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by allan_kuan

Reading both sides of the story tells me that there's heavy bias on both sides... but anyway...

The fact that there's almost no competition here (other than WestJet which only operates locally) is somewhat problematic as it means that Air Canada can't and is unwilling to adapt to the world market.

On the other hand, that adaptation may cause them to lose revenue and jobs, which is the excuse that they're putting forward.

In the end... I say... open up the markets... because Vancouver will surely benefit from increased tourism if there were more airlines operating here to more destinations. Also, if in the longer term Air Canada is able to adapt to this challenge, then maybe it itself could expand all over the place.

Huh?

Other than Vancouver-Sydney you'd be challenged to find a route that Air Canada doesn't have competition on. And saying Westjet operates "locally" is stretching things quite a bit.

As to trofirhen's article, that's been rebutted already here. Name me a spot in Australia where they can easily drive across a border to access unlimited flight options, as you can in most of Canada.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Huh?

Other than Vancouver-Sydney you'd be challenged to find a route that Air Canada doesn't have competition on. And saying Westjet operates "locally" is stretching things quite a bit.

As to trofirhen's article, that's been rebutted already here. Name me a spot in Australia where they can easily drive across a border to access unlimited flight options, as you can in most of Canada.

Tell me please: Who has "rebutted" the article, and what do you mean by "here?" Are you talking about your own contradiction to what is contained in the article?

And who said anything about "easily driving across the border" to (Seattle presumably) to get " unlimited flight options?"

If that is the case, then why do we have an airport In Vancouver in the first place, Whatnext? Why not just 'shut 'er down' and turn it into a megamall or something? Huh? Huh?

Why don't we just hop on a bus or car and drive to an American airport if we want to go somewhere? That seems to be the underlying thesis of your remark.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Tell me please: Who has "rebutted" the article, and what do you mean by "here?" Are you talking about your own contradiction to what is contained in the article?

And who said anything about "easily driving across the border" to (Seattle presumably) to get " unlimited flight options?"

If that is the case, then why do we have an airport In Vancouver in the first place, Whatnext? Why not just 'shut 'er down' and turn it into a megamall or something? Huh? Huh?

Why don't we just hop on a bus or car and drive to an American airport if we want to go somewhere? That seems to be the underlying thesis of your remark.

I'll put it simply for you: comparing the Australian and Canadian aviation markets is comparing apples and oranges. The fact is that most major airports in Canada are a relatively short distance from competition from American airports. So to bleat that there is some sort of evil Central Canadian monopoly etc. etc. is ridiculous. That is not a reason to "shut it down": by your flawed logic above Edmonton should just shut down their airport, as Calgary offers more options a short distance away.

I find it richly ironic that you post from one of the only Western countries that still clings to a state ownership share in their flag carrier.

Regardless, this topic has become tiresome and isn't adding anything new to the discussion of YVR.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I'll put it simply for you: comparing the Australian and Canadian aviation markets is comparing apples and oranges. The fact is that most major airports in Canada are a relatively short distance from competition from American airports. So to bleat that there is some sort of evil Central Canadian monopoly etc. etc. is ridiculous. That is not a reason to "shut it down": by your flawed logic above Edmonton should just shut down their airport, as Calgary offers more options a short distance away.

I find it richly ironic that you post from one of the only Western countries that still clings to a state ownership share in their flag carrier.

Regardless, this topic has become tiresome and isn't adding anything new to the discussion of YVR.

I'm not "bleating" about an evil Central Canadian monopoly.
In fact, I never referred to such a thing at all, I just gave a link to an article, to which you seem to react like sodium on water.
I think that you're strying to stonewall on this. What about the US airports you mentioned earlier? Now it's Calgary and Edmonton. Is this a "bait and switch" technique for escaping intellectual responsibility or what?

As for this not adding anything to the YVR thread, neither much do the endless discussions about flights to Japan, (no offense, please) although we accept input from all parties as a mattter of courtesy.

As far as THIS post is concerned, let other readers decide for themselves, would you please? Thank you.

For anyone interested, the original post is number 2570. Please people, help me out with this "number."

[Hourglass]

Originally Posted by whatnext

The fact is that most major airports in Canada are a relatively short distance from competition from American airports. So to bleat that there is some sort of evil Central Canadian monopoly etc. etc. is ridiculous. That is not a reason to "shut it down": by your flawed logic above Edmonton should just shut down their airport, as Calgary offers more options a short distance away.

Then why not open up the Canadian market further, since there is competition anyway?

Everyone has choice. The issue is whether people driving or flying to Seattle to catch a flight brings the most economic benefit to Vancouver. Is that your idea of a 'rebuttal'?

I've actually seen little in the way of logical rebuttal from you -- only an unbending defense of Air Canada's God-given right (aided and abetted by Transport Canada) to primacy on overseas routes (regardless of whether the route is actually served by Air Canada or not), and a thin-skinned sensitivity toward any perceived criticism of Air Canada itself (as observed by a number of other forum members).

Deregulation or opening up of markets always brings cries that the sky is falling (case in point, the recent speech by the Air Canada CEO to the Vancouver Board of Trade: Don't allow Emirates in! Vancouver will only be a spoke to a Dubai hub!). And yet, somehow successful companies manage to adapt and thrive -- and the consumer generally benefits from better choice and price. Air Canada has the benefit of an extensive route network in Canada, a young fleet, and dominant market share, so logically they should be able to be very successful in such an environment.

I think we're simply going to have to agree to disagree. Enough already.

[MalcolmTucker]

As for the originally posted article, its argument runs around the fact Air Canada underserves India and chooses to to help Lufthansa. Therefor to get more service to India, we should allow Emirates in. It completely ignores the fact that Air Canada is not allowed to start another route to India due to the current bilateral (well it is, but the 2nd route provisions in the current bilateral are pretty awful).

Originally Posted by Hourglass

Don't allow Emirates in! Vancouver will only be a spoke to a Dubai hub!). And yet, somehow successful companies manage to adapt and thrive -- and the consumer generally benefits from better choice and price. Air Canada has the benefit of an extensive route network in Canada, a young fleet, and dominant market share, so logically they should be able to be very successful in such an environment.

So because Air Canada can compete against WestJet, we should allow a subsidized state carrier, which operates from an illogically big hub, and this will be good? For consumers, price might go down, but choice will not.

Emirates operates pretty slyly. They go around and say, 'be open to us, we are open to you' and say this to everyone. Then because two countries they are open to, are not open to each other, they arbitrage. Emirates can only continue to exist as it does now in an environment where there is unfair market access into certain countries. (Beyond serving the Kangaroo routes)

[quobobo]

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

...we should allow a subsidized state carrier, which operates from an illogically big hub, and this will be good?

Yes. I have no problems with another state subsidizing flights for me.