YVR Airport & Sea Island Developments Discussion

[SpongeG]

from an article about lodging

Canada's two major airlines said they have noticed a spike in interest for flights in and out of Vancouver during the Olympics.

WestJet spokesman Robert Palmer said the airline has received several requests for special charter flights to Vancouver during the Games and it plans to fly as many as it can, depending on the availability of aircraft.

Air Canada said it is closely monitoring demand and will add capacity to Vancouver when required. It will also introduce non-stop service from Vancouver to Frankfurt, Paris, Geneva and Zurich during the Games and will bring several hundred more employees to Vancouver during the Olympics to ensure it can handle the increased traffic.

Global Travel managing partner Scott Clute expects a lot of regular winter-season visitors to the Vancouver/Whistler region will travel instead to resorts like Sun Peaks or Big White during the Olympics.

He also said several Vancouver residents will leave town to avoid the Olympic hoopla and many will fly out of Seattle or Bellingham to escape the perceived congestion and security issues at Vancouver International Airport.

[vansky]

we need more public sculpture in this city...more stuff in front of malls

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Hourglass

Might I point out that you're being inconsistent? On one hand, you state that Air Canada is deserving of special protection as the home side because it is one of the biggest employers in the Lower Mainland. On the other hand, you question why YVR, another one of the biggest employers in the Lower Mainland, should continue to expand for the future (providing needed construction jobs). Eliminating the AIF won't make them more competitive. It'll result in higher landing fees for airlines, which would also result in LESS competitiveness vs Seattle...

You honestly think YVR has gold-plated expansion plans (Toronto *cough cough*)?

Not all . I'm not encouraging Air Canada to expand and buy more aircraft if there is no business case for it. With Vancouver's share of the cruise market shrinking, and nothing on the horizon to suggest a big jump in tourism, I don't see why YVR is in perpetual expansion mode either.

You're right, Pearson is also an expensive gold-plated edifice, worse in that regard than Vancouver. I don't why people think their airport needs to be some Cadillac showplace, they certainly don't feel the same way about bus stations.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Not all . I'm not encouraging Air Canada to expand and buy more aircraft if there is no business case for it. With Vancouver's share of the cruise market shrinking, and nothing on the horizon to suggest a big jump in tourism, I don't see why YVR is in perpetual expansion mode either.

You're right, Pearson is also an expensive gold-plated edifice, worse in that regard than Vancouver. I don't why people think their airport needs to be some Cadillac showplace, they certainly don't feel the same way about bus stations.

Poor people use bus stations.

[MalcolmTucker]

& Bus users are very sensitive to price, if you build a nice station and try to raise your prices to pay for it, a competitor can drive you out of the market pretty fast.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Not all . I'm not encouraging Air Canada to expand and buy more aircraft if there is no business case for it. With Vancouver's share of the cruise market shrinking, and nothing on the horizon to suggest a big jump in tourism, I don't see why YVR is in perpetual expansion mode either.

I don't think Vancouver YVR was expanding for the cruise ship industry. They wanted to become the gateway to Asia. Something similar to San Francisco/LA, but for Canada.

IN actual fact, they do have that opportunity, but unfortunately, seem to hamstrung by politics.

Interestingly, the flight from SFO to Tokyo is 11 hours long. We beat that by 9 hours! If we became a substantial sized hub and people could save a couple of hours, why not?

Cathay Pacific uses YVR to act as a stopping point between NYC and Hong Kong. If Air Canada added more planes through YVR, and added routes, it could become the hub to Asia for much of North America. SF takes 11/12 hours to get to Tokyo. 14/15 hours to get to Hong Kong. Vancouver takes a few hours off both of those times. Many would opt for a shorter flight across the Pacific if they have to transfer anyhow.

How would it do this? Well, one way is hubbing most Canadian traffic through YVR to establish routes, and then reinstating the Eastern Canada <-> Asia direct routes once the YVR traffic has picked up US traffic.

This is part of the impetus in YVR being such a US friendly airport. I fear, however, with Seattle ramping up its international flights, YVR is losing its chance to be a North American hub for Asia.

For a list of places YVR serves ( Direct and non-direct ):
http://flightmapper.net/flights/Vancouver_YVR.html

[MalcolmTucker]

^ So Air Canada should cut services elsewhere to service Vancouver more? I guess you wouldn't mind hubbing through Toronto to get to London,

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

^ So Air Canada should cut services elsewhere to service Vancouver more? I guess you wouldn't mind hubbing through Toronto to get to London,

Doesn't Toronto serve in that capacity now?

I'm not talking about cutting flights, but consideration should be made to YVR first when increasing capacity along a route or adding a new route. I think the latter does happen naturally anyhow. If we made YVR an attractive hub, the whole country benefits. People aren't going to hub through YYZ when it means going back on themselves. It's not all AC as well. Open skies deals are crucial to success as well.

London is a major hub for Europe and warrants direct flights. Just as Hong Kong does. However, Toronto is already a hub for Europe and London now. There are many flights that go through Toronto from YVR. I believe there are 12x daily flights to LHR. YVR has 3x? This makes sense due to YYZ's location. (EDIT: Correction. YYZ has 4x daily flights to London. YVR has 3x. (as of 2006) source )
I doubt the Asian side of the equation is similarly skewed in YVR's favor.

MOST of the smaller European destinations ARE hubbed through Toronto. The idea for YVR was to become a hub for the REST of Asia. Increasing the number of flights and destinations for YVR makes the airport more convenient for connections. As it stands now, the traffic is split between the airports. I don't expect to go direct to many European places.

Hubbing all LONDON traffic through Toronto wouldn't really do much. YYZ isn't going to attract much US traffic when NYC and Chicago are far more attractive hubs.

Asia's different, as YVR's position actually makes it an attractive location. It's the shortest flight across the Pacific. It also goes both ways. We also need to improve our US connections when possible. That opens up the US market to Asia as well.

Many Asians going to US locations not directly served by their city could go through YVR as well.

[trofirhen]

[QUOTE=twoNeurons;4542333]Doesn't Toronto serve in that capacity now?
Asia's different, as YVR's position actually makes it an attractive location. It's the shortest flight across the Pacific. It also goes both ways. We also need to improve our US connections when possible. QUOTE]

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Toronto ALREADY has nonstop flights to Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tokyo, Beijing, and Seoul, all served by Air Canada. It also has (or had) a flight to Bangkok on Thai Airways through Seattle. And they are planning flights YYZ to New Zealand, as well, stopping at Los Angeles.

Get off this notion that YVR is the exclusive gateway to the Pacific for Toronto; it isn't. We need Toronto for Europe more than they need us for the Pacific.

Wake up and smell the coffee, everybody ! ! !

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by trofirhen;4542568...Toronto ALREADY has nonstop flights to Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tokyo, Beijing, and Seoul, all served by Air Canada. It also has (or had) a flight to Bangkok on Thai Airways through Seattle. And they are planning flights YYZ to New Zealand, as well, stopping at Los Angeles.

Get off this notion that YVR is the exclusive gateway to the Pacific for Toronto; [B

it isn't.[/B] We need Toronto for Europe more than they need us for the Pacific.

Wake up and smell the coffee, everybody ! ! !

Why is this a problem for you? Greater Toronto has a population double that of Vancouver, plus it draws from the rest of ON. It only makes sense they have some direct flights to Asia, as YVR has some direct flights to Europe.

Why should residents of Seattle want to connect through YVR to get to Asia or Europe, when again they have a larger population and would have to connect in a foreign country (Canada)? Plus SEA can draw international-bound travellers from PDX.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Why is this a problem for you? Greater Toronto has a population double that of Vancouver, plus it draws from the rest of ON. It only makes sense they have some direct flights to Asia, as YVR has some direct flights to Europe.

Yep, I agree. YVR is not the hub for YYZ... it's not in the right place for it. It can, however, be the hub for smaller US cities ( as well as West of Toronto ). To do this, it has to be convenient from these locations.

Why should residents of Seattle want to connect through YVR to get to Asia, when again they have a larger population and would have to connect in a foreign country (Canada)? Plus SEA can draw Asia-bound travellers from PDX.

I think it's more about the connecting flights to US destinations. Seattle can draw from a lot more US destinations which definitely gives it an edge.

Going through YVR isn't much of a hassle for Americans... they don't go through Canadian customs, it's like a domestic flight.

I wonder if Delta is starting SEA-KIX(Osaka) for example, because AC dropped it. Air Canada used to serve KIX with SEA and YVR pax. Incidentally, it was always cheaper out of SeaTac... go figure.

[trofirhen]

[QUOTE=whatnext;4542692]Why is this a problem for you? Greater Toronto has a population double that of Vancouver, plus it draws from the rest of ON. It only makes sense they have some direct flights to Asia, as YVR has some direct flights to Europe.QUOTE]

This is NOT a problem for me, as such. I simply wanted to point out to all the people who THINK that YVR is the Asia-Pacific jumping off point for YYZ
(and as such, a hub), that, in fact, it is not. YYZ has numerous nonstops to Asia that bypass Vancouver - and rightly so, given its size - and that Vancouver is not THE GREAT ASIA-PACIFIC HUB that it likes to think it is, that's all. In fact, this is really directed more towards people in Vancouver who think that we are THE pivotal Asia-Pacific city. (More delusions of grandeur, Vancouver-style)

[whatnext]

[QUOTE=trofirhen;4542797]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Why is this a problem for you? Greater Toronto has a population double that of Vancouver, plus it draws from the rest of ON. It only makes sense they have some direct flights to Asia, as YVR has some direct flights to Europe.QUOTE]

This is NOT a problem for me, as such. I simply wanted to point out to all the people who THINK that YVR is the Asia-Pacific jumping off point for YYZ
(and as such, a hub), that, in fact, it is not. YYZ has numerous nonstops to Asia that bypass Vancouver - and rightly so, given its size - and that Vancouver is not THE GREAT ASIA-PACIFIC HUB that it likes to think it is, that's all. In fact, this is really directed more towards people in Vancouver who think that we are THE pivotal Asia-Pacific city. (More delusions of grandeur, Vancouver-style)

Ahh, I see.

I see JAL is cutting the NRT-YVR-MEX flight as part of their reorg.

[Yume-sama]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Ahh, I see.

I see JAL is cutting the NRT-YVR-MEX flight as part of their reorg.

They will be flying once daily, as is the case now. They will not be flying twice daily two days a week, as they were before. So yes, they are cutting two flights per week.

They are also closing their Mexico office.

[Yume-sama]

OK, I just re-read the press release. The flights will remain exactly the same.

They are taking away two flights that go to Mexico City, but adding two flights that just go to Vancouver.

So, -2 +2 = no gain or loss.

Vancouver is the ONLY increase in service they will be doing out of every city in the World

Surprisingly they will be keeping us on the 747, even though they downgraded a lot of China flights from 777 or 767 to 737!

[trofirhen]

[QUOTE=whatnext;4544279]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Ahh, I see.

I see JAL is cutting the NRT-YVR-MEX flight as part of their reorg.

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

They will be flying once daily, as is the case now. They will not be flying twice daily two days a week, as they were before. So yes, they are cutting two flights per week.

They are also closing their Mexico office.

It's a good thing we have Mexicana! BTW, some years back, federal interfering sent Mexicana packing off to Seattle as well, and we lost it. It's nice to see it back. Seattle has Aeromexico instead.

[Hot Rod]

Speaking as a Seattle resident, it was cheaper for me to fly to China from Vancouver than Seattle. I fly out of Vancouver because it has more options and is always WAY cheaper (well, every time I've flown).

also, most international flights from Seattle to Asia connect through SFO, LAX, or YVR.

So, I think you all can drop this notion that Seattle is more of an Asian gateway than YVR. Oh, and Portland people are not flocking to Seattle for International flights - Portland has almost as many flights to Asia as Seattle does (in fact, Northwest/Delta has SEA and PDX sharing the NRT route).

Off top of my head, SEA has flights to Seoul (Asiana and Korean), NRT (United and Northwest/Delta), PEK (Hainan, not sure this will last), TPE (EVA [China Air dropped SEA to cargo only]). IIRC, that's only 4 cities in Asia. I'm not so sure SEA has as many flights to Europe either.

PDX has Lufthansa (as does YVR), SEA does not. SEA's strength is US market, as it is the primary US hub for Alaska Airlines and is a focus city for most of the US Airlines.

So, it is a mixed bag; I think YVR is still in the best position in the Pac NW to be the international hub. Doesn't YVR have nonstops to Seoul (Korean and AC, Asiana wants in soon), NRT (Japan Airlines, AC), Manila (PAL), TPE (China Air and EVA), HKG (Cathay and AC), PEK (Air China and AC), PVG (China Eastern and AC), Sydney (AC, what happened to Qantas?), AUK (Air New Zealand), Thai Air?, CAN (China Southern - July 2010, was to be now but delayed due to 787). Also, isn't YVR the 2nd largest International hub on the west coast (after LAX)?

[I know some of you argue that only flights off the continent are International, but in Seattle (and SFO/LAX) USA in general - we count flights to Canada as International. ... so, so should YVR; hence being a larger Int'l hub than SFO]

It is a shame that the Osaka route was eliminated and no other airline has picked it up yet, but think I read somewhere ANA wants to do the KIX-YVR route but is waiting for? yes - the 787. I suspect many other routes will become available once that airplane comes online.

Why is it so hard for Canadians to realize that SEA flights to US cities would be cheaper than YVR flights to said US cities???

However, I am surprised that flights from Seattle to many Canadian cities are cheaper than YVR to said cities. Who the hell is running your air service system???

Oh well, my fiance lives in China (for the next 6 months) so I will continue to use YVR for flights to Chengdu, Sichuan due to the convenience (only change planes in PEK), time (only 15 hours TOTAL), and price (usually around $800 CAD).

[Political_R]

Originally Posted by Hot Rod

.

PDX has Lufthansa (as does YVR), SEA does not.
.

Incorrect, SEA does have one daily flight to Frankfurt.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Political_R

Incorrect, SEA does have one daily flight to Frankfurt.

Yes, plus a daily Air France flight to Paris, which Vancouver does not have.

And a daily nonstop to Copenhagen, which Vancouver does not have.
Plus Amsterdam.
Plus London.

Seattle is better-connected to Europe than Vancouver, and catching up fast to Asia.

The joke's on you, Vancouver. hah!!

[Gordon]

One thing Seattle has that YVR doesn't have is a major is a major airline's hub ( Alaska 6th - 8th largest in the U.S)

Will AC keep it's YVR Sydney flight if the get YYZ to sydney. The current flight starts & Terminates in T0. A 777 can fly nonstop YYZ to Sydney

I wonder if there are any taxes that Victoria could reduce to make YVR a more appealing destination especially for low cost carriers.

As far as expansion goes the long term planning process must continue, but at this point we are running at 100% all afternoon for example.As of Jan 15 Westjet will start flying 4 times weekly to Lax & 3 times Weekly to Phx from yvr