Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5740965/

Topic: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: YTZ
Posted 2013-04-17 16:19:39 and read 7101 times.

http://www.consumer.ca/pdfs/cac_poll...ernational_air_carrier_choices.pdf

According to the Consumer Association of Canada, most Canadians favour allowing in more foreign competition in the aviation sector.

There is clearly public consensus on the issue. Wonder if this will impact the government's position at all. They opened up telecom after significant public pressure.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: IBOAviator
Posted 2013-04-17 17:31:05 and read 6941 times.

I'm in favour of this. Competition makes for a better market because competition increases the quality of the product being offered inevitably and increases overall efficiency.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: pnwtraveler
Posted 2013-04-17 17:33:40 and read 6936 times.

In this case you have to go to the publicized results and questions that were publicized. What we see might not be the whole survey. What we see are called motherhood and white bread questions. You need to look at exactly how the questionnaire is worded. As an advertising executive I have been involved in enough polling, surveying and focus groups to last a lifetime. But with all my experience I am not a survey specialist. But what I know is how the question is worded influences greatly the response. It is a real science both as a marketing tool and often are not necessarily a search for truth. The search for real truth of opinion is also science but has to be even more finely crafted to influence opinion in any way.

For example, "Would you be in favour of safer streets?" Or, Would you be in favour of lower taxes? You can easily predict the majority will agree. The more astute would want their answer further qualified. Usually a questionnaire survey starts with the most motherhood questions then drive deeper as to get to the real story. They start simple and get more specific. They also ask the same question in a number of different ways to improve the accuracy and prevent people from both misunderstanding or purposely skewing their answer.

In most cases, the "strongly agree" is much higher on the questions with obvious answers. Only the most educated on the subject, will see loopholes and then answer "somewhat agree". If you ask people if they want to save money they will always answer yes unless you qualify distinctly. If you ask people if they want more competition they will always answer yes because the prevailing consumer view is competition is good. You can see on the question about increased competition with Canadian carriers does not push past the motherhood level.

So the survey does its job. It is designed to test Canadians response to more competition and lower costs. However, it does not go into the core issues of the current debates that circle around and around. There is no rule that a survey has to be fairly worded. It can be a marketing tool to communicate a distinct idea. Political surveys often do both. They try to get to the core of the public's thinking and those results are often not publicly revealed. And they also ask leading surveys to use as a political tool and those results are selectively revealed as a tool to get you to support or vote.

To give the other side of the coin and skew the survey in the other direction, the survey could have asked, "Would you agree with foreign carrier competition against Canadian carriers to such an extent it meant the loss of airline management and head office jobs in Canada" Given the latest brouhaha with the Banks outsourcing so much of their back office work overseas and using foreign workers under different rules than Canadian workers, I would predict the outcome would all of a sudden change. Survey's by law don't have to be fair.

So if a survey was conducted to be entirely fair you would see questions like the ones asked in this survey, increasingly qualified until you found where the attitudes changed. Now this survey could have had 50 questions in theory and only a few questions divulged. There is no law that you have to reveal all the results either. This survey is a marketing tool and does it job. Hidden in it or not asked is to what extent Canadians will allow foreign competition and up to and including what cost. Is a level of loss of employment for lower costs acceptable? And if so to what level? Competition in the public's mind is numerous choices in the vast majority of instances. What also should have been asked then would have dealt with the controversies of dominant foreign carriers competing against Canadian Carriers if it meant that long term results would have a reduced level in the quantity of choice with airlines. And so on... That would survey real opinions.

This no different than the Wine Producers researching the benefits of drinking wine and using the results to help sell wine, or the Coffee growers doing the same things with the benefit of coffee. Much different than the Mayo Clinic publicizing a broad based research program that seeks the truth at all cost.

Thus endeth the survey lessen. So the next time you see a survey quoted in a paper, magazine or by an association think twice as to why and how they are doing it. What ax do they have to grind? Are they truly independent and seriously looking for true opinion or are they promoting something. Either is fair game, marketing tool or truth seeker. Just be astute enough to know the difference.

Bottom line, this survey on aviation competition in Canada, is a marketing tool and does it job for the association but is not the complete answer on the subject.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-17 18:46:04 and read 6802 times.

You don't say  Wow!

I've noticed quite a few pieces on the competitiveness, or lack thereof, of the Canadian market. Some are trivial, some common sense.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/edito...yhigh_air_fares_back_to_earth.html

http://www.thestar.com/life/travel/2...es__and_canadians_get_screwed.html

http://bc.ctvnews.ca/sky-high-airfar...tle-holiday-travel-plans-1.1070701

http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2012/06/canadian-fees

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/04/12/jesse-kline/

The Senate hearing is also worth following, if only because of what the witnesses are saying:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/SenCommitteeBu...arl=41&ses=1&Language=E&comm_id=19

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 2):
However, it does not go into the core issues of the current debates that circle around and around.

How many of those core issues/caveats are real? And how many of them are simply made up - like the "tens of thousands of jobs" claim.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 2):
. What also should have been asked then would have dealt with the controversies of dominant foreign carriers competing against Canadian Carriers if it meant that long term results would have a reduced level in the quantity of choice with airlines.

You are quite right about the wording of the question influencing the response. Take, for example, your own "question", which itself is (either deliberately or inadvertantly) based on a very questionable assumption: that the arrival of foreign carriers will result in a reduced level in the quantity of choice with airlines. I don't know if thats true. Can you think of any liberalized aviation markets where this would apply? Its one thing asking a quesiton based on evidence; its another asking it based on a questionable belief/assumption. In this case, I will stop myself from considering your question fair until you qualify the causality and underlying logic and assumptions with some type of evidence. If its true, evidence should be plentiful.

Until then, what you say "Should have been asked" is somewhat inferior to the question that was asked. In this case, the simpler, the better, if only because the caveats you want to include ought not to be included without some evidence to back the assumptions in them.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 2):
"Would you agree with foreign carrier competition against Canadian carriers to such an extent it meant the loss of airline management and head office jobs in Canada" Given the latest brouhaha with the Banks outsourcing so much of their back office work overseas and using foreign workers under different rules than Canadian workers, I would predict the outcome would all of a sudden change.

Would you?

First, lets look at the two cases you're comparing. RBC is a protected bank that declares billions of dollars in profits on a regular basis. Despite these profits, it wants to outsource jobs. Its black and white, and there's no direct cost to the person being polled.

In the second case, you have an airline that needs the government to step in on a regular basis. In 2009, AC needed an emergency bail out loan from the government. In 2010, AC needed the Government to protect it from competition. In 2011, and for the first of 2012, AC needed the government to protect it from its unions. In the second half of 2012 (and early 2013), AC needed the government to step in to protect it from its own pension obligations. In the meantime, after successfully stopping foreign competition, partly on the basis of a claim that tens of thousands of jobs would be lost, AC managed to get rid of 2700 such jobs from Canada. To top it off, there are quite a few people who feel it drectly on their wallet. Apparently, as a group, they're large enough to allow YOW to double in size.

I don't think the poll would come out quite as you expect it to. Especially with growing price-consciousness vis-a-vis the US. People know what airfares in the US cost, and as long as that gap in prices remains, people will slowly but surely move towards the "more competition" no matter how many caveats you put in.

That said, I don't care much for polls. People can be righteous all they want, but people still do vote with their wallets. If you want to sum up how redundant all these polls are, you need only look at Walmart. Has it been good for Canadian manufacturing? Probably not. Has it been good for Canada as a whole? Probably. The same applies to aviation. Is competition good for Air Canada? Probably not. Is it good for Canada as a whole? Probably.

Trying to skew the polls by adding caveats - some of them (such as the questionable ones that aren't backed by evidence) with an agenda - won't help much.

To be quite honest, the best poll question is the one that the competition commissioner already answered:

"Should Canadian consumers and businesses allow AC to be coddled at home by allowing it (as it itself suggests) to dominate parts of its home market to ensure it can thrive as a Canadian champion internationally?"

I dare suggest most Canadians will agree with what she has to say: “Canadian consumers and businesses,” she says, “ought not to pay the price for a company to be coddled at home so that it can stride about on the world stage.”

Quoting YTZ (Thread starter):
They opened up telecom after significant public pressure.

How's that working out? I hear they're all up for sale. One quote, in particular, amused me no end:

"Gary Wong, director of legal affairs at Mobilicity, said there is also disagreement over the CWTA’s position that Canadian wireless consumers enjoy competitive prices when they are actually among the highest in the world."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...m-big-player-bias/article10967477/

That, I am afraid, is the reality of how Canada works. We claim we're doing brilliantly, even when we're not. And the powers that be are lapping up the kool aid, and ignoring reality. I am certain that despite all these calls, we will see no change in aviation, simply because the people making the decisions rarely if ever pay for their own tickets. Insular Canada at its best. Or worst.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: pnwtraveler
Posted 2013-04-17 19:47:44 and read 6713 times.

What I stated regarding this "survey" stands. The examples I gave, I said were skewed the other direction for demonstration purposes. All legitimate versions of survey's used for "marketing" purposes and designed to convince the public of your opinion. Nowhere did I say inferior. It is entirely legitimate. Just don't try to then broadcast the results of this survey to state it is the public opinion as a whole because the survey isn't intended to be a discovery of what stands behind the simple questions. If it did it would go deeper, not just answer the simple questions it does and examples I gave that are motherhood and apple pie.

My comments ironically were forwarded by the way prior to posting, to one of the senior staff at one of the companies involved often in one of the organizations in the above examples, and the answer was all my statements were correct. To simply report the original survey as definitive of the issues at stake would be wrong. It is a survey of surface reactions to competition and costs as far as it goes. I know better that the results would swing widely if the survey was extensively done to get to the bottom line opinions and where the real opinion lies.

I am not going to debate the issues once again. I simply was pointing out the detail behind that survey so people would realize it's use, and appropriateness of the "level" of opinion cited. Newspaper articles are also not the same as a scientifically crafted survey and are as biased or not based on the author and other issues.

[Edited 2013-04-17 19:58:18]

[Edited 2013-04-17 19:59:55]

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: solarflyer22
Posted 2013-04-17 19:52:15 and read 6698 times.

I think what Canada needs is a good domestic version of Southwest. A relatively cheap LCC that has a good domestic cost base. Internationally, Air Canada will probably be dominant for a while. Perhaps they could call it "Northwest".

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: Airontario
Posted 2013-04-17 20:28:56 and read 6621 times.

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 5):

I think what Canada needs is a good domestic version of Southwest. A relatively cheap LCC that has a good domestic cost base. Internationally, Air Canada will probably be dominant for a while. Perhaps they could call it "Northwest".

Do you mean WestJet?

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-04-17 21:20:42 and read 6518 times.

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 5):
I think what Canada needs is a good domestic version of Southwest. A relatively cheap LCC that has a good domestic cost base. Internationally, Air Canada will probably be dominant for a while. Perhaps they could call it "Northwest".

It doesn't work in Canada. There have been several carriers in the Canadian market that have gone bankrupt in the past and there will be more in the future. Jetsgo, Canada 3000, Royal, Nation Air all have gone the way of the Do-do bird. They all tried to be LCCs but failed.

The market is not there to support what demand there is for air travel. I have always contended that Canada should open its markets not to foreign competition but to the foreign airlines and let them fly in Canada in the same manner that all airlines can do with the proper regulation.


This group has an agenda and is not impartial. This makes the survey integrity come into question. I for one of course believe that competition would create lower fares for the Canadian consumer and thus be a plus, which does not need a survey to tell that, it was just common sense.

[Edited 2013-04-17 21:38:44]


[Edited 2013-04-17 21:49:15]

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: czbbflier
Posted 2013-04-17 21:32:53 and read 6491 times.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 2):

In this case you have to go to the publicized results and questions that were publicized. What we see might not be the whole survey. What we see are called motherhood and white bread questions. You need to look at exactly how the questionnaire is worded. As an advertising executive I have been involved in enough polling, surveying and focus groups to last a lifetime. But with all my experience I am not a survey specialist. But what I know is how the question is worded influences greatly the response. It is a real science both as a marketing tool and often are not necessarily a search for truth. The search for real truth of opinion is also science but has to be even more finely crafted to influence opinion in any way.

Wonderful. I'm so glad I'm not alone in thinking this way. Thank you for being so eloquent. Welcome to my RR list.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: YTZ
Posted 2013-04-17 23:26:29 and read 6330 times.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 7):
This group has an agenda and is not impartial.

It's the Consumer Association of Canada. I think their agenda is plenty obvious.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2013-04-18 01:33:48 and read 6198 times.

Taxes and fees are primarily what make Canadian prices higher than American. There is plenty of competition for most routes which can support it.

Internationally, there are dozens of airlines serving Canada and Canadians have non stop or one stop flights to almost anywhere on the planet.

I'm flying to Vegas next week out of Kelowna on United and returning on Horizon...and that's not bad for a city of just over 100k people. The prices were just about the same as AC and WS. I chose the flights because of arrival and departure times.

If there's a market, an airline will move in and fill it.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: 757ops
Posted 2013-04-18 02:43:33 and read 6116 times.

Opening up international competition would be great as from what I see they limit foreign airlines so much that it becomes almost impossible to operate. I spoke to someone from ET recently and they were given 2x weekly from YYZ you can't compete with 2x frequency, they should have given at least 4x frequency but I believe AC wouldn't like that as they would loose the YYZ-Africa market they currently fly to Europe to connect!

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-18 04:17:41 and read 6008 times.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 4):
Newspaper articles are also not the same as a scientifically crafted survey and are as biased or not based on the author and other issues.

If you read the links, you would notice two things:

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/edito...yhigh_air_fares_back_to_earth.html

This one is written by Ambarish Chandra is an economics professor at the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management, and the Department of Management, U of T Scarborough Campus. He's done a fair bit of work on competition: http://individual.utoronto.ca/achandra/

Another link:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2012/06/canadian-fees

is based on - and links to: http://news.cision.com/university-of...ay-from-canada-s-airports,c9274598

Quoting brilondon (Reply 7):
I have always contended that Canada should open its markets not to foreign competition but to the foreign airlines and let them fly in Canada in the same manner that all airlines can do with the proper regulation.

The Competition Bureau called for this in 2008. Nothing has come of it so far, and I doubt anything ever will.

"While Canada has to date insisted on reciprocity as a condition of opening the Canadian airline market to foreign competition, the public interest in airline competition goes beyond the interests of existing domestic market participants to include the economy generally and important industries, such as tourism. The Bureau recognizes that there is an important policy question of whether rights of establishment or cabotage should be granted only on a reciprocal basis. Based on competition grounds, a strong case exists supporting the implementation of such measures unilaterally."

http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/e..._Bureau_Submission_to_the_CPRP.pdf

Quoting brilondon (Reply 7):
I for one of course believe that competition would create lower fares for the Canadian consumer and thus be a plus, which does not need a survey to tell that, it was just common sense.

I agree. But there seem to be a lot of folk around here who think its a zero sum game, which precludes the possibly of any plusses.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10):
Taxes and fees are primarily what make Canadian prices higher than American.

"Higher taxes and fees levied at Canadian airports are widely blamed, but a 28-percent average price gap remains when you remove that differential," said Smith Ph.D. student Omar Sherif Elwakil, one of the authors. "For example, a recent $400 Toronto-New York City roundtrip fare and its counterpart $177 Buffalo-New York City flight included an $82-to-$21 tax-fee differential that still left a substantial $162 overall differential."

http://news.cision.com/university-of...ay-from-canada-s-airports,c9274598

Or its simply a case of having a poor aviation policy on the whole.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10):
Internationally, there are dozens of airlines serving Canada and Canadians have non stop or one stop flights to almost anywhere on the planet.

Having routes and fostering competition on those routes are two different things.

I've never understood this Canadian need to put forward self-congratulatory statements such as this one, that hit the target and miss the point. Nothings going to change if Canadians keep applying blanket statements such as this one, which focus more on tokenism than quality/competition.

I'm sure you count AC/LH/LX/OS as four carriers, when we all know that they are metal neutral and their prices are set in one office. Different coloured tails. Identical prices. How competitive?

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10):
If there's a market, an airline will move in and fill it.

Only if they're allowed to. There are plenty of markets that are not viable for the airlines that currently have permission to fly to/from Canada that might be viable for new entrants with lower costs bases and better products.

The availability of supply has never been the issue (there's a whole Willie Walsh thread on it). The issue with Canada is not that there isn't enough supply, its that supply is being hampered with the goal of protecting demand for certain airlines rather than, you know, letting that suppliers compete for that demand. Hence the relatively higher airfares in Canada - and the call for more competition.

Quoting 757ops (Reply 11):
Opening up international competition would be great as from what I see they limit foreign airlines so much that it becomes almost impossible to operate. I spoke to someone from ET recently and they were given 2x weekly from YYZ you can't compete with 2x frequency, they should have given at least 4x frequency but I believe AC wouldn't like that as they would loose the YYZ-Africa market they currently fly to Europe to connect!

I think the call for more competition should be seen for what it is: a growing aversion to the notion that Canada's interests and AIr Canada's interests are the same. For too long, Canadian aviation policy has been based on this tenet. It probably still is. There is an automatic assumption that anything that is bad for AC, must be bad for Canada. To the extent that the government has started getting involved in the labour disputes of this so-called 'private' company.

As a result, most of these new routes are offered with laughably low frequencies. SV will be getting 2, I think. ET got two. TK has been in the market since 2009/10 and still isn't allowed to fly daily. And so on.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: YTZ
Posted 2013-04-18 07:06:47 and read 5848 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 3):
How's that working out?

Decently. Prices have definitely dropped and service has gone up. Could anyone have imagined $40 unlimited calling plans from the major carriers before Wind arrived?

Look at all the Average Revenue per User (ARPU) stats of the major airlines. They've all taken big hits since Wind started up.

The mistake the government made in my mind was not fully opening up to foreign competition. I would have preferred one of the big boys like Orange, Vodafone, T-Mobile or Three, instead of Wind.

Ditto with airlines. Personally, I'd love to have a common market in the US. I have no issues with transiting in Chicago instead of Toronto, if immigration procedures are improved. Nor do I have any issues with letting an American carrier set up a hub at Toronto and run flights out of there.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: pnwtraveler
Posted 2013-04-18 07:42:36 and read 5797 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 12):
I think the call for more competition should be seen for what it is: a growing aversion to the notion that Canada's interests and AIr Canada's interests are the same. For too long, Canadian aviation policy has been based on this tenet. It probably still is. There is an automatic assumption that anything that is bad for AC, must be bad for Canada. To the extent that the government has started getting involved in the labour disputes of this so-called 'private' company.

I agree that competition is viatlal for healthy business and consumer interests. The only issue I have with the current bilaterals might be with timing.

However, you are and I are never going to agree on a number of things.

1. Low cost is always in the best interest of consumers.
2. Competition by some very large major players or player will ever be as good as widespread competition from many sources.
3. Saying the same thing over and over without hard new information, doesn't make it true. Hence I have stepped out of much of the discussion, and even kept quiet when I was misinterpreted in the other recent of the numerous threads.
4. This is not just a Canadian issue when it comes to mega carriers.
5. The issue and opinions are as widespread as is constantly portrayed and is a niche issue.
6. I don't believe this is a pro AC policy at all (even though it benefits them in some instances but also hampers them in others) but has a broader scope. Nothing would benefit AC more than giving TK a fellow Star Alliance member more access at the expense of other non Star Carriers. However TK is being held to the same numeric formula that all other carriers have in that demand is proven and access is granted.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: drgmobile
Posted 2013-04-18 08:37:49 and read 5723 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 10):
Taxes and fees are primarily what make Canadian prices higher than American. There is plenty of competition for most routes which can support it.

This is not correct, actually. As the Conference Board report found last fall, there is a gap on the base fare.

What discussions like this all fail to touch on is whether or not foreign carriers are even interested in serving the Canadian domestic market. Even for major routes. Has any carrier even said it is interested? There are plenty of major U.S. markets that U.S. carriers choose not to serve because they aren't part of their network strategy. For example, you don't see United flying between Dallas and Atlanta.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: YTZ
Posted 2013-04-18 08:58:56 and read 5688 times.

Quoting drgmobile (Reply 15):
For example, you don't see United flying between Dallas and Atlanta.

Neither is a hub for United. So why would they fly between the two?

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-18 10:17:45 and read 5580 times.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 14):

You're right. We're not going to agree.

Furthermore, I'm less interested in adding new information than I am in challenging some commonly held beliefs that appear to be inconsistent with reality. I don't understand the points you're trying to make in 2, 4 and 5.

As for 6, AC and TK do not, as of now, have a revenue sharing metal neutral deal. Therefore AC does not benefit from TK's entry as much as it does with it's partnership with LH. Simply put, AC pax on AC/LH metal generate more revenue than putting them on TK metal. Note that it has taken 2+ years for AC to even play ball with its star alliance partner. I am willing to wager a fair bit of money that TK will get unlimited slots, with scant regard for this outdated and inconsistently applied numerical formula, if it enters the TA++ JV with UA, LH and AC.

In any case, this proven demand clause is hogwash. The market is not static - it responds to fluctuations in price. Prices in Canada are largely believed (proven?) to be higher than the rest of the world. Let competition chip away at the prices and see how demand changes. If prices go up demand goes down and vice versa. At what point is it "proven"?

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: 777way
Posted 2013-04-18 11:03:55 and read 5307 times.

Out of curiosity how many foreign airlines have stopped flying to Canada, here are a few;

Fiji Airways
Singapore Airlines
Malaysia
Thai
Air India
CSA
Aer Lingus
Qantas

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-18 15:20:58 and read 3952 times.

Quoting 777way (Reply 18):

In recent years (2009 +)

Olympic Airways
Aeroflot (Wiki says theyre resuming in June 2013)
Virgin America
LAN Chile

[Edited 2013-04-18 15:22:15]

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: YTZ
Posted 2013-04-18 15:38:14 and read 3872 times.

Quoting 777way (Reply 18):
Out of curiosity how many foreign airlines have stopped flying to Canada, here are a few;

Relevance to the topic at hand?

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-04-18 15:48:26 and read 3832 times.

Canadians have no shortage of airline competition. Most Canadians live within reasonable distance of major U.S. gateways and can choose among all carriers serving the U.S. if they're not happy with the fares and service available on direct flights from/to Canada. And considering the Canadian population, Canada has a large number of nonstop international carriers. And most domestic markets large enough to justify competitive service have it. Even many very small markets between remote points in northern Canada are served by two carriers. The number of markets with competitive service will also increase when WestJet's new regional carrier begins service with Q400s in markets whee their 737s are now too big.

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 5):
I think what Canada needs is a good domestic version of Southwest. A relatively cheap LCC that has a good domestic cost base.

That was WestJet's original business model. The difference is that the Canadian market is much smaller and much more seasonal than the U.S. domestic market.. WestJet has to rely on leisure markets like the Caribbean and Mexico to make use of their fleet during the winter when domestic traffic is low. Southwest can move their fleet around entirely within the U.S. to adjust for seasonal variations.

Quoting 777way (Reply 18):
Out of curiosity how many foreign airlines have stopped flying to Canada, here are a few;

But how many foreign carriers have started new service to Canada during the same period?

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: 777way
Posted 2013-04-18 16:17:29 and read 3750 times.

Quoting 777way (Reply 18):
Out of curiosity how many foreign airlines have stopped flying to Canada, here are a few;

Fiji Airways
Singapore Airlines
Malaysia
Thai
Air India
CSA
Aer Lingus
Qantas
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 19):
Olympic Airways
Aeroflot (Wiki says theyre resuming in June 2013)
Virgin America
LAN Chile

Tarom
SAS
TAP
Jat
Iberia
Aerosvit
Air Jamaica

when they were still around flying Malev, BMI

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 21):
But how many foreign carriers have started new service to Canada during the same period?

Quite a few not including cargo and charters, can any one list them?

China Southern
China Eastern
Sichuan
Hainan
Philippine
Emirates
Etihad
Qatar
Caribbean

also returned Royal Jordanian, Virgin Atlantic, Egypt Air (in June)

Quoting YTZ (Reply 20):

Relevance to the topic at hand?

just for fun.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-04-18 16:21:12 and read 3732 times.

Quoting 777way (Reply 22):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 21):
But how many foreign carriers have started new service to Canada during the same period?

Quite a few not including cargo and charters, can any one list them?

China Southern
China Eastern
Sichuan
Hainan
Philippine
Emirates
Etihad
Qatar
Caribbean

also returned Royal Jordanian, Virgin Atlantic, Egypt Air (in June)

Also TACA, Copa and Turkish. And Air New Zealand and Aeromexico returned after a long absence.

[Edited 2013-04-18 16:24:48]

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: 777way
Posted 2013-04-18 16:52:24 and read 3670 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 23):
Also TACA, Copa and Turkish. And Air New Zealand and Aeromexico returned after a long absence.

Jet Airways
Ethiopian

I think Philippine was also a resumption not a new service.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-18 17:03:19 and read 3747 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 21):
Canadians have no shortage of airline competition.

A definitive statement. What is it based on?

The academics and competition bureau suggest otherwise. I won't bother reposting everything, but between the Senate Hearings and the articles I've posted (by economists and otherwise) suggest that there is a shortage of competition. The Competition Bureau is even advocating offering unilateral cabotage rights to fix it.

Even the competition that does exist is not allowed to compete fairly. The restrictions on frequencies mars their ability to compete. If you don't want to take my word...well, there's plenty of industry experts who'll tell a similar tale.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: competitive markets are defined by the ability of suppliers to compete for demand. When one restricts an airlines ability to compete by imposing restrictions that are not imposed in an equal manner on all the other airlines, the resulting market conditions are not "competitive". Partially competitive perhaps. But not competitive. In such cases, yes, there is a shortage of competition.

For example, ET provides competition on ADD on 2 days per week. Does that make it a competitive route 7 days a week, 365 days a year? If you drink the usual self-congratulatory kool aid, then yes, perhaps it is.

What next? Claim that AC LH OS and LX are competing with each other by virtue of having different coloured tails?

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 21):
Most Canadians live within reasonable distance of major U.S. gateways and can choose among all carriers serving the U.S. if they're not happy with the fares and service available on direct flights from/to Canada.

Irrelevant.

If there was more competition in Canada, Canadians wouldn't have to go to other countries to find reasonable fares. Nor should they have to.

Again, I will note that the problem with Canada is not a lack of suppliers. It is artificial restrictions. If not providing unlimited access is the issue, then put the same restrictions on eveyrone. Otherwise any claim of competitiveness is little more than a joke in poor taste.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 21):

But how many foreign carriers have started new service to Canada during the same period?

How many of them can fly daily? An airline flying a 3 weekly cannot really compete in the fullest possible way with a carrier flying daily.

TK started with 3/wk.
Copa started with 4-5/wk.
Hainan started with 3 frequencies.
Carribean 2/wk
China Southern 4/wk
Qatar 3/wk
Emirates 3/wk
Etihad 3/wk

How many of those have gone daily?

Of course, if you're talking about token competition, then we've got plenty. Except that like all things token, it doesn't amount to much.

[Edited 2013-04-18 17:08:34]

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: gr8circle
Posted 2013-04-18 17:04:52 and read 3747 times.

Quoting 777way (Reply 22):
Quoting YTZ (Reply 20):
Relevance to the topic at hand?
just for fun.

YTZ, in a thread about foreign competition in air services to Canada, I'd think 777way asked a very relevant question......

Quoting 777way (Reply 24):
Jet Airways

9W has been operating to YYZ steadily since 2007, so they're not all that new.....AI may restart services once the 787s are back n the air and they get their act together......

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-04-18 17:23:49 and read 3774 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 25):
What next? Claim that AC LH OS and LX are competing with each other by virtue of having different coloured tails?

Those carriers certainly compete with one another. Just check their fares and you will find that there are big differences between the same points for travel on the same dates. I fly LX and LH fairly often in Europe and it's rare that both carriers offer the same fares between the same points. If you assume that LH calls the shots when it comes to pricing at LX, for example, you are very mistaken.

Quoting gr8circle (Reply 26):
Quoting 777way (Reply 24):
Jet Airways

9W has been operating to YYZ steadily since 2007, so they're not all that new....

But that was in connection with a list of carriers that dropped service to Canada, including several that did so much longer ago than 2007.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 25):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 21):
Most Canadians live within reasonable distance of major U.S. gateways and can choose among all carriers serving the U.S. if they're not happy with the fares and service available on direct flights from/to Canada.

Irrelevant.

If there was more competition in Canada, Canadians wouldn't have to go to other countries to find reasonable fares. Nor should they have to.

Why is a Canadian connecting in the U.S. any different than a European from dozens of countries in Europe connecting in AMS/FRA/CDG/LHR/ZRH/MUC etc etc.? Passengers make their decisions based on many factors. I will very often choose a connection over a direct flight because it's often cheaper. The same applies for connections to/from Canada via the U.S.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-18 18:26:07 and read 3723 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 27):
Those carriers certainly compete with one another. Just check their fares and you will find that there are big differences between the same points for travel on the same dates. I fly LX and LH fairly often in Europe and it's rare that both carriers offer the same fares between the same points. If you assume that LH calls the shots when it comes to pricing at LX, for example, you are very mistaken.

I should have specified Canada TATL. European market conditions are very different to Canadian market conditions. Prices are a funciton of demand and supply. When prices are significantly higher than they are in other countries, it is logical to conclude that there is a supply demand mismatch. I contend that Canada's market is undersupplied for any number of reasons, be it fiscal and fleet constraints for the incumbents, or government barriers preventing new entrants from entering fast enough to address the demand. Probably a bit of both. I don't think the same can be said for the EU, where LX and LH may give the impression that they are competing with the other when they are, in fact, responding to very specific challengers targetting their respective target audiences.

More to the point, how do airlines compete with each other if they are in metal neutral agreements? How will they benefit from undercutting each other when it doesn't matter whose aircraft the passenger is on?

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 27):
Why is a Canadian connecting in the U.S. any different than a European from dozens of countries in Europe connecting in AMS/FRA/CDG/LHR/ZRH/MUC etc etc.?

Connecting. You had me confused by "reasonable distance to US gateways". It made me think you were talking about the crowd that drives over.

In that case, I agree with you - there is no difference between connecting in Europe and the US. Funny you should bring it up though, since it highlights the impact of the lack of competition in Canada.

Take for example, this routing:

(Same mid-week day in may - returning 4 weeks later)

EWR-YYZ-FRA -$906
Compare it to
YYZ-FRA- $1600 (AC/LH)
and then compare these to
YYZ - EWR-FRA: $1389
and
EWR-FRA- $902

Ignore the massive difference in fares. Notice how the US-CAN-EU ticket is cheaper than the CAN-EU ticket, but the CAN-US-EU ticket is more expensive than the US-EU ticket. In my experience, this is the case more often than not. This is what is troubling. Sure I could save a couple of $100 dollars by flying through the US, but that doesn't change the fact that I am paying a premium, one way or the other, for living in Canada.

Should I have to? That is the crux of the question. Competition is favored because it is the only thing that can narrow the gap. After all, it is the relative lack of competition ex-Canada that allows UA to charge a connecting passenger more than it charges a pax for a direct flight (which, in most countries including Canada, command a premium). What gives?

I contend that it is a shortage of competition. Now it would be one thing if no one wanted to serve Canada - in which case one can justifiably say "tough maple cookie" or somesuch, but its a different matter altogether when suppliers are lining up waiting for increased access. And waiting. And waiting some more.

There's an illustration of the "shortage" of competition in Canada. Sure, its cheaper to fly through the US, which provides some sort of a competitive function. But you're still paying a premium for being a resident of Canada. Should we have to? In a globalizing world, where we're expected to compete with everybody and their dog, I don't think its the best use of money, let alone disposable income. These types of premiums deplete disposable income and negatively affect economic growth. If competition can help bring that premium down, Canada, as a whole, benefits, even if AC can't command $1600 for YYZ-FRA (thats the lowest price in the month of May).

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: yyz717
Posted 2013-04-18 18:50:09 and read 3700 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 12):
I think the call for more competition should be seen for what it is: a growing aversion to the notion that Canada's interests and AIr Canada's interests are the same. For too long, Canadian aviation policy has been based on this tenet. It probably still is. There is an automatic assumption that anything that is bad for AC, must be bad for Canada. To the extent that the government has started getting involved in the labour disputes of this so-called 'private' company.

As a result, most of these new routes are offered with laughably low frequencies. SV will be getting 2, I think. ET got two. TK has been in the market since 2009/10 and still isn't allowed to fly daily. And so on.

I think you're not seeing the big picture, and your comments perhaps better suited for the the 60's or 70's, not this decade.

Canada has wide open competition domestically. The Canada-US market is also "open skies" albeit without cabotage rights which I doubt any US or Canadian carriers would exercise anyway. These are the 2 markets where MOST Canadians fly. Most of the rest of our travel is to Mexico/Caribbean and Europe where reasonably liberal rights apply. We really do have all the competition we need.

The new minor restrictions on frequencies by EK, SV, ET and other off-shore & geographically remote carriers are completely irrelevant to 95% of Cdn travellers. We simply are not flying there and likely never will. So for the 95% of Canadians who fly traditional markets, we have all the competition we need.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 28):
I contend that Canada's market is undersupplied for any number of reasons, be it fiscal and fleet constraints for the incumbents, or government barriers preventing new entrants from entering fast enough to address the demand. Probably a bit of both.


Interesting. The facts suggest otherwise.
TS is Canada's largest carrier to Europe (yes, they carry more pax than AC to Europe) and they are reducing their fleet size and frequencies to Europe. Sunwing has suspended its 763 service to Europe and are code-sharing with Arkefly instead. These pull-backs suggest that the Canadian market is over-supplied, not under-supplied. We have also seen reduced frequencies and gauge into numerous Canadians markets by BA, AF and LH. This also suggests an over-supply.

Unless this whole thread is really about Emirates......

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 28):
EWR-FRA -$906
Compare it to
FRA- $1600 (AC/LH)
and then compare these to
EWR-FRA: $1389
and
EWR-FRA- $902

Did you get a fare quote on TS? That would demolish your argument.....

[Edited 2013-04-18 19:02:33]

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: HOONS90
Posted 2013-04-18 18:59:49 and read 3706 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 25):
If there was more competition in Canada, Canadians wouldn't have to go to other countries to find reasonable fares. Nor should they have to.

Canada - S. Korea has had open skies for around 5 years now and both KE and AC charge at least around $1500-2000 for a nonstop YYZ-ICN. Not that different from before!

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-18 19:58:54 and read 3649 times.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 29):
I think you're not seeing the big picture, and your comments perhaps better suited for the the 60's or 70's, not this decade.

Liberalized aviation markets in the 1960s or 1970s?

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 29):
Canada has wide open competition domestically.

Then why is the Competition Bureau calling for Cabotage? And why is the Senate suggesting it should be considered, according to the Report they published either yesterday or today?

"Cabotage and the exodus of Canadian passengers to U.S. airports are two issues that should be examined thoroughly as part of the development of a national strategy."

http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Co...ttee/411/trcm/rep/rep08apr13-e.pdf

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 29):
Most of the rest of our travel is to Mexico/Caribbean and Europe where reasonably liberal rights apply.

We've been over this. Flight patterns never change. Canadians will never fly to places other than Mexico/Caribbean and Europe.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 29):
We really do have all the competition we need.

How do you quantify this? I tend to use prices, which are an indicator of competition, which is an indicator of supply and demand. What do you use?

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 29):
The new minor restrictions on frequencies by EK, SV, ET and other off-shore & geographically remote carriers are completely irrelevant to 95% of Cdn travellers.

You can add China Southern and Hainan to that list of 3 weekly/4 weekly. I take it you mean to say that Canadians don't fly to China either?

As an aside, these aren't minor restrictions. They restrict the ability of ailrines to compete in premium classes, which we all know is critical to the survival of many routes.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 29):
TS is Canada's largest carrier to Europe (yes, they carry more pax than AC to Europe) and they are reducing their fleet size and frequencies to Europe.

Does TS provide regular scheduled services year round? Last I checked, they fly once a week on YOW-LGW. Only on Thursdays. In June. The return flights are on Tuesdays. Only Tuesdays. Yep, great competition that.

Not surprised they're reducing service to Europe. They haven't been doing too well financially, and Europe is in a financial crisis, which has hurt pax numbers.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 29):
These pull-backs suggest that the Canadian market is over-supplied, not under-supplied.

They're pullbacks on specific markets, the same ones you insist are the main markets. Other markets are growing. IST is an obvious example. India and China as a whole are another.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 29):
We have also seen reduced frequencies and gauge into numerous Canadians markets by BA, AF and LH.

All of these airlines have reported significant losses in the recent past. Oversupply or financial/fleet constraints? More to the point, has the Canadian market expanded or contracted in the past 2-3 years?

Table A18: Air Passenger Traffic in Canada, 2001-2011

International - Annual Change (%)

2011/10: +6.3%
2010/09: +9.2%
2009/08: +0.3%
2008/07: + 6.8
2007/06: +7.0
2006/05: +3.8
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/policy/anre-menu-3044.htm

Note - this is only international and NOT transborder.

Incidentally, the domestic market figures for 2011/10 were +2.9% and for transborder +2.3, well short of the +6.3 noted on international travel. For 2010/09, the respective figures were +1.8% (domestic) +7.7% (trans) and +9.2% (international). In fact, growth on the international market has been higher than Dom and Trans for most of the last 10 years.

How do you rationalize this growth with the capacity cuts being imposed by AF, LH and BA? The market isn't shrinking, thats for sure. Seems to me that the airlines are pulling out because of their own financial/fleet constraints. How have their books looked over the past couple of years?

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 29):
Did you get a fare quote on TS? That would demolish your argument.....

Bit difficult, given that they don't fly YYZ-FRA.

They do, however, fly to YUL. A search for the schedule in July revealed that they fly on 3 October and 23 October. As you might imagine, its difficult to book tickets. They do, however fly FRA-YYC on Sundays only (in July). And they have what looks like a 3/4 weekly service to YVR in July as well.

All of which is to say that no, it did not demolish my argument. They're simply not a regular carrier.

Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 30):
Canada - S. Korea has had open skies for around 5 years now and both KE and AC charge at least around $1500-2000 for a nonstop YYZ-ICN. Not that different from before!

Throw SQ in the mix and see what happens   (I jest).

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: drgmobile
Posted 2013-04-19 09:16:48 and read 3399 times.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 16):
Quoting drgmobile (Reply 15):
For example, you don't see United flying between Dallas and Atlanta.

Neither is a hub for United. So why would they fly between the two?

This is my point. If there are still major U.S. city pairs between which the U.S. majors don't fly because of the hub and spoke nature of their networks, what makes people think the carriers would be any more interested in operating between two Canadian cities?

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 31):
Then why is the Competition Bureau calling for Cabotage? And why is the Senate suggesting it should be considered, according to the Report they published either yesterday or today?

The specific reference was that it should be "examined" thoroughly as part of the development of a national strategy, but this wasn't one of the seven recommendations and received practically no attention during the hearings.

[Edited 2013-04-20 05:37:18 by SA7700]

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: NorthStarDC4M
Posted 2013-04-19 10:05:26 and read 3350 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 28):
Take for example, this routing:

(Same mid-week day in may - returning 4 weeks later)

EWR-YYZ-FRA -$906
Compare it to
YYZ-FRA- $1600 (AC/LH)
and then compare these to
YYZ - EWR-FRA: $1389
and
EWR-FRA- $902


We can play this game all day... fares aren't a good example but if you insist:

June 12 return 19 ( 1 week stays are much more common than 4, far enough out for advance purchase to take effect, again most price buyers are in this range).

fares USD, including all taxes and fees:

YYZ-London
952 TS (LGW), 1033 AC (LHR)
non-stop cheaper than any stopping

NYC-LON
1288 UA (EWR-LHR)
1050 AB (JFK-DUS-STN)

YYZ-NRT
1650 AC (YYZ-NRT)
1165 AC (YYZ-YVR-NRT)

NYC-NRT
1168 UA (EWR-NRT)
1166 AC (EWR-YVR-NRT)

YYZ-POS
361 Westjet (YYZ-POS)

NYC-POS
559 Caribbean (JFK-POS)

I don't really see a big discrepancy in fares? In fact we seem to be doing better than the US on some routes.


But seriously? THIS IS CANADA... this is a socialist country like it or not, and it's HUGE with very few people to pay taxes. We have a lot of services to pay for yet no one wants higher taxes, so the money comes from other sources. I'm also so tired of hearing this "we need more competition" rant...

I've heard it in the cell phone world, the government basically forced it in, and what do we have now? Not much change and the new entrants are struggling.
I've heard it in the natural gas world, so the government opened the market, what do we have now? HIGHER rates, scams, spam galore...

So when i hear it AGAIN in the airline world, in a country that has never supported more than 2 national airlines, with 35 million population spread over so much more real estate than nearly country on earth...
I wanna scream at people who keep claiming competition=lower charges. The record says otherwise, over and over again. If competition was so great why didn't Canadian survive? Why didn't CanJet's scheduled services profit? Why did any of JetsGo, Canada 3000, Skyservice, Greyhound, RootsAir, Harmony/HMY, etc.. go under?

You want lower airline fares in Canada, here's what you need to do:
END rental charges for airports (US airports GET paid by the feds, not the other way round.)
Cut NAV Canada charges by at LEAST 50%
Stop double dipping on taxes/security charges for flights to/from/over the US

Do those things, you might start seeing lower airfares... might... but again THIS IS CANADA.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: pnwtraveler
Posted 2013-04-19 10:21:33 and read 3347 times.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 29):
The Canada-US market is also "open skies" albeit without cabotage rights which I doubt any US or Canadian carriers would exercise anyway.

Actually Air Canada has been in favour of true open skies including point to point, and cabotage for US Carriers in Canada and Canadian carriers in the US.

There is wide open competition with any European Union carrier who wishes to fly to Canada. So you would think that so many potential options and so much potential for new carriers, IF Canada was such a deprived market, many more would be pushing to re-establish service.

The most significant and biggest impact on Canadian airfares would be achieved through more appropriate rents by the Canadian Government of the airport authorities, especially YYZ. Secondly would be taxes on the airfares themselves. However, both are significant income sources for the Feds. Exactly as NorthStar has said above.

The very bottom line for some, for some reason, is daily service is only what counts (whether the carrier is on record as wanting it or not), and anything else is not competition. Also a connection in European centres (choice and numbers have grown with TK, Finnair, Iceland Air, Jet through Brussels, among others starting to aggressively market their connections) doesn't count, what only seems to count is connecting through a Middle East hub.

I call this a tempest in a teapot and a few are intent on stirring that pot over and over and over.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: drgmobile
Posted 2013-04-19 11:24:49 and read 3288 times.

When people say cabotage in the North American context they usually are talking about an airline operating its own metal on a domestic route in a foreign country. There is another form of cabotage that could be pretty disruptive and wouldn't necessarily involve any airlines changing their network one bit: Allowing carriers to sell "domestic" routings through their home market hubs. For example, today it is illegal for Air Canada to sell somebody a ticket from Boston to Denver through Toronto. This is considered cabotage. Similarly, American can't sell you a Halifax-Vancouver ticket through Chicago. It would be interesting to see what would happen if this changed.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-04-19 12:19:18 and read 3246 times.

Quoting drgmobile (Reply 36):
When people say cabotage in the North American context they usually are talking about an airline operating its own metal on a domestic route in a foreign country. There is another form of cabotage that could be pretty disruptive and wouldn't necessarily involve any airlines changing their network one bit: Allowing carriers to sell "domestic" routings through their home market hubs. For example, today it is illegal for Air Canada to sell somebody a ticket from Boston to Denver through Toronto. This is considered cabotage. Similarly, American can't sell you a Halifax-Vancouver ticket through Chicago. It would be interesting to see what would happen if this changed.

It would make little difference. There's enough direct service and most people wouldn't want to have to deal with customs/immigration hassles when flying between two points in the same country. Some people would of course do it if it meant significantly lower fares, but they can already do it today by simply buying 2 tickets via the connecting point.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: b787900
Posted 2013-04-19 14:50:32 and read 3139 times.

Quoting 757ops (Reply 11):

  


More completion would do wonders indeed. Unfortunately, due to a number of factors, including a relatively low population density and high taxes, I don't think Canada is ever going to be as competitive as countries such as Australia or the US. Even though, airline business is never a level playing field, allowing ET to only serve YYZ twice a week does not do much good other than make this country uncompetitive.

If this is about protecting AC, then the least that could be done is fixing up the management of AC. Additionally, it would certainly not hurt to come up with a more competitive on-board product/service, at least in Y. Most travelers are occasional VFRs and are usually price conscious. As a result, they look for either the cheapest flights available or the best bang for the buck. And AC does not always fit the bill. On a recent YVR - YYZ flight the only thing that was served in Y was a small cup of soda/water/juice (not even a full soda can). Even US carriers serve more than that on similar length routes, not to mention usually for significantly cheaper. On international flights AC is better but nowhere near the likes of EK, SQ, TG, LX or a few other European carriers.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-19 16:37:16 and read 3053 times.

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 34):
I don't really see a big discrepancy in fares?

->

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 28):
Ignore the massive difference in fares. Notice how the US-CAN-EU ticket is cheaper than the CAN-EU ticket, but the CAN-US-EU ticket is more expensive than the US-EU ticket. In my experience, this is the case more often than not. This is what is troubling. Sure I could save a couple of $100 dollars by flying through the US, but that doesn't change the fact that I am paying a premium, one way or the other, for living in Canada.

I was trying to bring the second point to your attention. And clearly failed.

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 34):
So when i hear it AGAIN in the airline world, in a country that has never supported more than 2 national airlines, with 35 million population spread over so much more real estate than nearly country on earth...

90% of the population is within a 100km band. Australia might be similar, I think (mostly on the coasts). I think the more important stat is:

"My research shows that domestic air travel in Canada, measured by passenger miles flown per-capita, is only about 40 per cent of the corresponding U.S. level. This is especially surprising given that Canadian cities are generally further apart than are U.S. cities; if anything, we should be flying more than Americans, for whom driving is often a feasible alternative."

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/edito...yhigh_air_fares_back_to_earth.html

I read that as "policy failure". YMMV.

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 34):
I wanna scream at people who keep claiming competition=lower charges.

By all means, do exactly that: http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/00157.html

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 34):
END rental charges for airports (US airports GET paid by the feds, not the other way round.)
Cut NAV Canada charges by at LEAST 50%

2 problems:

1. "Economic theory has convincingly shown that firms with a lot of pricing power do not respond much to lower costs by reducing final prices. The real driver of such price reductions is competition"

2. . "Higher taxes and fees levied at Canadian airports are widely blamed, but a 28-percent average price gap remains when you remove that differential," said Smith Ph.D. student Omar Sherif Elwakil, one of the authors. "For example, a recent $400 Toronto-New York City roundtrip fare and its counterpart $177 Buffalo-New York City flight included an $82-to-$21 tax-fee differential that still left a substantial $162 overall differential."

In other words, we can turn down the dials on taxes to zero but there's no guarantee that it will translate into cheaper fares. Airlines price to what the market can bear. If they know that the market can bear $500 for NYC-

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 35):
So you would think that so many potential options and so much potential for new carriers, IF Canada was such a deprived market, many more would be pushing to re-establish service.

You're focusing on airlines from a market that is in pretty bad economic shape. I don't think many of them are doing too well. If they don't want to come to Canada, thats their call. Fair play and all that. However, if airlines do want to come to Canada, I don't think we should be discouraging them or putting unneccessary obstacles in their way.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 35):
The very bottom line for some, for some reason, is daily service is only what counts (whether the carrier is on record as wanting it or not), and anything else is not competition

I am that 'some'. And yes, daily service is only what counts for some very simple reasons:
Yields matter.
Premium passengers bring yields.
Long haul airlines rely on premium cabins.
Airlines need to fly daily to be able to compete with other airlines that fly daily. If one flies 3 days a week, it will struggle to compete with an airline flying daily. Thats not competition.

What do I base this on? Well Michael Tretheway of Intervistas put it quite succinctly at the Senate hearing:

"Today airlines need to have daily service. You cannot attract the business travellers if you do not have a daily service. The meeting got done on Tuesday, a couple of days early, but I have to hang around until Thursday until the next flight. If it is only three times a week, you have to wait one or two days or maybe you will be lucky on the day you want to go. You cannot sell business tickets that way. It has to be daily service."

http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Co...anguage=E&Parl=40&Ses=3&comm_id=19

Who is he? President, InterVISTAS Consulting Inc., and Executive Vice-president and Chief Economist for InterVISTAS Consulting Group. They seem to have quite a client list, so I assume he knows what he's talking about.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 35):
Also a connection in European centres (choice and numbers have grown with TK, Finnair, Iceland Air, Jet through Brussels, among others starting to aggressively market their connections) doesn't count, what only seems to count is connecting through a Middle East hub.

Incorrect. I don't care if its an ME carrier or a Chinese one. More=better. I will note that TK does not fly daily, neither apparently do China Southern and Hainan (unless thats changed recently). Chinese carriers carry Chinese tourists. We need more of those. According to the same Senate report quoted above, $1million of tourism revenue generates 10 jobs. We need more jobs here. Similarly, while I am a massive fan of 9W (my last flight on them was a little over 3 weeks ago), I am sad to say that Indian tax policies and state support for AI means that it is haemorraging money and is probably not going to be able to provide additional access to the Indian tourism market, which is also growing significantly. ME carriers, for all their many evils, do provide great connections with India and South Asia. Whats wrong with advocating that we tap into that market, espeically given the economic climate in Europe.

The Canadian Tourism Commission tracks 11 markets. Here is the annual change percentage for 2012:

Australia: + 6.5%
Brazil: +6.4%
China: +18.4%
France: -0.8%
Germany: -1.3%
India: +5.3%
Japan: +7.2%
Mexico: +7.3% (after contracting by 48% in 2009 due to the visa requirement)
South Korea: -7.4%
UK: -3.8%
US: +2.2%
http://en-corporate.canada.travel/si...ot/tourismsnapshot_2013_01_eng.pdf

Note how the three European countries have all recorded weak performances, while India, China and Brazil have all registered positive growth. The ME3 make Canada a viable option from tier 2 Indian cities by offering one-stop options with short connections, and as far as I am concerned, 1 CAD originating in India is just as good as any CAD.

I contend that more access for them, as well as anyone else who wants to fly here - anyone with the cost base, the fleet etc - should be allowed to. I did not know that Hainan and China 'Sudden' Southern were on 3/wk and 4/wk respectively, but now I do, and you can bet I will add them to my list of SV, TK, ET etc (as soon as I figure out their airline codes) that should get at least daily frequency.

But before I continue, I must ask: what purpose do these frequency restrictions (below daily) serve, other than to reduce an airlines ability to compete?

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 37):
It would make little difference. There's enough direct service and most people wouldn't want to have to deal with customs/immigration hassles when flying between two points in the same country. Some people would of course do it if it meant significantly lower fares, but they can already do it today by simply buying 2 tickets via the connecting point.

  

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 39):
Competition has picked up, but the effect has been what exactly?

Lower prices?

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 39):
So you want to change foreign ownership laws? Hell no...

Why? We need foreign capital. Our protectionist policies have made incumbents too rich to compete with. Takes a lot of money to compete with them and its not clear that we have people in Canada who are up for a fight.

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 39):
Ok flip side "We own this now and are shutting it down, 10000 Canadians out of work and we don't care"

Well, I guess its time to say goodbye to General Motors Canada, Toyota Canada, Shell Canada, Imperial Oil, Walmart Canada, Honda Canada, Costco (say it aint so), Pratt and Whitney Canada, Sears Canada (well, they're being polite and leaving on their own accord by the looks of it), Labatt (no loss there), Fairmont (formerly known as Canadian Pacific Hotels), etc.

All owned by foriegners. How many people do you think they employ?

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 39):
For example, Orascom, the company that Wind was financed by... does hard currency business with NORTH KOREA. You really want companies like that owning Canadian businesses?

China does business with North Korea. The US does business with China. Should we stop doing business with the US? That seems to be the logical extension of your argument.

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 39):
Spectrum auctions, something not done anywhere else in the world...

Pretty sure thats not true. India does it. India is also one of the most competitive wireless markets in the world. I don't remember exactly, but I think local calls cost 1-2 rupees/minute (2-4c/min) and nationwide calling is at double that. VPlenty of international competition too, a la Vodafone.

Quoting NorthStarDC4M (Reply 39):
Stop charging ridiculous CRTC fees to the carriers

Sure, if you can guarantee that the savings will be passed on to the consumer. No one is convinced that it will be.

[Edited 2013-04-19 16:47:10]

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: HOONS90
Posted 2013-04-19 16:53:50 and read 3039 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 31):
Throw SQ in the mix and see what happens (I jest).

If something like SIN-ICN-YYZ happened, I'd be ecstatic. Words cannot describe how happy that would make me!

Alas, it's not very likely since YVR didn't work for SQ  

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-19 17:04:49 and read 3025 times.

Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 42):
Alas, it's not very likely since YVR didn't work for SQ

They couldn't make SIN-ICN-YVR work as a 3 daily.

Trethaway (in the link above) notes:

"They (SQ) were operating with 90 per cent load factors. Ninety per cent of the seats on average were full, which means most of the flights were going out completely full."

"When some financial pressures came, Singapore Airlines had to decide what to do. It had to cut someplace. We cannot make Canada work, so cut it. Some people said it cut the service because of the economic conditions at the time. It cut the service because it could not make three-times-a-week service work."

"In my view, Singapore Airlines is highly likely to return to this market if we give it the right to fly daily" (presumably on the SIN-ICN-YVR run, since they have shown little interest in flying directly and the general consensus is that the SIN-Canada market is tiny).

I don't have an issue with SQ flying 5th freedom traffic like yourself from ICN, but others here do.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: mpsrent
Posted 2013-04-19 17:44:27 and read 2992 times.

Canadians are caught in dilemma, not enough air travel volume to generate lower fees and not enough of a cost incentive to encourage citizens to fly more.

As a Canadian who travels a couple of times each year to the U.K. I’m always amazed at how common it is for Europeans to head to the airport for a city break weekend or a week long get vacation. With some exceptions, city break air travel in Canada is a rare exception. People save air travel for their big vacation. For the average Canadian, a three day air vacation is simply too expensive. When in the U.K. I have many LCC’s to choose from to explore Europe such as Ryan Air, Jet2, Monarch and Easy Jet to name the obvious ones. Toss in deals from the legacy carriers and competition is still. Meanwhile in Canada excluding a few Porter runs, we get to choose between Air Canada and West Jet where pricing is often so similar you would assume that they set the prices together.

My read is that nothing will change in Canadian air travel unless someone enters the marketplace that has the financial well being and marketing to take the time it will require to change the culture of a population that generally views air travel as an expensive option for the wealthy.

As someone who loves air travel, I keep hoping for this day of change to come.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: yyz717
Posted 2013-04-19 18:06:52 and read 2975 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 43):
"They (SQ) were operating with 90 per cent load factors. Ninety per cent of the seats on average were full, which means most of the flights were going out completely full."

"When some financial pressures came, Singapore Airlines had to decide what to do. It had to cut someplace. We cannot make Canada work, so cut it. Some people said it cut the service because of the economic conditions at the time. It cut the service because it could not make three-times-a-week service work."

Any airline flying 90% LF on any route, can afford to raise prices to gen more revenue. It sounds like SQ left YVR for other reasons (a better use of the YVR aircraft commitment elsewhere, a strategic re-org, or throwing down the gauntlet to get more slots which backfired). So SQ is gone from Canada.....meh. Big deal. Life goes on.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-19 18:15:29 and read 2948 times.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 45):
Any airline flying 90% LF on any route, can afford to raise prices to gen more revenue. It sounds like SQ left YVR for other reasons (a better use of the YVR aircraft commitment elsewhere, a strategic re-org, or throwing down the gauntlet to get more slots which backfired). So SQ is gone from Canada.....meh. Big deal. Life goes on.

So tell me, what good came out of this? For the consumer, that is. Or more specifically, the average Canadian?

And what would we have lost by giving them a daily slot? Other than your approval?

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: andrefranca
Posted 2013-04-19 18:30:19 and read 2941 times.

Quoting Airontario (Reply 6):
Do you mean WestJet?

Westjet a LCC? give me a break, paid the same prices on them as I paid on AC, Canada needs more competition or you'll end up like us in Brazil, paying 400 usd for a 30 minutes hop due to lack of competition.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: yyz717
Posted 2013-04-19 18:32:12 and read 2944 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 46):
So tell me, what good came out of this?

Here's a few:
1. SQ was able to allocate a 772 to a more profitable route.
2. Canada's aviation policy maintains its consistency with all countries.
3. Canada demonstrates it will not be held hostage to cry-baby demands for more slots.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 46):
For the consumer, that is. Or more specifically, the average Canadian?

The average Canadian is not flying to SIN, or even INC for that matter, and never will. So the average Canadian is not impacted.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 46):
And what would we have lost by giving them a daily slot? Other than your approval?

And what would SQ have lost by maintaining the 3x weekly service given the strong LF's they had? And I suspect, profit? Other than your disapproval?

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-19 19:09:12 and read 2901 times.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 48):
1. SQ was able to allocate a 772 to a more profitable route.

Irrelevant. I only care for the Canadian consumer. I'm not particularly interested in what SQ or LH or EK do with their aircraft.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 48):
2. Canada's aviation policy maintains its consistency with all countries.

What consistency?

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 48):
3. Canada demonstrates it will not be held hostage to cry-baby demands for more slots.

Apart from the UAE, I don't recall any major spats.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 48):
The average Canadian is not flying to SIN, or even INC for that matter, and never will. So the average Canadian is not impacted.

I see your tendency to trivialize minorities in Canada is not limited to South Asians.

Given Canada's diversity, it is only natural that some markets affect some minorities more than others. For those markets, like Canada-Korea, the Canadian visible minorities who use that route are, well, 'average Canadians'. They are the average consumer segment that is affected by that market, and they are Canadian citizens. Hence, average Canadian. I can' t help but wonder if the manner in which you belittle the routes minorities use, is representative of your general outlook towards minorities.

Furthermore, by your logic, it would be safe to say that the average Canadian does not fly to Germany, the Netherlands, Cuba etc etc.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 48):
And what would SQ have lost by maintaining the 3x weekly service given the strong LF's they had? And I suspect, profit? Other than your disapproval?

Don't care about SQ. Only care about consumer choice and getting the best value-for-money.

So I will repeat, how do Canadian consumers (of Korean origin in this case) benefit from this refusal to give daily frequency. And more to the point, what would Canada have lost? After all, SQ had been serving Canada for at least a decade, if not longer, by that point. And what makes OS warrant a daily frequency (since we are talking about consistency)?

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: HOONS90
Posted 2013-04-19 19:40:33 and read 2872 times.

Quoting ElPistolero,reply=49So I will repeat, how do Canadian consumers (of Korean origin in this case) benefit from this refusal to give daily frequency. And more to the point, what would Canada have lost? After all, SQ had been serving Canada for at least a decade, if not longer, by that point. And what makes OS warrant a daily frequency (since we are talking about consistency)?:

I'd welcome fifth freedom competition with open arms.

KE is notorious for ripping off ICN bound passengers. The entry of TG on ICN-LAX resulted in KE dropping fares below the $1200 level on that route, which is almost unheard of.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: gr8circle
Posted 2013-04-19 20:26:41 and read 2831 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 27):
But that was in connection with a list of carriers that dropped service to Canada, including several that did so much longer ago than 2007.

Exactly....and 9W has never dropped service to YYZ.....they first started flying to YYZ in Aug or Sep 2007 and have been flying here ever since.....

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: upwardfacing
Posted 2013-04-20 00:10:56 and read 2730 times.

Quoting gr8circle (Reply 49):
9W has never dropped service to YYZ.

It has however been rumored to be dropped for quite some time. This route's future will depend on the proposed EY-9W tie-up.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: YYZatcboy
Posted 2013-04-20 02:26:14 and read 2690 times.

Quoting andrefranca (Reply 45):

Westjet a LCC? give me a break, paid the same prices on them as I paid on AC, Canada needs more competition or you'll end up like us in Brazil, paying 400 usd for a 30 minutes hop due to lack of competition.

Low COST not Low FARE. There is a difference.

People mistake the two all the time. A LCC is defined by their corporate cost structure, not by the fare that they pass on to the consumer. It's Low Cost for the company not Low Cost for the passenger.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: brilondon
Posted 2013-04-20 06:13:53 and read 2597 times.

Quoting 777way (Reply 18):
Fiji Airways
Singapore Airlines
Malaysia
Thai
Air India
CSA
Aer Lingus
Qantas

Singapore is part of the *A which is what

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 19):
LAN Chile
Quoting gr8circle (Reply 26):
9W has been operating to YYZ steadily since 2007, so they're not all that new.....AI may restart services once the 787s are back n the air and they get their act together......
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 29):
Canada has wide open competition domestically. The Canada-US market is also "open skies" albeit without cabotage rights which I doubt any US or Canadian carriers would exercise anyway. These are the 2 markets where MOST Canadians fly. Most of the rest of our travel is to Mexico/Caribbean and Europe where reasonably liberal rights apply. We really do have all the competition we need.

This is a good analysis of the situation. I would just add that domestically we just don't have the population to support any more airlines combined with the regulations and taxes combine to make it expensive to fly in Canada.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: YTZ
Posted 2013-04-20 11:36:26 and read 2458 times.

I am starting to wonder about consistency in our policies. Other we believe in free markets or we don't. Capitalism or not.

The in-between stance is the worst of both worlds. I can't believe how gullible Canadians are to buy the codswallop our flag waving national champions are serving up.

I would support protectionism if they actually well protected Canadian jobs or gave preferential treatment to the Canadian consumer. They don't. Protectionism serves as a way for them to justify their high rates while they shed labour in Canada.

Let's look at three prominent examples in three different sectors:

1) Banks. Look at the recent TFWP scandal. They've all been outsourcing high paying IT jobs by outsourcing with Indian IT companies. Of course, they innocently pretend they didn't know that Indian multi-nationals would hire Indians on temp visas instead of Canadians. Now, with the savings the banks gave has anybody seen service improve or charges drop?

2) Telecom. Nice protected oligopoly. We have some of the highest rates in the developed world. The companies love to talk about how much of the population they service. But they never talk about how little of the country's geographic area they actually cover. And they use such justifications to keep rates high, while they outsource call centre jobs and are slowly moving towards outsourcing other back-office functions as well. And their protection is accidental! The entire intent of keeping out foreign investment in telecom had to do with protecting our culture, not jobs!

3) Airlines. Air Canada waves the flag and it gets to send several thousand high paying maintenance jobs to Singapore and El Salvador. It gets protection from its pension obligations. And it gets protection from foreign competition.

Now if those sectors are deserving protection, how many here would agree to say tariffs on iPhones and Android devices. After all, surely Blackberry deserves protection. It creates far more high paying jobs and spinoffs than Air Canada (where the bulk of staff are low paid FAs, rampies, counter staff). Not to mention the massive dividends in intellectual property. Or why didn't we protect Nortel by slapping tariffs on Cisco networking gear? Surely Nortel was deserving of protection. What makes Air Canada so worthy of protection and Nortel and Blackberry so unworthy of protection?

Like I said, we either believe in free markets or we don't. Inconsistency is allowing our national "champions" from duping us.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-04-20 13:08:18 and read 2419 times.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 42):
Any airline flying 90% LF on any route, can afford to raise prices to gen more revenue. It sounds like SQ left YVR for other reasons (a better use of the YVR aircraft commitment elsewhere, a strategic re-org, or throwing down the gauntlet to get more slots which backfired). So SQ is gone from Canada.....meh. Big deal. Life goes on.

YVR made no sense for SQ. They rely on high-yield premium traffic to offset their low-density seating and high quality service. There was very little of that type of traffic on either SIN-YVR or ICN-YVR. SQ relied on low-yield 5th freedom Korean tourist traffic to fill their flights. They must have had many more lucrative routes for the aircraft that operated 3 x week SIN-ICN-YVR which would have required one aircraft.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-20 13:47:11 and read 2384 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 53):
YVR made no sense for SQ. They rely on high-yield premium traffic to offset their low-density seating and high quality service. There was very little of that type of traffic on either SIN-YVR or ICN-YVR. SQ relied on low-yield 5th freedom Korean tourist traffic to fill their flights. They must have had many more lucrative routes for the aircraft that operated 3 x week SIN-ICN-YVR which would have required one aircraft.

How long were they operating for?

They left in 2009 in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis. I think they would have been on the market for at least 3-4 years by that point, if not longer, which suggests that route was doing alright for them prior to the crisis.

That said, the Canadian Tourism commission notes that theres been a downturn in their tourism market headed for Canada. I have no idea what Canada -> Korea VFR/tourism/business traffic is, or if it can sustain that route. However, I think SQ can command a premium on the basis of its reputation, even in Y. It appears to be doing pretty well in India, which is notoriously price sensitive.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-04-20 14:01:10 and read 2364 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 54):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 53):
YVR made no sense for SQ. They rely on high-yield premium traffic to offset their low-density seating and high quality service. There was very little of that type of traffic on either SIN-YVR or ICN-YVR. SQ relied on low-yield 5th freedom Korean tourist traffic to fill their flights. They must have had many more lucrative routes for the aircraft that operated 3 x week SIN-ICN-YVR which would have required one aircraft.

How long were they operating for?

They left in 2009 in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis. I think they would have been on the market for at least 3-4 years by that point, if not longer,

Much longer than that. Early '90s if memory correct.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-20 15:43:20 and read 2320 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 55):
Much longer than that. Early '90s if memory correct.

...and they still had a hard time getting additional slots?! Well, maybe I should stop complaining about TK. They've gotten 2 extra slots in 4 years. Thats practically warp speed.   (I won't, though).

Quoting YTZ (Reply 52):
Other we believe in free markets or we don't. Capitalism or not.

Proclaiming belief in something and practicing it are too different things. If the two were the same, we wouldn't have such choice sayings as "Practice what you preach".

Quoting YTZ (Reply 52):
I would support protectionism if they actually well protected Canadian jobs or gave preferential treatment to the Canadian consumer

Protectionism is a simple case of a hidden/unofficial subsidy, wherein the Government interferes with the market to ensure that taxpayers end up spending at certain companies. In other words, it is directing taxpayer funds to companies without collecting them as taxes and redistributing them as subsidies, but the net affect is the same. The company being protected is basically getting a greater income than it could hope to generate in an open, competitive market. In an open, competitive market, the only way to get that income would be through government subsidies.

Protectionism and subsidies are basically two sides of the same coin.

FWIW no company under a protectionist regime will ever give preferential treatment to its captive audience. This is natural - they will try to make as much money as possible. Because they can. It would be silly not to. This doesn't just apply to airlines; it applies across the board. Compare TDs products in US and Canada for example. In one, its protected; in the other, its not. See who gets the better deal.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 52):
But they never talk about how little of the country's geographic area they actually cover. And they use such justifications to keep rates high

The standard Canadian mythology is that Canada's population is spread so far and wide that covering it costs money, and therefore these costs are justified. Cellphone coverage, in turn, comes through cellphone towers. The implicit argument is that to get coverage over a wide land mass, we need lots of towers, and towers are expensive, so cellphone coverage - and consequently rates - are expensive. Sounds about right. Logically sound, anyway. Till you look at the stats:

Canada: 13,000 wireless antennas
UK: 52,000 wireless antennas (smaller landmass, 2 times the population, 4 times the towers)
US: 285,561 wireless antennas (smaller landmass, 10 times the population, 20-odd times the towers)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...ire/article9146453/?service=mobile

Go figure.

A lot of our underlying assumptions are not necessarily true. The problem with Canadians is that we're either too polite, or too.... errr...intelligence-challenged, to ask questions.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 52):
Air Canada waves the flag and it gets to send several thousand high paying maintenance jobs to Singapore and El Salvador

The irony is lost on a lot of Canadians. Protect us to save jobs, but don't ask questions if we decide to get rid of them ourselves.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 52):
Now if those sectors are deserving protection, how many here would agree to say tariffs on iPhones and Android devices

They've taken aim at MP3 players, so you never know.  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ce-of-an-ipod-tax/article10987860/

Quoting YTZ (Reply 52):
What makes Air Canada so worthy of protection and Nortel and Blackberry so unworthy of protection?

One of our Senators spent almost $360,000 of taxpayer money over two years flying around. I don't think she was flying in Y (well $15,000/mth, I hope she wasn't flying Y because that's extremely poor value for money). And we both know there's only one ailrine that offers J for travel in Canada.

Yes, I'm being facetious, but if you think about it....

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: yyz717
Posted 2013-04-20 16:28:25 and read 2272 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 46):
I can' t help but wonder if the manner in which you belittle the routes minorities use, is representative of your general outlook towards minorities.

A predictable response in oh so many ways but get over it. I don't trivialize anything, I merely point out demographic reality. The hard lifting in terms of competition was in the 70's-90's when domestic competition and transborder competition was freed up. The rest (authority to/from Asia) is largely peanuts b/c it affects so few Canadians. The law of diminishing returns rules, however much pouting and foot-stamping goes on to the contrary in remote corners.....

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 46):
So I will repeat, how do Canadian consumers (of Korean origin in this case) benefit from this refusal to give daily frequency.

Hypothethical question. we'll never know. A more appropriate Q is how were Korean-Canadians hurt by the pullout of SQ YVR-ICN service. I bet not much.....

Quoting YTZ (Reply 52):
I am starting to wonder about consistency in our policies. Other we believe in free markets or we don't. Capitalism or not.

The consistency seems to be allowing 2-3 freqs/week to begin with. It's measured way of introducing new competition to Canada.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 52):
The in-between stance is the worst of both worlds.

Not really. It's just a measured response.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 53):
YVR made no sense for SQ.

I agree. Neither did SQ's ill-fated YYZ-AMS-VIE-SIN. Both routes competed against "home town" favourites and the traffic to the end destination (SIN) was too low to sustain the route.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 53):
They must have had many more lucrative routes for the aircraft that operated 3 x week SIN-ICN-YVR which would have required one aircraft.

Exactly. Same reason LAN and AM pulled out of YYZ. Better opportunities elsewhere. No accusations of government intervention in those decisions......

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 54):
I think SQ can command a premium on the basis of its reputation, even in Y. It appears to be doing pretty well in India, which is notoriously price sensitive.

The SQ brand is well known in India (I presume) while it is relatively unknown in Canada and (likely) could not generate a premium despite 90% LF's.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 56):
One of our Senators spent almost $360,000 of taxpayer money over two years flying around. I don't think she was flying in Y (well $15,000/mth, I hope she wasn't flying Y because that's extremely poor value for money). And we both know there's only one ailrine that offers J for travel in Canada.

I suspect her travels have been curtailed through sheer embarassment if not by order. I just hope she split her spend between AC and WS, in fairness. Be grateful she was not from BC or the Yukon.  

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-20 18:16:55 and read 2209 times.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 57):
The rest (authority to/from Asia) is largely peanuts b/c it affects so few Canadians. The law of diminishing returns rules, however much pouting and foot-stamping goes on to the contrary in remote corners.....

The law of diminishing returns? What does that have to do with anything?

You seem to be missing a fundamental point of Democracy: all citizens are equal and therefore their access to all services should be equal, regardless of how many actually end up using those services.

I know you like talking about democracy a lot, but do you actually understand its nuances vis-a-vis the majority v minority connundrum? Saying it doesn't affect the majority has never been a good enough reason to do or not do something. And while you're at it, perhaps look up the meaning of the law of diminishing marginal returns.

For the record (for 2006):
East and Southeast Asian origins - 2,212,340
South Asian origins - 1,316,770
Arab origins - 470,580

Thats what - 4 million. How many people does Canada have? 31 million?

4/31 million = 12.9% (thats probaly increased since 2006 because of, you know, more immigration).

Thats also larger than the population of every province other than ON, QC and BC. Incidentally, most of them are in those 3 provinces.

By your logic, we shouldn't worry about how Government policies adversely impact, say, PEI (population 140,000), or NB (population 751,000) because they're just ..."peanuts"...and "the law of diminishing returns rules" (whatever that means)?

Good luck with that.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: YTZ
Posted 2013-04-21 10:28:26 and read 1994 times.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 57):
Not really. It's just a measured response.

Sorry. But I don't buy that. Protecting RBC so they can hire foreign workers through a contractor or protecting AC so it can export thousands of jobs is a measured response?

If that's measure, why are tariffs on iPhones not a "measured" response to protect Blackberry? Tell me, would you support a 10% tax on all Apple products as a "measured response"? Or better yet, to draw a parallel to aviation, we can set import quotas on iPhones.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 57):
The consistency seems to be allowing 2-3 freqs/week to begin with. It's measured way of introducing new competition to Canada.

Fair enough. So where's the consistency in expanding beyond that? And where's the consistency in reducing access where O/D falls off?

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: drgmobile
Posted 2013-04-22 06:19:26 and read 1767 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 36):
It would make little difference. There's enough direct service and most people wouldn't want to have to deal with customs/immigration hassles when flying between two points in the same country. Some people would of course do it if it meant significantly lower fares, but they can already do it today by simply buying 2 tickets via the connecting point.

Airline pricing doesn't work this way. It's not A+B=C. Buying two separate tickets is not the same thing as the pricing that is set for a connecting ticket.

It is not rare for travellers flying a local leg to pay more for their ticket than a person on the same flight who originated at an earlier city. The fare is calculated to be a competitive rate for the journey.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2013-04-22 06:58:32 and read 1721 times.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 57):
Not really. It's just a measured response.

If ever there was an emptier, more meaningless turn of phrase.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 59):
If that's measure, why are tariffs on iPhones not a "measured" response to protect Blackberry? Tell me, would you support a 10% tax on all Apple products as a "measured response"? Or better yet, to draw a parallel to aviation, we can set import quotas on iPhones.

Good point. Why airlines are singled out (or were) isn't exactly clear, except perhaps for their high profile and their connections in government. Influence, even. Yip, inching towards the 'c' word...

Ultimately, Canada's aviation policy isn't good for jobs, it isn't good for economic growth and it isn't good for customers. Who then is it good for? AC? Is it worth it?

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-04-22 16:50:32 and read 1598 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 58):
Thats what - 4 million. How many people does Canada have? 31 million?

34.5 million.

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 61):
Ultimately, Canada's aviation policy isn't good for jobs, it isn't good for economic growth and it isn't good for customers.

WestJet seems to have done quite well under Canada's current aviation policy.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-22 18:21:07 and read 1541 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 62):

34.5 million.

Should have clarified it was 31.2 m for 2006. For Jan 2013, Statscan is reporting a shade over 35 million. 4 million increase over six years, with around 1.4 million -1.6 million (or 30-40% of that growth) coming through immigration means that the 12.9% visible minority from Asia/ME has probably increased as a percentage of the population, what with Philippines, China and India usually being the main sources.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 62):

WestJet seems to have done quite well under Canada's current aviation policy.

As it should. It is benefitting, after all, from some of the highest domestic airfares in the world. I tend to avoid the debate on domestic competition because, frankly, I have no exposure to it. I don't fly domestically. The few times I've considered it, I've ended up in the US. A planned trip to YYC ended up with me in DFW (and literally $200 in savings on airfare alone), while a planned trip to YVR ended up in HNL. Never visited either Canadian city as a result, despite living here for 14 years. Shame really - I'm sure they're very nice, buf if the airfares are too high, tough.

This is, of course, anecdotal, but there may well be a cost associated with it if others are doing what I do. That said, I can't think of a fix other than to gut the tax and fee regime and open the country up to cabotage. Its clear that most Canadian investors are too risk averse or lack the capital, appetite or ambition to take on established players in any of the protected sectors (the ones that do find themselves becoming the objects of derision and scorn - witness PD and its decision to buy the C-Series, and the consequent conclusions that Deluce is setting up to sell, not compete), but then again, its not guaranteed that foreign investors will be interested in investing here while our taxes remain so high. Domestically, well, we're paying for it in some form or the other.

WS may be profitable, but I suspect there is some cost associated with the fact that, on a per capita basis, Canadians fly less than half as much as Americans do.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: robsaw
Posted 2013-04-23 11:40:05 and read 1411 times.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 63):
This is, of course, anecdotal, but there may well be a cost associated with it if others are doing what I do. That said, I can't think of a fix other than to gut the tax and fee regime and open the country up to cabotage. Its clear that most Canadian investors are too risk averse or lack the capital, appetite or ambition to take on established players in any of the protected sectors (the ones that do find themselves becoming the objects of derision and scorn - witness PD and its decision to buy the C-Series, and the consequent conclusions that Deluce is setting up to sell, not compete), but then again, its not guaranteed that foreign investors will be interested in investing here while our taxes remain so high. Domestically, well, we're paying for it in some form or the other.

WS may be profitable, but I suspect there is some cost associated with the fact that, on a per capita basis, Canadians fly less than half as much as Americans do.

Sure Canadians fly less due to higher fares and geography but the solution of cabotage to lower fares (the tax/fees are applicable to everyone and don't have a competitive impact so I'll ignore that for now) only works:
- for routes that will attract a foreign carrier
- while other competitors remain viable

If the net result is just a switch of Canada carriers for the same number of foreign carriers there is no end improvement in fares on the big attractive routes and higher (or nonexistant service) on the less attractive routes.

Not sure what "taxes" you are talking about but the general tax regime in Canada is very attractive to foreign investors. The flow-through taxes on air travel are an impediment to growing the market intrinsically, which does negate some investment opportunity in the sector but it is competitively neutral.

Topic: RE: Canadians Favour More Foreign Competition
Username: ElPistolero
Posted 2013-04-23 14:27:00 and read 1361 times.

Quoting robsaw (Reply 64):
The flow-through taxes on air travel are an impediment to growing the market intrinsically, which does negate some investment opportunity in the sector but it is competitively neutral.

If we're talking about foreign investmentm these impediments, while competitively neutral WITHIN the market, make the market unattractive relative to other markets. Which is where the money will likely end up going instead.

Other than that, there is an interesting thread on the Canadian market going on.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/