Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5820238/

Topic: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: CPA62
Posted 2013-07-16 18:40:29 and read 10196 times.

Nothing in print back this up, however we have been told by PR Cargo GSA that YYZ service will be
suspended September 26, 2013. PR is looking at another city ex YVR. Wishfull thinking, but could Sao Paulo
be a possibility?

Topic: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: Akiestar
Posted 2013-07-16 18:45:11 and read 10177 times.

Something tells me this has to do with the realignment of the 77W for Europe, which is expected to start this October if things go well. It could be GRU though, but there's no new developments with PR's plans to start service to Brazil.

Topic: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: jagflyer
Posted 2013-07-16 18:52:28 and read 10108 times.

This is not surprising to me. The Philippine demographic is very price conscious due to many families travelling together and any cost savings is taken wherever possible. The majority of Philippine ex-pats in Toronto are not overly wealthy and have to support families back home so the cheapest fare is often the one chosen. My pinoy friend mentioned that his family members normally travel YYZ-DTW-NRT-MNL and it often can take over 24 hours. A simple check of the fares show PR is about $200-300 more expensive compared to KE and DL. When you've got 4-5 people going, that's $1000 in savings.

Topic: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: SANFan
Posted 2013-07-16 20:58:50 and read 9664 times.

Quoting CPA62 (Thread starter):
PR is looking at another city ex YVR.

You want to see wishful thinking? I'll give you delusional thinking: SAN!

Don't anyone bother flaming me. I realize the chances of PR still even remotely still thinking about MNL-YVR-SAN are right in there with snowballs and that very hot place!

In any case, it's kind of a hoot watching things happen at PR these days -- we never quite know what to expect next!

bb

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: Confuscius
Posted 2013-07-16 21:26:53 and read 9558 times.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 3):
You want to see wishful thinking? I'll give you delusional thinking: SAN!

Perhaps if the new airport is built in National City.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2013-07-16 21:36:14 and read 9510 times.

Confirmed per airlineroute.net

Say last flight September 18th.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: hybridace101
Posted 2013-07-16 22:34:02 and read 9312 times.

Quoting Akiestar (Reply 1):
Something tells me this has to do with the realignment of the 77W for Europe, which is expected to start this October if things go well. It could be GRU though, but there's no new developments with PR's plans to start service to Brazil.
Quoting jagflyer (Reply 2):

This is not surprising to me. The Philippine demographic is very price conscious due to many families travelling together and any cost savings is taken wherever possible. The majority of Philippine ex-pats in Toronto are not overly wealthy and have to support families back home so the cheapest fare is often the one chosen. My pinoy friend mentioned that his family members normally travel YYZ-DTW-NRT-MNL and it often can take over 24 hours. A simple check of the fares show PR is about $200-300 more expensive compared to KE and DL. When you've got 4-5 people going, that's $1000 in savings.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):

Confirmed per airlineroute.net

Say last flight September 18th.

1. Something tells me it could be both. Besides, the 77W already serves a number of destinations but is limited in quantity. So they have to choose the route that is under performing. Though I find it weird that MNL-YVR flights will continue to be daily.

2. Now that this appears to be confirmed, YYZ joins a long list of destinations launched over the past 10 years that have failed. Virtually every route outside east asia that was launched by PR in the past 10 years was somehow suspended at some point. If you look at it, its trajectory is quite similar to DEL: started with non-stop legs, had to revert to 1-stop due to poor yields/loads. This is why I worry for whether PR will be successful in the EU and NYC.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: aircanada014
Posted 2013-07-17 03:26:38 and read 8909 times.

I had the greatest pleasure to fly on PR in business class from YVR-MNL-YVR-YYZ. service and food was nice.
business class was light with lots of empty seats.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: connies4ever
Posted 2013-07-17 05:57:45 and read 8678 times.

PR should look at YWG. Relative to the size of the city, Filipinos have a big footprint in Winnipeg. About 30k in a city of 750k.  

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: yegbey01
Posted 2013-07-17 08:02:15 and read 8401 times.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 8):
PR should look at YWG. Relative to the size of the city, Filipinos have a big footprint in Winnipeg. About 30k in a city of 750k.

Same issue at YWG. Low yielding pax.

I really thought the YYZ route would do well..but I guess, business pax still prefer to do a stop in HKG and fly CX.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2013-07-17 08:50:17 and read 8270 times.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 3):
I realize the chances of PR still even remotely still thinking about MNL-YVR-SAN are right in there with snowballs and that very hot place!

I think people would rather drive two hours up to LAX for a direct flight to MNL, than fly from SAN to YVR then onward to MNL. Secondly, maintaining a station at SAN could be quite expensive especially for 2 or 3 weekly services only. Daily could be sustainable but then again, HA might still be serving MNL if the traffic was there.

Speaking of delusions...given the 787's recent vicissitudes, there might be a few slots becoming available which Boeing can offer a "great" deal on...a "win-win" solution for SAN-MNL...with sufficient demand    .

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 4):
Perhaps if the new airport is built in National City.

No need.....there's always NKX.   

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: SANFan
Posted 2013-07-17 09:06:53 and read 8212 times.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 10):
I think people would rather drive two hours up to LAX for a direct flight to MNL, than fly from SAN to YVR then onward to MNL. Secondly, maintaining a station at SAN could be quite expensive especially for 2 or 3 weekly services only. Daily could be sustainable but then again, HA might still be serving MNL if the traffic was there.

Speaking of delusions...given the 787's recent vicissitudes, there might be a few slots becoming available which Boeing can offer a "great" deal on...a "win-win" solution for SAN-MNL...with sufficient demand.

It seems to me that the whole SAN-service thing was the idea of the previous management group a few years ago and it WAS going to happen. (Timing is everything!) The idea had a handful of us here very excited, keeping in mind that we didn't have BA or JL flying nonstop intercontinentally at that time.

Since there has not been even a hint or whisper about SAN since the new management has taken the PR-reigns, any thoughts of seeing PR at Lindbergh have pretty much vanished. But of course you're right Devil', about the 787 being a game-changer; after all, that's a major part of the reason that we now have a daily nonstop to Tokyo from SAN on JL!

As I said earlier, it is fun to see all the ideas and big plans (and planes) coming out of Manila these days, so who knows!

bb

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: pnwtraveler
Posted 2013-07-17 10:52:12 and read 7988 times.

If YYZ doesn't work, no other city in Canada will work besides YVR. Reason is there are two national airlines with a huge number of connections to YVR from all sorts of cities. Time wise I imagine that flying AC to Hong Kong from YYZ and switching to a Manila flight isn't much longer than routing through YVR to Manila so there are other easy options.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-07-17 16:16:08 and read 5680 times.

I could never understand how Toronto could possibly be profitable with the 4 to 5 hour domestic sectors to/from YVR and no ability to sell domestic traffic.

[Edited 2013-07-17 16:52:23]

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: SANMAN66
Posted 2013-07-17 16:49:24 and read 5471 times.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 10):
I think people would rather drive two hours up to LAX for a direct flight to MNL, than fly from SAN to YVR then onward to MNL

Either that or take JAL from SAN and connect to MNL through NRT. (I don't know for sure how good connections
are at NRT,but I do know PR serves NRT.)

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 10):
SAN could be quite expensive especially for 2 or 3 weekly services only.

Another thing comes to mind. Does SAN have the demand for a second flight to Asia? PR would have to have
daily flights to compete with JAL who is running daily 787s between SAN and Narita. At this point, if PR
decided to run flights 2 to 3 times weekly from SAN (via.YVR), they would get creamed by JAL.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 11):
any thoughts of seeing PR at Lindbergh have pretty much vanished.

The chances of us seeing PR at SAN vanished with me when PR dropped their LAS-YVR-MNL flights.



[Edited 2013-07-17 17:03:04]

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2013-07-17 16:51:40 and read 5461 times.

Re YYZ, some people from the inside where actually surprised with the decision since the route started to positively pick up already load factor and patronage wise. I believe it is really logistics that hampered the continuance of the service more of a improving profit against a (greater profit projection - European route) but bottomline both will be making profits it is just a question for which will bring home more for now.

That is why I expect for a re introduction of Toronto once again just like RUH when they have the logisitics the fact the YVR will again be serviced with the A340 just shows how much they need to decide on a new aircraft to support their expansion

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: SANMAN66
Posted 2013-07-17 16:56:21 and read 5419 times.

I wonder if Cebu Pacific's plans to serve the U.S. is still in the works?

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: LFutia
Posted 2013-07-17 17:20:01 and read 5263 times.

Why not serve ORD? We have a huge Philipino population all around the suburbs. If I have an early morning flight out of ORD, I would see lots of people going to DTW for the MNL flight.

Leo/ORD

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: Polot
Posted 2013-07-17 17:29:13 and read 5188 times.

PR needs to wait until the Philippines get category 1 (I know I know, people have been saying it is just around the corner for a year now) before they can open a new US destination.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: iflypal
Posted 2013-07-17 18:59:01 and read 4726 times.

My take is that they will reintroduce Toronto once category 1 is lifted and be able to fly a US-Canada sector that will permit them to carry fifth freedom traffic ala MNL-LAX-YYZ, MNL-SFO-YYZ. Ironic would be a dual reintroduction of MNL-LAS-YYZ. 50% local traffic on the North American pair is better than no local traffic. Long ways away from a dedicated Toronto flight. It really is a shame they are abandoning the route so soon. Just puts into doubt a lot of the expansion plans. The published Middle East frequencies seem indeed like overkill. Wonder if that was done as a preventative measure against 5J taking stake of flight entitlements. Anyway, still a lot of exciting things going on at PAL. Looking forward to the ride.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: flightsimboy
Posted 2013-07-17 20:55:39 and read 4547 times.

This comes as a surprise as I know lots of Filipinos, as well as those who have parents that go to Manila often, and take the stop at HKG with AC. This get on at Toronto and get off at Manila concept would have been very advantageous for those wanting to have this option, especially the elderly who don't have transit stops etc. How were they even planning to go daily when they are actually cutting off these three flights so soon. Really hope to see Philippines come back soon!!

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: thekennady
Posted 2013-07-17 21:17:42 and read 4512 times.

Quoting LFutia (Reply 17):
Why not serve ORD? We have a huge Philipino population all around the suburbs

PR used to serve ORD back in 80s, I wonder if the market could support it. BR is looking at ORD and connections are plentiful via ICN with KE/OZ, NRT with JA/NH, HKG with CX, and more. PR would have to battle it out with many carriers that can connect people to the PHIL from ORD. If PR worked with UA or AA for US feed then id give it a chance.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2013-07-18 02:57:04 and read 4319 times.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 11):
The idea had a handful of us here very excited, keeping in mind that we didn't have BA or JL flying nonstop intercontinentally at that time.

Since there has not been even a hint or whisper about SAN since the new management has taken the PR-reigns, any thoughts of seeing PR at Lindbergh have pretty much vanished. But of course you're right Devil', about the 787 being a game-changer; after all, that's a major part of the reason that we now have a daily nonstop to Tokyo from SAN on JL!

A very important factor is MNL being some 1,600+nm farther from SAN than both those destinations. There are those who maintain that the 787 could not make it past the hurdles at SAN fully loaded for a nonstop to MNL. Still trying to come to grips with the rudiments of Piano.X to figure it out. Admittedly, PR would constantly need a very high load factor with decent belly business for the route to work.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13):
I could never understand how Toronto could possibly be profitable with the 4 to 5 hour domestic sectors to/from YVR and no ability to sell domestic traffic.

IMHO, it's widely recognized that YYZ was mainly an effort to put the 77Ws to work...the route clicking would've been a windfall.

Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 14):
Another thing comes to mind. Does SAN have the demand for a second flight to Asia? PR would have to have daily flights to compete with JAL who is running daily 787s between SAN and Narita.

A SAN service to MNL would predominantly be O&D VFR traffic...cheap, nonstop PR flights would be the most attractive. Pent-up demand for 3x weekly frequency may be there...but yields may not be enough to sustain the route.


Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 14):
The chances of us seeing PR at SAN vanished with me when PR dropped their LAS-YVR-MNL flights.

Arguably, LAS ending was SAN's best shot at a "one-plane" service to MNL at the moment.


Quoting SANMAN66 (Reply 16):
I wonder if Cebu Pacific's plans to serve the U.S. is still in the works?

Approval to fly 'wet-leased' metal to the U.S. doesn't really help 5J...them remaining on ICAO's list kinda threw a spanner on their expansion plan.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: RWA380
Posted 2013-07-18 06:56:20 and read 4147 times.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 10):
HA might still be serving MNL if the traffic was there

The traffic is there, the yields are not. HA couldn't compete with the trash yields that PR seems to be able to operate on.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: doug_Or
Posted 2013-07-18 08:00:08 and read 4066 times.

People keep mentioning markets as cheap VFR markets.... Aren't all long haul destinations from MNL low yielding VFR markets?

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: Devilfish
Posted 2013-07-18 08:08:09 and read 4179 times.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 23):

The traffic is there, the yields are not. HA couldn't compete with the trash yields that PR seems to be able to operate on.

Airlines entering the Philippine market must've had a good idea already of their local competitions' cost structures. Either that or they were very confident that alliances and regulatory advantages would carry the day for them.

.
http://philippineairspace.blogspot.c...013/05/how-your-airlines-fare.html

I didn't drag this out during the HA thread discussion...but it painted a very dismal picture for HA.

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 24):
People keep mentioning markets as cheap VFR markets.... Aren't all long haul destinations from MNL low yielding VFR markets?

Guess that's a convenient excuse for when an operation fails to come up with the expected results.   

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: hybridace101
Posted 2013-07-18 09:46:51 and read 4067 times.

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 24):

People keep mentioning markets as cheap VFR markets.... Aren't all long haul destinations from MNL low yielding VFR markets?

This is why in my book I consider BKK a high-yielding market: it's a high-yielding holiday market.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: travelin man
Posted 2013-07-18 12:00:56 and read 4064 times.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 25):
Airlines entering the Philippine market must've had a good idea already of their local competitions' cost structures. Either that or they were very confident that alliances and regulatory advantages would carry the day for them.

Am I reading that chart right? Does it say DL has a 41% load factor into the Philippines? If so.... that's not much better than HA's.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: sebring
Posted 2013-07-18 12:07:08 and read 4038 times.

http://www.philippineflightnetwork.c...ppine-airlines-ending-toronto.html

As for the idea that Philippine Airliners can do better when it can operate between Canada and Manilla with a fifth freedom routing via the US, any international airline that has done this between Toronto and California has failed. Just too much narrowbody competition.

[Edited 2013-07-18 12:09:00]

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: SANMAN66
Posted 2013-07-18 13:52:38 and read 3934 times.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 22):
Arguably, LAS ending was SAN's best shot at a "one-plane" service to MNL at the moment

Yeah, but PR ended LAS while the Philippines is still in CAT-2. It is my understanding that while a
country remains in CAT-2, air carriers cannot start up new U.S. routes. I had been looking at it this
way,since PR dropped LAS while in CAT-2, PR could not expand anywhere in the U.S. Dropping
LAS is a new management decision and LAS/SAN via YVR was not part of the new PR management.
(San Miguel).

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 22):
Approval to fly 'wet-leased' metal to the U.S. doesn't really help 5J...them remaining on ICAO's list kinda threw a spanner on their expansion plan.

I thought that was the idea, to use wet-leased aircraft to allow them to open up new U.S. routes. I've heard
that wet-leasing aircraft is very expensive, and any country under CAT-2 can wet-lease aircraft from CAT-1 countries to start new routes.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: Akiestar
Posted 2013-07-20 09:41:17 and read 3471 times.

Rumor no more.

I was at the wedding of my uncle today, and I have it on very good authority that PR is NOT dropping YYZ. This development was apparently just finalized today, and bookings for MNL-YYZ are being accepted again.

At least this has been blown out of the water.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2013-07-20 10:37:20 and read 3372 times.

Quoting Akiestar (Reply 30):

would you know, why the sudden change of hearts? Would really like to see it on philaviation.net or philippineairspace.blogspot.com

It were true, then I wouldnt be surprised, their market has already picked up and the logistics are in place just as when it has already gained some grounds at YYZ.

Really hope your news is accurate.. by any chance they mentioned what aircraft they will be utilizing to YYZ?

P.S. out of topic, but I guess the current B787 recent hurdle has somehow sealed the deal for Airbus and PAL huh?

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: pnwtraveler
Posted 2013-07-20 12:00:39 and read 3256 times.

Quoting sebring (Reply 28):
As for the idea that Philippine Airliners can do better when it can operate between Canada and Manilla with a fifth freedom routing via the US, any international airline that has done this between Toronto and California has failed. Just too much narrowbody competition.

Unless you are going to try to undercut the competition most US routes already have a load of competition on them. Look at LAX and you have multiple carriers already flying it and fighting over the route. Virgin America had trouble breaking in to AC, WestJet, American etc. Once you come in with low fares the other players are going to match so even that is just temporary. By adding YYZ PAL is hoping to make its YVR to MAN fuller, more profitable, and snag business that might just go through another route. The YYZ leg doesn't even have to be profitable per se if it adds enough to the YVR on section. I am not sure how much cargo is in the YYZ leg either. Sufficient through belly cargo could make a marginal route better.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: iflypal
Posted 2013-07-20 12:48:21 and read 3184 times.

A mock booking on PR118 Dec 18 indicates Toronto indeed is online. It wasn't the case as of yesterday. great news. Indicates one stop 777-300 via Vancouver

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: Akiestar
Posted 2013-07-20 16:50:12 and read 3030 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 31):
would you know, why the sudden change of hearts? Would really like to see it on philaviation.net or philippineairspace.blogspot.com

It were true, then I wouldnt be surprised, their market has already picked up and the logistics are in place just as when it has already gained some grounds at YYZ.

My source here is an aunt of mine who is a VP at PR. According to her, "they" had a meeting. I didn't get who "they" were: I am under the presumption it's either a PR-only meeting, or PR finished negotiations with the GTAA and/or the governments of Toronto and/or Ontario to ensure continued PR service.

A plausible explanation to this as well is that Christmastime is coming, and this season is a particularly strong season for travel to the Philippines. I bet PR would like to take advantage of that traffic as well.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2013-07-20 18:14:27 and read 2913 times.

Thank you Akiestar, thought so too, Christmas is a MUST TRAVEL for balikbayans - a guaranteed sold seat where ever we have kababayans.

My source works for PR too at Operations and indeed they have consistently see the YYZ load improving since.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: MHG
Posted 2013-07-21 00:54:49 and read 2647 times.

Apparently they have sourced another two A340-300 to serve YYZ but it´s still unclear where these aircraft are coming from ...

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: opethfan
Posted 2013-07-21 01:08:18 and read 2625 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13):
I could never understand how Toronto could possibly be profitable with the 4 to 5 hour domestic sectors to/from YVR and no ability to sell domestic traffic.

I'm sorry, your wording there was a little awkward... are you saying that you don't see how YYZ would be a profitable route considering PR could just fly into YVR and sell codeshare domestic flights YVR-YYZ?

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: hybridace101
Posted 2013-07-21 04:24:01 and read 2474 times.

I better hope the A343s they are sourcing are carriers that operated AVOD across all classes and lie-flat C seats. It will make for an incredibly boring 16-18 hours from MNL to Posted 2013-07-21 08:47:31 and read 2248 times.

Great to hear Philippines is continuing to serve Toronto   

http://airlineroute.net/2013/07/20/pr-yyz-sep13update2/

[Edited 2013-07-21 08:48:16]

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2013-07-21 09:59:39 and read 2156 times.

Does this mean that PAL A340 count is now at ten?

4 original fleet A340

4 Iberia

2 more to be leased to support YYZ operations

Can anyone confirm if I have it correctly, likewise can anyone update its configurations and pictures would be a huge bonus!

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: MHG
Posted 2013-07-21 11:44:25 and read 2026 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 40):
Does this mean that PAL A340 count is now at ten?

4 original fleet A340

4 Iberia

2 more to be leased to support YYZ operations

This is how I read it but ...
Right now there are still two outstanding deliveries from Iberia.
Who knows if they were talking about those ?
It´s unclear whether these two A340´s for YYZ are two additional frames from a yet unknown operator bringing the total fleet to ten by then.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-07-21 13:11:01 and read 1937 times.

Quoting opethfan (Reply 37):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 13):
I could never understand how Toronto could possibly be profitable with the 4 to 5 hour domestic sectors to/from YVR and no ability to sell domestic traffic.

I'm sorry, your wording there was a little awkward... are you saying that you don't see how YYZ would be a profitable route considering PR could just fly into YVR and sell codeshare domestic flights YVR-YYZ?

No, I meant that I couldn't see how their current operation could be profitable with a 4 to 5 hour sector at both ends of the route with no ability to sell domestic traffic. Assume there are usually many empty seats on the YVR-YYZ-YVR sectors since many passengers will originate/terminate in YVR. And if they do fill the flight with YYZ passengers, YVR basically becomes a fuel stop, also meaning added costs.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: hybridace101
Posted 2013-07-21 16:47:21 and read 1791 times.

I just hope if ever it will be aircraft in addition to the ex-IB ones, it will be the ex-LA ones as they have AVOD across all classes. It will be an extremely boring 17 hours between MNL and YYZ.

Topic: RE: Rumor:PR To Drop YYZ
Username: opethfan
Posted 2013-07-21 17:00:29 and read 1767 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 42):
No, I meant that I couldn't see how their current operation could be profitable with a 4 to 5 hour sector at both ends of the route with no ability to sell domestic traffic. Assume there are usually many empty seats on the YVR-YYZ-YVR sectors since many passengers will originate/terminate in YVR. And if they do fill the flight with YYZ passengers, YVR basically becomes a fuel stop, also meaning added costs.

Ah, similar to CX's HKG-YVR-JFK route which allows for affordable YVR-JFK legs, except that PR don't sell YVR-YYZ. Thanks for the clarification.


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/