TriJetFan1 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1128 posts, RR: 8 Posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2907 times:
Hi all, I recently found that Tango was been suspeneded some time ago. I was just wondering why it fell in and what was its real point?
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, RR: 59 Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2696 times:
Tango was a feeble attempt to create an LCC within AC mainline. Of course it failed since the operating costs were still higher than Westjet, and also because it was the same inept & incompetent mgmt running Tango as were running AC mainline.
To break and destroy Canada 3000.
C3 failed on its own.
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
Whiteguy From Canada, joined Nov 2003, 681 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2631 times:
Tango had nothing to do with C3 going under. Tango started flying Nov 1st and 80% of flights actually cancelled for the first 2 weeks because the loads were so poor. C3 went under because they went on a spending spree and decided to become a schedualed carrier. I think if they would have stuck to the charters they would still be around today.
RT514 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2603 times:
Tango was a feeble attempt to create an LCC within AC mainline
Exactly.
Quite simply put, Tango was to Air Canada as Song is to Delta.
so tango`s routes will be fully taken over by ac and its affilates?
at which date the transition will be finished?
If I'm not mistaken, Tango is already technically defunct and the A320's bearing Tango liveries will become a rarer sight as they get repainted in AC colors. Now, AC sells "Tango Fares" on AC mainline, a discounted, no return trip required fare for many flights within Canada and between Canada and the USA.
CanadaEH From Canada, joined Jul 2003, 1341 posts, RR: 4 Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2571 times:
Tango was an even worse idea than Zip.
Tango was operated by mainline pilots (if I'm not mistaken?) at mainline payscales, only with lower ticket prices. So mainline Air Canada operated Tango at the same same price as a mainline aircraft, only with cheaper fares.
Zip, on the other hand, was operated with 'B' scale employees at a rate competitive (but still higher) with Westjet. Zip IMO was more of a success than Tango was.
Kind of makes you wonder: does Air Canada like to dance? Zip, Tango, Jazz... hmmmm.. Guess we'll find out when it emerges from CCAA.
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 58 Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2559 times:
Yet another attempt at the airline within an airline concept.......Tango was AC's response to LCC and mainly flew leisure or low-yeild routes. AC had Tango, DL had Express and now Song, CO had CO Lite, and US had Metrojet, and none have been successful......Song is still flying but the future of Song is very unclear. Lets see if United's TED and Qantas' Jetstar are any more successful.
B747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2467 times:
I used to be a pretty vocal critic of Tango, but viewing it in the right retrospective light I realize that it had its role to play, albeit in a limited capacity - and for the most part it played it pretty well.
Tango was officially born as a concept following the death of RootsAir and Milton's plan to build an AC LCC out of those ashes. As the scheduled airline competition in Canada grew in 2000 as everyone rushed to fill the perceived CP vacuum, it became obvious that AC was oversized. However, the Government of Canada had mandated as part of the AC-CP merger agreement that the airline was NOT PERMITTED TO REDUCE THE WORKFORCE until 2003. While this was subsequently relaxed following 9/11, at the time that Tango was being contemplated there was an urgent need to rededicate these excess resources to CUT LOSSES. Tango was never intended to be profitable as a standalone entity. It was simply a means for AC to cut their losses until they were able to restructure on their own terms, something that they finally were able to do when they filed for creditor protection.
What Tango succeeded in doing was creating brand awareness that exceeded even their own expectations. That is why the Tango concept (or paradigm if you prefer ) has lived on in the form of the branding for the ultra-low North American fare types.
BTW, since I'm virtually certain this thread will be forwarded to him soon enough, hi Ben!
JoFMO From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 2211 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2383 times:
B747: sure wasn't it in the star timetable. But I guess AC will replace most of the former zip routes to AC or jazz. Today there is only one daily AC flight from Edmonton to Vancouver. The rest is zip. So with abandoning zip there has to be an replacement. But nothing is listed in the star timetable for October so far. That was what I meant and what makes me wonder.
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, RR: 59 Reply 15, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2365 times:
However, the Government of Canada had mandated as part of the AC-CP merger agreement that the airline was NOT PERMITTED TO REDUCE THE WORKFORCE until 2003. While this was subsequently relaxed following 9/11, at the time that Tango was being contemplated there was an urgent need to rededicate these excess resources to CUT LOSSES.
Keep in mind Sean that AC walked willingly into the CP merger. AC could have fought against the no-layoff provision or even walked away from the merger.
AC's agreement to not reduce the workforce until 2003 was a disasterous strategic move whose blame can be laid only at Milton's shifty feet.
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
B747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2342 times:
Keep in mind Sean that AC walked willingly into the CP merger
The AC-CP merger is a textbook case for why there should be minimal government interference. If Collenette had simply kept his nose out of things to begin with, we'd have had CP go under as they deserved to and the smaller carriers and AC pick up the slack. Nature (and free markets) abhor a vacuum and that would have created better competition and more longterm net gains.
Once Collenette decided to suspend the rules and allow CP a special exception to the foreign ownership limits, Milton had no choice but to push for the merger. A level playing field must apply to everyone. Allowing CP access to foreign capital while keeping everyone else's hands tied behind their back was not helpful to anybody in the industry. CP was expendable. Not letting them die in 1999 was the defining event that triggered AC's later problems.
Lets not blame AC for willingly taking over CP. Based on the alternative, it was the safer course of action. The true blame must lie with David Collenette.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1128 posts, 
From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3050 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 2211 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
) has lived on in the form of the branding for the ultra-low North American fare types.
Printer friendly format 
