Beijing21 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2004, 83 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4580 times:
I've read on the very Geneva spotters website www.dpts.org that Air Canada will be opening sometime in 2005 a Montreal-Geneva route with A333. Can anyone confirm that and add up some content to that very short release please ?
Scf158 From Switzerland, joined Dec 2003, 413 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4434 times:
I also read the same thing....
"According to various sources in Switzerland and in Quebec, Air Canada is planning to launch a new flight between Montreal Trudeau and Geneva sometime during 2005. Initially Air Canada would operate Airbus A330-300 equipment on this new route, possibly switching by 2006 to Airbus A319LR converted from the current fleet."
Beijing21 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2004, 83 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4109 times:
So on both sides of the Atlantic the route has its sources. It means we will certainly here from AC soon...I guess the new summer timetable could be the most suitable time to open up the leg.
But according to a GVA airport recent survey, YUL is one of the most demanded destinations among JFK, Tokyo and London. So why a A333 would not be the appropriate equipement ? I guess connections from Montreal are comparable to Boston.
By the way, Boston and Washington were proposed by former CEO André Dosé and recently the new head of marketing and sales in Geneva as very profitable routes if the equipment, a BBJ or ACJ is available at some extent. Any news on that ?
Ezycrew From Spain, joined Oct 2001, 460 posts, RR: 4 Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4056 times:
I read not long ago on the GVA airport website, that the 1st offline destination from GVA was YUL, so I'm quite sure it can be a great success! Our ZRH-YUL flight always has an average 40-60 pax ex-GVA.
AF, KL and BA also get quite a nice YUL traffic ex GVA via their respective hubs.
Beijing21 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2004, 83 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4040 times:
Does anybody know if other Companies are actively considering GVA for 2005. I know QR is rumoured and will ETIHAD be able to cope with EMIRATES with only 3 weekly connections via MUC. GVA is beginning to deploy efforts to establish itself as a stopover from North America to Asia KU is an example. Sad that thhey only have 2 weekly service and so attract only low yield passengers and even in small numbers.
My assumption is that AC is trying to get GVA with A333 because they eye a destination beyond GVA. Why not India, Lebanon ( it has been already discussed in this forum ) and IRAN!!!
Beijing21 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2004, 83 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3982 times:
FLYYUL, I fully agree with you on the fact that AC like CO wants now to develop "niche" markets. So the smallest aircraft the fleet records will be the basis for new network expansion. I just found interesting that without promoting with extensive intensity Canada, a natural market provides at least 120-150 passengers a day. So potentially, yes 762-3 ER will be the suitable equipment. But the cabin amenities are certainly better featured on A333 and to that point high yield passenger (Geneva's justification for many routes that would otherwise look odd) are sensitive to that.
Well again, does anybody see further developement on the long-haul segment in GVA for 2005 despite the additions made above ?
Beijing21 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2004, 83 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3947 times:
You're right, A333 is unlikely to be profitable all year round. I look forward to seeing the product AC will be offering on YUL-GVA-YUL and especially how they will be marketing. I hope though the cabin on 762-3 ER will refurbish somehow.
As an end note, my remark will just remind the boeing readers that the most efficient/profitable transatlantic aircraft actually will not for sure be the 7E7 but in fact, you mentioned it FLYYUL, it is the 757 in 2 class...with winglets!!!
FLYACYYZ From Canada, joined Jan 2004, 1914 posts, RR: 12 Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3945 times:
BEIJING 21 -
Nobody would argue that the A333 would be the PREFERRED aircraft serving any potential new European route, but given the availability of aircraft and anticipated loads, as mentioned by others, I see the B763 in a J/Y configuration.
As far as 'beyond" destinations, such as India, AC's competitive advantage is the only non-stop service from North America, unless you were ulitmately considering secondary Indian markets besides DEL/BOM. This same commerical strategy would apply to BEY or THR, if those routes ever came to fruititon.
In terms of comparing cabin amentities between aircraft types, AC's entire fleet will be retrofitted with new seating including individual IFE's on every aircraft from the CRJ700 up. Therefore comfortwise, seating should be similar on the entire international fleet.
But we all agree on one thing. It would be great touching down in GVA again!!
Beijing21 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2004, 83 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3918 times:
Indeed my fear was, they open up the route with an equipment that fits to the potential of the market but not in term of the customer demand in term of comforf. And so the A333 would be the only option. Now you said the are going to newly equiped their cabin with state of the art devices in order to increase quality of service proposed, so I'm confident a 762-3ER would do great on that leg...
LX23 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 347 posts, RR: 3 Reply 16, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3735 times:
But according to a GVA airport recent survey, YUL is one of the most demanded destinations among JFK, Tokyo and London
Just a remark on Beijing's post... have you noticed that out of those four destinations, only ONE has direct service? I've always wanted LX to succeed, but sometimes, they deserve to fall on their ass for some of management's stupidity (losing LHR amongst other cases, as wel as refusal to start ANY OTHER intercon routes ex GVA) KU is apparently not doing too badly on the ORD route... now if only LX would launch a service to one of these places...
LX23 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 347 posts, RR: 3 Reply 20, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2586 times:
Due to the current KU fleet size and the amount of flights they currently have, it is doubtful that they will be able to add freqs. KU currently has only 4 A343s, and these serve:
KWI-BKK-MNL 6x weekly
KWI-GVA-ORD 2x weekly
KWI-FRA 3x weekly
KWI-JKT 2x weekly
(I think this covers it, though I'm almost sure I'm missing something)
GVA returning to more than 1 daily long-haul might be too late if they don't do it quickly enough, as companies eventually start taking up some of the market (for example AC, Etihad, Emirates, KU).
Not to be a ZRH-basher, but I do think that one of the taboos the LX chairman was talking about was dropping some intercons ex-ZRH in exchange for more ex-GVA (or even BSL, though I'd stick with GVA for the assessment).
YUL on its own will probably be quite profitable, though I am not going to go as far as saying that it will be more profitable than JFK. After all, there seems to be enough room in the NYC for more than just a daily flight (LX daily, CO 6x weekly during the winter)
Beijing21 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2004, 83 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2476 times:
Thank you for your comments and remarks. Indeed I would bet that CEO Franz enclines to rely on datas and other figures and not to concentrate every efforts to justify minimum use of a state of the art terminal in ZRH. In addition to that I continue to say that ( and I would bet that we will see soon a second swiss long-haul aircraft operation down there in GVA ) The questions are what, when and how.
What : Will they convince AA to make a daily link with ORD or DFW...and so will probably kill KU for good or a BBJ/ACJ outsourced to private air.
When : As the quaterly reports are featuring good results for swiss. They are back on track and aiming to lease some additional aircrafts, I would bet summer 05 as the departing time.
How : There we are. With the crisis going on between them and the travel agent community I'm not so sure they will find sufficient back up there to get those flights at high exposure... But I can be wrong.
In fact I'm deeply convinced that swiss is working in silent to come up with a project. Whatever it is I see a codeshare with AA.
Just in addition to your KU A343 planning list, they do operate a 5 weekly JFK service as well. I guess 2 are via Heathrow and 3 nonstop.
Well I seem to have been to much extatic mentionning the profitability of a YUL flight. Indeed GVA is not a newcomer into double daily service with NYC. SR, TW, PA, DL and CO have experienced the route but I'm sure that the reactivity to market is essential here. I mean whatever the yield, the number of passenger and cargo lift, all of this depends of your financial structure and product.
HB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4414 posts, RR: 76 Reply 23, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2351 times:
There is most certainly a market for GVA-YUL because of the francophone traffic, so an AC flight would work, for sure during the busy summer months. The question remains whether the flight can remain in the black during the winter months. I don't think a seasonal flight, which is what AC is doing in so many European markets, is desirable for this market.
On a related note, is AC exploring the possibility of a similar BRU-YUL flight? I know that SN has been thinking about it. Last time AC tried was around 1995, with 3 miserable weekly flights and only for one season. The route was, for obvious reasons, a complete failure. But Sabena made it work, when they started operations a couple of years later with MD11 and later A332/333/342/343.
Beijing21 From Switzerland, joined Nov 2004, 83 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2134 times:
Well, I see passion stirred up down here.
Let's get this back on track.
I think either LX or AC will gain if they decide to open up the leg. swiss has not the adequate equipment A332. So AC left and we agree that the AC product, with cabin refurbishment, will make the 763ER the appropriate stuff to operate.
The question remains : When the official announcement will be made ?
I suspect in January for summer 05.
25 LX23: well....it just so happens that a goodly portion of those 40-60 pax ex-GVA bound for YUL are C-class pax, meaning they could fill an AC 763 C-class ca
26 RJ100: Don't want to sound pessimistic but when CEO Franz speaks about "breaking taboos", then he certainly does not mean good things. He means things like o
27 LX23: Actually RJ, I both agree and disagree with you. when CEO Franz speaks about "breaking taboos", then he certainly does not mean good things I will mos
28 YUL332LX: ''...then a lot of them will keep flying Swiss, LH, BA, CO etc. '' Exactly. ...and AF, AC (via CDG), etc. That's why this route is a bit risky for AC.
29 Scf158: What about if AC and LX where to codeshare on the route?
30 YUL332LX: LX is already flying to YUL so I don't see them getting into a codeshare with AC...
31 RJ100: LX23 I see your point. I agree with you that people would use the direct flight but as mentioned above this takes time. And during this time AC cannot