AC330 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 338 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 8606 times:
I know Singapore Airlines was recently denied access to the Sydney - Los Angeles route, which makes me wonder...Air Canada just announced that in 2007 they will start YYZ-LAX-SYD service. Why is AC allowed with no trouble to launch this route?? Does this have something to do with the Open Skies agreement between Canada and the US??
Juventus From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 2835 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 8286 times:
I wonder that as well. Qantas viewed Singapore as a huge threat, but they don't seem to care about Air Canada. WHY???????? I'm sure they rather not have AC on the route, but they don't seem bother that much. SQ plans to keep on trying, game is not over.
EnviroTO From Canada, joined Aug 2004, 829 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 8163 times:
I don't read it that way. It says the allowed intermediate points are Fiji, Tahiti, Honolulu, San Francisco, a point to be agreed. So the one point to be agreed needs to be set to LAX and SFO would still be permitted regardless. It probably would be an easy sell between Canada and Austrailia so have that intermediate point selected as LAX because of the equal benefit to Qantas. If Qantas is to run a YYZ route they are most likely to fly via LAX as well.
TinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 8114 times:
Quoting Accargo (Reply 9): But AC will not be using the acft you saw today now will it? It will be using brand new 777-200LR with J (business) class Pods (think Virgin and Air NZ) and AVOD in every seat.
Well, I personally would care less coz I know the facts but think about the old lady sitting next to me who think because the plane looks beat up it's unsafe. C'mon, nothing against AC but you gotta agree their planes don't look that appealing to the common eye.... from the inside too.
VonRichtofen From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 4639 posts, RR: 36
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 7973 times:
Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 12): Here's a couple. Note the word 'new' on the second pic. Heck, even WN's lively looks better....but like you said, everybody is entitled to their own opinion.
That first pic is the only one in the fleet like that, it's a trial. The second pic is not the new interior, installation of the new interiors doesn't start till May of this year. Why he says "new AC airliner" is unknown to me.
Besides, it's not like any US airline has a transpacific service up to par with AC let alone SQ Especially so when AC's 777's arrive.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31435 posts, RR: 85
Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7911 times:
Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 15): You couldn't be more right about that. UA B744's are in worse shape.
Yet they evidently still fill up the back on a regular basis. Since most (if not all) flight search engines search only by price, and not amenities, if UA can offer a lower price then QF or AC, they'll get the sale, even if passengers will be better entertained on QF or AC.
On the flip side, it would be nice if you could specify airline amenities like you can with hotels, so you could see that AC might be $30 more then UA, but offers a 1" wider seat, 16:9 in-seat video, and ice cream instead of cookies with your "beef or pasta".
B707Stu From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 918 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 7254 times:
I'm still not clear. AC has 5th freedom rights to pick up local LAX traffic for Sydney? They already have YYZ-LAX rights so that's a no brainer. It's the LAX traffic that I'm not clear about. If they do in fact have these rights, or are about to get these rights, whether from LAX or SFO, I think it's significant. AC will compete very well here, especially with the inbound Western Canadian traffic they'll be able to discount, as well as YUL, YYZ (eastern Canada) traffic they'll get.
As to AC planes looking beat up. A piece of this is due to weather but before all you SAS people say how pretty their planes are, AC's probably see a lot more use and have less times in the 'plane-wash.' Bottom line is AC is a world class carrier. Now, if I was flying LAX-SYD, would I fly them? No, I think I'd prefer UA, NZ or QF in J class.
YULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2185 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 7083 times:
YYZ is AC's main hub. AC wants to open a new route from its main hub to SYD. No aircraft can fly it non-stop. LAX is pretty much on the route and is the most logical stop: the most halfway (well, not exactly halfway, but the closest possible stop from SYD), a big StarAlliance hub, served by AC from other cities. It makes sense for them to be allowed to fly it.
Similarly, doesn't NZ have rights on the FRA-LAX sector? Or am I wrong?
SQ????? What would the route be? LAX-SYD? With machines and crew based at LAX or SYD? I guess so since I do not see any logic in a SIN-SYD-LAX route since SIN-LAX non-stop already exists. And a SIN-LAX-SYD route would be a pure non-sense!!!
So, in the case of SQ, that would be a route in the pure purpose of killing the competition, UA being in top of my mind.
Nobody wants airline transportation to work this way...
Quoting Zvezda (Reply 2): AC vs. SQ should be decided by the market, not by governments.
... except a few people, to whom I would advice to never get a job in a legacy carrier, would their dreams become reality...
Polaris From Canada, joined Feb 2000, 1150 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6849 times:
The explanation, in very general terms, without going into specific details about bilaterals is about geography.
The various agreements between Australia and the US, Australia and Canada, and the US and Canada, allow for the type of service that Air Canada proposes because the US is geographically between Australia and Canada (Air Canada's home base).
Agreements between Singapore and Australia, Singapore and the US, and Australia and the US, are unlikely to include this kind of service because Australia is not geographically between the US and Singapore (Singapore Airlines' home base).
That's basically how it works.
Now, if Singapore Airlines was looking to fly to Antarctica with a stop in Australia...
Ecuatoriana707 From Australia, joined Feb 2006, 33 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6709 times:
The Australian Govt's decision to keep status quo on the Syd - Lax route was the right one. I'm no fan of higher airfares, but I know that it's our country's last lucrative route which hasn't been traded away. Like JFK-LHR, it should be tightly controlled until Australia gets something in return. I also welcome Air Canada to the route - its great to see some more North American airlines coming back on the service. What about Northwest? If its such a money spinner surely others US carriers seeking increased revenue would jump at it. Alternatively SQ have a part share of Air NZ - who holds rights, currently not used, to fly SYD - LAX. You'd think there would be a back-door way of SQ establishing some competition on the service using carriers with rights already approved.
Simpilicity From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 6428 times:
Quoting Juventus (Reply 3): I wonder that as well. Qantas viewed Singapore as a huge threat, but they don't seem to care about Air Canada. WHY???????? I'm sure they rather not have AC on the route, but they don't seem bother that much. SQ plans to keep on trying, game is not over.
AC's reputation is bloody awful, whereas perception of SQ is number 1.
QF knows how bad AC is & they can't stop them anyway.
There's always possibility of AC using someone else's aircraft (eg. SQ) until they can get a AC aircraft such as 777 to operate route from APR07.
: AC's reputation is far from bloody awful.. in fact, quite the opposite. http://www.aircanada.com/en/us/news/best/index.html?src=ad_lb AC will launch L
: This does not offset the generally less than friendly attitude of the cabin crew. You will have the grandma's on these routes and they do just enough
: Some day, this old urban legend will die. But for now, its fun to see it keep being repeated. But, I hate to introduce fact, as it really screws up a
: Why the obsession with LAX-SYD? Why not SFO-SYD for SQ? anybody.....
: I guess they want to go where the most valuable traffic is. Australia's importance to Hollywood probably results in a lot of First and Business Class
: Yes. No. The only local traffic they can carry are people coming from Australia, people on stopovers in Los Angeles and non-revenue traffic including
: Longhauler... thanks for this titbit; it gives cause for hope that the old culture is being swept away.
: Oh it is thank god. Also most of the very senior f/a's that are still around are the good ones with excellent customer service skills. They stayed be
: This is a problem with AC, but a much smaller problem than with AA, DL, and UA. On my last international UA flight, there was not an FA in F or C cla
: SQ sold their stake in NZ quite a while ago...
: Actually why is everyone focused on SYD? What about BNE or MEL? Poor BNE and MEL. We always get forgotten
: You had me in your corner up until this comment. You say AC is a world class airline, but if you had to choose, you still wouldn't fly them on this s
: I would take UA aircraft and AC cabin crew over AC aircraft and UA cabin crew. Both of these hypotheticals would be completely unappealing with SQ in