Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Emirates Increases Toronto To A 380  
User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4784 posts, RR: 43
Posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 22796 times:

Breaking News:

Emirates announces that its Dubai-Toronto flights will get a capacity increase effective June 1st from 3 weekly B 773ERs to 3 weekly Airbus A 380s.

Link: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Emirates-Airline-Makes-iw-14649536.html

**********************
Oh boy...this is going to change and effect a lot of online airlines targeting ME, ISC and BKK/SIN/Africa traffic.

Also J/F class pax will want to fly this aircraft just for the experience initially.

This is a very bold and ambitious move by EK which can also be seen as a way to lobby hard for daily YYZ flights asap.

[Edited 2009-03-16 08:22:23]

123 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNorthStarDC4M From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 3022 posts, RR: 36
Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 22726 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

 eyepopping   faint 

Still not loaded but wow... *fingers crossed*

And here i always expected LH to be the 1st 380 into YYZ.



Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
User currently offlineYXD172 From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 449 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 22725 times:

Wow! I never expected this upguage, especially in the current economy. It'll be great to see the A380 in Canada, in service.

I wonder though, if they do get access to more frequencies, will the route return to a 777? I hope not, but this may just be a negotiation ploy...



Radial engines don't leak oil, they are just marking their territory!
User currently offlinePnwtraveler From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 2241 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 22532 times:

They have been saying this for a while now so I hope it is true and not just a rehash of the rumour. There are gates ready to use in the new T1 with multi bridges. Emirates often uses them now to deplane the 77W. If they can prove they are filling the A380 it will be a feather in their cap. However, I am not in favour of EK's unfettered access but am quite happy to see the A380.

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21526 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 22276 times:



Quoting YXD172 (Reply 2):
Wow! I never expected this upguage, especially in the current economy. It'll be great to see the A380 in Canada, in service.


They have to put the A380s somewhere. They have almost 50 of them still on order.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineBillreid From Netherlands, joined Jun 2006, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 21692 times:

was not aware that YYZ was A380 ready.
Interesting for the most expensive airport in the world but they gotta put those birds out there.



Some people don't get it. Business is about making MONEY!
User currently offlineYYZatcboy From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1081 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 21302 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Finally! I'm sure planning on heading down to YYZ to check it out in June. Perhaps a little YYZ spotters meetup is in order for the big event?


DHC1/3/4 MD11/88 L1011 A319/20/21/30 B727 735/6/7/8/9 762/3 E175/90 CRJ/700/705 CC150. J/S DH8D 736/7/8
User currently offlineMarco From United Arab Emirates, joined Jul 2000, 4169 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 21307 times:

Actually EK's loads on the YYZ route are quite impressive, especially in their premium cabins despite the frequency being only 3 times a week!

Mark - yes EK is a publicly traded company but it is a profitable company that is run efficiently despite all the nay sayers and rumours. They should be proud of themselves, they have set a standard for airlines and have promoted Dubai tremendously (most hotels, shopping malls, major establishments are owned by ruling family and a few elite families) so overall it is a profitable venture!



Proud to be an Assyrian!
User currently offlineManfredj From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 21189 times:



Quoting YXD172 (Reply 2):
Wow! I never expected this upguage, especially in the current economy.

Just ask anyone who lives or works in Dubai...they will tell you that they are affected just as much as anyone. If not worse because many projects for growth have been put on pause.


With the amount of 380's Emirates has on order, wouldn't you expect to start seeing increased destinations? They have to be used somewhere.



757: The last of the best
User currently offlineDirectorguy From Egypt, joined Jul 2008, 1681 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 21106 times:

Great news that EK will deploy the A380 on the YYZ route (not yet confirmed, but great news anyway!).
No other airlines will increase/start service between Canada and the Persian Gulf anytime soon, so for the foreseable future, EK will be the airline with the most capacity offering the bigger network from the DXB hub.

Additonal capacity will be a blessing for those who have trouble finding tickets during peak times, and will further trade/VFR links between Canada and the Persian Gulf and the Subcontinent. Initially I thought 72 J seats would be overkill, but YYZ is one of the routes that help drive EK's substantial subcontinent network. Three flights per week means that the airline will cram more people into less flights, while on the other hand some people will preffer to fly on airlines offering daily flights.

Ideally EK would certainly like to expand in Canada, but their expansion plans aren't going to go unchecked. These are people with a plan to make the A380s work. So far, loads haven't deppreciated dramatically and for such drastic times EK is one of the few airlines to continue expanding like that. Clearly they are doing something right.


User currently offlineChrisA330 From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 632 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 21076 times:



Quoting Directorguy (Reply 25):
Great news that EK will deploy the A380 on the YYZ route (not yet confirmed, but great news anyway!).

Considering EK issued a Press Release, I'd say it's confirmed.

http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/090316/0482327.html


User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3375 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 20953 times:



Quoting Billreid (Reply 15):
was not aware that YYZ was A380 ready.
Interesting for the most expensive airport in the world but they gotta put those birds out there.

I would think it is ready at least at the gate because if the GTAA would be morons to spend $4.5 billion on the new T1 (which EK operates out of) and not make it A380. I would think that they are at least a few gates that can handle it. The taxiways might need some widening but runways 05/23 and 15L/33R are sufficient to handle it for a take off both being over 11,000 ft.

Work might need to be done at T3 if any of the carriers operating there want to fly it in but as of now I don't think any are.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineEmiratesUK From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 288 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 20855 times:

YYZ is about the only destination that EK doesnt fly daily too...

As EK cant get any increase in frequencies the "logical" next move is to increase capacity. As the A380 is the only option they have, then A380 it will be.

I find it amazing to see the amount of bashing EK get on this forum...

If SQ decided to uplift LAX or JFK etc with an A380 everyone one would be overjoyed..
So will we see the same bashing when LH or AF send the A380 to YYZ or YUL perhaps? NO of cause not...

EK need an uplift in capacity becasue they cant increase the "silly" x3 frequencies... so what else are they to do.. A380 it is..

If everyone is SO worried about home grown airlines like AC then loby for them to start direct services to destinations EK do well with out of YYZ.



EK A380 Private suite - Here I come!!
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21526 posts, RR: 59
Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 20502 times:

I think it's futile to argue the merits or faults of a state run, state controlled "publicly traded" company. One side can try to claim they are autonomous till they are blue in the face, the other can claim that it's all a front, but neither will convince the other because there is no way to prove it. Which is the problem with state run companies. Rather than more transparency, there is usually less, because there is the pride and ego of the government at stake.


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineLongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4972 posts, RR: 42
Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 20491 times:



Quoting EmiratesUK (Reply 31):
If everyone is SO worried about home grown airlines like AC then loby for them to start direct services to destinations EK do well with out of YYZ.

Actually it is not AC everyone is worried about. It is airlines like KL, LH, AF, BA, etc that have flown to Canada for half a century that are being protected. It is not just AC's traffic they are after, it is the European carriers who are carrying Canadian traffic through their hubs to other countries, and have since transatlantic travel began.

When the Government of Canada was reviewing the application of EK, they stated that they WOULD allow more traffic if it was just between Canada and UAE, with no through traffic, to start ... EK declined. Clearly it was not local traffic they were trying to promote ... as they claim.

It is like the application of SQ for increased access to Canada. When it was stated that YES they can increase traffic between Canada and Singapore, they declined. What they actually wanted was to increase traffic from YVR to ICN.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineEmiratesUK From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 288 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 20331 times:



Quoting LongHauler (Reply 36):
It is airlines like KL, LH, AF, BA, etc that have flown to Canada for half a century that are being protected. It is not just AC's traffic they are after, it is the European carriers who are carrying Canadian traffic through their hubs to other countries, and have since transatlantic travel began.

Then in theory we could complain about every new carrier that starts a new service from LHR

Look at when CO, DL, US & NW all moved in to LHR...

They did it because they were after BA,VS,UA,AA's traffic.. because they didnt like being based at LGW.

Did anyone complain... NO!


EK move in and bang people are going MAD..



EK A380 Private suite - Here I come!!
User currently offlineFlyyul From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4980 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 20288 times:



Quoting LongHauler (Reply 36):
Actually it is not AC everyone is worried about. It is airlines like KL, LH, AF, BA, etc that have flown to Canada for half a century that are being protected. It is not just AC's traffic they are after, it is the European carriers who are carrying Canadian traffic through their hubs to other countries, and have since transatlantic travel began.

When the Government of Canada was reviewing the application of EK, they stated that they WOULD allow more traffic if it was just between Canada and UAE, with no through traffic, to start ... EK declined. Clearly it was not local traffic they were trying to promote ... as they claim.

It is like the application of SQ for increased access to Canada. When it was stated that YES they can increase traffic between Canada and Singapore, they declined. What they actually wanted was to increase traffic from YVR to ICN.

This is exactly the point. Emirates should be allowed capacity to Canada which is to the level of market demand to the UAE with some beyond consideration.

Emirates with an A380 to Toronto comes at a cost, somebody is going to suffer. Should more service by permitted, the same will happen to already established carriers in Calgary/Vancouver that are competing within the economic realities of the industry.


User currently offlineFighterPilot From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 1391 posts, RR: 22
Reply 17, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 20224 times:

So what's the landing fee going to cost? $500,000?  stirthepot 

Cal  airplane 



*Insert Sound Of GE90 Spooling Up Here*
User currently offlineFlyyul From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4980 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 20115 times:



Quoting EmiratesUK (Reply 38):
Then in theory we could complain about every new carrier that starts a new service from LHR

Look at when CO, DL, US & NW all moved in to LHR...

They did it because they were after BA,VS,UA,AA's traffic.. because they didnt like being based at LGW.

Did anyone complain... NO!


EK move in and bang people are going MAD..

irrational argument. There actually is a strong demand from the UAE to the UK. This has very little bearing on CO/NW/AA/DL whatever.

The inverse is that Canada (less than 30 million people) has weak traffic to UAE, and we already have 6t weekly flights with large capacity gauge. The type of traffic EK/EY want, is traffic to India/Asia - that AC/LH/BA/KL/AF/LX carry from Canada with capacity that meet market demand by satisfying both demand to Europe and beyond.

EK wants to take this traffic with small local rights between Canada and the UAE, and at the same time, sabotage the current traffic carried by current carriers.

This is such a simple concept...


User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13742 posts, RR: 19
Reply 19, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 19950 times:



Quoting Flyyul (Reply 41):
EK wants to take this traffic with small local rights between Canada and the UAE, and at the same time, sabotage the current traffic carried by current carriers.

Yes. Isn't that called capitalism, business or more simply, life?



Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineGr8Circle From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 3105 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 19830 times:



Quoting Flyyul (Reply 41):
sabotage the current traffic carried by current carriers.

This is such a simple concept...

Not so simple....because to some of us, this translates to much needed "competition", not "sabotage".....

Moreover, as EK has been flying to YYZ for over a year now, they are also a "current" carrier....


User currently offlineFlyyul From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4980 posts, RR: 51
Reply 21, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 19760 times:



Quoting Gr8Circle (Reply 43):
Not so simple....because to some of us, this translates to much needed "competition", not "sabotage".....

Moreover, as EK has been flying to YYZ for over a year now, they are also a "current" carrier...

Satisfying a proven demand. The Canadian government has limited their available capacity by right-sizing the bilateral according to demand - which i'm all in favor of.

Any additional service, which satisfies traffic other than Canada - UAE (more capacity is aimed at getting better share of subcontinent traffic) - should not be permitted.


User currently offlineHeathrow From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 979 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 19737 times:

nothing has been updated into the schedule. It still shows as 77W

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21526 posts, RR: 59
Reply 23, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 19546 times:



Quoting EmiratesUK (Reply 38):
Did anyone complain... NO!

What planet do you live on?

The UK, BA and VS all complained loudly. But because they were now part of the EU, they couldn't protect their home market anymore due to an open skies bilateral with the USA that was long overdue, and because the UK gave up their autonomy in the aviation market to the central authority. And overall for the EU, this open skies is beneficial because it opened up anywhere in Europe to anywhere in the USA to any carrier. This creates more O&D markets and/or adds more opportunity for EU and USA carriers on existing O&D markets.

Compare this with Dubai. There is value for EK to fly to various Canadian cities because they can then connect passengers onward to other places, not because there is any major O&D demand to Dubai. But for Canada, they already have 1-stop/1-connection service to just about anywhere in the world from all major Canadian cities. So all they would really gain is the right for AC to fly to Dubai from all sorts of Canadian cities, routes that don't have enough demand on their own to support flights without onward connections in Dubai.

The only way this would really make sense for AC is if they signed a code-share and revenue sharing partnership with EK. But that's not what EK is after. They are after global domination. Who benefits other than EK in that scenario?



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineAC788 From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 69 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (5 years 6 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 19279 times:



Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 20):

Sounds like a plan to me! I can't wait to see this bird in person, especially at YYZ!
 Big grin


25 LouA340 : Some can also see it the other way around. Couldn't AC use this to also connect passengers from the Middle East region onward to Canadian cities thro
26 Flyyul : Well said. Thanks for your input.
27 ChrisA330 : The point is, there isn't enough traffic from the UAE alone to support multiplie flights into/out of Canada. These flights need to be supported by tr
28 FlyEmirates : Also of interest is that currently as of 1st June both JFK flights are being sold as 8/42/304, therefore it is planned to pull the A380 from JFK, thus
29 SQ_EK_freak : The website still shows the A380 on 201 on certain dates throughout June?[Edited 2009-03-16 13:27:49]
30 EmiratesUK : I was refering to people on this forum, not the airlines... Also have the likes of BA,LH,AF,KL etc etc complained about EK wanting to increase YYZ.??
31 Airbus1 : For what its worth I think this was a bit of a change of plan by Emirates - and reflects the current state of the US economy. Loads to JFK are not eno
32 EK413 : I totally agree and hope access continues to be denied... EK just wants to dump capacity on a weak market to drive out the national carriers... EK413
33 Airbus1 : "The point i;m trying to make (if you would gladly consider it), is that additional EK access to YYZ/YYC/YVR -in excess of market demand to UAE - woul
34 Post contains links Scbriml : I have had to delete over 40 posts from this thread. The main reason being responses to posts which make unsubstantiated claims. Either back-up your c
35 Plunaaircanada : OMG the a380 to YYZ!!!!
36 YOWza : Whenever EK does ANYTHING there is always screaming in some quarters from the usual detractors. While there is a degree of murkiness to how EK operate
37 Jamincan : I suspect the carrier which would be affected the most if EK were to operate to Calgary would be KL. Not because of all the Dutch who would now trave
38 AirNz : In which case it kind of indicates that EK know exactly what they are doing, as opposed to the 'expertise' on a.net who only think they do. Yes, and
39 Viscount724 : AC could not establish a hub at DXB as they would never obtain the 5th freedom traffic rights, and the costs to do that would be very high compared t
40 JAGflyer : I was looking at the EK booking site today and saw a R/T ticket from YYZ to DXB was like $2100 in Y!!? Perhaps this was a full fare Y ticket but I can
41 Threepoint : You need to think one more chess move ahead. Once EK has achieved their desired level of "dominance", which implies a monopolistic scenario (and thus
42 Alessandro : So when did the A380 visit Toronto last time?
43 Lexy : I need to head up to Toronto for some photography work. This is just the incentive!!!
44 Viscount724 : I may be wroing but I believe the only Canadian airports visited by the A380 so far are YVR, YUL and YFB (Iqaluit, formerly Frobisher Bay) where they
45 Sunnyb : What are you talking about? I just checked the return fare between YYZ to DEL via DXB in Y and it's CAD 1327.42 (including taxes on emirates.com). Mo
46 Threepoint : Check the fare between YYZ and DXB (which is what was quoted, even though India was confusingly mentioned). It may be that the tag-on beyond a hub is
47 Behramjee : The fares from YYZ to BOM/DEL/BLR/MAA return are as follows: EY - $ 1125 all incl (to BOM/DEL/MAA only) 9W - $ 1150 all incl LH - $ 1350 all incl (in
48 Pnwtraveler : The A380 hasn't visited YYZ before. As I said above in post 3, there are two (possibly 3) gates at T1 that are multi-bridge and ready for the A380. In
49 Brilondon : They would not just start flying them because they "have to go somewhere" is not the way they would decide on a equipment deployment but have real re
50 Manu : I recently saw AC advertising YYZ-DXB for under $400 each way, plus taxes. I can't find the ad now (it was listed on their main website ad). Total co
51 Sankaps : Where can one access this kind of info? Is there a site accessible to the general public?
52 Post contains links Antskip : According to http://www.seatguru.com/, the EK A380 does have wider economy seats than its B777's: 18", as compared to 17" - the A345 has 17.5". My pe
53 2707200X : That's good news, Emirates sees the demand but unfortunately production of the A380 is slowing down.
54 Swallow : Par for the course on an EK A380 thread. Don't know if the 77W to YYZ has a two-class configuration, but it seems to me that increasing capacity from
55 Hohd : Of course, EK knows what the target markets are: Indian Subcontinent, SE Asia, other Middle Eastern cities and Australia. They are not targeting the O
56 JAL : This is awesome news for Emirates and Toronto! Looks like the route is doing extremely well for them!
57 Directorguy : IMO, why should EK/EY be denied access to Canada on the basis that only they will benefit due to fifth freedom rights, and that AC can't reciprocate a
58 Flyyul : EK/EY should be given rights that satisfy the demand between Canada and the UAE.
59 David_itl : Given that one of those airlines is seeing fit to go to A380 ops, wouldn't you agree that the current rights are restrictive? =
60 Sebring : By what inherent right does EK have to fly anywhere it pleases? The answer is none. Bilateral air rights are just that - bilateral. If the Japanese p
61 Behramjee : precisely...be happy for what u already have rather than acting like a spoilt brat and then getting kicked along the way aka Etihad comes in and take
62 Manu : The seat pitch on the aircraft I was on was 31! My knees were against the seat ahead of me the entire way. I asked for an Emergency Exit row after th
63 SInGAPORE_AIR : And who's going to provide that? Air Canada?! Ha ! A one-stop service via Emirates will offer Canadians more choice to said destinations. One could a
64 RJ111 : It's as well placed as DXB to tap into the North America-Middle East/Sub-Continent maket. Which is the only logical traffic flow EK can attain from N
65 Threepoint : YYZ is located in a very favourable location for onward connections - but for different markets unable to receive nonstop service, such as Japan-Braz
66 RJ111 : Funneling everyone from NA to ISC/ME via YYZ is geographically almost identical to funneling everyone from ISC/ME via DXB to NA.
67 Ncfc99 : I'm with directorguy here. The argument that keeps surfacing is that EK shouldn't be allowed to connect pax at DXB, but it seems to be OK for other a
68 Sebring : It could be any number of airlines- far preferable to adding unnecessary travel time. My wife is flying to Pakistan shortly on Etihad. She could have
69 Antskip : EK quite well know there is no "right". They have had to argue their case with any number of national governments to create a global airline. Like th
70 SInGAPORE_AIR : Unfortunately, I disagree with your stance. So it's incumbent on let's say, more 'natural' carriers, to forge the way before other more exotic carrie
71 YOWza : While I would not mind a loosening of the bilateral I think it's imperative that EK understand that the Canadian government is under no obligation to
72 Threepoint : Please explain "geographically almost identical". Do you mean 'comparable distance'? Or total elapsed travel time? Toronto is not a natural launching
73 RJ111 : It means that to get from a varitey of places in NA to a variety of places in ME/ISC. The extent of diversion is almost identical via either YYZ or D
74 Viscount724 : The big difference is that EK has a huge network of services between their DXB hub and many other cities in Asia/Africa/Middle East that they can fee
75 CayMan : Well said thanks for comment. The key is defintiely the difference between EK having heavy access to YYZ and being able to tap the large GTA and Cdn
76 Sebring : I read tonight that Dubai is tightening up its rules and regulations with respect to modesty and behavior. Now someone may wish to dress provocativel
77 Sebring : I don't think you have any special insight into what "we" want. Eighty percent of Americans according to the latest public opinion polls approve of "
78 HB-IWC : While I can understand some of the arguments made by both sides here, I do not agree with this particular remark. KLM will soon be serving Canada wit
79 Ikramerica : Wow. So EK is "progress" and if you don't allow them unlimited access to your country, you are a luddite? Hardly. EK is a prime example of a predator
80 CayMan : Here here! I don't mean too invoke politics i raise this by way of example only and in context of sovereign nations being able to set their aviation
81 Flyyul : KLM serves primarily the European continent for which both governments agreed that open skies was justified based on demand. The premise for their se
82 Babybus : The Canadian routes seem very strong compared to their cousins over the border. I never get mail from airlines selling discount tickets to Canada (unf
83 Threepoint : While those flights serve a lot of 6th freedom traffic, I'd contest the assertion that there isn't enough O&D to sustain a couple of the Canada-Germa
84 Pnwtraveler : People sometimes confuse competition which is healthy for business and predatory business practices. Reading some people's posts you would think AC ha
85 HB-IWC : I fail to see a difference between KLM filling its aircraft with up to 90% beyond AMS traffic through its extensive European network, and EK doing th
86 Threepoint : As a moderator, I would have expected you'd include some sources for these statements. KLM only fills its planes with 10% O&D? From just Toronto or f
87 Gr8Circle : I'm not really sure about the 90% figure, but the fact remains that KL, AF, LH, BA and AZ have for years together, depended on the connecting passeng
88 Threepoint : Keep in mind a significant portion of the Canadian market to south Asia doesn't get there via the Atlantic.
89 SQ_EK_freak : I find that hard to believe - I'm not questioning the validity of your post Sebring, but rather how credible that public opinion poll is. Perhaps it'
90 Gr8Circle : I don't get your point.....I'm talking specifically about YYZ - S.Asia.....S.Asia is comprises of India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bangladesh...
91 HB-IWC : I clearly stated UP TO 90% connecting traffic. The numbers vary between the different stations (YVR, YYZ, YUL; YYC has yet to start) as well as depen
92 Sebring : The Canada-Netherlands agreement was forged at a time when Canadian Airlines International was rightsholder for Canada and the Netherlands granted wh
93 Flyyul : Again I ask, wahts the business case for EK to serve Dubai and beyond from Calgary. How many Indian/Pakistani/Sri Lankan and other Middle East countr
94 Threepoint : Perhaps you could have been more clear when limiting your discussion to the GTA. Although the thread title includes 'Toronto', the scope of the discu
95 CayMan : Perhaps I was unclear or you misunderstood what I was saying. But it's exactly what you said: they are free to do in their own country as is Canada,
96 Gr8Circle : Isn't it clear enough that I was talking about YYZ when I specifically refer to it in my post? Where have I referred to any airport in Western Canada
97 Threepoint : I've forgotten who said what, when they said it, and what the original discussion was about. To be honest, I'm no longer sure if we're debating A380s
98 Viscount724 : You can't even begin to compare the O&D market between Canada and Dubai with O&D markets like the UK, France and Germany.
99 Astuteman : It's a big increase in space per pax though. 427 pax in a 773ER only get 0.77 m2 per pax 489 pax in an A380 get 1.13m2 per pax A 46% increase in spac
100 Gr8Circle : So who is comparing? All I said is that the major European carriers flying out of YYZ all depend on a lot of connecting passengers to S.Asian countri
101 Threepoint : I'd venture that's exactly what we're talking about. There's a big difference between carriers flying a ton of O&D passengers in a 777 with some conn
102 Gr8Circle : I get your point....but that can only be addressed if the Canadian govt lays down a rule that carriers have to have a certain proportion of O&D versu
103 Swallow : Indeed. It is interesting to see how much 'noise' is generated when an EK 380 is the topic of discussion, whereas not much is said about the other wi
104 Pnwtraveler : Big Momma. I love that. Presumeably a "Big Momma" will be sent prior to June 1 for training and familiarization. No A380 has been to YYZ yet. If anyon
105 Viscount724 : You seemed to be implying that the Canadian government was somehow favouring carriers like BA/AF/LH etc. which also carry a lot of connecting traffic
106 Astuteman : A whole 10% less? Rgds
107 WROORD : If they canot fill the A380 @JFK I am not sure how they plan on having full loads at YYZ? They do not have a code share with AC to get feeder traffic.
108 Viscount724 : I'm sure EK has an interline ticketing agreement with AC so they can sell through fares including AC connecting sectors. You con't have to codeshare
109 JAGflyer : At the moment, AC does not have a codeshare on the flight, nor does EK have codeshares on AC flights.
110 Threepoint : But that doesn't leave out the possibility of an interline agreement, which means a person could fly one a single ticket from any other Canadian airpo
111 Post contains links Antskip : Reports are that EK are getting much better loads out of YYZ than JFK: "The move to the bigger aircraft will allow the airline carry 400 extra passen
112 Threepoint : Of course they will.
113 Gr8Circle : I certainly wasn't implying anything of that sort....however, I would say that some members on this forum do seem to favour the said carriers
114 SInGAPORE_AIR : "favour" seems to be putting it very mildly.
115 Emirates773er : Not to mention that they are absolutely right in saying that, if they can fill the A380 up on the YYZ-DXB segment for the next few months there remai
116 Viscount724 : The Canadian government would look at the nature of that traffic, specifically how much is O&D Canada-UAE and how much is 6th freedom to/from the res
117 Lightsaber : Best name yet for the A380! Excellent example. But not expanding, Japan has forfeited the ability to be one of the major trans-Pacific hubs. Oh, NRT
118 BlueShamu330s : That honour has to go to CNN's naming on its first arrival at LAX "Oh my, here she comes, the Big Momma Jamma of them all.... " Rgds
119 Post contains links Threepoint : In an interesting development, the Canadian government has just approved an air transport agreement between Canada and Turkey: http://www.newswire.ca/
120 Pnwtraveler : This has been a rumour for a while with TK paying for an office fronting on University Avenue (high rent and very visible) in Toronto. A friend who fl
121 YOWza : Here's the thing though, the GoC does not need an excuse. They too got 3 PAX and 3 cargo per week with an additional 3 code shares. I wonder how long
122 Threepoint : I didn't realize this. That will stifle any premium preference over EK service. Probably already in the works.
123 Thenoflyzone : TK can get in line after EK ! Canada is not know to renegociate bilaterals that quickly.... Thenoflyzone
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
AC Increases YYZ-BOG To 6x Weekly posted Fri Dec 16 2005 19:36:38 by SOUTHAMERICA
Emirates And AC To Fly YYZ-DXB! posted Sun Oct 16 2005 06:49:03 by RicardoFG
EK Increases Flights To Australia posted Fri Feb 6 2009 01:24:55 by EK156
POE (Porter) 9001 - YYZ To YTZ? posted Mon Nov 3 2008 06:44:44 by AAmd11
All Emirates AKL-DXB To Be Only 1 Stop posted Mon Aug 25 2008 11:33:02 by Fly2CHC
Emirates A380 Diversion To MUC posted Sun Aug 10 2008 03:42:08 by Honza
First Emirates A380 Flight To JFK posted Thu Jul 31 2008 12:19:59 by Haan
Emirates Won't Fly To Durban posted Tue Jun 17 2008 08:23:17 by MAH4546
Emirates Increases India Flights posted Mon May 26 2008 07:49:50 by Behramjee
Etihad Increases Flights To Egypt.. posted Tue Apr 15 2008 13:37:02 by MSYYZ