Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Westjet Evaluating Wide Body Order  
User currently offlineAF185 From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2012, 259 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 16879 times:

According to Bloomberg:

Quote:
WestJet Airlines Ltd. (WJA) is evaluating adding long-haul international routes and has begun talks with Boeing Co. (BA) and rival Airbus SAS about wide-body jets that could fly farther than its single-aisle fleet.

Discussions are preliminary and focused on availability, capability and pricing, WestJet Chief Executive Officer Gregg Saretsky said at an investor presentation today. The airline has no definitive plans to purchase wide-body aircraft, and any decisions will probably be delayed until it’s satisfied with new Encore regional unit.

“There’s an opportunity for us to start exploring this notion of a possible wide-body long-haul international operations,” Saretsky said. The airline is just starting to review “what that might look like,” he said, and has no immediate plans to order aircraft

Buying bigger planes and adding longer routes would give WestJet more ammunition as it seeks to win market share from larger competitor Air Canada. (AC/A) The discounter resumed flights to New York’s LaGuardia airport in June and plans to open its new regional unit by 2013 to serve locations now only reached by Canada’s largest airline.

More information on the following link: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-1...ng-airbus-on-wide-body-planes.html

64 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBlueBus From United States of America, joined Feb 2011, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 16881 times:

Southwest and WestJet changing so much gives opportunity for other airlines to replace their old models, imho

User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 16652 times:

WN will probably remain domestic for the near future, I see no widebody orders for them at all for a long time....

For WestJet this is a bit surprising.

If this was 1995 and we were talking about this, user WestJet747 would be all excited right now  


That aside, these guys are probably looking at the 788 or A359. I honestly do not see them pulling a Skymark and buying A380s/748i's.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinelostsound From Canada, joined May 2012, 225 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 16439 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):
That aside, these guys are probably looking at the 788 or A359.

I'd say the A330 is up for discussion too.  

My guess is the 787 will be the victor because of their relationship with Boeing, especially just after receiving their 100th 737NG aircraft. However I'd love to see them order the A350 to give the Canadian market more aircraft diversity seeing Air Canada has already ordered 787s. And so I could get better chance to fly on the A350 and 787. :P

[Edited 2012-12-06 20:12:43]


"Our hands are full, our lives are not"
User currently offlinedlramp4life From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 931 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 16409 times:

If WestJet or WN is looking into wide body aircraft which I found doubtful I think they would dabble with a 767 first if anything...


PHX Ramp, hottest place on earth
User currently offlineCPA62 From Canada, joined Jan 2012, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 16254 times:

It would be great to see a 2nd sched international carrier, particulalry one based in the west. Air Canada
has done little to develop routes from Western Canada (in my opinion). Hope Westjet can fill the need particulalry from
Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver.
I wonder if WEstjet is talking with Branson on a low cost carrier, since Air Canada nixed any possibility of a joint venture?


User currently offlinecyeg66 From Canada, joined Feb 2011, 202 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 16141 times:

Well, I for one, am shocked by this news....


On second thought, perhaps not. To dredge the same old discussion as in the past, there's a reason YYC is expanding to the extent that it is. First Encore, then will come Envoy (or whatever new "international name they will affix to their long haul flying). It's been a long time coming... Their home base makes a pretty good launch pad for long haul, methinks. It'll never get as big as YYZ, YUL, or YVR's international ops, but it should be good to double current international pax numbers within 10 year's time. My guesstimations only... Looking forward to the anti-Wetjet-small-fry-forever comments that are no doubt gonna surface in this thread.



slow to 160, contact tower, slow to 160, contact tower, slow to....ZZZZZZZ......
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19712 posts, RR: 58
Reply 7, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 16122 times:

Quoting dlramp4life (Reply 4):

If WestJet or WN is looking into wide body aircraft which I found doubtful I think they would dabble with a 767 first if anything...

I doubt it very much. I'd say that the options would be 787, A330, or A350.

The 787 would be the ideal aircraft. Small size, good flexibility, low operating costs. But it won't be available until almost 2020 at this point with its backlog. The A350 has the operating costs but is larger probably than ideal. It can probably be had within three years. The A330 can be had within one to two years, I'd wager, but has the highest operating costs. That said, the current A330 is still a modern, efficient aircraft and it's going to be less expensive to order than the new planes.


User currently offlinetimpdx From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 556 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 16077 times:

The A330 series seems to be the go-to airframe for carriers needing wb wings sooner than later. Too bad the 767 just doesn't seem to be competitive for need it ASAP widebodies.

User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4990 posts, RR: 42
Reply 9, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 15997 times:

Quoting AF185 (Thread starter):
Discussions are preliminary and focused on availability, capability and pricing, WestJet Chief Executive Officer Gregg Saretsky said at an investor presentation today.

Interesting that it is Gregg Saretsky that is considering this. As most know, he was in upper management at Canadian Airlines ... and since his arrival at Westjet, they are looking more and more like Canadian! I hope he does better than the first iteration.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineJU068 From Vanuatu, joined Aug 2009, 2640 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 15898 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

So what routes would they consider launching? Maybe London in Europe?

User currently offlinethreepoint From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 2136 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 15731 times:

Quoting CPA62 (Reply 5):
Air Canada has done little to develop routes from Western Canada (in my opinion).

Only because the market from western Canada doesn't really warrant such development. What enhanced service could you suggest (that will make money)?

Quoting cyeg66 (Reply 6):
Looking forward to the anti-Wetjet-small-fry-forever comments that are no doubt gonna surface in this thread.

What will surface is what's on everybody's mind: WestJet has radically diverged from their original and tested business model. Change is good Donkey, but I wonder how WS can keep cost structure down with the introduction of much new infrastructure overseas, a tripling of aircraft types, etc.

Quoting JU068 (Reply 10):
So what routes would they consider launching? Maybe London in Europe?

No doubt the leisure routes with high load factors and price conscious travelers (LGW, HKG, maybe something in mainland China, but more likely more western Europe).



The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
User currently offlineJU068 From Vanuatu, joined Aug 2009, 2640 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 15704 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting threepoint (Reply 11):
No doubt the leisure routes with high load factors and price conscious travelers (LGW, HKG, maybe something in mainland China, but more likely more western Europe).

Thanks. I hope we see them launch flights to Belgrade!


User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5472 posts, RR: 30
Reply 13, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 15180 times:

I imagine, if it actually does ever happen, they'll test the long haul waters much like they're trying out the 757...they'll try some wet leases to check things out before committing to buying a fleet.


What the...?
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13130 posts, RR: 100
Reply 14, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 15079 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This sounds wise. See what the economics are and think about it. Let Boeing and Airbus know you are interested, but wait to see what the best option is. Its a shame the MAX won't have a little more range, or Westjet could skip the widebodies all together.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):
WN will probably remain domestic for the near future, I see no widebody orders for them at all for a long time....

WN will go international. Just with 737s.  
Quoting dlramp4life (Reply 4):
I think they would dabble with a 767 first if anything...

Why?!? 767s are being replaced by A330s and 788s. Since Westjet isn't planning to rush into widebodies, they have time to learn about and decide on the A330, A359, and 789. I doubt they would look and larger. After returning 736s to the leasors, I expect WJ will focus on CASM which relugates the 767 to 'has been.' Why did you suggest the 767 for an airline that won't be incorporating widebodies for a few years? By the time Westjet buys a widebody, there will be hundreds of 787s in the global fleet and that will change the economics.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4226 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 14821 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 13):
I imagine, if it actually does ever happen, they'll test the long haul waters much like they're trying out the 757...they'll try some wet leases to check things out before committing to buying a fleet.

I am surprised at WS not having their own 757's in the fleet before they move into the wide body market. I can't see WS buying any thing from Europe but from Boeing as they seem to like the North American product.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinelostsound From Canada, joined May 2012, 225 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 14366 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 15):
I can't see WS buying any thing from Europe but from Boeing as they seem to like the North American product.

I don't think North America has anything to do with it. They started their business model based off Southwest's so they used the same 737 aircraft in order to do it properly. Through that, they have built a strong relationship with Boeing, who have so far churned out 100 planes in their name. This relationship they already have with the manufacturer is why I believe they will not go the Airbus path. Boeing will probably offer the 737MAX for cheap along side a 787 order which would be quite appetizing to WS.



"Our hands are full, our lives are not"
User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 14310 times:

There are still some "terrible teens" on the market, a very cheap WB and should be decent in size and range? Shorter backlog too compared to new builds.

User currently offlinestrangr From Australia, joined Apr 2012, 110 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 10830 times:

imo Westjet has the ability to expand into a larger market, and I would be thinking only into the EU market which is what Canadians want the most of.

I consider how companies like VAU, they started off as a Low cost, no frills carrier, to now be a business market carrier fighting with the legacy for far more.

I see great potential in this for WJ, but hope they are smarter and only aim for markets like EU, a company like WJ would have no need to fly to China or Australia


User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 881 posts, RR: 11
Reply 19, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 10740 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 7):
The 787 would be the ideal aircraft. Small size, good flexibility, low operating costs. But it won't be available until almost 2020 at this point with its backlog. The A350 has the operating costs but is larger probably than ideal. It can probably be had within three years. The A330 can be had within one to two years, I'd wager, but has the highest operating costs. That said, the current A330 is still a modern, efficient aircraft and it's going to be less expensive to order than the new planes.

I would think that a few 788 slots might be made open if some of the bigger carriers start taking long looks at the 787-10 and want to convert some of their current orders.

It would be interesting to see if the 788 can make inroads into a low-cost international market on less traveled routes. If there was an airframe to do it that would be the one.


User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13602 posts, RR: 61
Reply 20, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 10689 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I can almost guarantee that Gregg has been wishing the B757-200 were still available for purchase from Boeing.


"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25338 posts, RR: 22
Reply 21, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8737 times:

Quoting strangr (Reply 18):
I see great potential in this for WJ, but hope they are smarter and only aim for markets like EU, a company like WJ would have no need to fly to China or Australia

WestJet is WS not WJ. WJ is another Canadian carrier, Air Labrador, based in Goose Bay (YYR) serving many small points in the province of Newfoundland & Labrador as well as Quebec with 7 Twin Otters, 1 Beech 1900, 1 Beech King Air and 1 Cessna 208 Caravan.


User currently offlineSixtySeven From Canada, joined Nov 2006, 332 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8680 times:

Wonder if he will contract that flying out in terms of pilots?

He's done that with Encore.

He's tried it with the 757 Hawaii op.

He just made a speech concerning his unit costs being up 50% since launch. This certainly won't help.



Stand-by for new ATIS message......
User currently offlineYVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2469 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 8231 times:

Quoting AF185 (Thread starter):
The airline has no definitive plans to purchase wide-body aircraft, and any decisions will probably be delayed until it’s satisfied with new Encore regional unit.

I think this is the key. Very wise to get Encore making money before they try out new ventures.

That being said, the 788 is a no brainer if they ever go down this path. But I struggle to come up with new routes not already served, so they will just be stealing off AC as usual. I think current opportunities in secondary Chinese markets will be taken by the time this happens. I cant suddenly see a mass explosion of growth in YYC to start offering flights to HKG, PVG etc.

Can anyone explain why Zoom failed? They seemed to have a good thing going, I really enjoyed their service (for what I paid) when I used them and the planes seemed to be pretty full. My understanding it was their UK operation, Canada left to itself probably would have been OK? My point being there could be market for a similar product with 788's instead of 763's to compete with Canadian Affair (TS) and it would probably have a better chance of making it with the huge recognition and respect WS have vs a newb like Z4, deeper pockets and regional feed. Get a couple of codeshares with someone like AB or BE.



Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
User currently offlineBA777-236 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 673 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 8209 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 7):
The 787 would be the ideal aircraft. Small size, good flexibility, low operating costs. But it won't be available until almost 2020 at this point with its backlog.

What about via lessors? I'm sure their longhaul fleet (to start off) wouldn't be huge, so why not lease 5 frames and order 5 more?

What about Westjet and alliances? Are they interested in joining Oneworld or Skyteam?



I like British Airways! I'm not sure why, but I do! ;-)
User currently offlineabrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 5100 posts, RR: 55
Reply 25, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 8411 times:

Gregg is a very smart man, and WestJet is probably has the best approach to figuring out the airline game. Airlines must evolve. Or, die. In a country with only 35 million people, saturation for the 737 fleet would have happened sooner or later. Gregg and team must be admired for recognizing this and taking the airline in the next steps of its natural evolution.

They have a fantastic executive team supported by some very strong managers across in finance and network planning. I do see the widebody in their fleet - but hopefully, they will give the 350 and the 333 consideration.

Saludos,
A.



Live, and let live.
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13602 posts, RR: 61
Reply 26, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 8194 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 20):
I can almost guarantee that Gregg has been wishing the B757-200 were still available for purchase from Boeing.

Scratch that, I meant the -300.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlinebehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4784 posts, RR: 43
Reply 27, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8126 times:

Over a long term period, the ideal aircraft for WS's long haul aspirations is indeed the Boeing 787-900 which would offer the best overall performance capable of seating 350 pax in an all Y class configuration with 32 inch seat pitch and a flying range of 13-14 hours nonstop with no payload issues.

However the Canadian high density long haul market is very seasonal and yields arent that great. For example, demand to Europe in IATA Winter season falls down quite a bit and in the summer months demand is less to the Caribbean states. The only year round long haul markets that witness consistent demand is the Canada-Far East Asia markets of China, HKG, MNL, Japan and South Korea. Even India is seasonal i.e. demand is mainly between OCT-FEB but the yields to India are way lower and un-viable for a privately owned airline to consider versus SE Asia.

WS also needs to see which alliance would like to take it on because it can then act as a good feeder for the Canadian market. Obviously its two only choices are Sky Team and One World but gaining access to decent LHR slots might be a real problem for the airline. For Sky Team though, it should not face a problem getting slots at CDG as it is France and Italy are big VFR (FCO) and leisure markets out of Canada.


User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5472 posts, RR: 30
Reply 28, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8080 times:

It will be years before Westjet gets serious about any overseas routes. It is going to take at least a couple of years for their expansion plans south to solidify after they get the Q400's on line...which will take a couple of years in itself.

It's interesting that they are floating the idea of widebody aircraft, but I suspect it will be at least 3 years before they actually get serious about choosing a plane...if they ever do.



What the...?
User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4990 posts, RR: 42
Reply 29, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7954 times:

Quoting abrelosojos (Reply 25):
Airlines must evolve. Or, die.

I agree with what you say, but I think I would use the word "adapt" over "evolve". There are good reasons why an airline should not change if it is not necessary.

Look at Southwest Airlines, the airline after which WS (and most LCCs) was modeled. They are still basically holding onto their roots, and they are still one of the most consistently profitable airlines on the earth with an enviable passenger satisfaction rate. While rumours run rampant, still after 50 years, Southwest still had one aircraft type, (I don't see the B717s lingering long), still no regional carrier and still no aspirations of wide body aircraft.

This recent article about Westjet made me wonder about "evolving" into a legacy carrier:

http://www.theprovince.com/touch/story.html?id=7666418



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineairliner371 From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 1394 posts, RR: 2
Reply 30, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7803 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):

WN will probably remain domestic for the near future, I see no widebody orders for them at all for a long time....

Well, they will in 2015, not exactly short term but not too far out.



You will either love or hate the airline industry. If you love it, it will get in your blood and it will never leave.
User currently offlinekrisyyz From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7729 times:

Great news for Canadian travellers, but not for AC's LCC and TS. If WS is able to maintain their level of service on long-haul ops then they will undoubtedly take customers away from the current carriers. As mentioned, the 737MAX/787 order has a good chance, but I would discount the A330 just yet, it depends on how quickly WS wants to start long-haul ops.

KrisYYZ


User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4990 posts, RR: 42
Reply 32, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7683 times:

Quoting krisyyz (Reply 31):
If WS is able to maintain their level of service on long-haul ops then they will undoubtedly take customers away from the current carriers.

Only if they are cheaper. There is NO brand loyalty nor service preferences when it comes to vacation leisure travelers. And I would doubt that WS could come close to Transat or Sunwing with regard to seat mile costs.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlinethreepoint From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 2136 posts, RR: 9
Reply 33, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7513 times:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 29):
This recent article about Westjet made me wonder about "evolving" into a legacy carrier:

http://www.theprovince.com/touch/story.html?id=7666418

From the article longhauler provided:
He said WestJet also wants to revisit the benefits received by the mainline employees.
“We have found ourselves because of where the industry has gone — mostly backwards — that we’re well above market in a lot of those,” he said. “We’re going to revisit that.”


This seems to reinforce that WestJet is resigned to joining the race to the bottom that they have trumpeted seperates them from the legacy carriers.



The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
User currently offlinelostsound From Canada, joined May 2012, 225 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7489 times:

I think the biggest question of all is, would they be all-economy or will WestJet introduce a new long haul business class?


"Our hands are full, our lives are not"
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25338 posts, RR: 22
Reply 35, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7317 times:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 32):
There is NO brand loyalty nor service preferences when it comes to vacation leisure travelers.

Many leisure passengers also want to get their frequent flyer miles. A lot of leisure travellers are also very frequent business travellers and may thus prefer the same carrier for their leisure travels.


User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16280 posts, RR: 56
Reply 36, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7264 times:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 9):
Interesting that it is Gregg Saretsky that is considering this. As most know, he was in upper management at Canadian Airlines ... and since his arrival at Westjet, they are looking more and more like Canadian!

Other than a 737 fleet based in YYC, WS is really nothing like CP was.

Quoting threepoint (Reply 11):
What will surface is what's on everybody's mind: WestJet has radically diverged from their original and tested business model.

Radically? No. Marginally? Yes. WS remains the same as it always was: an LCC. They have simply grown and added a FFP and Y+ cabin and offer good service (as good as AC). The key to WS will always be lower costs, whether they add 788 and TA/TP routes or not.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25338 posts, RR: 22
Reply 37, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7185 times:

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 36):
They have simply grown and added a FFP and Y+ cabin and offer good service (as good as AC).

Frequency is also part of service. In most cases WS doesn't match AC frequency in major competitive markets, and frequency is a very strong factor in carrier choice, especially by business travellers who generate the highest yields.


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 38, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7104 times:

Quoting airliner371 (Reply 30):
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2):

WN will probably remain domestic for the near future, I see no widebody orders for them at all for a long time....

Well, they will in 2015, not exactly short term but not too far out.

I should've specified that I see WN as narrow-body only, given HOU's endeavor of getting Mexican service.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2493 posts, RR: 11
Reply 39, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6726 times:

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 36):
The key to WS will always be lower costs, whether they add 788 and TA/TP routes or not.

What cost advantage ! WS's cost advantage over AC is down to only 10, 15%.

http://business.financialpost.com/20...s-cushion-over-air-canada-shrinks/

It will get even worse once these presumed long haul aircraft arrive into the fleet.

Thenoflyzone



us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2493 posts, RR: 11
Reply 40, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 6299 times:

Quoting cyeg66 (Reply 6):
Their home base makes a pretty good launch pad for long haul, methinks. It'll never get as big as YUL, or YVR's international ops, but it should be good to double current international pax numbers within 10 year's time. My guesstimations only..

Doubling the international passenger numbers at YYC from 1 million and change to 3 million is not a small feat (transborder pax not included)! Especially in 10 years time. Heck i got 10 years in the company and I'm sure it seems like yesterday when we were both sitting on YQB TCU. A blink of an eye i tell ya !

WS will not get any new long-haul aircraft before 2016, 2017 at the earliest. That's already 4-5 years away. Doesn't leave much time to double intl pax numbers in just 5 years.

Quoting CPA62 (Reply 5):
Air Canada
has done little to develop routes from Western Canada (in my opinion).
Quoting threepoint (Reply 11):
Only because the market from western Canada doesn't really warrant such development. What enhanced service could you suggest (that will make money)?

Exactly ! If there was money to be made, AC would be on it. We saw this as well with AC trying to establish their LCC on trans-pac routes out of YVR, only to realize that the market might not be there, due to the rise of non-stop flights from YYZ (where the money is in the first place !).

WS's cost structure is increasing (read post above), and it will only get worse with the Dash 8-400s and long haul aircraft arriving in the fleet. A 5-10% increase in operating costs is often the difference between making money on a route or not !

We know WS wants to lower costs, and this will inevitably make WS realize that going low cost long-haul might not be the best idea in order to achieve this.

My bet is on them scrapping the idea altogether. Low cost long haul has been proven to be very difficult to operate successfully.

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2012-12-09 08:40:45]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 41, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 6090 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 14):
WN will go international. Just with 737s.



Tend to agree. And if they are looking at Canada as an initial "international" market, I'd bet YHM would be the place they go. It's reasonably close to Toronto with nowhere near the fees that YYZ charges. Heck, WN could even arrange a "WN Express" bus to Toronto downtown to make it painless (slight extra charge). Not sure immigration facilities at YHM, but I'm sure that can be arranged.

Then maybe YHU, not crowded, close to centre-ville, and again cheaper than YUL.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineYXD172 From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 449 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 6024 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 41):
Heck, WN could even arrange a "WN Express" bus to Toronto downtown to make it painless (slight extra charge). Not sure immigration facilities at YHM, but I'm sure that can be arranged.

It'd be an interesting idea, the facilities are already there (there are a few weeklies to the Caribbean right now) and I'm sure the YHM airport authority would be happy to get any more service, seeing as how they're down to two WS flights a day (plus ~6 international flights weekly over the winter, or another 4 daily WS summer flights).

That said, I'm not sure how low the fees are at YHM compared to YYZ (WS is usually ~$20 cheaper at YHM, but that doesn't always correlate directly with fees).

Either way, it could get interesting if we see WN and WS revisit the tie-up that they were thinking of a while back!



Radial engines don't leak oil, they are just marking their territory!
User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16280 posts, RR: 56
Reply 43, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 6022 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 37):
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 36):
They have simply grown and added a FFP and Y+ cabin and offer good service (as good as AC).

Frequency is also part of service. In most cases WS doesn't match AC frequency in major competitive markets, and frequency is a very strong factor in carrier choice, especially by business travellers who generate the highest yields.

I agree. The Q400 fleet will enable them to increase freq's on key business routes.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 39):
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 36):
The key to WS will always be lower costs, whether they add 788 and TA/TP routes or not.

What cost advantage ! WS's cost advantage over AC is down to only 10, 15%.

I know. I read that also. I wonder if that comment was aimed at the WS workforce that cost reduction will continue to rule at WS.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 40):
WS's cost structure is increasing (read post above), and it will only get worse with the Dash 8-400s and long haul aircraft arriving in the fleet.

But the Q400's will bring in extra revenue, and WS is betting that the incremental revenue will exceed the incremental cost.

Getting back to a WS widebody, WS could like order 5 788's just for operation on existing routes (eg, YYZ-YYC/YVR, YVR-HNL/GOG, YYC-HNL, and a few sun routes) given their high load factors with their NG fleet. So an initial widebody order does not necessarily indicate a move into TA/TP routes right away.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineBE77 From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5958 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 40):
Doubling the international passenger numbers at YYC

Being an airline pax based out of YYC, there are a few limitations in the WS offerings right now that a widebody would help fix (although a 737MAX would help in some cases).
Hawai'i is a very real problem! (Well, it's not Hawai'i fault, but WS can't get there from YEG and YYC direct without the 757 lease which is a real downgrade in the onboard product (as much as I love the 757, even the non-XM AC 767 is a better on board product for a 6 hour flight).
Direct to anywhere in the Caribbean is another area (other than CUN and Cuba) - although the MAX probably will make more sense in most cases.
At peak times they could fill YYC-YYZ flights easily enough without having to sacrifice fares.
And of coourse, YYZ to Europe or Asia is not an option for them without a wb - and that market just keeps growing with the oil sands increasing (such as the NEXXEN deal this weekend).

One thing about YYC is that there is a lot more premium market per capita than any other city in Canada (try to get an upgrade on AC on anything other than the red-eye flights). The premium pax are not just for the biz class either, but willing to pay a bit more for direct flights.
Of course, while a wb fleet for WS would probably start out in YYC, if (when?) they went international there is the entire YVR to Asia, Australia, and NZ markets. AC is sure keeping prices up there whenever I look at YVR-SYD flights, and there are no deal on NZ either. YYZ and YUL to Europe is more competitive, but there is probably room for them there as well, even if only to give AC bashers a home team option.



Tower, Affirmitive, gear is down and welded
User currently offlineBE77 From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 45, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5877 times:

As for a wb type.
If they do go for wb, it would almost have to be a 787 or 350....choosing the 767 or 330 for anything more than temp lift while the 'real' order was being built would not work so well in the duopoly AC vs WS world. Basically, neither of them can afford to fall too far behind in their offerings - they can be different, but they can't be inferior / old / etc.

So with AC getting 787's, WS just can't be seen buying 'old' last generation technology, with all the comfort and environmental differences that would go with it - AC would just have a free pass on all the marketing (cabin pressure and comfort, greenhouse gases / CO2 / efficiency per seat, etc., etc.).

While for sure not the only reason for the choice, a similar argument was there for the when the Q's were picked over the ATR - with AC already adding the Q's to their fleet you really don't want to have the slower option (even if the gate to gate time was only a few minutes different) when you are competing over distances in Canada!



Tower, Affirmitive, gear is down and welded
User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 2058 posts, RR: 1
Reply 46, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 5766 times:

If Westjet is really serious, I think they would go for some second hand 763s first. New A350s, A330s, 777s, or 787s is just too much money to risk.


Go coogs! \n//
User currently offlinecyeg66 From Canada, joined Feb 2011, 202 posts, RR: 1
Reply 47, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 5608 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 40):
Doubling the international passenger numbers at YYC from 1 million and change to 3 million is not a small feat (transborder pax not included)!

Amazing the number of passengers 3 or 4 based 788-sized aircraft would bring in. Not all that difficult, really. Besides, by my "ok" math skills, 1.3 x 2 = 2.6. Nit-picky, but a bit of a difference. Additionally, Calgary will have long since outgrown Ottawa as Canada's 4th largest city in the next 10 years by probably adding about another 300k citizens in that time. Organically, that means more people will be flying then. Unless another loopy Liberal takes the helm   , the 'real' per capita money will also (still) be there.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 40):
Especially in 10 years time. Heck i got 10 years in the company and I'm sure it seems like yesterday when we were both sitting on YQB TCU.


Except the difference is, you probably were sitting there just the other day. Lol. And yes, time flies.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 40):
WS will not get any new long-haul aircraft before 2016, 2017 at the earliest. That's already 4-5 years away. Doesn't leave much time to double intl pax numbers in just 5 years.

I sorta predicated my assumptions on them getting long haul as early as those dates you mention but in all likelihood, it would be even longer than that so doubling numbers would likely take a few years longer.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 40):
Exactly ! If there was money to be made, AC would be on it. We saw this as well with AC trying to establish their LCC on trans-pac routes out of YVR, only to realize that the market might not be there, due to the rise of non-stop flights from YYZ (where the money is in the first place !)

AC isn't currently in the business of making profits, though. They're close but rarely hitting the mark. Perhaps operating out of one of the world's most expensive airports (with YUL not being terribly cheap, either) hurts their bottom line. Dunno. Thank God bankruptcies help to sort some of those pesky high operating cost issues out. Westjet will never (at least for the foreseeable future) have to resort to such practices because they like to operate in the black. Their top dogs make decisions that see to it, as opposed to AC's upper management famously sacrificing body parts to put a few bucks in the shareholders' pockets. Bravo. As yyz717 alluded to, sure WS's costs can only go up but they're banking on making their revenue stream increase incrementally by that same and even greater amount. This isn't the US with their much larger market. Here, you change or you fail (die is such a harsh term).

Keep up those differing strategies, boys. See what the future holds. Should be interesting in any event. What's funny is that nothing, absolutely nothing is definitive as far as WS and long-haul flying is concerned. I'll bet YYC airport authority are privy to a few of their ideas, though.



slow to 160, contact tower, slow to 160, contact tower, slow to....ZZZZZZZ......
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2493 posts, RR: 11
Reply 48, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5424 times:

Quoting cyeg66 (Reply 47):
Additionally, Calgary will have long since outgrown Ottawa as Canada's 4th largest city in the next 10 years by probably adding about another 300k citizens in that time. Organically, that means more people will be flying then.

Yes, most of them will be flying, but you and me both know that most of the flying will be domestic.

Quoting cyeg66 (Reply 47):
They're close but rarely hitting the mark. Perhaps operating out of one of the world's most expensive airports (with YUL not being terribly cheap, either) hurts their bottom line.
YYC is going to need to fund their new 14,000 footer and the new terminal somehow....so you can count on fees going up in cowtown as well. Airport improvement fees already got bumped up to 30$ per passenger as of March 1, 2013.

Quoting cyeg66 (Reply 47):
I'll bet YYC airport authority are privy to a few of their ideas, though.

Of course. They have adopted the "build it and they will come" mentality. Let's see if its going to work.

Personally, i wouldn't hold my breath.

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2012-12-09 20:17:51]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 49, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 5275 times:

Quoting cyeg66 (Reply 47):
AC isn't currently in the business of making profits, though. They're close but rarely hitting the mark.

$429M to the good last quarter, just to point out. Even Mr Saretsky has recently conceded that WS's cost advantage over AC has largely evaporated.

Most of AC's financial woes derive from three sources:
- defined benefit pension plan;
- lingering effects of merger (a stupid move IMHO since CP was close to collapse anyway);
- ACCPA (which was out of their hands as a point of law)



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2493 posts, RR: 11
Reply 50, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5154 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 49):
Most of AC's financial woes derive from three sources:
- defined benefit pension plan;
- lingering effects of merger (a stupid move IMHO since CP was close to collapse anyway);
- ACCPA (which was out of their hands as a point of law)

Add to that list.......
- Useless management...

.
.
.
.

"Lingering effects of merger"....lol....caused by what.......useless management.....

Thenoflyzone



us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineBE77 From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5119 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 48):
Yes, most of them will be flying, but you and me both know that most of the flying will be domestic.

Most is probably right, but, that 'most' is likely noticeably less than the numbers indicate.
As it stands, there is not a lot of incentive for AC to offer direct international when they have YVR as the gateway, and have YYZto get you to Europe (and YUL counts if you need to go to Africa via CDG).

Of my 17 trips this year from YYC, 11 have been YYC-YYZ, of which exactly 1 did not continue internationally. If I could fly direct, or a more direct route, I would be all over it. Since I usually overnight in YYZ, it probably all counted as domestic, even though it wasn't.

Between the raw population growth, the average earnings in the city, and the international nature of the primary industry, I think that YYC will continue to expand in both volumes and destinations internationally...not as fast as the city and airport authority might hope, but at a still considerable rate. I certainly hope so - more options make my life easier!



Tower, Affirmitive, gear is down and welded
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 52, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4982 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 50):
Add to that list.......
- Useless management...

I think it's common knowledge that the recent management of AC has not exhibited the leadership required under trying circumstances.

As a manager myself the last several years of my career one of the things I tried to stress to all staff (18 nominally) was that "We are all in this together; we win as a team, we lose as a team". I wasn't just a bean counter, I was involved in the technical work up to my hips. When I retired, my employer named me as a recipient of a distinguished service award for delivering a commercial contract on-time, on-budget (try that, LockMart), but I told the powers that be that I wouldn't accept it unless everyone got some kind of recognition, which they did at our recent Awards Banquet.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 50):
"Lingering effects of merger"....lol....caused by what.......useless management.....

The merger was driven by the fear that someone else (Canada 3000 ???) would swoop in and grab all the Asia/Pacific route authority, more than anything. If AC had waited 3-4 more months, CP would surely have collapsed. AC could then make the argument that ONLY they could safely operate the Asia/Pacific long-haul, and all the union issues would never have arisen, as the former CP employees would have gone to the back of the line. Believe me, grievances over the merger are still being argued. It was an epic dumb move.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4990 posts, RR: 42
Reply 53, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4808 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 52):
The merger was driven by the fear that someone else (Canada 3000 ???) would swoop in and grab all the Asia/Pacific route authority, more than anything. If AC had waited 3-4 more months, CP would surely have collapsed.

CP possibly could have collapsed. Or maybe for political reasons the government would have allowed the proposal from AMR Corp, to increase investment to 49%, then ONEX would have jumped in as that was a requirement of theirs as well. Then AC would have had to do something they haven't had to since their inception ... that is compete with a financially stable carrier on equal terms!

But, if CP did collapse, the Minister of Transport at the time, M. Collinette, stated that AC would NOT get CP's international routes. He stated that he sees many capable airlines, Air Transat, Canada 3000, Skyservice, Royal, etc. ... all who would have an equal chance at applying for routes. He also stated that it would likely be divided equally among them as the task of absorbing the routes would be daunting.

Then there was the issue of the NRT slots. At the time, considered the most valuable slots on the earth. The Japanese government stated that the only way the slots would NOT revert back to the Japanese government was a complete merger, as they would not allow a slot sale. In fact they watched the whole merger process closely just to make sure it was not a "slot sale".

M. Collinette also stated that CP's LHR slots would likely go to one airline only, to be more competitive. I am sure this scared the hell of of AC, as LHR was and is a huge profit area.

Simply, AC couldn't risk it. With the merger CP, brought in less than $1B of debt ... a pretty good deal for AC.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 52):
all the union issues would never have arisen

Its a long story and worthy of its own thread, but a lot of those issues arose from the ineffective management stated above. AC, pitted each group against each other in hopes of getting a better deal, not realizing the loss of goodwill and poisoned atmosphere could last a decade.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlinecyeg66 From Canada, joined Feb 2011, 202 posts, RR: 1
Reply 54, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4703 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 48):

Yes, most of them will be flying, but you and me both know that most of the flying will be domestic.

As though that makes it less prestigious... No one will argue that YYC is currently a predominantly domestic airport, what with WS being a mostly domestic airline, but what happens when you reach a "critical mass" of passengers transiting thru the airport? It opens possibilities. Check BE77's comments. The amount of domestic pax will probably increase another one million or so over the next 2 years.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 48):
YYC is going to need to fund their new 14,000 footer and the new terminal somehow....so you can count on fees going up in cowtown as well. Airport improvement fees already got bumped up to 30$ per passenger as of March 1, 2013.

As the base for WS mainline and soon to be Encore, they've a very big interest in keeping fees very competitive. They can already bank on more ca$h from the aforementioned Encore flights being added to the docket. They're making plans for a large increase in other revenues through shops and restaurants in the IFP and later-to-be-remodeled B,C piers. I can't see it being anywhere near as expensive to operate from as YYZ, for example. The tax environment is a little more favourable, as well.
As for the "14,000 footer", I know you won't argue that it's been needed for a while now. They scrapped plans 17 years ago to build it when CRDA came in. Now, it's strictly necessary to accommodate the greater peaks that will become more commonplace over the coming years. Plus, have I ever mentioned how many days a year the weather in YYC is garbage and results in significantly reduced arrival rates? Far too common. It's winter 9 months a year, for cryin' out loud.   I'd love to see YUL operate 28/24R for a few years and see how they manage.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 48):
Of course. They have adopted the "build it and they will come" mentality. Let's see if its going to work.

Personally, i wouldn't hold my breath.

Many folks wearing more expensive suits than either you or I own have met many times to come up with this plan. It's not unilateral by any stretch. Why the skepticism? You expect it to be deserted when it opens? It'll have lots of capacity, no doubt, but AFAIK the airlines won't complain. Besides, the airport has long been overdue for a makeover. The drab concrete and limited ambient lighting is underwhelming, to say the least.

Quoting BE77 (Reply 51):

Of my 17 trips this year from YYC, 11 have been YYC-YYZ, of which exactly 1 did not continue internationally. If I could fly direct, or a more direct route, I would be all over it.
.
.
Between the raw population growth, the average earnings in the city, and the international nature of the primary industry, I think that YYC will continue to expand in both volumes and destinations internationally..

   and   



slow to 160, contact tower, slow to 160, contact tower, slow to....ZZZZZZZ......
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5472 posts, RR: 30
Reply 55, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4605 times:

Quoting cyeg66 (Reply 54):
As the base for WS mainline and soon to be Encore, they've a very big interest in keeping fees very competitive.

WS has said they are pretty much maxed out domestically. They said one of the reasons they got the Q's was to free up some 737's to expand their network into the States.

That alone will increase the international presence in Calgary while domestic numbers will start to level off.



What the...?
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2493 posts, RR: 11
Reply 56, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4462 times:

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 55):
WS has said they are pretty much maxed out domestically. They said one of the reasons they got the Q's was to free up some 737's to expand their network into the States.
WS has been getting steady deliveries of 737s for years now. If demand warranted for a new US route out of YYC, nothing is stopping them from operating it. Heck, they can put their recently delivered 100th 737 on it...

Let's face it, the main reason they are getting the Q's is to open up flights into secondary Canadian cities, ones which cannot necessarily justify a 737 service, in order to offer even more DOMESTIC flights to the likes of YYZ, YYC, YVR etc.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 55):
That alone will increase the international presence in Calgary while domestic numbers will start to level off.

That will increase the transborder presence, not international.

In fact, having a look at passenger growth figures for YYC so far in 2012, the only thing that is "leveling off" IS international (less than 1 % increase so far this year). Transborder has the healthiest percentage increase (8%) and domestic increase remains strong (5%).

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2012-12-10 17:42:29]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25338 posts, RR: 22
Reply 57, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4416 times:

Quoting BE77 (Reply 51):
Of my 17 trips this year from YYC, 11 have been YYC-YYZ, of which exactly 1 did not continue internationally. If I could fly direct, or a more direct route, I would be all over it. Since I usually overnight in YYZ, it probably all counted as domestic, even though it wasn't.

Were you continuing to Europe? If so, wouldn't AC's nonstops to LHR and FRA, KL's nonstops to AMS and BA's nonstops to LHR, be more convenient than connecting via YYZ? Or were you going somewhere where it made sense to connect in YYZ, like South America?


User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2493 posts, RR: 11
Reply 58, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4408 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 57):
Were you continuing to Europe? If so, wouldn't AC's nonstops to LHR and FRA, KL's nonstops to AMS and BA's nonstops to LHR, be more convenient than connecting via YYZ? Or were you going somewhere where it made sense to connect in YYZ, like South America?


Exactly what i was thinking. YYC is extremely well connected internationally for a city of 1 million. Now that they have NRT as well, just can't see where else a non-stop is warranted.

Thenoflyzone



us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5472 posts, RR: 30
Reply 59, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4244 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 56):

That will increase the transborder presence, not international.
Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 56):
Let's face it, the main reason they are getting the Q's is to open up flights into secondary Canadian cities,


All of their 737's are already working. They don't have any free planes to open new routes without sacrificing current routes.

I'm just going by what Westjet has stated. The Q's will take over some current 737 routes which will be better served with the turboprops. That frees up 737's to open new routes into the States, and presumably Mexico and the Caribbean as well. They will also be opening new Canadian routes but that's not the only reason they stated.

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 56):
That will increase the transborder presence, not international.

Isn't travel to the US technically international?

[Edited 2012-12-10 21:50:22]


What the...?
User currently offlineabrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 5100 posts, RR: 55
Reply 60, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4201 times:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 29):
Look at Southwest Airlines, the airline after which WS (and most LCCs) was modeled. They are still basically holding onto their roots, and they are still one of the most consistently profitable airlines on the earth with an enviable passenger satisfaction rate. While rumours run rampant, still after 50 years, Southwest still had one aircraft type, (I don't see the B717s lingering long), still no regional carrier and still no aspirations of wide body aircraft.

= WN operates in a richer, larger, and relatively dense region of the U.S. It would take a lot more before WN reaches saturation. Finally, look at WN's growth in the last few years ... it has stalled. Profits are barely there. I will go on the record that if something drastic does not happen, WN will be challenged to maintain profitability.

Saludos,
A.



Live, and let live.
User currently offlineYYZatcboy From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1083 posts, RR: 0
Reply 61, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4122 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

WN also had 727's, so they have operated two aircraft types.

http://www.airliners.net/photo/South...rlines/Boeing-727-227-Adv/0084477/



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 offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 62, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 4069 times:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 53):
Simply, AC couldn't risk it. With the merger CP, brought in less than $1B of debt ... a pretty good deal for AC.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 52):
all the union issues would never have arisen

Its a long story and worthy of its own thread, but a lot of those issues arose from the ineffective management stated above. AC, pitted each group against each other in hopes of getting a better deal, not realizing the loss of goodwill and poisoned atmosphere could last a decade.

Agreed, and if any one wants to join in on a new thread, I'm for it.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineYVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2469 posts, RR: 0
Reply 63, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3754 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 62):
Agreed, and if any one wants to join in on a new thread, I'm for it.

No need, just look in archive, in 4 outta 5 threads concerning AC it usually creeps in somewhere  



Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
User currently offlineBE77 From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 64, posted (1 year 9 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3526 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 57):
Were you continuing to Europe? If so, wouldn't AC's nonstops to LHR and FRA, KL's nonstops to AMS and BA's nonstops to LHR, be more convenient than connecting via YYZ? Or were you going somewhere where it made sense to connect in YYZ, like South America?
Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 58):
just can't see where else a non-stop is warranted.



Typically the YYZ stopovers take me to Africa or South America.
About 1/2 of Africa (French speaking) is much easier to get to through CDG, which I find easier to connect through YUL or YYZ than LHR, and with no competition the KL flight's are usually more than double the cost of connecting through YUL or YYZ on AC (and you still have to connect!).
Getting to the central/southern Caribbean and northern South America from western Canada is generally a two day or overnight event - you can 'almost' make it through Houston, but the best connections would be Miami and you still can't get there early enough to catch most of the onward flights.
(Of course, WS could already serve MIA direct from YYC if the math worked for them, and they don't so there is a story there - an early morning departure would save me several travel days per year though, so I keep hoping!).

My real wish is that WS does decide to go more international, and adds flights from YYC. If the whole point to point model works, then the extra flights would work, and with a bit more competitive pressure AC would likely add more direct flights as well (as was the case when they put the non-XM 767's onto Hawaii in the winter - there was a definite competitive back and forth there with the direct flights being the selling feature).
As I see it, AC could put more international flights out of YYC right now, but it would be counterproductive for them to do so - they are going to get the traffic anyway, and by hubbing through YYZ or YVR they can add / supplement capacity and frequencies from those locations, which in turn makes it more attractive to those larger markets, etc. When / if WS adds direct international flights from YYC (and AC responds for competitive reasons) then we'll all get a much better idea of what the 'real' international traffic could be - and I think it's higher than the current thinking.



Tower, Affirmitive, gear is down and welded
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...
LH Wide Body Order Coming posted Wed Jan 30 2008 12:46:27 by Carls
SAA To Place Wide-body Order? posted Wed Dec 20 2006 13:52:06 by Flying-Tiger
Delta Goes Wide-body On JFK-LAX Again posted Mon Nov 5 2012 08:35:46 by g500
The Shortest Wide Body Route Starts Again! posted Tue Oct 16 2012 08:23:02 by justinlee
UA Narrow Body Order...When? posted Wed Mar 28 2012 02:59:39 by ual777uk
Why No Continental Wide Body On LAX-HNL posted Wed Nov 16 2011 02:29:09 by DID747
Why No Wide Body For Short Haul? posted Fri Aug 27 2010 14:11:17 by eugegall
Wide Body-rich Airports posted Fri Mar 26 2010 15:30:16 by embrider
Did DCA Ever Have Wide Body Service? posted Mon Nov 30 2009 13:59:00 by 747400sp
Iberia Wide Body Fleet Renewals - 787/350XWB posted Wed Aug 26 2009 03:21:21 by Corernagh14