SpaceshipDC10
Topic Author
Posts: 4708
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:23 pm

The analysis has been published by CBC and I wonder which of Jetstoo, Jetlines or WestJet will be first off the ground. At least I've learned that NewLeaf is no longer around, don't know I managed to miss that though.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/what-s- ... -1.4234226
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 577
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Mon Aug 07, 2017 3:56 am

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:
The analysis has been published by CBC and I wonder which of Jetstoo, Jetlines or WestJet will be first off the ground. At least I've learned that NewLeaf is no longer around, don't know I managed to miss that though.

NewLeaf was purchased by Flair. I'm sure you know that Flair was the company doing all the flying for NewLeaf. You can see the rebranding effort on the newleaf website. So, Flair is still trying to make a go of it. They are still operating scheduled service. At least now, the name on the ticket matches the name on the aircraft, even if the URL is still newleaf. :roll:

JetsToo??? I thought that the name was going to be FlyToo. Either way, I guess Enerjet decided that Jet Naked was too risqué. If a geeky Canadian folk-rock band could put naked in their name in 1988, you'd think it would be okay for a ULCC now.

https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... -to-flytoo
 
SpaceshipDC10
Topic Author
Posts: 4708
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:54 pm

aerolimani wrote:
NewLeaf was purchased by Flair. I'm sure you know that Flair was the company doing all the flying for NewLeaf.


It only got to me now that Flair purchased NewLeaf, however I knew they were flying FOR them until recently.

aerolimani wrote:
JetsToo??? I thought that the name was going to be FlyToo. Either way, I guess Enerjet decided that Jet Naked was too risqué. If a geeky Canadian folk-rock band could put naked in their name in 1988, you'd think it would be okay for a ULCC now


Yes, Jetstoo as reported by CBC, but to me it sounds a lot like Jetgo... :roll: As for the name, Jet Naked could have been too risqué if they want to attract families.
 
Skywatcher
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2002 11:19 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:46 pm

In my opinion they are all dumb names. There is a reason they can't find investors. I wouldn't invest in any of them except maybe WestJet can pull it off.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:12 am

Skywatcher wrote:
In my opinion they are all dumb names. There is a reason they can't find investors. I wouldn't invest in any of them except maybe WestJet can pull it off.


WestJet don't need any investors to launch a separate brand.
 
sanjet
Posts: 179
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:58 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:06 am

Jetsgo, canjet, zoom airlines.... remember those!? Canada is a small market with challenging climate and tax situation with a large territory to traverse. Will never work, past experience has shown.
Will Fly For Food!
 
SpaceshipDC10
Topic Author
Posts: 4708
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:31 pm

sanjet wrote:
Jetsgo, canjet, zoom airlines.... remember those!? Canada is a small market with challenging climate and tax situation with a large territory to traverse. Will never work, past experience has shown.


Well one has worked but at the cost of basically another airline.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Crew
Posts: 1752
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:53 pm

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:
As for the name, Jet Naked could have been too risqué if they want to attract families.

They'd also risk attracting Spirit customers like this guy!

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/f ... 524601001/
Forum Moderator
 
airman99o
Posts: 878
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 1999 4:15 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:22 pm

I've been in the industry for 16 + years now. Have people not learned? I can count on how many were either gobbled up or went bust in my times.
Royal, Canjet ( all attempts ), Canada 3000, Harmony, Zoom, Jetsgo, Roots Air, Greyhound, Canair, VistaJet, Skyservice, Just to name a few. I truly wish them luck but even with foreign ownership and investment. With Air Canada and WestJet chomping at their bits, and the other entrants into the ULCC, its going to be a blood bath, If they manage to even get off the ground in the first place.
Safety is Everyones Responsibility.
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1150
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Tue Aug 08, 2017 3:48 pm

airman99o wrote:
I've been in the industry for 16 + years now. Have people not learned? I can count on how many were either gobbled up or went bust in my times.
Royal, Canjet ( all attempts ), Canada 3000, Harmony, Zoom, Jetsgo, Roots Air, Greyhound, Canair, VistaJet, Skyservice, Just to name a few. I truly wish them luck but even with foreign ownership and investment. With Air Canada and WestJet chomping at their bits, and the other entrants into the ULCC, its going to be a blood bath, If they manage to even get off the ground in the first place.


Don't think you can really lump all those carriers into the reasons for failure in a thread about ULCC start ups. All these airlines were very different in the business plans......
 
airman99o
Posts: 878
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 1999 4:15 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:46 pm

Very true, but it just goes to show its one hell of a battle. now with 4 ulcc's attempting to start thats a bit of over crowding on these underserved airports and routings. Will be a great time for travelling. Probably going to be cheaper than my travel passes with the airline. and confirmed. :-D
Safety is Everyones Responsibility.
 
jimbo737
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:18 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Tue Aug 08, 2017 5:22 pm

Enerjet has had all the approvals required to start a sched service for years, together with a small operating 737NG fleet, (though the currently have no 737's in the barn), and even they have not been able to attract the capital required.

I've seen the deck currently being circulated by Jetlines and it remains an incoherent mess with little changing since the first version I saw in Nov 2013. They claim they've identified 170 markets they can make work and are still tossing about YKF as their eastern hub, all of which is patently absurd.

The CBC / Canadian media is constantly recirculating the same story about all these upstarts year after year and nothing changes.

The new entrants have had a ministerial exemption to go have 49% foreign ownership for about 9 months and still nothing.

With WJ talking about a ULCC, and at least thus far, talking about doing things the right way when it comes to "airlines within airlines", it will be no easy task for anyone else to raise the $50-$75m of paid in capital required to get a new venture off the ground in Canada.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:50 pm

jimbo737 wrote:
Enerjet has had all the approvals required to start a sched service for years, together with a small operating 737NG fleet, (though the currently have no 737's in the barn), and even they have not been able to attract the capital required.

I've seen the deck currently being circulated by Jetlines and it remains an incoherent mess with little changing since the first version I saw in Nov 2013. They claim they've identified 170 markets they can make work and are still tossing about YKF as their eastern hub, all of which is patently absurd.

The CBC / Canadian media is constantly recirculating the same story about all these upstarts year after year and nothing changes.

The new entrants have had a ministerial exemption to go have 49% foreign ownership for about 9 months and still nothing.

With WJ talking about a ULCC, and at least thus far, talking about doing things the right way when it comes to "airlines within airlines", it will be no easy task for anyone else to raise the $50-$75m of paid in capital required to get a new venture off the ground in Canada.


According to wiki, Enerjet have a Twin Otter with zero 737s? Weird.
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 1213
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:35 pm

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Air Transat in this debate. They might not fit the model of a ULCC at the moment, but they aren't that far off and could pivot pretty quickly.

Europe is seeing charter companies rebrand as LCC scheduled so maybe Transat could be working quietly away on this?
 
YYZLGA
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:28 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:38 pm

The problem with all these start-up LCCs in the past has been that they're ridiculously under-capitalized. They don't have the capital to withstand heavy competition from Air Canada and Westjet as they start up. There's a reason that JetBlue has been the most successful LCC startup in the states, while many others have folded (the reincarnations of Eastern Airlines/PanAm, Hooters Air, Vision Airlines, etc.). JetBlue had the financial backing to get on its feet at the start. To a certain extent, Porter had the same, which is why it's still around. If a Canadian ULCC is going to be successful, it's going to need to start up with a decent schedule and network and with enough financial backing to last more than a couple months of tough competition. It will also need agreements with airports for reduced AIFs. If that happens, I can certainly see there being a market for Toronto-Vancouver flights that cost less than $500 r/t in economy.
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Wed Aug 09, 2017 4:15 pm

The question I have is whether Canada's population is large enough to support Air Canada, Westjet, and potentially several ULCCs? Canada is a vast country geographically, but her population isn't quite that vast. Perhaps some Canadian A-Netters could chime in and give their views on this?
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 2805
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Wed Aug 09, 2017 4:26 pm

YYZLGA wrote:
If that happens, I can certainly see there being a market for Toronto-Vancouver flights that cost less than $500 r/t in economy.


How far under $500 do you expect them to be, and will that be enough of a differential to get enough people to drop AC and WestJet?

NYC-LAX is a little longer but high volume (like YYZ-YVR) and very competitive with UA, AA, DL, B6 and AS/VX offering nonstops with some frequency, plus a ton of connecting options. Take lowest fares, convert to CDN$, add HST ... and one sees CDN$500 fares on NYC-LAX r/t.
 
User avatar
yowza
Posts: 4339
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:01 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Wed Aug 09, 2017 4:39 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
YYZLGA wrote:
If that happens, I can certainly see there being a market for Toronto-Vancouver flights that cost less than $500 r/t in economy.


How far under $500 do you expect them to be, and will that be enough of a differential to get enough people to drop AC and WestJet?

NYC-LAX is a little longer but high volume (like YYZ-YVR) and very competitive with UA, AA, DL, B6 and AS/VX offering nonstops with some frequency, plus a ton of connecting options. Take lowest fares, convert to CDN$, add HST ... and one sees CDN$500 fares on NYC-LAX r/t.

I did a spot check and while you do see C$500 inventory there is plenty available at C$410 and up. And that is at 1.27 CAD:USD. I would imagine that similar values could surface up here too.

YOWza
 
Dominion301
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:01 am

YYZLGA wrote:
The problem with all these start-up LCCs in the past has been that they're ridiculously under-capitalized. They don't have the capital to withstand heavy competition from Air Canada and Westjet as they start up. There's a reason that JetBlue has been the most successful LCC startup in the states, while many others have folded (the reincarnations of Eastern Airlines/PanAm, Hooters Air, Vision Airlines, etc.). JetBlue had the financial backing to get on its feet at the start. To a certain extent, Porter had the same, which is why it's still around. If a Canadian ULCC is going to be successful, it's going to need to start up with a decent schedule and network and with enough financial backing to last more than a couple months of tough competition. It will also need agreements with airports for reduced AIFs. If that happens, I can certainly see there being a market for Toronto-Vancouver flights that cost less than $500 r/t in economy.


Some have been well capitalized but had terrible business plans. Take CanJet scheduled version II for example. Flying only 737s, regardless of variant/generation, are impossible to fill multiple times daily to/from mostly Atlantic Canada (the most seasonal traffic in all of Canada - YHZ handles more traffic than YOW in July-August but is wayyyyy behind YOW outside of the summer peak) and relying on mostly O&D/very little connecting traffic outside of May-Thanksgiving. Had CanJet bought a fleet of a dozen Q400s to fly the majority of these flights (sound like PD much?) allowing for most 737s to fly south in winter (sound like WS much?), I have no doubts C6 would still be a scheduled carrier today. The problem is when you let clueless family members run the play toy airline part of your empire instead of people who know what they're doing, you have a recipe for failure.
 
jimbo737
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:18 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:07 am

There is zero chance any airport in Canada will offer reduced aif's for any new entrant.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:19 am

jimbo737 wrote:
There is zero chance any airport in Canada will offer reduced aif's for any new entrant.


True. The poster was probably trying to refer to reduced landing and terminal fees, plus marketing dollars. Those are the kinds of things plus a savvy marketing team, any successful airport authority would already be doing to attract more traffic.

Just look at traffic stats from the past few years and look at/align it with corresponding marketing/incentives and you'll quickly see which airports are good at attracting additional services and which aren't.
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1150
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:06 am

jimbo737 wrote:
There is zero chance any airport in Canada will offer reduced aif's for any new entrant.


YXX has already ended their AIF.....
 
jimbo737
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:18 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:30 am

They've ended it for ALL passengers.

The post suggested airports would offer reduced AIF's for a new entrant, resulting in passengers on the incumbent airlines subsidizing those of the new entrant.

Not going to happen.

Airports sometimes provide temporary reduced fees / marketing dollars on new routes. It doesn't make a lot of sense on a number of levels to throw dollars at a new airline operating flights to the same n/s markets as the incumbents.

I'd love to see Jetlines list of 170 non-stop routes they refer to on page 8 of their current deck they've identified both domestically and otherwise that are apparently underserved, and operate them whilst "avoiding (sic) the hubs of major carriers".

Is it any wonder they've struggled mightily to raise capital since the jetLines concept was first floated in late 3Q 2013?
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1150
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:44 am

jimbo737 wrote:
They've ended it for ALL passengers.

The post suggested airports would offer reduced AIF's for a new entrant, resulting in passengers on the incumbent airlines subsidizing those of the new entrant.

Not going to happen.

Airports sometimes provide temporary reduced fees / marketing dollars on new routes. It doesn't make a lot of sense on a number of levels to throw dollars at a new airline operating flights to the same n/s markets as the incumbents.

I'd love to see Jetlines list of 170 non-stop routes they refer to on page 8 of their current deck they've identified both domestically and otherwise that are apparently underserved, and operate them whilst "avoiding (sic) the hubs of major carriers".

Is it any wonder they've struggled mightily to raise capital since the jetLines concept was first floated in late 3Q 2013?


It was eliminated as of June 1st....
 
YYZLGA
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:28 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:39 pm

jimbo737 wrote:
There is zero chance any airport in Canada will offer reduced aif's for any new entrant.


I'm not talking about YYZ but rather airports like YHM, which have little to lose. They might well consider it in exchange for the airline covering renovation of the terminal or a new terminal building. At many European ULCC airports, the carrier builds and runs its own very spartan terminal, which would be an even better model. Flying a ULCC out of a Taj Mahal terminal like YYZ makes no sense. Regardless, if they don't consider it, a ULCC is not likely to be viable given current airport fees.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:41 pm

YYZLGA wrote:
jimbo737 wrote:
There is zero chance any airport in Canada will offer reduced aif's for any new entrant.


I'm not talking about YYZ but rather airports like YHM, which have little to lose. They might well consider it in exchange for the airline covering renovation of the terminal or a new terminal building. At many European ULCC airports, the carrier builds and runs its own very spartan terminal, which would be an even better model. Flying a ULCC out of a Taj Mahal terminal like YYZ makes no sense. Regardless, if they don't consider it, a ULCC is not likely to be viable given current airport fees.


Yeah it'd be interesting to see whether any airport in Canada would be willing to build an ULCC terminal, like some European/Asian airports have. Lower costs in a spartan, single level, jet bridge-free terminal where the only retail is a Timmies and a magazine shop and you need to rent a baggage cart if you want to use one.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 577
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Thu Aug 10, 2017 11:54 pm

Dominion301 wrote:
YYZLGA wrote:
jimbo737 wrote:
There is zero chance any airport in Canada will offer reduced aif's for any new entrant.


I'm not talking about YYZ but rather airports like YHM, which have little to lose. They might well consider it in exchange for the airline covering renovation of the terminal or a new terminal building. At many European ULCC airports, the carrier builds and runs its own very spartan terminal, which would be an even better model. Flying a ULCC out of a Taj Mahal terminal like YYZ makes no sense. Regardless, if they don't consider it, a ULCC is not likely to be viable given current airport fees.


Yeah it'd be interesting to see whether any airport in Canada would be willing to build an ULCC terminal, like some European/Asian airports have. Lower costs in a spartan, single level, jet bridge-free terminal where the only retail is a Timmies and a magazine shop and you need to rent a baggage cart if you want to use one.

At one point in the history of WS at YXX, they had a very basic building. It was a large-ish quonset with big, exposed metal hallide light fixtures. It felt a bit like a chicken barn.
 
YYZLGA
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:28 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:24 am

Dominion301 wrote:
Yeah it'd be interesting to see whether any airport in Canada would be willing to build an ULCC terminal, like some European/Asian airports have. Lower costs in a spartan, single level, jet bridge-free terminal where the only retail is a Timmies and a magazine shop and you need to rent a baggage cart if you want to use one.


It might make a lot of sense for YYZ, which has a very high cost terminal building that's reaching capacity, with expansion expected to cost a ten-figure sum. An alternative expansion would be a cheap, warehouse-like separate terminal for ULCC entrants. It might also attract carriers like Sunwing or even TS, probably along with some of the international LCCs like WOW. It would certainly cost a lot less than Pier G and might postpone the need for it. It seems like it could be a win for everybody: LCCs get reduced fees in a terminal that meets their needs, while AC and WS get more gates without needing to pay for a billion-dollar expansion.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:40 am

YYZLGA wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
Yeah it'd be interesting to see whether any airport in Canada would be willing to build an ULCC terminal, like some European/Asian airports have. Lower costs in a spartan, single level, jet bridge-free terminal where the only retail is a Timmies and a magazine shop and you need to rent a baggage cart if you want to use one.


It might make a lot of sense for YYZ, which has a very high cost terminal building that's reaching capacity, with expansion expected to cost a ten-figure sum. An alternative expansion would be a cheap, warehouse-like separate terminal for ULCC entrants. It might also attract carriers like Sunwing or even TS, probably along with some of the international LCCs like WOW. It would certainly cost a lot less than Pier G and might postpone the need for it. It seems like it could be a win for everybody: LCCs get reduced fees in a terminal that meets their needs, while AC and WS get more gates without needing to pay for a billion-dollar expansion.


WOW might be interested but TS and WG always use jetbridges at any airport they serve that have them. TS and WG aren't exactly LCCs, they're leisure carriers aka tour operators who happen to fly aircraft.
 
SpaceshipDC10
Topic Author
Posts: 4708
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:35 pm

Dominion301 wrote:
TS and WG always use jetbridges at any airport they serve that have them. TS and WG aren't exactly LCCs, they're leisure carriers aka tour operators who happen to fly aircraft.


Although TS is indeed a leisure airline as you describe it, you can still buy cheap or cheaper tickets only. How can they manage that through their lower costs.
They even maintain year-round scheduled service on certain routes.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 529
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:40 pm

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
TS and WG always use jetbridges at any airport they serve that have them. TS and WG aren't exactly LCCs, they're leisure carriers aka tour operators who happen to fly aircraft.


Although TS is indeed a leisure airline as you describe it, you can still buy cheap or cheaper tickets only. How can they manage that through their lower costs.
They even maintain year-round scheduled service on certain routes.


You can buy only tickets only solely on TS' scheduled services...mind you nowadays that's like 85% of what they fly. Any charters involved buying a full package. Obviously for flights going south only a handful of non-package tickets are sold whereas to Europe probably at least 50% are tickets only.

The point is, TS don't operate a business model à la Allegiant, Frontier, Ryanair, Wizz, etc. They operate more like Jet2.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 2805
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:22 pm

YYZLGA wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
Yeah it'd be interesting to see whether any airport in Canada would be willing to build an ULCC terminal, like some European/Asian airports have. Lower costs in a spartan, single level, jet bridge-free terminal where the only retail is a Timmies and a magazine shop and you need to rent a baggage cart if you want to use one.


It might make a lot of sense for YYZ, which has a very high cost terminal building that's reaching capacity, with expansion expected to cost a ten-figure sum. An alternative expansion would be a cheap, warehouse-like separate terminal for ULCC entrants.


In terms of making YYZ low cost, there's still the problem of splitting costs of general airport infrastructure between ULCC and other carriers. How much would a chicken barn really save per enplanement? Is that the kind of facility (stripped down passenger amenities and little revenue from concessions) that GTAA really wants to offer?
 
Steelhead
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 3:04 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:28 pm

The terminal building at YHM is exactly what is being described as the perfect ULCC-terminal. No need to build or change anything!
 
drgmobile
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:06 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 2:48 pm

Dominion301 wrote:
YYZLGA wrote:
jimbo737 wrote:
There is zero chance any airport in Canada will offer reduced aif's for any new entrant.


I'm not talking about YYZ but rather airports like YHM, which have little to lose. They might well consider it in exchange for the airline covering renovation of the terminal or a new terminal building. At many European ULCC airports, the carrier builds and runs its own very spartan terminal, which would be an even better model. Flying a ULCC out of a Taj Mahal terminal like YYZ makes no sense. Regardless, if they don't consider it, a ULCC is not likely to be viable given current airport fees.


Yeah it'd be interesting to see whether any airport in Canada would be willing to build an ULCC terminal, like some European/Asian airports have. Lower costs in a spartan, single level, jet bridge-free terminal where the only retail is a Timmies and a magazine shop and you need to rent a baggage cart if you want to use one.


Each major airport in Canada prepares a master plan that outlines its capital development path for the next 20+ years. They consult on them fairly extensively in the community and with users. These are a pretty good guide to where you'll see development in the coming years. Airports don't generally build terminals for market segments that don't exist yet in their market.
 
jimbo737
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:18 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:25 pm

The original YXX terminal was a converted truck wash building. It was converted into a passenger terminal in under 40 days.

YQQ's terminal was a series of portable buildings strung together.
 
YYZLGA
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:28 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:19 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
In terms of making YYZ low cost, there's still the problem of splitting costs of general airport infrastructure between ULCC and other carriers. How much would a chicken barn really save per enplanement? Is that the kind of facility (stripped down passenger amenities and little revenue from concessions) that GTAA really wants to offer?


THere's no reason why you couldn't have a decent selection of overpriced concessions in a ULCC barn, if that's a concern. I think that kind of facility would actually save quite a bit of money. If it cost ~$150 million, which seems reasonable given the ~$150 million cost of the new LCC terminal at Narita, that's about one tenth of the cost of Pier G for a saving of $1.35 billion. At 4%, that's $54 million a year in interest alone.

drgmobile wrote:
Each major airport in Canada prepares a master plan that outlines its capital development path for the next 20+ years. They consult on them fairly extensively in the community and with users. These are a pretty good guide to where you'll see development in the coming years. Airports don't generally build terminals for market segments that don't exist yet in their market.


Perhaps they should be a little more proactive--most successful businesses are. Regardless, that's no problem for YYZ since they haven't updated their master plan in well over a decade and it's overdue.
 
drgmobile
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:06 am

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:32 pm

YYZLGA wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
In terms of making YYZ low cost, there's still the problem of splitting costs of general airport infrastructure between ULCC and other carriers. How much would a chicken barn really save per enplanement? Is that the kind of facility (stripped down passenger amenities and little revenue from concessions) that GTAA really wants to offer?


THere's no reason why you couldn't have a decent selection of overpriced concessions in a ULCC barn, if that's a concern. I think that kind of facility would actually save quite a bit of money. If it cost ~$150 million, which seems reasonable given the ~$150 million cost of the new LCC terminal at Narita, that's about one tenth of the cost of Pier G for a saving of $1.35 billion. At 4%, that's $54 million a year in interest alone.

drgmobile wrote:
Each major airport in Canada prepares a master plan that outlines its capital development path for the next 20+ years. They consult on them fairly extensively in the community and with users. These are a pretty good guide to where you'll see development in the coming years. Airports don't generally build terminals for market segments that don't exist yet in their market.


Perhaps they should be a little more proactive--most successful businesses are. Regardless, that's no problem for YYZ since they haven't updated their master plan in well over a decade and it's overdue.


When you say "proactive," you mean build a building that isn't needed and for which there are no customers? That may work for a hotel or golf club but I am sure there are many in the aviation sector who would support that strategy.

Master plans are updated once every 10 years, per the lease agreements between airport authorities and the federal government. A quick Google search indicates that the current GTAA Master Plan is from 2008, so not so much "well over a decade" or overdue.
 
izbtmnhd
Posts: 478
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:25 pm

Ah, yes. The classic warehouse/barn model of terminal building. YYZ should hire some engineers from IAD...they're complete experts in this field. :lol:
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 577
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:40 pm

drgmobile wrote:
YYZLGA wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
In terms of making YYZ low cost, there's still the problem of splitting costs of general airport infrastructure between ULCC and other carriers. How much would a chicken barn really save per enplanement? Is that the kind of facility (stripped down passenger amenities and little revenue from concessions) that GTAA really wants to offer?


THere's no reason why you couldn't have a decent selection of overpriced concessions in a ULCC barn, if that's a concern. I think that kind of facility would actually save quite a bit of money. If it cost ~$150 million, which seems reasonable given the ~$150 million cost of the new LCC terminal at Narita, that's about one tenth of the cost of Pier G for a saving of $1.35 billion. At 4%, that's $54 million a year in interest alone.

drgmobile wrote:
Each major airport in Canada prepares a master plan that outlines its capital development path for the next 20+ years. They consult on them fairly extensively in the community and with users. These are a pretty good guide to where you'll see development in the coming years. Airports don't generally build terminals for market segments that don't exist yet in their market.


Perhaps they should be a little more proactive--most successful businesses are. Regardless, that's no problem for YYZ since they haven't updated their master plan in well over a decade and it's overdue.


When you say "proactive," you mean build a building that isn't needed and for which there are no customers? That may work for a hotel or golf club but I am sure there are many in the aviation sector who would support that strategy.

Master plans are updated once every 10 years, per the lease agreements between airport authorities and the federal government. A quick Google search indicates that the current GTAA Master Plan is from 2008, so not so much "well over a decade" or overdue.

Being proactive is not a bad thing. It seem, though, that when airports are proactive, they are criticized for needless/wasteful spending. Take YYC's new international terminal, for example. Granted, it has its issues, but when I hear people criticize it, the finishing comment is often something like "Why do we even need this anyhow? The airport was fine already." There was also MUCH criticism levelled at the city for going forward with building a tunnel underneath 17L-35R while it was being constructed.

However, in the case of a constructing a real terminal for a not-yet-existing ULCC, it would be a stretch too far, IMHO. However, the quonset terminal is a reasonable idea, and doesn't require a lot of pre-planning. From day 1 of construction to opening, you could have a functioning terminal in a matter of a few months. In this instance, I don't think much proactivity is required. Plus, if you built a quonset terminal, and then the ULCC fails, it would not be a lot of money lost. You can always sell a used quonset to a farmer somewhere.

Speaking of quonset terminals, that's what WS has for its Encore operation out of YYC. It's really not glamorous.
 
dirk88
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:12 pm

I'm not familiar with the Canadian market, but looking at a map for possible airports to serve, would a route like Kitchener/Hamilton (Toronto) to Langley (Vancouver) have any chance of success? Also, what about Spirit offering something like Bellingham (just south of the border from Vancouver) to Buffalo/Niagara Falls have any chance to gain a piece of the Toronto-Vancouver pie?
 
AAvgeek744
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:08 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:55 pm

dirk88 wrote:
I'm not familiar with the Canadian market, but looking at a map for possible airports to serve, would a route like Kitchener/Hamilton (Toronto) to Langley (Vancouver) have any chance of success? Also, what about Spirit offering something like Bellingham (just south of the border from Vancouver) to Buffalo/Niagara Falls have any chance to gain a piece of the Toronto-Vancouver pie?


Spirit already flies to NIagara Falls to three cities, FLL, MYR, and MCO. All less than daily. Bellingham seems to be predominately G4 with the exception of the Horizon flights down to PDX and SEA.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 577
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: After years of turbulence, ultra-low-cost carriers could finally take flight in Canada

Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:57 pm

dirk88 wrote:
I'm not familiar with the Canadian market, but looking at a map for possible airports to serve, would a route like Kitchener/Hamilton (Toronto) to Langley (Vancouver) have any chance of success? Also, what about Spirit offering something like Bellingham (just south of the border from Vancouver) to Buffalo/Niagara Falls have any chance to gain a piece of the Toronto-Vancouver pie?

The only airport in Langley, YLY, is not capable of supporting commercial flights. The only capable Canadian airports in the area are YVR and YXX. Abbotsford (YXX) is in use already by Flair (formerly NewLeaf), but it is quite far from the coast. Rather than finding budget-minded Vancouver travellers, it attracts people who live closer to YXX, and who find it easier to drive to than to head to YVR.

Canadians do already use BLI to fly with Allegiant to US destinations. However, for what is essentially domestic travel, I think you'd have a difficult time convincing Canadians to cross the border twice in a journey. It's too inconvenient.

Once upon a time, long before WS existed, Horizon flew BLI-YYC, and was used by Canadians. But, once WS came along, domestic Canadian fares dropped significantly, and Horizon was no longer competitive. Also, in those days, Canadians could cross the border using any gov't issued ID. I took that flight several times with an Alberta Liquor Control Board ID. It was a card which the ALCB issued to people who didn't have driver's licenses, so that you could purchase alcohol or enter a bar.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos