I used to be a pretty vocal critic of Tango, but viewing it in the right retrospective light I realize that it had its role to play, albeit in a limited capacity - and for the most part it played it pretty well.
Tango was officially born as a concept following the death of RootsAir and Milton's plan to build an AC
LCC out of those ashes. As the scheduled airline competition in Canada grew in 2000 as everyone rushed to fill the perceived CP
vacuum, it became obvious that AC
was oversized. However, the Government of Canada had mandated as part of the AC
-CP merger agreement that the airline was NOT PERMITTED TO
REDUCE THE WORKFORCE until 2003. While this was subsequently relaxed following 9/11, at the time that Tango was being contemplated there was an urgent need to rededicate these excess resources to CUT LOSSES. Tango was never intended to be profitable as a standalone entity. It was simply a means for AC
to cut their losses until they were able to restructure on their own terms, something that they finally were able to do when they filed for creditor protection.
What Tango succeeded in doing was creating brand awareness that exceeded even their own expectations. That is why the Tango concept (or paradigm if you prefer
) has lived on in the form of the branding for the ultra-low North American fare types.
BTW, since I'm virtually certain this thread will be forwarded to him soon enough, hi Ben!
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada