Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
tphuang
Posts: 5460
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:18 pm

Dominion301 wrote:
MAH4546 wrote:
Nice to see YYT-FLL, especially after WestJet slashed it's FLL network in the past two years.

Crazy how long a flight that is - about as long as FLL-LAS!


Crazy how YYT “becomes” the 2nd FLL destination for WS in 2018-19.

Why they pulled YHZ/YUL/YOW-FLL is a total head scratcher.

So I guess YYZ-BCN will be on the 763? That accounts for 3/7 pulled YYC-Europe 763 rotations to LGW that will be replaced by the 789. WS could theoretically add another 763 Europe route out of YYZ for summer 2019...they could also add a couple more MAX routes to Europe from Eastern Canada but I’m not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.


presumably there is too much competition on those market and WS is very weak in markets East of Toronto.
 
axiom
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:39 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Wed Oct 31, 2018 1:14 pm

tphuang wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
MAH4546 wrote:
Nice to see YYT-FLL, especially after WestJet slashed it's FLL network in the past two years.

Crazy how long a flight that is - about as long as FLL-LAS!


Crazy how YYT “becomes” the 2nd FLL destination for WS in 2018-19.

Why they pulled YHZ/YUL/YOW-FLL is a total head scratcher.

So I guess YYZ-BCN will be on the 763? That accounts for 3/7 pulled YYC-Europe 763 rotations to LGW that will be replaced by the 789. WS could theoretically add another 763 Europe route out of YYZ for summer 2019...they could also add a couple more MAX routes to Europe from Eastern Canada but I’m not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.


presumably there is too much competition on those market and WS is very weak in markets East of Toronto.


WS also dumped several TPA routes, all of which were in the east.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:12 pm

jimbo737 wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
MAH4546 wrote:
Nice to see YYT-FLL, especially after WestJet slashed it's FLL network in the past two years.

Crazy how long a flight that is - about as long as FLL-LAS!


Crazy how YYT “becomes” the 2nd FLL destination for WS in 2018-19.

Why they pulled YHZ/YUL/YOW-FLL is a total head scratcher.

So I guess YYZ-BCN will be on the 763? That accounts for 3/7 pulled YYC-Europe 763 rotations to LGW that will be replaced by the 789. WS could theoretically add another 763 Europe route out of YYZ for summer 2019...they could also add a couple more MAX routes to Europe from Eastern Canada but I’m not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.


They pulled all those FLL flights because even with their lower fully allocated operating costs and loads in the 90% range, the yields were garbage and didn’t contribute anything to the bottom line.

If others want to chase market share and lose money doing so, WS is letting them fill their boots. Their goal is raise fares when WS is gone. When they return to compensatory levels, WS will likely return.


If loads were north of 90%, sounds like they weren't charging a high enough fare. BTW, where'd you get the 'yields were garbage' evidence from? The US DOT publications?

The thing is, WS is now aspiring to be a global carrier, yet they still can't figure out/don't seem motivated how to be a national carrier first. Save for YHZ, they're a token player east of YYZ, where even PD sometimes outranks them.
 
winginit
Posts: 3049
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:03 pm

klm617 wrote:
Doesn't surprise me at all Delta wants the customer mind set to be that ATL is your only option for connections within their network. So if you are flying Delta or one of their JV carriers you should be programmed to think that going through Atlanta is your only way to get from point A to B even when their might be more convenient better options within their network.


Delta and Westjet do not yet have a JV, and thus they are legally forbidden from discussing any pricing or network related decisions. Delta had nothing to do with this decision so your logic doesn't hold water.
 
User avatar
Acey
Topic Author
Posts: 1125
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:06 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:26 pm

It's a fool errand to think Delta plays no role whatsoever in this.
If a man hasn't discovered something that he will die for, he isn't fit to live. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14626
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:35 pm

Acey wrote:
It's a fool errand to think Delta plays no role whatsoever in this.


That's literally true because WS certainly takes DL passengers at LGA and has some sense of where those folks are coming from and wher they are going.

But if YYC-BNA is performing to expectations, ATL would probably be the next logical add in the region with or without DL.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
jimbo737
Posts: 541
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:18 am

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:43 pm

Dominion301 wrote:
jimbo737 wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:

Crazy how YYT “becomes” the 2nd FLL destination for WS in 2018-19.

Why they pulled YHZ/YUL/YOW-FLL is a total head scratcher.

So I guess YYZ-BCN will be on the 763? That accounts for 3/7 pulled YYC-Europe 763 rotations to LGW that will be replaced by the 789. WS could theoretically add another 763 Europe route out of YYZ for summer 2019...they could also add a couple more MAX routes to Europe from Eastern Canada but I’m not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.


They pulled all those FLL flights because even with their lower fully allocated operating costs and loads in the 90% range, the yields were garbage and didn’t contribute anything to the bottom line.

If others want to chase market share and lose money doing so, WS is letting them fill their boots. Their goal is raise fares when WS is gone. When they return to compensatory levels, WS will likely return.


If loads were north of 90%, sounds like they weren't charging a high enough fare. BTW, where'd you get the 'yields were garbage' evidence from? The US DOT publications?

The thing is, WS is now aspiring to be a global carrier, yet they still can't figure out/don't seem motivated how to be a national carrier first. Save for YHZ, they're a token player east of YYZ, where even PD sometimes outranks them.


Airlines don't cancel profitable routes.

WS pulled all those FLL flights because even with their lower fully allocated operating costs of 14.15 cents generated over an asl of 897 miles, (and YUL-FLL is 1,384 miles, so you can imagine what WS's casm is over that longer stage length - it isn't anywhere close to 14.15 cents), and YUL-FLL loads in Q1 2018 of 92.9%, and a system break even load factor in the quarter of 81.65%, the yields were garbage and didn’t contribute anything to the bottom line.

Let's put it another way: WS's system BELF in the quarter was 81.65% and they cancelled a route that, according to US DoT Form 41 data, had loads of 92.9%. I think you can do the math here.

Alaska Air ditched YVR-LAX for basically the same reason. Who cares about loads if you lose money on every flight? Only market share driven airlines or airlines trying to figure out what to do with tons of excess capacity do this sort of thing.

Meanwhile, AC Rouge operated that route with an 81.7% l/f in the same period. AC operated with a system BELF of 84.7% in the quarter, with a fully allocated system cost of 16.43 cents generated over a 1,665 mile asl, (meaning the costs were even higher for the 1,384 mile YUL-FLL sector).

If others want to chase market share and lose money doing so, WS and others are letting them fill their boots.

In pure leisure markets, (Quebec to FLL), and especially in a high density Rouge 767, an airplane seat is a commodity. The lowest cost operator sets the fares and once set, that's the bar that exists. That's unless there are people who gleefully pay 15-20% more to fly to the same place in the same seat at the same time. I don't know too many people, especially leisure travelers who are prepared to do that. Do you?

There's a reason why AC lost close to $100m including interest expense in Q1 2018, with an industry bottom margin, (with interest expense moved above the line), of -2.4%.

I'd venture to guess part of that reason is chasing market share on hyper low yield routes operating aircraft designed for 6-10 hour sectors on 3 hr wide body flights filled with aeroplan redemptions. And that was with 73.3 cent a liter fuel. It'll be closer to 86 cents this winter.

No US carrier operates wide bodies from the NYC area to the sixth borough. Enough said.

Their goal is likely to raise fares now that WS is gone. When they return to compensatory levels, WS will likely return. Airplanes are very portable.
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5251
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Wed Oct 31, 2018 5:57 pm

Acey wrote:
It's a fool errand to think Delta plays no role whatsoever in this.


I agree Delta pretty much calls the shots who flies where within their JV agreements. Knowing how Delta is fueled by ego you either play nice with them or you will have to deal with their wrath. So everyone pretty much plays along.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
robsaw
Posts: 444
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 7:14 am

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Wed Oct 31, 2018 6:26 pm

Dominion301 wrote:

The thing is, WS is now aspiring to be a global carrier, yet they still can't figure out/don't seem motivated how to be a national carrier first. Save for YHZ, they're a token player east of YYZ, where even PD sometimes outranks them.


A good business goes where the profits are and deploys their assets accordingly. If letting the eastern routes dwindle while expanding international routes out of the west makes better economic sense - they should do it. Being a fully national carrier with all major routes overlapping with AC shouldn't be motivated by corporate ego.
 
winginit
Posts: 3049
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Wed Oct 31, 2018 7:01 pm

Atlwarrior wrote:
kavok wrote:
RJNUT wrote:
The have the codeshare in place already, so the feed is already there. The JV just adds another layer of cooperation that isn't needed to add this route.


No, I get that. The issue is the JV isnt approved yet. Part of the justification for approval of the JV would be that it would create new US-Canada routes, and more choices for consumers. Obviously connecting ATL and YYC (the biggest hubs for each) does that.

However by adding the route now, it makes it appear like the JV wasn’t necessary for this significant route to be added. Whether it is all for show or not, it would seem waiting until after a JV is approved and then saying “with the JV we are able to add YYC-ATL” provides better justification for the request. Again, the JV is not approved, and I think adding this route now actually hurts the cause.


How can it hurt the JV when Georgia and Canada has significant trade ties.

http://www.georgia.org/wp-content/uploa ... INAL-1.pdf


It can hurt the case for the JV and arguably make it less likely that the JV is approved.

DL and WS' argument for why they need a JV and ATI is that it will allow them to coordinate in a way that expands their networks to the benefit of customers. In launching ATLYYC prior to the JV being approved, WS is essentially saying "we can launch routes like this one into DL's overwhelmingly largest hub without schedule or pricing coordination with DL". In undermines the primary argument for the JV.

I'm shocked WS announced this prior to JV approval especially since the DOT forced UA and AC to give some concessions back when they approved that JV.

klm617 wrote:
Acey wrote:
It's a fool errand to think Delta plays no role whatsoever in this.


I agree Delta pretty much calls the shots who flies where within their JV agreements. Knowing how Delta is fueled by ego you either play nice with them or you will have to deal with their wrath. So everyone pretty much plays along.


Again, Delta and WestJet do not have a joint venture, so DL cannot 'call the shots' here. They have only applied for a JV, and cannot yet coordinate on pricing or schedules. For them to cooperate or 'call the shots' with WestJet, who are at present a competitor, would be illegal. As for Delta's other JV agreements, of course JV carriers go along - DL has equity stakes in their primary JV partners and their JV partners do not have equity stakes in DL. It's not ego driven so much as rationally financially driven. If I buy your house even though you live in it I get to decide what color to paint it - not you. You go along because I own the asset and call the shots. It's not all that different from DL owning half of VS, half of AM, and a 10% stake in AFKL.
 
BML87
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 6:55 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:09 am

Dominion301 wrote:
MAH4546 wrote:
Nice to see YYT-FLL, especially after WestJet slashed it's FLL network in the past two years.

Crazy how long a flight that is - about as long as FLL-LAS!


Crazy how YYT “becomes” the 2nd FLL destination for WS in 2018-19.

Why they pulled YHZ/YUL/YOW-FLL is a total head scratcher.

So I guess YYZ-BCN will be on the 763? That accounts for 3/7 pulled YYC-Europe 763 rotations to LGW that will be replaced by the 789. WS could theoretically add another 763 Europe route out of YYZ for summer 2019...they could also add a couple more MAX routes to Europe from Eastern Canada but I’m not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.


Not 3/7 but 3/5. That frame operated YYC-LGW 5x and YEG-LGW 2x. That route is still scheduled.
 
Thomaas
Posts: 686
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2014 10:52 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 7:50 am

jimbo737 wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
jimbo737 wrote:

They pulled all those FLL flights because even with their lower fully allocated operating costs and loads in the 90% range, the yields were garbage and didn’t contribute anything to the bottom line.

If others want to chase market share and lose money doing so, WS is letting them fill their boots. Their goal is raise fares when WS is gone. When they return to compensatory levels, WS will likely return.


If loads were north of 90%, sounds like they weren't charging a high enough fare. BTW, where'd you get the 'yields were garbage' evidence from? The US DOT publications?

The thing is, WS is now aspiring to be a global carrier, yet they still can't figure out/don't seem motivated how to be a national carrier first. Save for YHZ, they're a token player east of YYZ, where even PD sometimes outranks them.


Airlines don't cancel profitable routes.

WS pulled all those FLL flights because even with their lower fully allocated operating costs of 14.15 cents generated over an asl of 897 miles, (and YUL-FLL is 1,384 miles, so you can imagine what WS's casm is over that longer stage length - it isn't anywhere close to 14.15 cents), and YUL-FLL loads in Q1 2018 of 92.9%, and a system break even load factor in the quarter of 81.65%, the yields were garbage and didn’t contribute anything to the bottom line.

Let's put it another way: WS's system BELF in the quarter was 81.65% and they cancelled a route that, according to US DoT Form 41 data, had loads of 92.9%. I think you can do the math here.

Alaska Air ditched YVR-LAX for basically the same reason. Who cares about loads if you lose money on every flight? Only market share driven airlines or airlines trying to figure out what to do with tons of excess capacity do this sort of thing.

Meanwhile, AC Rouge operated that route with an 81.7% l/f in the same period. AC operated with a system BELF of 84.7% in the quarter, with a fully allocated system cost of 16.43 cents generated over a 1,665 mile asl, (meaning the costs were even higher for the 1,384 mile YUL-FLL sector).

If others want to chase market share and lose money doing so, WS and others are letting them fill their boots.

In pure leisure markets, (Quebec to FLL), and especially in a high density Rouge 767, an airplane seat is a commodity. The lowest cost operator sets the fares and once set, that's the bar that exists. That's unless there are people who gleefully pay 15-20% more to fly to the same place in the same seat at the same time. I don't know too many people, especially leisure travelers who are prepared to do that. Do you?

There's a reason why AC lost close to $100m including interest expense in Q1 2018, with an industry bottom margin, (with interest expense moved above the line), of -2.4%.

I'd venture to guess part of that reason is chasing market share on hyper low yield routes operating aircraft designed for 6-10 hour sectors on 3 hr wide body flights filled with aeroplan redemptions. And that was with 73.3 cent a liter fuel. It'll be closer to 86 cents this winter.

No US carrier operates wide bodies from the NYC area to the sixth borough. Enough said.

Their goal is likely to raise fares now that WS is gone. When they return to compensatory levels, WS will likely return. Airplanes are very portable.


You can’t use AC’s breakeven load factor to determine wether a Rose route is losing profitable. Rouge has a breakeven factor that is BELOW WS’ which is why they now dominate sun destinations from both YYZ and YUL. They wouldn’t be running 4-5x daily 767s is they lost money on the route.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 2:25 pm

robsaw wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:

The thing is, WS is now aspiring to be a global carrier, yet they still can't figure out/don't seem motivated how to be a national carrier first. Save for YHZ, they're a token player east of YYZ, where even PD sometimes outranks them.


A good business goes where the profits are and deploys their assets accordingly. If letting the eastern routes dwindle while expanding international routes out of the west makes better economic sense - they should do it. Being a fully national carrier with all major routes overlapping with AC shouldn't be motivated by corporate ego.


They do indeed, but a good business also takes a long-term outlook. WS have repeatedly stated they want to be a global airline. That’s pretty tough to achieve if you you’re unwilling to commit to having a year round presence on most of the primary non-YYZ transcon routes, that may not be as profitable in the short-term, but are critical components to being a well connected global airline.
 
flyyul
Posts: 4460
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 11:25 am

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:04 pm

jimbo737 wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
jimbo737 wrote:

They pulled all those FLL flights because even with their lower fully allocated operating costs and loads in the 90% range, the yields were garbage and didn’t contribute anything to the bottom line.

If others want to chase market share and lose money doing so, WS is letting them fill their boots. Their goal is raise fares when WS is gone. When they return to compensatory levels, WS will likely return.


If loads were north of 90%, sounds like they weren't charging a high enough fare. BTW, where'd you get the 'yields were garbage' evidence from? The US DOT publications?

The thing is, WS is now aspiring to be a global carrier, yet they still can't figure out/don't seem motivated how to be a national carrier first. Save for YHZ, they're a token player east of YYZ, where even PD sometimes outranks them.


Airlines don't cancel profitable routes.

WS pulled all those FLL flights because even with their lower fully allocated operating costs of 14.15 cents generated over an asl of 897 miles, (and YUL-FLL is 1,384 miles, so you can imagine what WS's casm is over that longer stage length - it isn't anywhere close to 14.15 cents), and YUL-FLL loads in Q1 2018 of 92.9%, and a system break even load factor in the quarter of 81.65%, the yields were garbage and didn’t contribute anything to the bottom line.

Let's put it another way: WS's system BELF in the quarter was 81.65% and they cancelled a route that, according to US DoT Form 41 data, had loads of 92.9%. I think you can do the math here.

Alaska Air ditched YVR-LAX for basically the same reason. Who cares about loads if you lose money on every flight? Only market share driven airlines or airlines trying to figure out what to do with tons of excess capacity do this sort of thing.

Meanwhile, AC Rouge operated that route with an 81.7% l/f in the same period. AC operated with a system BELF of 84.7% in the quarter, with a fully allocated system cost of 16.43 cents generated over a 1,665 mile asl, (meaning the costs were even higher for the 1,384 mile YUL-FLL sector).

If others want to chase market share and lose money doing so, WS and others are letting them fill their boots.

In pure leisure markets, (Quebec to FLL), and especially in a high density Rouge 767, an airplane seat is a commodity. The lowest cost operator sets the fares and once set, that's the bar that exists. That's unless there are people who gleefully pay 15-20% more to fly to the same place in the same seat at the same time. I don't know too many people, especially leisure travelers who are prepared to do that. Do you?

There's a reason why AC lost close to $100m including interest expense in Q1 2018, with an industry bottom margin, (with interest expense moved above the line), of -2.4%.

I'd venture to guess part of that reason is chasing market share on hyper low yield routes operating aircraft designed for 6-10 hour sectors on 3 hr wide body flights filled with aeroplan redemptions. And that was with 73.3 cent a liter fuel. It'll be closer to 86 cents this winter.

No US carrier operates wide bodies from the NYC area to the sixth borough. Enough said.

Their goal is likely to raise fares now that WS is gone. When they return to compensatory levels, WS will likely return. Airplanes are very portable.


Will bet any considerable sum that YUL-FLL is a highly profitable market for AC. AC is not a gulf carrier, they're accountable to shareholders and internal management that take a very disciplined view on delivering the targets set out by the corporation. It's automatic that AC network planners are not just having fun sending up to 5 767/day on YUL-FLL.

The fact that WS sees more value in YEG-YHM, over one of the countries largest transborder city-pairs (YUL-FLL) is highly concerning.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:17 pm

flyyul wrote:
jimbo737 wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:

If loads were north of 90%, sounds like they weren't charging a high enough fare. BTW, where'd you get the 'yields were garbage' evidence from? The US DOT publications?

The thing is, WS is now aspiring to be a global carrier, yet they still can't figure out/don't seem motivated how to be a national carrier first. Save for YHZ, they're a token player east of YYZ, where even PD sometimes outranks them.


Airlines don't cancel profitable routes.

WS pulled all those FLL flights because even with their lower fully allocated operating costs of 14.15 cents generated over an asl of 897 miles, (and YUL-FLL is 1,384 miles, so you can imagine what WS's casm is over that longer stage length - it isn't anywhere close to 14.15 cents), and YUL-FLL loads in Q1 2018 of 92.9%, and a system break even load factor in the quarter of 81.65%, the yields were garbage and didn’t contribute anything to the bottom line.

Let's put it another way: WS's system BELF in the quarter was 81.65% and they cancelled a route that, according to US DoT Form 41 data, had loads of 92.9%. I think you can do the math here.

Alaska Air ditched YVR-LAX for basically the same reason. Who cares about loads if you lose money on every flight? Only market share driven airlines or airlines trying to figure out what to do with tons of excess capacity do this sort of thing.

Meanwhile, AC Rouge operated that route with an 81.7% l/f in the same period. AC operated with a system BELF of 84.7% in the quarter, with a fully allocated system cost of 16.43 cents generated over a 1,665 mile asl, (meaning the costs were even higher for the 1,384 mile YUL-FLL sector).

If others want to chase market share and lose money doing so, WS and others are letting them fill their boots.

In pure leisure markets, (Quebec to FLL), and especially in a high density Rouge 767, an airplane seat is a commodity. The lowest cost operator sets the fares and once set, that's the bar that exists. That's unless there are people who gleefully pay 15-20% more to fly to the same place in the same seat at the same time. I don't know too many people, especially leisure travelers who are prepared to do that. Do you?

There's a reason why AC lost close to $100m including interest expense in Q1 2018, with an industry bottom margin, (with interest expense moved above the line), of -2.4%.

I'd venture to guess part of that reason is chasing market share on hyper low yield routes operating aircraft designed for 6-10 hour sectors on 3 hr wide body flights filled with aeroplan redemptions. And that was with 73.3 cent a liter fuel. It'll be closer to 86 cents this winter.

No US carrier operates wide bodies from the NYC area to the sixth borough. Enough said.

Their goal is likely to raise fares now that WS is gone. When they return to compensatory levels, WS will likely return. Airplanes are very portable.


Will bet any considerable sum that YUL-FLL is a highly profitable market for AC. AC is not a gulf carrier, they're accountable to shareholders and internal management that take a very disciplined view on delivering the targets set out by the corporation. It's automatic that AC network planners are not just having fun sending up to 5 767/day on YUL-FLL.

The fact that WS sees more value in YEG-YHM, over one of the countries largest transborder city-pairs (YUL-FLL) is highly concerning.


I fully agree or the fact they can’t (or aren’t interested) in making the likes of YUL-YEG, YOW-YVR etc. work year-round, while flying YHM-YEG year-round (including 10x weekly in winter) on Swoop just to keep the likes of Flair and the threat of Jetlines at Bay, is puzzling to say the least.

What was that again about AC and chasing market share? Me thinks WS are doing so.
 
777Mech
Posts: 1018
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:55 pm

klm617 wrote:
Acey wrote:
It's a fool errand to think Delta plays no role whatsoever in this.


I agree Delta pretty much calls the shots who flies where within their JV agreements. Knowing how Delta is fueled by ego you either play nice with them or you will have to deal with their wrath. So everyone pretty much plays along.


It's literally against the law for DL to "call the shots" at this point in time. They DO NOT have have JV.
 
jmt18325
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:08 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:16 pm

jimbo737 wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
jimbo737 wrote:
Meanwhile, AC Rouge operated that route with an 81.7% l/f in the same period. AC operated with a system BELF of 84.7% in the quarter, with a fully allocated system cost of 16.43 cents generated over a 1,665 mile asl, (meaning the costs were even higher for the 1,384 mile YUL-FLL sector).



You have no way from that of knowing the BELF of the narrow body fleet, widebody fleet, or Rouge - so there's no way that you can know they're losing money on that route.

Air Canada continues to perform well quarter after quarter though - we do know that.
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5251
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:29 pm

777Mech wrote:
klm617 wrote:
Acey wrote:
It's a fool errand to think Delta plays no role whatsoever in this.


I agree Delta pretty much calls the shots who flies where within their JV agreements. Knowing how Delta is fueled by ego you either play nice with them or you will have to deal with their wrath. So everyone pretty much plays along.


It's literally against the law for DL to "call the shots" at this point in time. They DO NOT have have JV.


Even you can't say with a straight face the Delta has no influence in WS adding ATL. Per the press release this add is all about Delta and the ATL hub.

"Being able to access the world's busiest airport direct from Calgary is a strategic advantage that will allow our guests more access to the U.S. and connect to more places in the world," said Bob Sartor, Calgary Airport Authority's President and CEO. "We thank WestJet for this further investment and for providing another way to travel to and from Canada."

WestJet is the only airline flying non-stop from Calgary to ATL, the world's largest airline hub – home of Delta Airlines, a WestJet codeshare partner since 2011. Together with Delta, via Hartsfield-Jackson airport WestJet will offer codeshare access to an extensive list of U.S. destinations including the southeastern United States and Gulf Coast and cities such as Memphis, Tenn., Charleston, S.C., New Orleans, La., Savannah, Ga., Pensacola and Panama City, Fla.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
winginit
Posts: 3049
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:39 pm

klm617 wrote:
Even you can't say with a straight face the Delta has no influence in WS adding ATL. Per the press release this add is all about Delta and the ATL hub.


Let's be very clear. It is illegal and would be a federal breach of antitrust law for Delta and WestJet to coordinate in any way shape or form towards WS launching YYC-ATL. It would be illegal for WS to say "Hey Delta would you support us via connections if we launched YYC-ATL?". It would also be illegal for Delta to say "Hey WS ya know you should really fly to our biggest hub from your biggest hub". Cut and dry. Illegal. If there was any credible suspicion that either of those things happened you'd have competitor airline and passenger class action lawsuits springing up left and right.

What is not illegal; however, is WestJet independently concluding "ya know it might make sense for us to serve the busiest airport in the world which also happens to be our codeshare partner's largest hub."

So no, DL had no active influence in WS choosing to launch this route. They did not get in a room together and make the decision. That's illegal. WS independently concluded that it would be a rational business decision and if we're being honest - that's probably true. I imagine this route will do quite well.

Delta and WestJet DO NOT currently have a Joint Venture

klm617 wrote:
WestJet is the only airline flying non-stop from Calgary to ATL, the world's largest airline hub – home of Delta Airlines,


Did WestJet really screw up the Airlines vs. Air Lines in the press release? Ouch.
 
User avatar
Acey
Topic Author
Posts: 1125
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:06 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:03 pm

winginit wrote:
Did WestJet really screw up the Airlines vs. Air Lines in the press release? Ouch.

I still think DL spelling our capital city wrong is worse. Air Lines, airlines... meh. Semantics. Washingten, DC seems worse.
If a man hasn't discovered something that he will die for, he isn't fit to live. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
SaschaYHZ
Posts: 269
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2014 4:41 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:12 pm

For the YHZ-FLL part, there are 2 other carriers (AC and TS) that also fly it dseasonally, so I can understand why they wanted to cut it if it wasn't profitable enough, seeing as there's already a fair amount of competition on the route
 
User avatar
Acey
Topic Author
Posts: 1125
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:06 pm

Re: WS Announces YYC-ATL, YYZ-BCN, YYT-FLL

Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:17 pm

winginit wrote:
klm617 wrote:
Let's be very clear. It is illegal and would be a federal breach of antitrust law for Delta and WestJet to coordinate in any way shape or form towards WS launching YYC-ATL.

Is it also illegal for them to talk about launching a joint venture which they're trying to do? Or antitrust comes bowling over doors to delete the contact info of any WestJetter that a DL exec has on their contact list?

The word I used was "no role whatsoever" which is different than "running the show".

"If one were to hypothetically launch ATL, what would be your hypothetical assessment of the hypothetical ground service company that currently serves ATL?"
"If one were to hypothetically launch ATL, from a western Canadian city blocked at 4 hrs 13 min with a 52 minute turn, how screwed is that flight if they have to land on 28?"

Come at me, antitrust.
If a man hasn't discovered something that he will die for, he isn't fit to live. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.

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