jimbo737 wrote:

https://news.paxeditions.com/news/airline/eu-approval-still-required-air-canadas-takeover-transat/jeevesfloridarentals.com

The deal still needs EU approval, expected sometime in the first half of ‘21.

Anyone familiar with EU bureaucracy and meddling will recognize that this deal will not be done without the extraction of a kilogram of flesh that reduces AC n/s dominance across the Atlantic, esp with the demise of Norwegian and other EU based disrupters.

In essence, the EU will do the job Justy, the Boy Blunder, was not prepared to do, despite recommendations from Transport Canada and the Competition Bureau.

As it stands, if you want a n/s flight from YUL or YQB to the sun, your choice is basically AC.

Quebec consumers will be digging much deeper into their jeans for travel when this is all over.

The big winner down the road is Plattsburgh. I would imagine every ULCC in the US must be rubbing their hands in glee at the seasonal sun flying opportunities that will be presenting themselves once borders open up an the internment camps are shutdown.

The concessions made by Canada are pretty severe if you will. I highly doubt that the European commission will add any further concessions. I think with what Canada has said has to happen with the merger, I think Europe's job was made easier.if Europe adds any more concessions AC will walk

A330Inter wrote:

While I agree that the present situation would give a huge dominance to AC on these markets, what's preventing Westjet, Flair, Swoop or other airlines to step in and offer competition if the market exists?
Any price-sensitive demand will likely shift to the new entrant? rather than crossing the border for instance.

Nothing is preventing any of those airlines from swooping in. Westjet is sweating profusely because it's a threat to their company and they don't have anywhere near the same leverage

WestJet’s leverage has always been its considerable unit cost advantage over AC.

If I had a dime for every time I’d read that somehow AC has WestJet on the run, I’d have retired to Scottsdale, would have invested in another ULCC startup, (my 4th), and be playing golf everyday.

Well, 2 out of 3 ain’t bad.

EdmFlyBoi wrote:

Either party can now walk away:

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/air-canada- ... -1.1564135

It would seem that unless AC gets this deal done on their terms they may indeed walk away. Transat may fail if in fact a deal doesn't get done.

The EU delay gives AC a 'get out of jail free' card. Reuters also confirmed the status.

(Reuters) - Canadian tour operator Transat A.T. Inc said on Tuesday Air Canada had refused to extend the deadline for its C$188.7 million ($148.73 million) takeover deal beyond Feb. 15, after European regulators failed to give their approval.

Shares of Transat tumbled 8%, while those of Air Canada rose 3.5%.

While the companies are discussing potential amendments, there can be no assurance that an agreement will be reached, or that Air Canada or the company will not terminate the deal if the relevant circumstances so warrant, Transat said in a statement.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tran ... SKBN2AG1RS

Well PKP can always try his luck again. But frankly if I were him and wanted to have a fleet of empty planes, I'd go out and buy a fleet of 1/144 scale models, or if I was really feeling frisky with my money, 1/72 scale models. Was it Richard Branson who said "how to become poor? Easy start off rich and buy and airline"?

AC (and others!) would do well to conserve its cash at the moment. There will be headwinds for a very long time in this industry.

Beech

jimbo737 wrote:

https://news.paxeditions.com/news/airline/eu-approval-still-required-air-canadas-takeover-transat/jeevesfloridarentals.com

The deal still needs EU approval, expected sometime in the first half of ‘21.

Anyone familiar with EU bureaucracy and meddling will recognize that this deal will not be done without the extraction of a kilogram of flesh that reduces AC n/s dominance across the Atlantic, esp with the demise of Norwegian and other EU based disrupters.

In essence, the EU will do the job Justy, the Boy Blunder, was not prepared to do, despite recommendations from Transport Canada and the Competition Bureau.

As it stands, if you want a n/s flight from YUL or YQB to the sun, your choice is basically AC.

Quebec consumers will be digging much deeper into their jeans for travel when this is all over.

The big winner down the road is Plattsburgh. I would imagine every ULCC in the US must be rubbing their hands in glee at the seasonal sun flying opportunities that will be presenting themselves once borders open up an the internment camps are shutdown.

The biggest takeaway here is that literally nobody - not TC, not the EU, not the Competition Bureau - consider WS to be a relevant player.

Must be embarrassing.

ElPistolero wrote:

jimbo737 wrote:

https://news.paxeditions.com/news/airline/eu-approval-still-required-air-canadas-takeover-transat/jeevesfloridarentals.com

The deal still needs EU approval, expected sometime in the first half of ‘21.

Anyone familiar with EU bureaucracy and meddling will recognize that this deal will not be done without the extraction of a kilogram of flesh that reduces AC n/s dominance across the Atlantic, esp with the demise of Norwegian and other EU based disrupters.

In essence, the EU will do the job Justy, the Boy Blunder, was not prepared to do, despite recommendations from Transport Canada and the Competition Bureau.

As it stands, if you want a n/s flight from YUL or YQB to the sun, your choice is basically AC.

Quebec consumers will be digging much deeper into their jeans for travel when this is all over.

The big winner down the road is Plattsburgh. I would imagine every ULCC in the US must be rubbing their hands in glee at the seasonal sun flying opportunities that will be presenting themselves once borders open up an the internment camps are shutdown.

The biggest takeaway here is that literally nobody - not TC, not the EU, not the Competition Bureau - consider WS to be a relevant player.

Must be embarrassing.

Haha thats probably true. Hence why Westjet is sweating

777luver wrote:

The concessions made by Canada are pretty severe if you will. I highly doubt that the European commission will add any further concessions. I think with what Canada has said has to happen with the merger, I think Europe's job was made easier.if Europe adds any more concessions AC will walk

How so?

The numbers tell the EU that it’s being asked to sign off on AC taking 58% off the Canada - EU market share.

The concessions are contingent on other airlines - airlines that the Canadian Competition Bureau has publicly assessed as being uninterested. From an EU perspective (and indeed from any perspective), the “concessions” are very unlikely to come to fruition, and therefore amount to nothing.

Anyway, as Jimbo had pointed out, the handling of this on the Canadian side should really put an end to this notion that the government has it in for AC. Allowing AC to use non refundable fares as interest-free loans, or going against advice on TS from the Competition Bureau... suggest that it is very sensitive to AC’s needs. Perhaps too much.

ElPistolero wrote:

jimbo737 wrote:

https://news.paxeditions.com/news/airline/eu-approval-still-required-air-canadas-takeover-transat/jeevesfloridarentals.com

The deal still needs EU approval, expected sometime in the first half of ‘21.

Anyone familiar with EU bureaucracy and meddling will recognize that this deal will not be done without the extraction of a kilogram of flesh that reduces AC n/s dominance across the Atlantic, esp with the demise of Norwegian and other EU based disrupters.

In essence, the EU will do the job Justy, the Boy Blunder, was not prepared to do, despite recommendations from Transport Canada and the Competition Bureau.

As it stands, if you want a n/s flight from YUL or YQB to the sun, your choice is basically AC.

Quebec consumers will be digging much deeper into their jeans for travel when this is all over.

The big winner down the road is Plattsburgh. I would imagine every ULCC in the US must be rubbing their hands in glee at the seasonal sun flying opportunities that will be presenting themselves once borders open up an the internment camps are shutdown.

The biggest takeaway here is that literally nobody - not TC, not the EU, not the Competition Bureau - consider WS to be a relevant player.

Must be embarrassing.

A growing airline has nothing to be embarrassed by something they are not even fully tapped into yet. It is akin to comparing a 20 year olds accomplishments to a 85 year olds. Pick on something similar to its own age.

The EU could care less about the status of non-EU airlines.

They are, however, notorious when it comes to delving into anti competitive issues that impact EU members, and the AC/TS merger definitely raises competition concerns, Thus the reason they continue to delay what some here would consider to be a pretty simple decision, which it obviously isn't.

Regardless, it remains to be seen if AC will bother to pursue this deal. I remain of the mind that Transat isn't particularly useful to AC or WS for that matter, (fleet type alone for WS makes it a dumb deal), and without a domestic feed network, it'd be a foolhardy acquisition for anyone else.

If PKP wants to play airline in the post covid world without a domestic feed network of at least 40 narrow bodies, let him.

The Feds have watched the Cdn industry almost implode over the past 11 months with thousands of job disappearing and have done nothing about it. It's hard to imagine them getting bent out of shape about Transat's 1,500 jobs when Air Canada axed a further 1,700 a week or so ago.

At best, Transat shareholders are about to get another nasty buzzcut.

If I were AC, I'd walk and simply pick up whatever pieces I wanted down the road for nothing, with no strings attached and no union seniority issues to have to deal with. I doubt WJ, or anyone else, has any sort of appetite to take on the brain damage of what Transat brings to the table for at least 3 years.

I agree, consolidation will come through shrinkage not mergers. If AC needs some A321LRs it can pick up Transat’s leases when PKP has finished making airplane noises in the cockpits of his parked airplanes, or just order its own when better times come. A lot less trouble than trying to integrate another airline.

At the rate AC is burning cash I think they are being wise not extending the deadline. And would be wiser still to walk away.

Beech

Aresxerexade wrote:

A growing airline has nothing to be embarrassed by something they are not even fully tapped into yet. It is akin to comparing a 20 year olds accomplishments to a 85 year olds. Pick on something similar to its own age.

Sure, we can wait another 60 years for WS to stop behaving as conservatively as an 85 year old (not sure the age analogy works well here - 20 year olds are typically more ambitious and energetic 85 year olds).

For the record, WS is the second largest airline in a G7 country. 125 aircraft. Billions in revenue. But its (at best) not interested in 15% of the Canada-EU market, which almost entirely originates in Canada.

Just goes to reinforce the reality that WS is like a (insert Canadian telco) - perfectly profitable in a semi-protected and skewed market (low quality FR products at AC mainline prices etc), but too mollycoddled to succeed outside its comfort zone where it’ll have to step up it’s game to compete.

Odds are that in 10/20/30 years it’ll still be a fringe player complaining about 100 + year old airlines. Plus ca change etc.

This AC-TS ... whatever you want to call it - it doesn’t reflect well on the state of (pre-COVID) Canadian aviation, does it. A Canadian airline is probably going to fold into nothing because we’ve allowed all kinds of JVs, and mollycoddled the ambition out of our own airlines.

Maybe it’s time to take a good long look at TA++ and see if it’s still a good idea. Are these JVs time limited?

jimbo737 wrote:

If I were AC, I'd walk and simply pick up whatever pieces I wanted down the road for nothing, with no strings attached and no union seniority issues to have to deal with. I doubt WJ, or anyone else, has any sort of appetite to take on the brain damage of what Transat brings to the table for at least 3 years.

It sounds harsh but there are advantages to doing it that way: obtaining aircraft at new lower market rates instead of being stuck with TS's deals, trained new hires at bottom of pay scale and bottom of seniority list, no EU or CDN competition review or constraints. If AC wants nothing of that, TS probably implodes, anyway, and AC has spent nothing to remove a competitor.

The odds of Transat going bankrupt have just increased markedly. They are virtually shut down right now with almost depleted liquidity.

Sunwing is a fraction (5%) of pre-covid ops.

Porter is in a coma.

Westjet and AC are what, 20% of pre-covid.

All of the above are all still declining while the covid numbers in Canada drop drastically (~25% what they were a couiple of months ago).
The number of new cases are dropping fast elsewhere too.

On top of all this the Federal government wants AC to repay billions of "non-refundable" airfares instead of offering vouchers for travel in the future?

The only airlines that got any assistance beyond what every other company in the country was entitled to were the small Northern carriers that service indigenous communities.

This is just crazy.

You know, I hope the upcoming bankruptcy of Transat adds to the likelihood of costing Trudeau his dominance of the 30 or so ridings in greater Montreal during the upcoming election.
The bungling is epic.

MIflyer12 wrote:

It sounds harsh but there are advantages to doing it that way: obtaining aircraft at new lower market rates instead of being stuck with TS's deals, trained new hires at bottom of pay scale and bottom of seniority list, no EU or CDN competition review or constraints. If AC wants nothing of that, TS probably implodes, anyway, and AC has spent nothing to remove a competitor.

It’s frankly the most logical way to do it. And in many ways, it was always going to be the end-state. The moment Rouge came onto the market, TS’ days looked numbered. And so it’s proven. That’s not a criticism of Rouge, or AC’s right to pursue Rouge. It’s all fair play.

It does however, create this dilemma where a foreign entity holds the key to TS employees’ well-being because Canadian policies (JVs, protecting EU carriers sixth freedom traffic from non-EU disrupters) have created a situation where one airline dominates close to 70% of a massive market, making it difficult for any competition-oriented analysis to look the other way, especially if other EU carriers decide to play politics.

From a consumer perspective, the outcome is the same regardless of what the EU does. Nothing stopping AC from buying aircraft on the cheap and running those routes anyway at whatever prices they want. The only ones impacted are TS employees and to a lesser degree, shareholders. This is an inevitable consequence of allowing one actor to accrue too much market power - in this case by design - to the extent that the other side may not be able to overlook it even if they wanted to.

COVID may yet shake that up, but for now, the analysis will be done on the basis of pre-COVID numbers - on the assumption that they represent “normal”.

Curiously, I don’t think the crowd that professes concern for Canadian airline jobs will lose much sleep over TS employees if AC walks away.

How does it work anyway? If AC uses TS to serve sun destinations, and uses the AC aircraft they replace to operate in the EU, can they circumvent a lot of this (except in the most slot-constrained airports)?

Skywatcher wrote:

The odds of Transat going bankrupt have just increased markedly. They are virtually shut down right now with almost depleted liquidity.

Sunwing is a fraction (5%) of pre-covid ops.

Porter is in a coma.

Westjet and AC are what, 20% of pre-covid.

All of the above are all still declining while the covid numbers in Canada drop drastically (~25% what they were a couiple of months ago).
The number of new cases are dropping fast elsewhere too.

On top of all this the Federal government wants AC to repay billions of "non-refundable" airfares instead of offering vouchers for travel in the future?

The only airlines that got any assistance beyond what every other company in the country was entitled to were the small Northern carriers that service indigenous communities.

This is just crazy.

Just going to say that in Canada, caseloads are declining on the back of massive provincial lockdowns, not because the virus is burning itself out. There’s clear causality between lockdowns and case loads. Countries like the UK have even stricter lockdowns now than before on account of new variants. We should be clear here.

As for aid, what would you like the government to do? Give airlines with billions of dollars in the bank interest free loans? The governments already done that in a de facto way with the refunds issue. It’s also allowed a questionable merger. What else should it do? Write a blank cheque? Not sure that it needs to be said, but governments are accountable to taxpayers first and foremost, and have to act in their interests.

The likelihood of AC not getting more favourable terms when it’s account dwindles closer to zero is, frankly, zero. We’re just not at that stage yet.

As an aside 1500 TS votes aren’t going to move the dial in any urban riding.

ElPistolero wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

It sounds harsh but there are advantages to doing it that way: obtaining aircraft at new lower market rates instead of being stuck with TS's deals, trained new hires at bottom of pay scale and bottom of seniority list, no EU or CDN competition review or constraints. If AC wants nothing of that, TS probably implodes, anyway, and AC has spent nothing to remove a competitor.

It’s frankly the most logical way to do it. And in many ways, it was always going to be the end-state. The moment Rouge came onto the market, TS’ days looked numbered. And so it’s proven. That’s not a criticism of Rouge, or AC’s right to pursue Rouge. It’s all fair play.

It does however, create this dilemma where a foreign entity holds the key to TS employees’ well-being because Canadian policies (JVs, protecting EU carriers sixth freedom traffic from non-EU disrupters) have created a situation where one airline dominates close to 70% of a massive market, making it difficult for any competition-oriented analysis to look the other way, especially if other EU carriers decide to play politics.

From a consumer perspective, the outcome is the same regardless of what the EU does. Nothing stopping AC from buying aircraft on the cheap and running those routes anyway at whatever prices they want. The only ones impacted are TS employees and to a lesser degree, shareholders. This is an inevitable consequence of allowing one actor to accrue too much market power - in this case by design - to the extent that the other side may not be able to overlook it even if they wanted to.

COVID may yet shake that up, but for now, the analysis will be done on the basis of pre-COVID numbers - on the assumption that they represent “normal”.

Curiously, I don’t think the crowd that professes concern for Canadian airline jobs will lose much sleep over TS employees if AC walks away.

How does it work anyway? If AC uses TS to serve sun destinations, and uses the AC aircraft they replace to operate in the EU, can they circumvent a lot of this (except in the most slot-constrained airports)?

My point is that the covid new cases situation is improving notably (for whatever reason) at the same time as Federal government policies concerning Canadian airlines are increasingly forcing them to close up shop more than ever. For this I do blame our government. Either help them or don't institute policies that obliterate them as much.

Should they "bail out" the airlines? Maybe, but don't make AC sound like the bully for doing something that is perfectly legal and in fact stated right on the ticket contract when you, I and everybody else purchases a flight. Classic political diversion abuse in the absence of a well thought out government plan after what, 12 months?

I agree that 1,500 votes won't make a difference but the bad press of another botched dossier when Transat goes belly up will influence far more people than that.

Skywatcher wrote:

ElPistolero wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

It sounds harsh but there are advantages to doing it that way: obtaining aircraft at new lower market rates instead of being stuck with TS's deals, trained new hires at bottom of pay scale and bottom of seniority list, no EU or CDN competition review or constraints. If AC wants nothing of that, TS probably implodes, anyway, and AC has spent nothing to remove a competitor.

It’s frankly the most logical way to do it. And in many ways, it was always going to be the end-state. The moment Rouge came onto the market, TS’ days looked numbered. And so it’s proven. That’s not a criticism of Rouge, or AC’s right to pursue Rouge. It’s all fair play.

It does however, create this dilemma where a foreign entity holds the key to TS employees’ well-being because Canadian policies (JVs, protecting EU carriers sixth freedom traffic from non-EU disrupters) have created a situation where one airline dominates close to 70% of a massive market, making it difficult for any competition-oriented analysis to look the other way, especially if other EU carriers decide to play politics.

From a consumer perspective, the outcome is the same regardless of what the EU does. Nothing stopping AC from buying aircraft on the cheap and running those routes anyway at whatever prices they want. The only ones impacted are TS employees and to a lesser degree, shareholders. This is an inevitable consequence of allowing one actor to accrue too much market power - in this case by design - to the extent that the other side may not be able to overlook it even if they wanted to.

COVID may yet shake that up, but for now, the analysis will be done on the basis of pre-COVID numbers - on the assumption that they represent “normal”.

Curiously, I don’t think the crowd that professes concern for Canadian airline jobs will lose much sleep over TS employees if AC walks away.

How does it work anyway? If AC uses TS to serve sun destinations, and uses the AC aircraft they replace to operate in the EU, can they circumvent a lot of this (except in the most slot-constrained airports)?

My point is that the covid new cases situation is improving notably (for whatever reason) at the same time as Federal government policies concerning Canadian airlines are increasingly forcing them to close up shop more than ever. For this I do blame our government. Either help them or don't institute policies that obliterate them as much.

Should they "bail out" the airlines? Maybe, but don't make AC sound like the bully for doing something that is perfectly legal and in fact stated right on the ticket contract when you, I and everybody else purchases a flight. Classic political diversion abuse in the absence of a well thought out government plan after what, 12 months?

I agree that 1,500 votes won't make a difference but the bad press of another botched dossier when Transat goes belly up will influence far more people than that.

I agree. AC has refunded the REFUNDABLE fares. It's the NON REFUNDABLE fares that has people's panties in a knot. And it wasn't even the airlines' fault, the govt banned travel. And then said the airlines giving out vouchers was legal. Until it wasnt okay with them. And then the press went on a witchunt and made the airlines out to the bad guys. So I don't have any sympathy for people that bought a non refundable fare and are now crying a river at the airlines while the govt has just as much if not more of a blame to take in all this. But hey let's not blame the govt at all

777luver wrote:

I agree. AC has refunded the REFUNDABLE fares. It's the NON REFUNDABLE fares that has people's panties in a knot. And it wasn't even the airlines' fault, the govt banned travel. And then said the airlines giving out vouchers was legal. Until it wasnt okay with them. And then the press went on a witchunt and made the airlines out to the bad guys. So I don't have any sympathy for people that bought a non refundable fare and are now crying a river at the airlines while the govt has just as much if not more of a blame to take in all this. But hey let's not blame the govt at all

Has the government made airlines out to be the bad guys? Most of their language has been about equivocation -“complex situation”, “airlines are in a difficult situation” etc. Opposition politicians have made hay, but the governments position has always been whatever is in that CTA “order”. They only talk about refunds when they admit that aid will be conditional on refunds. Is that unreasonable? Other governments have taken the same approach, no?

As to the legality of not providing refunds, it has yet to be tested in court. Airline tariffs are not beyond reproach; governments can rule them unreasonable and force changes whenever they please.

That they haven’t fixed something they can fix with one fell swoop of the pen tells its own tale. And it’s not one of an antagonistic government. If anything, it’s approach so far has pumped billions of non-interest funds into airlines. How many other airlines are getting unconditional zero interest loans?

And on the notion of this being outside airlines’ control, have to take the good with the bad. Airlines benefit in good economic times that are based on factors outside their control. No reason that shouldn’t work the other way too. Unless the idea is that airlines should reap profits when the times are good, but transfer the losses to taxpayers when they’re not. It’s not a reasonable approach.

This AC-TS situation demonstrates that the government doesn’t have it in for airlines. They could have reasonably made life a lot more difficult for AC and TS, but chose not to. They couldn’t, however control how the EU approaches it.

ElPistolero wrote:

Aresxerexade wrote:

A growing airline has nothing to be embarrassed by something they are not even fully tapped into yet. It is akin to comparing a 20 year olds accomplishments to a 85 year olds. Pick on something similar to its own age.

Sure, we can wait another 60 years for WS to stop behaving as conservatively as an 85 year old (not sure the age analogy works well here - 20 year olds are typically more ambitious and energetic 85 year olds).

For the record, WS is the second largest airline in a G7 country. 125 aircraft. Billions in revenue. But its (at best) not interested in 15% of the Canada-EU market, which almost entirely originates in Canada.

Just goes to reinforce the reality that WS is like a (insert Canadian telco) - perfectly profitable in a semi-protected and skewed market (low quality FR products at AC mainline prices etc), but too mollycoddled to succeed outside its comfort zone where it’ll have to step up it’s game to compete.

Odds are that in 10/20/30 years it’ll still be a fringe player complaining about 100 + year old airlines. Plus ca change etc.

This AC-TS ... whatever you want to call it - it doesn’t reflect well on the state of (pre-COVID) Canadian aviation, does it. A Canadian airline is probably going to fold into nothing because we’ve allowed all kinds of JVs, and mollycoddled the ambition out of our own airlines.

Maybe it’s time to take a good long look at TA++ and see if it’s still a good idea. Are these JVs time limited?

Who says they are not interested in that market? They do fly to Europe , and pre pandemic, were poised to launch new routes. Do you think an aggressive and quick expansion is the way to go? Look how well that turned out for so many carriers already, Norwegian as a prime example. If WS was so indeed "mollycoddled", they would not have invested in 10 787's ( with options for 10 more) introduced a remarkable J cabin and service, nor opened their own airport lounge. I do not see any trepidation, on WS's part , to venture out of its comfort zone. In fact, based on all its accomplishments in the last five years, the narrative describes the contrary.

beechnut wrote:

I agree, consolidation will come through shrinkage not mergers. If AC needs some A321LRs it can pick up Transat’s leases when PKP has finished making airplane noises in the cockpits of his parked airplanes, or just order its own when better times come. A lot less trouble than trying to integrate another airline.

At the rate AC is burning cash I think they are being wise not extending the deadline. And would be wiser still to walk away.

Beech

Not so sure. Yes AC is burning cash but they have quite good liquidity and a very well funded pension. They are also reasonably asset rich with a large number of aircraft that are owned and a large number of valuable slots, especially at LHR, FRA, HND, etc. There is also likely going to be a bailout from the Federal Government coming. Even if AC has to provide refunds, the bailout will likely cover this.

The takeover of Transat comes with a fairly significant increase in market share, which, in and of itself, is quite a value laden proposition. The cost of the acquisition is quite small relative to overall losses for 2020. Yes AC needs to be cautious in spending, but the amount to acquire Transat is, in the long run, worth likely more than what AC is paying.

hollywoodcory wrote:

CFM565A1 wrote:

jmt18325 wrote:

Well, my September booking to WAW changed.

I don't think there's been anything concrete from our scheduling about summer/fall cancellations. As others have correctly pointed out, AC seems to be doing things week to week right now so stay tuned!

Those routes were removed for entire summer period, including YHZ/YYT-LHR which has been removed until late October. Yes, as the weeks go on more routes will likely be removed/cancelled as well.

Happened a year ago too and then they re-launched a few. I choose to remain in a wait n'see mode with cancellations and relaunches for something that far off based on past experience. A company equipment bid is on the horizon as well!

EdmFlyBoi wrote:

beechnut wrote:

I agree, consolidation will come through shrinkage not mergers. If AC needs some A321LRs it can pick up Transat’s leases when PKP has finished making airplane noises in the cockpits of his parked airplanes, or just order its own when better times come. A lot less trouble than trying to integrate another airline.

At the rate AC is burning cash I think they are being wise not extending the deadline. And would be wiser still to walk away.

Beech

Not so sure. Yes AC is burning cash but they have quite good liquidity and a very well funded pension. They are also reasonably asset rich with a large number of aircraft that are owned and a large number of valuable slots, especially at LHR, FRA, HND, etc. There is also likely going to be a bailout from the Federal Government coming. Even if AC has to provide refunds, the bailout will likely cover this.

The takeover of Transat comes with a fairly significant increase in market share, which, in and of itself, is quite a value laden proposition. The cost of the acquisition is quite small relative to overall losses for 2020. Yes AC needs to be cautious in spending, but the amount to acquire Transat is, in the long run, worth likely more than what AC is paying.

Agreed. AC knows the long term investment may well be worth otherwise why are they still pursuing it

cirrusdragoon wrote:

Who says they are not interested in that market? They do fly to Europe , and pre pandemic, were poised to launch new routes. .

Competition Bureau:

“In total, the Bureau evaluated the plans and capabilities of over 20 competing airlines based on a review of documents from the Parties and third parties, stakeholder interviews, expert opinion and other information.
...

The Bureau's review did not uncover evidence indicating that entry or expansion by competitors would be likely, timely, or sufficient to constrain a potential exercise of market power on the routes listed in Tables 6 and 7.“

https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic ... 04522.html

Admittedly assuming that WS was one of those 20 carriers and not so irrelevant that they weren’t included at all.

cirrusdragoon wrote:

Do you think an aggressive and quick expansion is the way to go? Look how well that turned out for so many carriers already, Norwegian as a prime example. .

A better comparison would be AC Rouge. Worth pointing out that DY operated in a far more competitive market (or set of markets) than either Canadian carrier.

We did hear quite a lot of complaints from WS folk about how AC was adding too much capacity over the past 5 years. Suggests that the risk aversion/lack of ambition is ingrained.

cirrusdragoon wrote:

If WS was so indeed "mollycoddled", they would not have invested in 10 787's ( with options for 10 more) introduced a remarkable J cabin and service, nor opened their own airport lounge. I do not see any trepidation, on WS's part , to venture out of its comfort zone. In fact, based on all its accomplishments in the last five years, the narrative describes the contrary.

See above. WS’ approach is about as low-risk as they come, given how much air travel - especially leisure travel - has expanded in Canada over the past decade.

Don’t get me wrong - it’s nice that WS is finally trying out an FF program and a J product, but this (IMHO “too little, too late”) risk-averse approach has left it as a bystander with a 15% of the primarily ex-Canada TATL market up for grabs.

ElPistolero wrote:

cirrusdragoon wrote:

Who says they are not interested in that market? They do fly to Europe , and pre pandemic, were poised to launch new routes. .

Competition Bureau:

“In total, the Bureau evaluated the plans and capabilities of over 20 competing airlines based on a review of documents from the Parties and third parties, stakeholder interviews, expert opinion and other information.
...

The Bureau's review did not uncover evidence indicating that entry or expansion by competitors would be likely, timely, or sufficient to constrain a potential exercise of market power on the routes listed in Tables 6 and 7.“

https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic ... 04522.html

Admittedly assuming that WS was one of those 20 carriers and not so irrelevant that they weren’t included at all.

cirrusdragoon wrote:

Do you think an aggressive and quick expansion is the way to go? Look how well that turned out for so many carriers already, Norwegian as a prime example. .

A better comparison would be AC Rouge. Worth pointing out that DY operated in a far more competitive market (or set of markets) than either Canadian carrier.

We did hear quite a lot of complaints from WS folk about how AC was adding too much capacity over the past 5 years. Suggests that the risk aversion/lack of ambition is ingrained.

cirrusdragoon wrote:

If WS was so indeed "mollycoddled", they would not have invested in 10 787's ( with options for 10 more) introduced a remarkable J cabin and service, nor opened their own airport lounge. I do not see any trepidation, on WS's part , to venture out of its comfort zone. In fact, based on all its accomplishments in the last five years, the narrative describes the contrary.

See above. WS’ approach is about as low-risk as they come, given how much air travel - especially leisure travel - has expanded in Canada over the past decade.

Don’t get me wrong - it’s nice that WS is finally trying out an FF program and a J product, but this (IMHO “too little, too late”) risk-averse approach has left it as a bystander with a 15% of the primarily ex-Canada TATL market up for grabs.

I agree, too little too late and now they are playing catch up. Its the honest truth and it will bite them

ElPistolero wrote:

cirrusdragoon wrote:

Who says they are not interested in that market? They do fly to Europe , and pre pandemic, were poised to launch new routes. .

Competition Bureau:

“In total, the Bureau evaluated the plans and capabilities of over 20 competing airlines based on a review of documents from the Parties and third parties, stakeholder interviews, expert opinion and other information.
...

The Bureau's review did not uncover evidence indicating that entry or expansion by competitors would be likely, timely, or sufficient to constrain a potential exercise of market power on the routes listed in Tables 6 and 7.“

https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic ... 04522.html

Admittedly assuming that WS was one of those 20 carriers and not so irrelevant that they weren’t included at all.

cirrusdragoon wrote:

Do you think an aggressive and quick expansion is the way to go? Look how well that turned out for so many carriers already, Norwegian as a prime example. .

A better comparison would be AC Rouge. Worth pointing out that DY operated in a far more competitive market (or set of markets) than either Canadian carrier.

We did hear quite a lot of complaints from WS folk about how AC was adding too much capacity over the past 5 years. Suggests that the risk aversion/lack of ambition is ingrained.

cirrusdragoon wrote:

If WS was so indeed "mollycoddled", they would not have invested in 10 787's ( with options for 10 more) introduced a remarkable J cabin and service, nor opened their own airport lounge. I do not see any trepidation, on WS's part , to venture out of its comfort zone. In fact, based on all its accomplishments in the last five years, the narrative describes the contrary.

See above. WS’ approach is about as low-risk as they come, given how much air travel - especially leisure travel - has expanded in Canada over the past decade.

Don’t get me wrong - it’s nice that WS is finally trying out an FF program and a J product, but this (IMHO “too little, too late”) risk-averse approach has left it as a bystander with a 15% of the primarily ex-Canada TATL market up for grabs.

The competition bureau is not present in WS board rooms, does not have insider knowledge on future strategy, and can only speculate and theorize at best, very much akin to what you write for example.

When entering into new territory , it is best not to bite off too much than you can chew. Expanding too fast and too far is one of the reasons why airlines fail. The other is by not growing at all. Let us recall the overly bold acquisitions made by Canada 3000 as it attempted, unsuccessfully, to position itself as a reincarnated Canadian Airlines. More recently, Virgin Australia. Or perhaps , Air Italy and their cavalier approach.

Nothing is ever too late. I am very much interested on your data and/or detailed analysis of your honest opinions that show it is too late for an airline to expand or acquire market share. An empire, much like Air Canada's empire, took time to develop and at times bit off too much that lead to problematic times circa 1999-2001.

Much like fate of the "Air Transat acquisition", time will tell what truly transpires.

More photos (outside of the paint hangar): https://www.instagram.com/p/CLccyfRhYbq/

And more details from the hanagar: https://www.facebook.com/AeronewsGlobal ... 6334474106

Very beautiful , love it.

Since we moved the discussion onto paint, AC registered their first A220-300 in honor of Calvin Rovinescu:

https://simpleflying.com/air-canada-ceo-retirement-airbus-a220/

SyracuseAvGeek wrote:

This video is from a flight on an Air Canada Beech-1900D from Toronto to Syracuse.

https://youtu.be/o03VIMnC46A

The Syracuse was discontinued (along with Rochester and Harrisburg) after they retired that aircraft type in 2018.

When might these cities see international service again after covid?

If the route wasn't able to be sustained with the B1900, is there a business case for it to come back post covid, and with what aircraft? I mean I'm sure that there is a market to fly into ROC, SYR, BDL, just not for AC.

basspaul wrote:

Since we moved the discussion onto paint, AC registered their first A220-300 in honor of Calvin Rovinescu:

https://simpleflying.com/air-canada-ceo-retirement-airbus-a220/

I'm being picky but C-GROV is FIN 101 delivered to AC last year.....they are reporting this a year later lol

Not sure if this has been mentioned (only read current page in the thread) but Rovinescu says a deal with the feds is close: https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.citynew ... eport/amp/

Great to see a new iteration of the TCA retro jet.

Dominion301 wrote:

Not sure if this has been mentioned (only read current page in the thread) but Rovinescu says a deal with the feds is close: https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.citynew ... eport/amp/

Great to see a new iteration of the TCA retro jet.

The article is dated the 16th and Rovinescu's last day on the job was the 15th. Hard to say what will come of it as its been dragging on for months.
Yeah, that retro paint job looks hot, especially in one of the linked images depicting a full view of the aircraft outside the hangar.

crosscheckyyz wrote:

SyracuseAvGeek wrote:

This video is from a flight on an Air Canada Beech-1900D from Toronto to Syracuse.

https://youtu.be/o03VIMnC46A

The Syracuse was discontinued (along with Rochester and Harrisburg) after they retired that aircraft type in 2018.

When might these cities see international service again after covid?

If the route wasn't able to be sustained with the B1900, is there a business case for it to come back post covid, and with what aircraft? I mean I'm sure that there is a market to fly into ROC, SYR, BDL, just not for AC.

I believe AC will return to BDL, there is a long history of AC serving Hartford and not just YYZ but also YUL. Pre covid all flights were going to CRJ-200, loads are not not great, typically in the 50's and 60's but I bet the flights make money with some business connections between Hartford and Canada as well as a connecting point for Europe.

Did anyone else notice that AC611 a 7M8 from YHZ-YYZ didn't go above Fl200 and Fl180 for the entire flight today.

Wonder what that was about.

While raising items for anyone know why: - On the 16th, A220 C-GJXE flew YYZ-PHX and has been there since (today 19th) with no flights showing in upcoming days. Why the prolonged visit for an A220 to PHX? Not a site for maintenance nor likely for storage.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airc ... e#26d6137c

Just a reminder if you are posting images or news articles they need to be properly sourced, including providing a link to the actual source. Failure to do so will result in post/s being deleted for not adhering to the copyright and advertising rules as stated in the forum rules

AC619 Operated by another 7M8 that didnt go over Fl200. Same route YHZ-YYZ but different plane. Very bizarre considering the other maxes have been flying at normal altitudes.

https://fr24.com/data/flights/ac619#26dd6df1

yyztpa2 wrote:

While raising items for anyone know why: - On the 16th, A220 C-GJXE flew YYZ-PHX and has been there since (today 19th) with no flights showing in upcoming days. Why the prolonged visit for an A220 to PHX? Not a site for maintenance nor likely for storage.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airc ... e#26d6137c

C-GJXN did YUL-PHX today aswell. Very strange considering they said they want to rely more on the 220 for domestic flying.

https://fr24.com/data/aircraft/c-gjxn#26dcba58

jumbojettony wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

While raising items for anyone know why: - On the 16th, A220 C-GJXE flew YYZ-PHX and has been there since (today 19th) with no flights showing in upcoming days. Why the prolonged visit for an A220 to PHX? Not a site for maintenance nor likely for storage.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airc ... e#26d6137c

C-GJXN did YUL-PHX today aswell. Very strange considering they said they want to rely more on the 220 for domestic flying.

https://fr24.com/data/aircraft/c-gjxn#26dcba58

2xxx flight numbers are ferry flights, charters or cargo not normal pax revenue flights...

Whiteguy wrote:

jumbojettony wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

While raising items for anyone know why: - On the 16th, A220 C-GJXE flew YYZ-PHX and has been there since (today 19th) with no flights showing in upcoming days. Why the prolonged visit for an A220 to PHX? Not a site for maintenance nor likely for storage.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airc ... e#26d6137c

C-GJXN did YUL-PHX today aswell. Very strange considering they said they want to rely more on the 220 for domestic flying.

https://fr24.com/data/aircraft/c-gjxn#26dcba58

2xxx flight numbers are ferry flights, charters or cargo not normal pax revenue flights...

Agree with you. The flight number used for both A220 was AC2357 and these appear to be ferries with fligh number most recently used to reposition or test fly Max before their return to service.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ac2357
I was asking for reason for the flights and then staying there. Does not appear to be charter.

jumbojettony wrote:

AC619 Operated by another 7M8 that didnt go over Fl200. Same route YHZ-YYZ but different plane. Very bizarre considering the other maxes have been flying at normal altitudes.

https://fr24.com/data/flights/ac619#26dd6df1

Going out on a limb here, but I was watching flights at cruise last evening, and the eastbound flights in the YYZ - YUL - YHZ corridor were all going well over 700 mph. Westbound ones seemed to be lucky to achieve 400mph. Could it be possible that the turbulence and extreme headwinds had westbound flights from Halifax staying around FL200 ? Seemed to me there was a very strong jet stream running that routing. Even at the moment, ETH501 out of JFK is southeast of Halifax cruising at 705mph at FL 350 .

https://www.stattimes.com/news/air-cana ... air-cargo/

New AC cargo president interview

https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/c ... 69043.html

Looks like SkyRegional is no more. 25 E175s are being transferred to Jazz. Jazz will operate 100% of AC's 70+ seat regional flying.

It also appears the DH3 fleet is being removed from AC flying. Going forward to be a CR2/CR9/DH4/E75 fleet. It will be interesting to see how this all balances out. Pre-COVID the DH4s had gone west (exclusive of YTZ ops) and the DH3 fleet was primarily handling regional ops from YYZ.

shoelessjoe wrote:

It also appears the DH3 fleet is being removed from AC flying. Going forward to be a CR2/CR9/DH4/E75 fleet. It will be interesting to see how this all balances out. Pre-COVID the DH4s had gone west (exclusive of YTZ ops) and the DH3 fleet was primarily handling regional ops from YYZ.

I had noticed that the CRJ2 seemed to have come back into service on Jazz flights over the past few weeks. It looks like their retirement will wait a bit longer.

With the DH3 gone, I highly doubt you will see AC resurrect some of their smaller station closures from over the past year.

Smaller cities closer to a larger population base prefer the frequency the B190, DH1 and DH3 were able to provide. Now your lowest option has become a 50-seat jet from yesteryear.
People in Lethrbridge, Medicine Hat, North Bay, etc. are close enough to drive to another AC station without having to wait for their now 1x daily flight on a CR2 or DH4.

I guess AC got what they wanted out of QK . With Chorus stock price 1/2 of what it was at it's peak, and if the TS deal falls thru, maybe AC could re-purchase Jazz. Wait 5-10 years once things are rosy again and IPO it again. Chorus has already done the hard work with all their internal cost cuttings.

yyztpa2 wrote:

shoelessjoe wrote:

It also appears the DH3 fleet is being removed from AC flying. Going forward to be a CR2/CR9/DH4/E75 fleet. It will be interesting to see how this all balances out. Pre-COVID the DH4s had gone west (exclusive of YTZ ops) and the DH3 fleet was primarily handling regional ops from YYZ.

I had noticed that the CRJ2 seemed to have come back into service on Jazz flights over the past few weeks. It looks like their retirement will wait a bit longer.

As far as I remember going back to last April/May, the CR2 never did get entirely grounded. At the lowest points 3 or 4 were still active all based out of YUL. I guess this means some DH4s will come back east for the likes of YTS, YSB, YQG, YXU, etc. I imagine there will be a mix of CRJs there too. It probably also means some CRJ transborder stations won't come back like MKE, IND, etc...unless AC want to operate them 1x daily primarily to feed YYZ's peak overseas bank. Interesting times indeed.

I imagine these cuts will provide opportunities for Porter when they eventually get back in the air. They'll probably take a hard look at giving YYB another go.

What are AC 789s doing in ATL?