nascar1 wrote:

Any news when S23 schedule will be announced?

IMO it'll probably be next week. If not next week they might even wait until mid-November until the slot allocation comes out for LHR and AMS maybe?

ZazuPIT wrote:

CrewBunk wrote:

Acey wrote:

When I was at YEG I could see, as a ratio, the number of local vs onward pax on KL's YEG-AMS. It was obviously significant.

KLM has a good reputation and an excellent product connecting through AMS, and still only flies four times a week. I have to imagine if stronger European demand were there, they’d be flying daily.

Saw this a couple weeks ago, seems YEG could lose KL. Didn't see it posted previously.

https://www.routesonline.com/news/29/br ... green-cap/

It's interesting that YUL and BOS are also there. In the case of YUL, they'd still have TS to AMS seasonally whereas in the case of BOS, KL would still have Skyteam partner DL flying the route.

IceCream wrote:

https://westjet.mediaroom.com/2022-10-19-WestJet-to-offer-service-between-Terrace,-B-C-,-and-Calgary

WestJet today announced that it will add four-times weekly service between Terrace, B.C., and Calgary, beginning December 1, 2022.

Westjet and Air Canada both offered the direct service in 2015 at the height of liquefied natural gas development speculation in the northwest but both withdrew when passenger numbers failed to live up to expectations.

This route was then re-attempted back in 2018 , launched with twice-weekly service, and then just six months after WS introducing the service it was cut due to poor performance.

What has changed now is LNG Canada recently announced that they are now past the 70 per cent completion mark of the liquefied natural gas export terminal project in Terrace, its mega-billion project to export a super-cooled and liquefied version of the fuel overseas. WS no doubt is anticipating better traffic following this development.

cirrusdragoon wrote:

IceCream wrote:

https://westjet.mediaroom.com/2022-10-19-WestJet-to-offer-service-between-Terrace,-B-C-,-and-Calgary

WestJet today announced that it will add four-times weekly service between Terrace, B.C., and Calgary, beginning December 1, 2022.

Westjet and Air Canada both offered the direct service in 2015 at the height of liquefied natural gas development speculation in the northwest but both withdrew when passenger numbers failed to live up to expectations.

This route was then re-attempted back in 2018 , launched with twice-weekly service, and then just six months after WS introducing the service it was cut due to poor performance.

What has changed now is LNG Canada recently announced that they are now past the 70 per cent completion mark of the liquefied natural gas export terminal project in Terrace, its mega-billion project to export a super-cooled and liquefied version of the fuel overseas. WS no doubt is anticipating better traffic following this development.

Interestingly AC is also resuming it twice weekly in November, but they stayed on the route right until covid happened. There has to be some sort of market if both airlines are repeatedly attempting this route.

IceCream wrote:

cirrusdragoon wrote:

IceCream wrote:

https://westjet.mediaroom.com/2022-10-19-WestJet-to-offer-service-between-Terrace,-B-C-,-and-Calgary

WestJet today announced that it will add four-times weekly service between Terrace, B.C., and Calgary, beginning December 1, 2022.

Westjet and Air Canada both offered the direct service in 2015 at the height of liquefied natural gas development speculation in the northwest but both withdrew when passenger numbers failed to live up to expectations.

This route was then re-attempted back in 2018 , launched with twice-weekly service, and then just six months after WS introducing the service it was cut due to poor performance.

What has changed now is LNG Canada recently announced that they are now past the 70 per cent completion mark of the liquefied natural gas export terminal project in Terrace, its mega-billion project to export a super-cooled and liquefied version of the fuel overseas. WS no doubt is anticipating better traffic following this development.

Interestingly AC is also resuming it twice weekly in November, but they stayed on the route right until covid happened. There has to be some sort of market if both airlines are repeatedly attempting this route.

Absolutely, and there is a burgeoning market for sure as the terrace region will benefit from the LNG industry.

berari wrote:

Acey wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

lol

Someone's insecurity at YEG's strong performance showing through here...

He's wrong in the sense that old YEG was not the Canadian hub of ULCC and low yielding fares.

However, that is quite clearly the case now and it continues to trend in that direction. YEG is strong in metrics that aren't particularly favourable for YEG.

It's not just Swoop. Even Flair has its headquarters at YEG and we see their flights growing there. I chuckled at YEG strong performance.

Actually Swoop has its headquarters in YYC. Not to mention WS, which by their own description is going back to their low cost approach. By your metric, this must really show the decline of YYC. Can't sustain network carriers.

cirrusdragoon wrote:

IceCream wrote:

https://westjet.mediaroom.com/2022-10-19-WestJet-to-offer-service-between-Terrace,-B-C-,-and-Calgary

WestJet today announced that it will add four-times weekly service between Terrace, B.C., and Calgary, beginning December 1, 2022.

Westjet and Air Canada both offered the direct service in 2015 at the height of liquefied natural gas development speculation in the northwest but both withdrew when passenger numbers failed to live up to expectations.

This route was then re-attempted back in 2018 , launched with twice-weekly service, and then just six months after WS introducing the service it was cut due to poor performance.

What has changed now is LNG Canada recently announced that they are now past the 70 per cent completion mark of the liquefied natural gas export terminal project in Terrace, its mega-billion project to export a super-cooled and liquefied version of the fuel overseas. WS no doubt is anticipating better traffic following this development.

Good local intel

But to me most of the travel would have been generated during construction as opposed to operation. I guess we'll see if this route sticks around.

YEGFlyer wrote:

Actually Swoop has its headquarters in YYC. Not to mention WS, which by their own description is going back to their low cost approach. By your metric, this must really show the decline of YYC. Can't sustain network carriers.

The difference is that at YEG, ULCC growth has come at the expense of "network carriers". Not only has that not really been the case here, but WS wants to increase the mainline operation here by more than 50%.

WS fares still match AC dollar for dollar. If they intend for that to no longer be the case, then there's a discussion to be had about them being an actual LCC... but for now, they're still flying transatlantic Dreamliners with pods and have a better lounge for premium pax than Air Canada.

Acey wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Actually Swoop has its headquarters in YYC. Not to mention WS, which by their own description is going back to their low cost approach. By your metric, this must really show the decline of YYC. Can't sustain network carriers.

The difference is that at YEG, ULCC growth has come at the expense of "network carriers". Not only has that not really been the case here, but WS wants to increase the mainline operation here by more than 50%.

WS fares still match AC dollar for dollar. If they intend for that to no longer be the case, then there's a discussion to be had about them being an actual LCC... but for now, they're still flying transatlantic Dreamliners with pods and have a better lounge for premium pax than Air Canada.

Better lounge? How so? Can’t be true *sarcasm*
Genuine question tho

777luver wrote:

Acey wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Actually Swoop has its headquarters in YYC. Not to mention WS, which by their own description is going back to their low cost approach. By your metric, this must really show the decline of YYC. Can't sustain network carriers.

The difference is that at YEG, ULCC growth has come at the expense of "network carriers". Not only has that not really been the case here, but WS wants to increase the mainline operation here by more than 50%.

WS fares still match AC dollar for dollar. If they intend for that to no longer be the case, then there's a discussion to be had about them being an actual LCC... but for now, they're still flying transatlantic Dreamliners with pods and have a better lounge for premium pax than Air Canada.

Better lounge? How so? Can’t be true *sarcasm*
Genuine question tho

How is it not better? Genuine question

cirrusdragoon wrote:

777luver wrote:

Acey wrote:

The difference is that at YEG, ULCC growth has come at the expense of "network carriers". Not only has that not really been the case here, but WS wants to increase the mainline operation here by more than 50%.

WS fares still match AC dollar for dollar. If they intend for that to no longer be the case, then there's a discussion to be had about them being an actual LCC... but for now, they're still flying transatlantic Dreamliners with pods and have a better lounge for premium pax than Air Canada.

Better lounge? How so? Can’t be true *sarcasm*
Genuine question tho

How is it not better? Genuine question

WS Calgary lounge is actually quite nice. Good food and wine options. Nice layout. Even the AC lounge in Calgary is quite nice compared to some of the other.

When it comes to other airports WS is using contract lounges and it is a mixed bag. The Plaza Premium lounges in Canada tend to have more food options than Maple Leaf. Drinks can go either way. Layout can go either way. Coffee can go either way.

777luver wrote:

Better lounge? How so? Can’t be true *sarcasm*
Genuine question tho

To be clear, I am talking about Calgary and Calgary only, since this discussion devolved into YYC vs YEG. The brand new WestJet lounge in Calgary is better, IMO, than the AC lounge here. Again, Calgary only. This is the only place WS actually has their own lounge.

This really only matters in the context of WS becoming an alleged LCC, who obviously typically do not have lounges of this caliber. Beating the AC lounge at your home base is not a particularly notable accomplishment.

Acey wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Actually Swoop has its headquarters in YYC. Not to mention WS, which by their own description is going back to their low cost approach. By your metric, this must really show the decline of YYC. Can't sustain network carriers.

The difference is that at YEG, ULCC growth has come at the expense of "network carriers". Not only has that not really been the case here, but WS wants to increase the mainline operation here by more than 50%.

WS fares still match AC dollar for dollar. If they intend for that to no longer be the case, then there's a discussion to be had about them being an actual LCC... but for now, they're still flying transatlantic Dreamliners with pods and have a better lounge for premium pax than Air Canada.

The real difference is that the distinction between types of airlines is becoming less and less relevant. Both ULCCs and legacies provide comparable service, for 90% of travelers. The notion of ranking airports poorly when they offer more ULCC service is ridiculous and actually opposite to what matters to the vast majority of travelers (price, nonstop services).

YEGFlyer wrote:

Acey wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Actually Swoop has its headquarters in YYC. Not to mention WS, which by their own description is going back to their low cost approach. By your metric, this must really show the decline of YYC. Can't sustain network carriers.

The difference is that at YEG, ULCC growth has come at the expense of "network carriers". Not only has that not really been the case here, but WS wants to increase the mainline operation here by more than 50%.

WS fares still match AC dollar for dollar. If they intend for that to no longer be the case, then there's a discussion to be had about them being an actual LCC... but for now, they're still flying transatlantic Dreamliners with pods and have a better lounge for premium pax than Air Canada.

The real difference is that the distinction between types of airlines is becoming less and less relevant. Both ULCCs and legacies provide comparable service, for 90% of travelers. The notion of ranking airports poorly when they offer more ULCC service is ridiculous and actually opposite to what matters to the vast majority of travelers (price, nonstop services).

I don't know if I'd say they provide comparable service just yet. Being able to access a wide variety of places in North America and abroad can only be done through network carriers, and the frequencies of network carriers are significantly better than anything ULCC's can provide. There's a long long way to go before any ULCC can provide any sort of comparable service to any network carrier. Twice weekly YEG-LAX is not comparable at all to WS' own flight.

If you're not flying to Kelowna or Toronto or Vancouver you're going to probably be facing some problems flying with Flair.

YEGFlyer wrote:

Acey wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Actually Swoop has its headquarters in YYC. Not to mention WS, which by their own description is going back to their low cost approach. By your metric, this must really show the decline of YYC. Can't sustain network carriers.

The difference is that at YEG, ULCC growth has come at the expense of "network carriers". Not only has that not really been the case here, but WS wants to increase the mainline operation here by more than 50%.

WS fares still match AC dollar for dollar. If they intend for that to no longer be the case, then there's a discussion to be had about them being an actual LCC... but for now, they're still flying transatlantic Dreamliners with pods and have a better lounge for premium pax than Air Canada.

The real difference is that the distinction between types of airlines is becoming less and less relevant. Both ULCCs and legacies provide comparable service, for 90% of travelers. The notion of ranking airports poorly when they offer more ULCC service is ridiculous and actually opposite to what matters to the vast majority of travelers (price, nonstop services).

There is a massive difference, frequency and connections.
If you fly Flair you have limited times you can fly, and for some areas limited days a week. If you are flying between one of Calgary, Toronto and Vancouver its pretty easy but outside of that you need to adjust your schedule pretty dramatically or get onto a airline with a proper networK to connect.
And business travellers (who I assume make up more than 10% of travellers) still don't touch ULCC's. Heck our large consulting firm sent out a notice saying we can't take them even if cheaper (we are suppose to book cheapest direct fares).

ddp wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Acey wrote:

The difference is that at YEG, ULCC growth has come at the expense of "network carriers". Not only has that not really been the case here, but WS wants to increase the mainline operation here by more than 50%.

WS fares still match AC dollar for dollar. If they intend for that to no longer be the case, then there's a discussion to be had about them being an actual LCC... but for now, they're still flying transatlantic Dreamliners with pods and have a better lounge for premium pax than Air Canada.

The real difference is that the distinction between types of airlines is becoming less and less relevant. Both ULCCs and legacies provide comparable service, for 90% of travelers. The notion of ranking airports poorly when they offer more ULCC service is ridiculous and actually opposite to what matters to the vast majority of travelers (price, nonstop services).

There is a massive difference, frequency and connections.
If you fly Flair you have limited times you can fly, and for some areas limited days a week. If you are flying between one of Calgary, Toronto and Vancouver its pretty easy but outside of that you need to adjust your schedule pretty dramatically or get onto a airline with a proper networK to connect.
And business travellers (who I assume make up more than 10% of travellers) still don't touch ULCC's. Heck our large consulting firm sent out a notice saying we can't take them even if cheaper (we are suppose to book cheapest direct fares).

The key word here is "becoming". I'm not saying they are entirely comparable today. But I am saying that the trend line is clear.

YEGFlyer wrote:

Both ULCCs and legacies provide comparable service, for 90% of travelers. The notion of ranking airports poorly when they offer more ULCC service is ridiculous and actually opposite to what matters to the vast majority of travelers (price, nonstop services).

From your airport this is somewhat true, because your airport is the mecca of the ULCC. From every other major airport in the country, they fail miserably in the latter of these 2 metrics and 90% of the travelers who you claim care so much about nonstop services do not fly ULCC for this reason.

Been a while since I've seen a Flair plane down here on the international side, though I recall seeing one sometime ago with 10 people on it. Where have they gone? From my window I can see 2 Flair MAX's parked on runway 26 because there's no crews to fly them till next year. That must explain it.

Thoughts from all of the discussion above:

* Being someone in YEG I agree anecdotally I have seen a lot of cases where many were Westjet fans primarily for easy access to their winter homes in PSP or PHX for example and that drove a lot of their other flying behavior favoring Westjet.

* I wonder if Westjet creating the mega hub at YYC might mean AC draws down even a bit further in YYC and flies more YEG traffic direct where they are going or through other their other hubs.

* Edmonton remains one of the fastest growing areas in the country as noted above. It should absolutely be seen as a growth market with potential.

* I very much appreciate that YEG has to show a very strong demand (higher than what hubs show) to earn a flight. Appreciate the numbers sharing and as noted it's such a complicated task to get a proper idea of demand when you factor in people flying KLM, a US based airline, driving to a different airport, etc...

Acey wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Both ULCCs and legacies provide comparable service, for 90% of travelers. The notion of ranking airports poorly when they offer more ULCC service is ridiculous and actually opposite to what matters to the vast majority of travelers (price, nonstop services).

From your airport this is somewhat true, because your airport is the mecca of the ULCC. From every other major airport in the country, they fail miserably in the latter of these 2 metrics and 90% of the travelers who you claim care so much about nonstop services do not fly ULCC for this reason.

Been a while since I've seen a Flair plane down here on the international side, though I recall seeing one sometime ago with 10 people on it. Where have they gone? From my window I can see 2 Flair MAX's parked on runway 26 because there's no crews to fly them till next year. That must explain it.

As ULCCs grow, offering more routes, they will only become more convenient, not less. We have to look at overall trends rather than just point in time analysis. But this doesn't really matter, the evidence is right there before our eyes how airports are falling over themselves to bring ULCCs into their market. This dispels the notion of ULCC presence being "bad" for a market.

YEGFlyer wrote:

Acey wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Both ULCCs and legacies provide comparable service, for 90% of travelers. The notion of ranking airports poorly when they offer more ULCC service is ridiculous and actually opposite to what matters to the vast majority of travelers (price, nonstop services).

From your airport this is somewhat true, because your airport is the mecca of the ULCC. From every other major airport in the country, they fail miserably in the latter of these 2 metrics and 90% of the travelers who you claim care so much about nonstop services do not fly ULCC for this reason.

Been a while since I've seen a Flair plane down here on the international side, though I recall seeing one sometime ago with 10 people on it. Where have they gone? From my window I can see 2 Flair MAX's parked on runway 26 because there's no crews to fly them till next year. That must explain it.

As ULCCs grow, offering more routes, they will only become more convenient, not less. We have to look at overall trends rather than just point in time analysis. But this doesn't really matter, the evidence is right there before our eyes how airports are falling over themselves to bring ULCCs into their market. This dispels the notion of ULCC presence being "bad" for a market.

Yeah, I don’t really understand the notion that ULCCs taking over from AC/WS is a “bad” thing. That’s quite literally the market choosing. If anything, it’s not flattering for the two incumbents that they’ve been forced to cut flights because of a ULCC.

I think YYC will see pax move towards ULCCs too. It’s probably happening already, notwithstanding that they account for a smaller proportion of pax at a much larger airport. WS/AC won’t get squeezed out of YYC, but that’s hardly indicative of ULCC performance (unless we assume that they are only a “success” when others start cutting routes).

ElPistolero wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Acey wrote:

From your airport this is somewhat true, because your airport is the mecca of the ULCC. From every other major airport in the country, they fail miserably in the latter of these 2 metrics and 90% of the travelers who you claim care so much about nonstop services do not fly ULCC for this reason.

Been a while since I've seen a Flair plane down here on the international side, though I recall seeing one sometime ago with 10 people on it. Where have they gone? From my window I can see 2 Flair MAX's parked on runway 26 because there's no crews to fly them till next year. That must explain it.

As ULCCs grow, offering more routes, they will only become more convenient, not less. We have to look at overall trends rather than just point in time analysis. But this doesn't really matter, the evidence is right there before our eyes how airports are falling over themselves to bring ULCCs into their market. This dispels the notion of ULCC presence being "bad" for a market.

Yeah, I don’t really understand the notion that ULCCs taking over from AC/WS is a “bad” thing. That’s quite literally the market choosing. If anything, it’s not flattering for the two incumbents that they’ve been forced to cut flights because of a ULCC.

I think YYC will see pax move towards ULCCs too. It’s probably happening already, notwithstanding that they account for a smaller proportion of pax at a much larger airport. WS/AC won’t get squeezed out of YYC, but that’s hardly indicative of ULCC performance (unless we assume that they are only a “success” when others start cutting routes).

In what ways have WS or AC been forced to cut flights because of the ULCC's?

Why on earth would people argue that the ULCCs are harming the Canadian market? AC still flies like 20 flights between YYZ and YVR/YUL, with a bunch being wide bodies, Calgary is still quite a significant base, flights to international destinations remain and are expanding, the only airline that may be taking a hit is WS, and they are making up for that with having Swoop around, stealing ULCC market share.

While I have never flown flair once in my life (even though they serve YKF, my local airport), I am so happy they exist, mainly because AC fares in Canada have gotten so much lower. Finding a 220 RT fare between YYZ and YVR was pretty much impossible before flair started flying that route. Flights to Phoenix, Florida, Montreal, Alberta, etc are all much lower than what they were even 5 years ago. You can see this by looking at fares for route pairs that are not operated by a ULCC (Like Yellowknife, Whitehorse, a lot of the US market, or until recently, st johns). Typical prices before the ULCCs came about were around 500$. They've cut my air fares in Canada in half.

IceCream wrote:

ElPistolero wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

As ULCCs grow, offering more routes, they will only become more convenient, not less. We have to look at overall trends rather than just point in time analysis. But this doesn't really matter, the evidence is right there before our eyes how airports are falling over themselves to bring ULCCs into their market. This dispels the notion of ULCC presence being "bad" for a market.

Yeah, I don’t really understand the notion that ULCCs taking over from AC/WS is a “bad” thing. That’s quite literally the market choosing. If anything, it’s not flattering for the two incumbents that they’ve been forced to cut flights because of a ULCC.

I think YYC will see pax move towards ULCCs too. It’s probably happening already, notwithstanding that they account for a smaller proportion of pax at a much larger airport. WS/AC won’t get squeezed out of YYC, but that’s hardly indicative of ULCC performance (unless we assume that they are only a “success” when others start cutting routes).

In what ways have WS or AC been forced to cut flights because of the ULCC's?

Don’t know; was just referencing this further up thread:

Acey wrote:

The difference is that at YEG, ULCC growth has come at the expense of "network carriers".

At YEG, it's clearly true to a degree. Swoop and Flair growth paralleled a mainline WestJet decline. AC had drawn down YEG prior to ULCC so I don't even correlate the two. I'm not saying this is or isn't harming the Canadian market.

At YYC, there's no significant evidence of it.

CrewBunk wrote:

Acey wrote:

When I was at YEG I could see, as a ratio, the number of local vs onward pax on KL's YEG-AMS. It was obviously significant.

KLM has a good reputation and an excellent product connecting through AMS, and still only flies four times a week. I have to imagine if stronger European demand were there, they’d be flying daily.

Slots.

BASE10 wrote:

Thoughts from all of the discussion above:

* Being someone in YEG I agree anecdotally I have seen a lot of cases where many were Westjet fans primarily for easy access to their winter homes in PSP or PHX for example and that drove a lot of their other flying behavior favoring Westjet.

* I wonder if Westjet creating the mega hub at YYC might mean AC draws down even a bit further in YYC and flies more YEG traffic direct where they are going or through other their other hubs.

* Edmonton remains one of the fastest growing areas in the country as noted above. It should absolutely be seen as a growth market with potential.

* I very much appreciate that YEG has to show a very strong demand (higher than what hubs show) to earn a flight. Appreciate the numbers sharing and as noted it's such a complicated task to get a proper idea of demand when you factor in people flying KLM, a US based airline, driving to a different airport, etc...

Very true. Especially the people who are accustomed to flying WS to Phoenix so they try to always fly WS for business. I think that is a surprisingly large group.

I see AC getting squeezed at YYC, but also squeezed at YEG. AC doesn't appear to tolerate lower margins at any station unless it has some strategic benefit.

YEGFlyer wrote:

CrewBunk wrote:

Acey wrote:

When I was at YEG I could see, as a ratio, the number of local vs onward pax on KL's YEG-AMS. It was obviously significant.

KLM has a good reputation and an excellent product connecting through AMS, and still only flies four times a week. I have to imagine if stronger European demand were there, they’d be flying daily.

Slots.

KLM obviously has such a large operation, if YEG were such an untapped market with great profit potential they could easily make space for 3 more weekly slots.
WS could've restarted YEG-LGW and might have done well on it to be fair, so I guess there's a market there, but with their recent announcement it doesn't seem like that'll happen.

YEGFlyer wrote:

CrewBunk wrote:

Acey wrote:

When I was at YEG I could see, as a ratio, the number of local vs onward pax on KL's YEG-AMS. It was obviously significant.

KLM has a good reputation and an excellent product connecting through AMS, and still only flies four times a week. I have to imagine if stronger European demand were there, they’d be flying daily.

Slots.

Weird that KLM magically has found the slots to support daily or 5/6x weekly service to their other Canadian stations, but once YEG is involved the restriction is "slots".

It surely has nothing to do with the fact that YEG-AMS at its current service level seldom goes out near full, and loads weakened in August while YVR and YUL strengthened.

BASE10 wrote:

Thoughts from all of the discussion above:


* Edmonton remains one of the fastest growing areas in the country as noted above. It should absolutely be seen as a growth market with potential.

.

Perhaps, but if WS doesn't see the potential given their market share, I'm not sure that AC or others would too. I'm not sure how the EAA is run now, but I recall them losing a lot of confidence when they made decisions like subsidizing the IcelandAir flights ~2013. Back when I was living in YZF, it was easy to connect via YEG to most US southern destinations and most of that has eroded to YVR/YYC and LCC, moreso than other places. If the business case was there somebody would be flying the routes.

yzfElite wrote:

BASE10 wrote:

Thoughts from all of the discussion above:


* Edmonton remains one of the fastest growing areas in the country as noted above. It should absolutely be seen as a growth market with potential.

.

Perhaps, but if WS doesn't see the potential given their market share, I'm not sure that AC or others would too. I'm not sure how the EAA is run now, but I recall them losing a lot of confidence when they made decisions like subsidizing the IcelandAir flights ~2013. Back when I was living in YZF, it was easy to connect via YEG to most US southern destinations and most of that has eroded to YVR/YYC and LCC, moreso than other places. If the business case was there somebody would be flying the routes.

Back then most US flights left in the early morning so not sure how easy it really was? The early AM USA flights catered to local businesses traffic. (Taking the cream off the top of the market). As I've mentioned it has been a long time since there's been a true hub where connections are actually facilitated at YEG. It's overdue for that to come back.

yzfElite wrote:

BASE10 wrote:

Thoughts from all of the discussion above:


* Edmonton remains one of the fastest growing areas in the country as noted above. It should absolutely be seen as a growth market with potential.

.

Perhaps, but if WS doesn't see the potential given their market share, I'm not sure that AC or others would too. I'm not sure how the EAA is run now, but I recall them losing a lot of confidence when they made decisions like subsidizing the IcelandAir flights ~2013. Back when I was living in YZF, it was easy to connect via YEG to most US southern destinations and most of that has eroded to YVR/YYC and LCC, moreso than other places. If the business case was there somebody would be flying the routes.

Regarding ACs displeasure with Iceland Air- the story has been told many times from different perspectives. It's a bit of a legend, but it's old news. AC has expanded in interesting ways at YEG lately. I'm curious to see what their next steps are especially as ULCCs bite into YVR, YYZ, YUL markets.

Separate topic:

Any intel on Delta/WS JV future application/revision? I would imagine with -- 1) WS's Canada westcoast-focused initiatives and/or 2) a world with potential AA/B6 NEA approval -- that the required government contingency (LGA slot divestments) would be lessened greatly or erased entirely. I guess Delta/WS are just waiting it out when there's more ULCC competition at LGA before re-submitting. (?)

YEGFlyer wrote:

yzfElite wrote:

BASE10 wrote:

Thoughts from all of the discussion above:


* Edmonton remains one of the fastest growing areas in the country as noted above. It should absolutely be seen as a growth market with potential.

.

Perhaps, but if WS doesn't see the potential given their market share, I'm not sure that AC or others would too. I'm not sure how the EAA is run now, but I recall them losing a lot of confidence when they made decisions like subsidizing the IcelandAir flights ~2013. Back when I was living in YZF, it was easy to connect via YEG to most US southern destinations and most of that has eroded to YVR/YYC and LCC, moreso than other places. If the business case was there somebody would be flying the routes.

Back then most US flights left in the early morning so not sure how easy it really was? The early AM USA flights catered to local businesses traffic. (Taking the cream off the top of the market). As I've mentioned it has been a long time since there's been a true hub where connections are actually facilitated at YEG. It's overdue for that to come back.

Unfortunately, not every city in the world can be a hub so it's not really overdue. At the end of the day YEG (also YYC) are relatively small North American cities and Canada is a relatively small country. There just isn't demand every city to be some sort of a connecting hub with multiple banks. American cities significantly larger than Calgary or Edmonton can barely get any flights to Europe at all and have relatively small airports. If YEG truly had so much potential someone out there would have started more flights. The reality is WS and AC don't see a large market in YEG that cannot easily be connected through YVR/YYC/YUL/YYZ. DL has left, UA IAH was dropped, even AS to SEA seems to be permanently down to 1x daily.

WS isn't some evil spawn of Satan trying to destroy YEG or smaller airports, they're just doing what's best for them to operate their business and minimize losses.

With regard to AC so far the only real addition is a twice-weekly seasonal flight to Cancun. They've completely gutted domestic flying out of YEG, slashing YMM/YQU/YZF/YXE/YYJ/YLW/YWG. But don't get me wrong, this is a great addition. But WS isn't unique to cutting YEG flights.

YEGFlyer wrote:

yzfElite wrote:

BASE10 wrote:

Thoughts from all of the discussion above:


* Edmonton remains one of the fastest growing areas in the country as noted above. It should absolutely be seen as a growth market with potential.

.

Perhaps, but if WS doesn't see the potential given their market share, I'm not sure that AC or others would too. I'm not sure how the EAA is run now, but I recall them losing a lot of confidence when they made decisions like subsidizing the IcelandAir flights ~2013. Back when I was living in YZF, it was easy to connect via YEG to most US southern destinations and most of that has eroded to YVR/YYC and LCC, moreso than other places. If the business case was there somebody would be flying the routes.

Regarding ACs displeasure with Iceland Air- the story has been told many times from different perspectives. It's a bit of a legend, but it's old news. AC has expanded in interesting ways at YEG lately. I'm curious to see what their next steps are especially as ULCCs bite into YVR, YYZ, YUL markets.

Perhaps but AC is redirecting what I would define as high yield frequent travel from my team via YVR and losing some of it to 5T as a result of pulling all YZF flying out of AB this fall. WS has also reduced to one flight and it's now YYC only for the winter, whereas YEG was always the gateway to the north for decades.

IceCream wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

yzfElite wrote:

Perhaps, but if WS doesn't see the potential given their market share, I'm not sure that AC or others would too. I'm not sure how the EAA is run now, but I recall them losing a lot of confidence when they made decisions like subsidizing the IcelandAir flights ~2013. Back when I was living in YZF, it was easy to connect via YEG to most US southern destinations and most of that has eroded to YVR/YYC and LCC, moreso than other places. If the business case was there somebody would be flying the routes.

Back then most US flights left in the early morning so not sure how easy it really was? The early AM USA flights catered to local businesses traffic. (Taking the cream off the top of the market). As I've mentioned it has been a long time since there's been a true hub where connections are actually facilitated at YEG. It's overdue for that to come back.

Unfortunately, not every city in the world can be a hub so it's not really overdue. At the end of the day YEG (also YYC) are relatively small North American cities and Canada is a relatively small country.

You're right of course, but I do find myself somewhat surprised that YEG-MSP hasn't come back in RJ or E75 form. Doesn't look like it's coming next year either. Lacking both ORD and MSP is a big hole for YEG.

Acey wrote:

IceCream wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Back then most US flights left in the early morning so not sure how easy it really was? The early AM USA flights catered to local businesses traffic. (Taking the cream off the top of the market). As I've mentioned it has been a long time since there's been a true hub where connections are actually facilitated at YEG. It's overdue for that to come back.

Unfortunately, not every city in the world can be a hub so it's not really overdue. At the end of the day YEG (also YYC) are relatively small North American cities and Canada is a relatively small country.

You're right of course, but I do find myself somewhat surprised that YEG-MSP hasn't come back in RJ or E75 form. Doesn't look like it's coming next year either. Lacking both ORD and MSP is a big hole for YEG.

I'm sort of expecting DL to come back eventually. You'd think even just a single daily e175 would be relatively easy and money-making for DL. Purely speculative but maybe WS launches it with a Q400.

IceCream wrote:

Acey wrote:

IceCream wrote:

Unfortunately, not every city in the world can be a hub so it's not really overdue. At the end of the day YEG (also YYC) are relatively small North American cities and Canada is a relatively small country.

You're right of course, but I do find myself somewhat surprised that YEG-MSP hasn't come back in RJ or E75 form. Doesn't look like it's coming next year either. Lacking both ORD and MSP is a big hole for YEG.

I'm sort of expecting DL to come back eventually. You'd think even just a single daily e175 would be relatively easy and money-making for DL. Purely speculative but maybe WS launches it with a Q400.

YEG's geographic position as last major city on the polar route to Europe from western NA, and second last (other than Anchorage) on the polar route to Asia from Eastern NA, is significant and is part of the reason the airport works well as a hub. That isn't comparable to a generic midsized US city. People in YEG by and large expect good air service and I think they are right to do so. It's been provided historically, and it is completely valid to criticize an airline that has an explicit plan to marginalize local air service. My point is that YEG's air service is on the right track now. it's been given a major boost with ULCCs, new euro service starting next year, and US routes slowly coming back. Interestingly, looks like WS is also increasing domestic frequency here and there.

YEGFlyer wrote:

YEG's geographic position as last major city on the polar route to Europe from western NA, and second last (other than Anchorage) on the polar route to Asia from Eastern NA, is significant and is part of the reason the airport works well as a hub.

LAX-YYC-Europe is even shorter than LAX-YEG-Europe, and has an international terminal with 24 dual boarding bridges, support for sterile transit, and parallel runways... i.e. things that YEG does not have that actually matter in the context of working well as a hub.

Acey wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

YEG's geographic position as last major city on the polar route to Europe from western NA, and second last (other than Anchorage) on the polar route to Asia from Eastern NA, is significant and is part of the reason the airport works well as a hub.

LAX-YYC-Europe is even shorter than LAX-YEG-Europe, and has an international terminal with 24 dual boarding bridges, support for sterile transit, and parallel runways... i.e. things that YEG does not have that actually matter in the context of working well as a hub.

You mean airlines don't think of creating mega global hubs in random cities just because they happen to geographically be in a certain position even though it's no longer 1960 and that doesn't actually matter whatsoever?

IceCream wrote:

Acey wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

YEG's geographic position as last major city on the polar route to Europe from western NA, and second last (other than Anchorage) on the polar route to Asia from Eastern NA, is significant and is part of the reason the airport works well as a hub.

LAX-YYC-Europe is even shorter than LAX-YEG-Europe, and has an international terminal with 24 dual boarding bridges, support for sterile transit, and parallel runways... i.e. things that YEG does not have that actually matter in the context of working well as a hub.

You mean airlines don't think of creating mega global hubs in random cities just because they happen to geographically be in a certain position even though it's no longer 1960 and that doesn't actually matter whatsoever?

Despite your wildest hopes, Edmonton is not the equivalent of Gander Newfoundland. It is a large city, fastest growing in Alberta, cranking out jobs and growth... these are highly complementary to YEG's geographic location.

YEGFlyer wrote:

IceCream wrote:

Acey wrote:

LAX-YYC-Europe is even shorter than LAX-YEG-Europe, and has an international terminal with 24 dual boarding bridges, support for sterile transit, and parallel runways... i.e. things that YEG does not have that actually matter in the context of working well as a hub.

You mean airlines don't think of creating mega global hubs in random cities just because they happen to geographically be in a certain position even though it's no longer 1960 and that doesn't actually matter whatsoever?

Despite your wildest hopes, Edmonton is not the equivalent of Gander Newfoundland. It is a large city, fastest growing in Alberta, cranking out jobs and growth... these are highly complementary to YEG's geographic location.

You're right that Edmonton is not Gander but who here has ever mentioned that besides you right now? Edmonton is a growing city and passenger traffic will most probably increase, but that does not equate to YEG becoming some international hub to Europe and Asia, that is a completely ridiculous statement.

At the end of the day YEG is growing overall, but still struggling in many ways. A fast-growing city with a gradually growing airport does not mean YEG is entitled to be a hub for WS or AC, or that those two airlines are evil entities that have it out for YEG because they're making decisions that are best for their own businesses and for their bottom line...

Ottawa is growing even faster than Edmonton, yet they've lost all of their TATL flights and have half of YEG's traffic. Population growth on its own is not a good indicator of what an airport should look like.

But of course, Edmonton is growing 0.91% faster than Calgary, watch out WestJet...

IceCream wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

IceCream wrote:

Ottawa is growing even faster than Edmonton, yet they've lost all of their TATL flights and have half of YEG's traffic. Population growth on its own is not a good indicator of what an airport should look like.

But of course, Edmonton is growing 0.91% faster than Calgary, watch out WestJet...

YOW is a great case in point about how WS has just not been able to develop a market in a city over a million people.

Looking at YOW departures for the next 24 hours, Flair has more available seat miles than WS/Swoop and while I haven't added up Porter, they probably have more too. How is it that WS has dropped to the fourth carrier in Canada's fourth largest metro area (yes it has apparently passed Calgary). I get it that my comment is a little cheeky because Flair is surely flying less passengers and yield, but WS has had 25 more years to develop the market. It's amazing that WS has just two flights a day to YYC and five to YYZ out of YOW these days. Nothing south, nothing east (well one Swoop), nothing to Edmonton, Winnipeg, Vancouver, etc. It is a Saturday and it is off season, but still.

I hope whatever their strategy is works for the sake of national competition, but they've got to be licking their wounds after attempting to become a full service national carrier.

IceCream wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

IceCream wrote:

You mean airlines don't think of creating mega global hubs in random cities just because they happen to geographically be in a certain position even though it's no longer 1960 and that doesn't actually matter whatsoever?

Despite your wildest hopes, Edmonton is not the equivalent of Gander Newfoundland. It is a large city, fastest growing in Alberta, cranking out jobs and growth... these are highly complementary to YEG's geographic location.

You're right that Edmonton is not Gander but who here has ever mentioned that besides you right now? Edmonton is a growing city and passenger traffic will most probably increase, but that does not equate to YEG becoming some international hub to Europe and Asia, that is a completely ridiculous statement.

At the end of the day YEG is growing overall, but still struggling in many ways. A fast-growing city with a gradually growing airport does not mean YEG is entitled to be a hub for WS or AC, or that those two airlines are evil entities that have it out for YEG because they're making decisions that are best for their own businesses and for their bottom line...

Ottawa is growing even faster than Edmonton, yet they've lost all of their TATL flights and have half of YEG's traffic. Population growth on its own is not a good indicator of what an airport should look like.

But of course, Edmonton is growing 0.91% faster than Calgary, watch out WestJet...

Actually, keep an eye on cargo in next few years out of YEG. I do expect you will see NA to Europe and Asia "hub" starting to arise. The plans have been publicly posted, but not super widely circulated. AC is a current non-factor at YEG. WS has a residual presence. Neither will be a strategic winner for YEG unless something changes drastically. As mentioned my view is that YEG's air service is on the right track now. it's been given a major boost with ULCCs, new euro service starting next year, and US routes slowly coming back. Interestingly, looks like WS is also increasing domestic frequency here and there. WS can join the party, if they wish, but they have indicated they do not want to do so. Arguably, the market is WestJet's to lose, but the losses have already started. (similar to how WS is losing market share in all other markets, too, except Calgary).

YEGFlyer wrote:

IceCream wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Despite your wildest hopes, Edmonton is not the equivalent of Gander Newfoundland. It is a large city, fastest growing in Alberta, cranking out jobs and growth... these are highly complementary to YEG's geographic location.

You're right that Edmonton is not Gander but who here has ever mentioned that besides you right now? Edmonton is a growing city and passenger traffic will most probably increase, but that does not equate to YEG becoming some international hub to Europe and Asia, that is a completely ridiculous statement.

At the end of the day YEG is growing overall, but still struggling in many ways. A fast-growing city with a gradually growing airport does not mean YEG is entitled to be a hub for WS or AC, or that those two airlines are evil entities that have it out for YEG because they're making decisions that are best for their own businesses and for their bottom line...

Ottawa is growing even faster than Edmonton, yet they've lost all of their TATL flights and have half of YEG's traffic. Population growth on its own is not a good indicator of what an airport should look like.

But of course, Edmonton is growing 0.91% faster than Calgary, watch out WestJet...

Actually, keep an eye on cargo in next few years out of YEG. I do expect you will see NA to Europe and Asia "hub" starting to arise. The plans have been publicly posted, but not super widely circulated. AC is a current non-factor at YEG. WS has a residual presence. Neither will be a strategic winner for YEG unless something changes drastically. As mentioned my view is that YEG's air service is on the right track now. it's been given a major boost with ULCCs, new euro service starting next year, and US routes slowly coming back. Interestingly, looks like WS is also increasing domestic frequency here and there. WS can join the party, if they wish, but they have indicated they do not want to do so. Arguably, the market is WestJet's to lose, but the losses have already started. (similar to how WS is losing market share in all other markets, too, except Calgary).

So are you saying YEG is seeing major success with cargo or passenger service? I've been referring to passenger service (since this is the WS thread) and with regard to WS, AC and the US3 they have all decreased their presence at YEG. MSP is gone, SLC is gone, IAH just recently got axed, SEA is permanently down to one daily, so I don't really see the US routes slowly coming back. The reality is YEG is becoming more and more dominated by ULCC's while full-service carriers are drawing back service.

With regard to cargo, I'll believe it when I see it. Covid was probably the best time for something like a cargo hub to occur, and I do recall the EIA releasing plans a few years ago, but little progress has been made. This will be my last comment because I'm derailing the thread.

IceCream wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

IceCream wrote:

You're right that Edmonton is not Gander but who here has ever mentioned that besides you right now? Edmonton is a growing city and passenger traffic will most probably increase, but that does not equate to YEG becoming some international hub to Europe and Asia, that is a completely ridiculous statement.

At the end of the day YEG is growing overall, but still struggling in many ways. A fast-growing city with a gradually growing airport does not mean YEG is entitled to be a hub for WS or AC, or that those two airlines are evil entities that have it out for YEG because they're making decisions that are best for their own businesses and for their bottom line...

Ottawa is growing even faster than Edmonton, yet they've lost all of their TATL flights and have half of YEG's traffic. Population growth on its own is not a good indicator of what an airport should look like.

But of course, Edmonton is growing 0.91% faster than Calgary, watch out WestJet...

Actually, keep an eye on cargo in next few years out of YEG. I do expect you will see NA to Europe and Asia "hub" starting to arise. The plans have been publicly posted, but not super widely circulated. AC is a current non-factor at YEG. WS has a residual presence. Neither will be a strategic winner for YEG unless something changes drastically. As mentioned my view is that YEG's air service is on the right track now. it's been given a major boost with ULCCs, new euro service starting next year, and US routes slowly coming back. Interestingly, looks like WS is also increasing domestic frequency here and there. WS can join the party, if they wish, but they have indicated they do not want to do so. Arguably, the market is WestJet's to lose, but the losses have already started. (similar to how WS is losing market share in all other markets, too, except Calgary).

So are you saying YEG is seeing major success with cargo or passenger service? I've been referring to passenger service (since this is the WS thread) and with regard to WS, AC and the US3 they have all decreased their presence at YEG. MSP is gone, SLC is gone, IAH just recently got axed, SEA is permanently down to one daily, so I don't really see the US routes slowly coming back. The reality is YEG is becoming more and more dominated by ULCC's while full-service carriers are drawing back service.

With regard to cargo, I'll believe it when I see it. Covid was probably the best time for something like a cargo hub to occur, and I do recall the EIA releasing plans a few years ago, but little progress has been made. This will be my last comment because I'm derailing the thread.

A few years ago only, United used to run 3 to 4 dailies to DEN, 2 to 3 dailies to IAH, 2 to SFO, 2 to ORD and one daily to EWR from YEG in addition to many flights on various airlines. As a Premier 1K with United at the time, I used to fly on United 3 times a month out of YEG. Flights were pretty much full especially IAH and DEN. The idea that YEG does not generate passengers is a bunch of BS. Consolidation at the four major airports (YYZ, YVR, YYC and YUL) have contributed to a significant decrease of service at secondary airports like YEG and YOW. In fat, the decision by the Canadian Gov't to limit international service during to COVID to the big four airports really hurt stations like YEG.

YEG will eventually regain service.

yegbey01 wrote:

IceCream wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

Actually, keep an eye on cargo in next few years out of YEG. I do expect you will see NA to Europe and Asia "hub" starting to arise. The plans have been publicly posted, but not super widely circulated. AC is a current non-factor at YEG. WS has a residual presence. Neither will be a strategic winner for YEG unless something changes drastically. As mentioned my view is that YEG's air service is on the right track now. it's been given a major boost with ULCCs, new euro service starting next year, and US routes slowly coming back. Interestingly, looks like WS is also increasing domestic frequency here and there. WS can join the party, if they wish, but they have indicated they do not want to do so. Arguably, the market is WestJet's to lose, but the losses have already started. (similar to how WS is losing market share in all other markets, too, except Calgary).

So are you saying YEG is seeing major success with cargo or passenger service? I've been referring to passenger service (since this is the WS thread) and with regard to WS, AC and the US3 they have all decreased their presence at YEG. MSP is gone, SLC is gone, IAH just recently got axed, SEA is permanently down to one daily, so I don't really see the US routes slowly coming back. The reality is YEG is becoming more and more dominated by ULCC's while full-service carriers are drawing back service.

With regard to cargo, I'll believe it when I see it. Covid was probably the best time for something like a cargo hub to occur, and I do recall the EIA releasing plans a few years ago, but little progress has been made. This will be my last comment because I'm derailing the thread.

A few years ago only, United used to run 3 to 4 dailies to DEN, 2 to 3 dailies to IAH, 2 to SFO, 2 to ORD and one daily to EWR from YEG in addition to many flights on various airlines. As a Premier 1K with United at the time, I used to fly on United 3 times a month out of YEG. Flights were pretty much full especially IAH and DEN. The idea that YEG does not generate passengers is a bunch of BS. Consolidation at the four major airports (YYZ, YVR, YYC and YUL) have contributed to a significant decrease of service at secondary airports like YEG and YOW. In fat, the decision by the Canadian Gov't to limit international service during to COVID to the big four airports really hurt stations like YEG.

YEG will eventually regain service.

A good reminder of the way things can change fairly quickly and in short order in the industry.

It’s good to remain positive and when some airlines dont prioritize YEG others can fill that void. Don’t forget Porter has at least 50 E2s on order and could very well be looking for a western hub/base in the not too distant future.

BASE10 wrote:

yegbey01 wrote:

IceCream wrote:

So are you saying YEG is seeing major success with cargo or passenger service? I've been referring to passenger service (since this is the WS thread) and with regard to WS, AC and the US3 they have all decreased their presence at YEG. MSP is gone, SLC is gone, IAH just recently got axed, SEA is permanently down to one daily, so I don't really see the US routes slowly coming back. The reality is YEG is becoming more and more dominated by ULCC's while full-service carriers are drawing back service.

With regard to cargo, I'll believe it when I see it. Covid was probably the best time for something like a cargo hub to occur, and I do recall the EIA releasing plans a few years ago, but little progress has been made. This will be my last comment because I'm derailing the thread.

A few years ago only, United used to run 3 to 4 dailies to DEN, 2 to 3 dailies to IAH, 2 to SFO, 2 to ORD and one daily to EWR from YEG in addition to many flights on various airlines. As a Premier 1K with United at the time, I used to fly on United 3 times a month out of YEG. Flights were pretty much full especially IAH and DEN. The idea that YEG does not generate passengers is a bunch of BS. Consolidation at the four major airports (YYZ, YVR, YYC and YUL) have contributed to a significant decrease of service at secondary airports like YEG and YOW. In fat, the decision by the Canadian Gov't to limit international service during to COVID to the big four airports really hurt stations like YEG.

YEG will eventually regain service.

A good reminder of the way things can change fairly quickly and in short order in the industry.

It’s good to remain positive and when some airlines dont prioritize YEG others can fill that void. Don’t forget Porter has at least 50 E2s on order and could very well be looking for a western hub/base in the not too distant future.

Taking this back on topic, I wonder how WS will react to Porter's expansion? Any specific new routes that could be launched preemptively? Or just deploy more Swoop flights everywhere to hopefully run Porter out on price?

yegbey01 wrote:

A few years ago only, United used to run 3 to 4 dailies to DEN, 2 to 3 dailies to IAH, 2 to SFO, 2 to ORD and one daily to EWR from YEG in addition to many flights on various airlines. As a Premier 1K with United at the time, I used to fly on United 3 times a month out of YEG. Flights were pretty much full especially IAH and DEN. The idea that YEG does not generate passengers is a bunch of BS. Consolidation at the four major airports (YYZ, YVR, YYC and YUL) have contributed to a significant decrease of service at secondary airports like YEG and YOW..

Specifically in regards to UA 10+ dailies at YEG, consolidation of any sort is not to blame. Where have those flights gone? They're not in Calgary. CO's 5 daily YYC-IAH are gone, if you haven't noticed. YEG is getting the shaft to a degree but the incessant narrative that other Canadian airports are to blame is increasingly untrue.

yzfElite wrote:

IceCream wrote:

YEGFlyer wrote:

How is it that WS has dropped to the fourth carrier in Canada's fourth largest metro area (yes it has apparently passed Calgary).

There is no acceptable explanation as far as I'm concerned, WS is simply weak in the east besides YYZ. Their new strategy is to justify this by claiming to be a strong "western" carrier.

The only consolation is that YYC-YOW flights appear to be doing very well for WS recently, so at least they're likely to be committed to the seats they currently offer.

YEGFlyer wrote:

Taking this back on topic, I wonder how WS will react to Porter's expansion? Any specific new routes that could be launched preemptively? Or just deploy more Swoop flights everywhere to hopefully run Porter out on price?

WS/Swoop likely already fly anything they'll want to defend from Porter. The method of defense will be frequencies and price.

YEGFlyer wrote:

IceCream wrote:

Acey wrote:

LAX-YYC-Europe is even shorter than LAX-YEG-Europe, and has an international terminal with 24 dual boarding bridges, support for sterile transit, and parallel runways... i.e. things that YEG does not have that actually matter in the context of working well as a hub.

You mean airlines don't think of creating mega global hubs in random cities just because they happen to geographically be in a certain position even though it's no longer 1960 and that doesn't actually matter whatsoever?

Despite your wildest hopes, Edmonton is not the equivalent of Gander Newfoundland. It is a large city, fastest growing in Alberta, cranking out jobs and growth... these are highly complementary to YEG's geographic location.

Yes, Edmonton YEG's geographic location on the Map looks closer to Asia / Europe compared to Calgary (YYC) in Western, Canada for sure. No doubt.

But with the Airbus A330's, Airbus A350's, Boeing 787's or Boeing 777's all designed to fly longer distances. International flights to / from Europe or Asia at YYC can (overfly) YEG area,without problems 7 days a week nonstop (both directions).