Is Canada Revising Some Bilaterals?

777way · Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:22 am

Turkish Airlines are launching a fourth weekly to YYZ and PIA too are said to be in talks for added frquency currently restricted to thrice weekly/1000 seats only, the third once was actually supposed to be via Montreal and Europe non-stop but Canada allowed them to do so and its said to be renewed every year according to some, so it can be revoked.

tayser · Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:45 am

I read somewhere that Australia and Canada are negotiating. There's an old one with restrictions on both carriers to serving only 2 cities in the respective countries (non-stop over via a point in the US) as well as max 14x weekly services (I think?). It's a case of why the hell not given there's only one direct flight a day at the moment - no point restricting direct flights (even though YVR is likely to be the only non-stop destination from Australia).

The sticking point will be any stopover in the US for en-route services deeper into Canada. Currently I think both country's airlines are only allowed to stop in either HNL or SFO with LAX excluded - pretty sure on the AU-US side there are no restrictions, dunno about US-CA, but assuming US-CA is all good, the only thing that would need to change is AU-CA to allow the city that both country's airlines would want: LAX.

However from the Australian side, given QF is getting into bed even more with AA & the international restructure, I doubt you'd possibly see tag ons to YUL from QF11/12, QF15/16 or QF93/94.

edit re above: forgot - LAX-YYZ/YUL would be 5th freedom and assuming the US-AU and US-CA CA-AU agreements are all in alignment Australian carriers could carry pax between all three points. AA only do it 1x daily with a 737 now, they could drop it and just put codes on QF93/94 into YYZ which is an 380 (now daily) and sits most of the day in LAX (arrival early-mid morning, departure 10-11pm) - would be interesting lol

But yes, just go open skies - let others have a crack if they're willing to risk it.

[Edited 2011-11-25 03:51:23]

Thenoflyzone · Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:08 pm

Air agreements recently signed or updated by Canada.......

http://www.international.gc.ca/trade...r-acc/facts-air-eclair.aspx?view=d

So to answer your question, yes, Canada is prone these days on expanding old air agreements, or granting additional frequencies on the fly.....

Thenoflyzone

WestJet747 · Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:17 pm

Quoting tayser (Reply 1):
LAX-YYZ/YUL would be 5th freedom and assuming the US-AU and US-CA CA-AU agreements are all in alignment Australian carriers could carry pax between all three points. AA only do it 1x daily with a 737 now, they could drop it and just put codes on QF93/94 into YYZ which is an 380 (now daily) and sits most of the day in LAX (arrival early-mid morning, departure 10-11pm) - would be interesting lol

I've been suggesting this for a while now, I'm glad someone agrees. I was on QF93 a few months back and it was a miserable experience waiting in customs lines for about an hour, having to haul-ass to make the connecting LAX-YYZ flight with a heavy backpack and laptop bag, further having to basically bribe security to let me skip ahead in order to make my flight, then jumping onto the plane right before the door closed...and all to catch an AA flight (an airline I absolutely despise).

I would love seeing the kangaroo in Toronto some day. I would take QF Y long before I would take AA F/J.

Quoting tayser (Reply 1):
But yes, just go open skies - let others have a crack if they're willing to risk it.

Don't tease EK and EY with such a comment

Kaiarahi · Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:27 pm

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 3):
I've been suggesting this for a while now, I'm glad someone agrees. I was on QF93 a few months back and it was a miserable experience waiting in customs lines for about an hour, having to haul-ass to make the connecting LAX-YYZ flight with a heavy backpack and laptop bag, further having to basically bribe security to let me skip ahead in order to make my flight, then jumping onto the plane right before the door closed...and all to catch an AA flight (an airline I absolutely despise).

It wouldn't change anything - you'd still have to clear U.S. CBP/Immigration, pick up your bags, clear Customs, recheck your bags, and re-clear security, even if you're getting back on the same plane.

Quoting tayser (Reply 1):
AA only do it 1x daily with a 737 now, they could drop it and just put codes on QF93/94 into YYZ which is an 380 (now daily) and sits most of the day in LAX (arrival early-mid morning, departure 10-11pm) - would be interesting lol

Not likely to happen. A380 is wayyyyyy too big. Even to JFK, QF only operates an A332 add-on. There's a reason AA only operates a 737 - AC has the route sewn up. VX tried LAX-YYZ and gave up after a couple of months.

tayser · Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:15 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 4):
Not likely to happen. A380 is wayyyyyy too big. Even to JFK, QF only operates an A332 add-on. There's a reason AA only operates a 737 - AC has the route sewn up. VX tried LAX-YYZ and gave up after a couple of months.

QF LAX-JFK-LAX is a different beast - it's only filled with people who have an onward ticket to BNE/SYD/MEL as QF cant sell "domestic" tickets in the US (Cabotage). Extending (93/94 or 15/16 (Which is the 747 from BNE) - assuming 5th freedoms are compliant with all three air services agreements) to YYZ would allow QF to enter into the O&D market between LAX and YYZ - i.e actively sell and compete with AC (and any other US carrier for that matter) as well as sell tickets from YYZ to BNE/SYD/MEL.

Qantas 15 11:30am → 6:45am BNE-LAX [existing schedule]
Qantas 107 11:50am → 6:25am SYD-LAX [existing schedule]
Qantas 25 3:05pm → 6:30am AKL-LAX [existing schedule]

Qantas 93 11:20 am → 6:40 am MEL-LAX [existing schedule]
Qantas 93 9:00 am → 4:45pm LAX-YYZ
Qantas 94 7:00pm → 9:35pm YYZ-LAX
Qantas 94 11:30pm → 9:55am+2 LAX-MEL [existing schedule]

Qantas 26 11:25pm → 9:50pm+2 LAX-AKL [existing schedule]
Qantas 16 11:50pm → 7:50am+2 LAX-BNE [existing schedule]
Qantas 108 11:40pm → 9:25am+2 LAX-SYD [existing schedule]

Viscount724 · Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:25 pm

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 3):
I would love seeing the kangaroo in Toronto some day.

QF's previous attempt in 2000 to serve YYZ (via HNL using 763s) was quickly dropped. I think it only lasted a few months.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © John Kelley

RP TPA · Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:59 pm

IIRC, the latest USA/Canada bilateral allows carriers from either country to fly from their home country to the other one, and then to a 3rd country, with full traffic rights on all sectors. When AC ordered the 777s a few years ago, they had announced the first route as YYZ-LAX-SYD, with the ability to sell LAX-SYD. The problem, of course, was that the current CDA-AU agreement only allows 2 transit points in the US (HNL and SFO, as as Tayser had pointed out), and AU wasn't willing to ammend it. That's when AC changed it to the current YVR-SYD flight.

Hopefully, if they can come to an agreement, AC will be able to sell LAX-AU service in the future (to MEL, using the 787 perhaps??).

Viscount724 · Sat Nov 26, 2011 12:04 am

Quoting RP TPA (Reply 7):
Hopefully, if they can come to an agreement, AC will be able to sell LAX-AU service in the future (to MEL, using the 787 perhaps??).

Personally, I doubt AC has any major desire now to operate LAX-Australia considering all the capacity on that route. I expect it's very far down their list of priorities for new service. Fifth freedom carriers almost always generate lower yields.

threepoint · Sat Nov 26, 2011 5:55 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 8):
Personally, I doubt AC has any major desire now to operate LAX-Australia considering all the capacity on that route.

Agreed. Although an LAX stopover between say, YYZ and SYD would be ideal (the great circle route essentially crosses midfield in LAX), perhaps AC could consider either SFO (insignificant difference in distance). One wonders if there are sufficient high-yield passengers in the SFO area to make that option viable.
But my money rests on AC continuing their existing connection at YVR, where again the great circle distance YYZ-YVR-SYD is less than 2% more than the direct route and the inherent hassles of a US transit are eliminated.

threepoint · Sat Nov 26, 2011 5:59 pm

Not mentioned here are the recently improved relations with the UAE, which may see the continuation of discussions re EK and EY service to Canada: http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/11...g-after-military-eviction-in-2010/
I'm betting we'll see daily EK service to YYZ within a year or so.

pnd100 · Sun Nov 27, 2011 12:43 am

Quoting threepoint (Reply 10):
I'm betting we'll see daily EK service to YYZ within a year or so.

I agree threepoint. If that happens of course it will end the A380 to YYZ too, I suspect EK will use a 777 at that point.

The Canadian government will likely take the initiative to change bilaterals as it is hoped AC will develop it's international profile in anticipation of 787 deliveries. I know, I'm skeptical as well considering the ever looming presence of big brother partners UA & LH but you never know.

On this thread we have discussed TK, PK, EK increasing service potentially. Any word on any potential newcomers other than QF? Any thoughts on VS or EI entering Canada?

What about those that may drop Canada? I am looking in the direction of financially troubled Indian carriers like AI / 9W.

cmf · Sun Nov 27, 2011 12:57 am

Quoting tayser (Reply 1):
The sticking point will be any stopover in the US for en-route services deeper into Canada. Currently I think both country's airlines are only allowed to stop in either HNL or SFO with LAX excluded

Wouldn't that be second freedom that must be given by all ICAO signatories?

Gemuser · Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:21 am

Quoting cmf (Reply 12):
Quoting tayser (Reply 1):
The sticking point will be any stopover in the US for en-route services deeper into Canada. Currently I think both country's airlines are only allowed to stop in either HNL or SFO with LAX excluded

Wouldn't that be second freedom that must be given by all ICAO signatories?

No Fifth Freedom. The current bi-lateral allows fifth freedom rights for both countries only at SFO & HNL. Second freedom rights are not USUALLY restricted to specific ports as they do not involve commerical interest of either countries airlines, although I do not remember the details from the last time I read the Australian/Canada bi-lateral.

Last I heard talks were scheduled, but Canada cancelled them. This was back when AC was interested in LAX-SYD, back before the explosion in capacity on the route.

Gemuser

pnd100 · Sun Nov 27, 2011 2:25 am

5th freedom is critical to any Australia to Canada via USA route. Personally I think an Australia to YYZ via SFO would work for whatever airline chose to start it.

ual747den · Sun Nov 27, 2011 5:18 am

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 3):
Don't tease EK and EY with such a comment

Quoting threepoint (Reply 10):

Not mentioned here are the recently improved relations with the UAE, which may see the continuation of discussions re EK and EY service to Canada: http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/11...g-after-military-eviction-in-2010/
I'm betting we'll see daily EK service to YYZ within a year or so.

I do not follow the situation very close but I would be very surprised to see Canada work with the UAE after what they have done to them with the base thing.

On a really funny side note, I was at a very nice hotel in Cyprus about a month ago and spent a lot of time at night talking to the bartender. He told me that when UAE kicked the military out many of the men were sent to Limassol while waiting for transfer back to Canada. He told me that they must not have been able to drink and go out in the UAE because when they arrived in Cyprus they never stopped drinking! He told me about the guys getting drunk and throwing anything that was not bolted down out of the windows of their rooms. He said that finally the management had enough and started supplying bus service at night to the clubs so that these guys would not stay at the hotel! It all sounds like a whole lot of fun to me!

threepoint · Sun Nov 27, 2011 5:23 am

Quoting pnd100 (Reply 11):
Any word on any potential newcomers other than QF?

I can't see Qantas making a go of it in Canada anytime soon. It seems AC has the nonstop SYD-YVR market looked after with the AC 33/34 service; it's not a route that can support multiple players like SYD-LAX. As has been demonstrated, tag-on services from California haven't worked well. It may be interesting to see who'll try YVR-MEL first with new 787s: AC or QF. I can see it being more of a priority for AC.

Quoting pnd100 (Reply 11):
Any thoughts on VS or EI entering Canada?

I think Virgin will adopt a 'wait & see how YVR 3x weekly goes' approach before making any further forays. It would make sense to increase YVR-LHR to daily service before attempting a 2nd city. The YYZ-LHR market is saturated at present, and they're going have to work hard to make a living off YVR-LHR.
Aer Lingus? Maybe to YYZ and that would be low-yield at best, no? Nah, I don't see it happening.

WestJet747 · Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:16 am

Quoting UAL747DEN (Reply 15):
I do not follow the situation very close but I would be very surprised to see Canada work with the UAE after what they have done to them with the base thing.

I always say that "the dollar speaks loudest". Which is precisely why Canadian foreign officials have been in talks recently trying to rectify this messy situation. There's far too much investment opportunity (going in both directions) to allow this feud to go much further and hinder what would otherwise be a healthy business relationship. The whole Camp Mirage thing is water under the bridge. Plans to withdraw troops in the Middle East were already in motion anyway.

Quoting threepoint (Reply 16):
It may be interesting to see who'll try YVR-MEL first with new 787s: AC or QF. I can see it being more of a priority for AC.

I'd put a few dollars on AC. It's easier for AC to enter a 2nd city than it is for QF to enter a new country (especially when there's no real equipment advantage).

Quoting threepoint (Reply 16):
Aer Lingus? Maybe to YYZ and that would be low-yield at best, no? Nah, I don't see it happening.

Couldn't agree more. A quick Google search says that they served YUL once upon a time, but that ended in 1979.

pnd100 · Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:21 pm

For good reasons stated above, it would seem that QF, VS, EI are not expanding in Canada based on our speculations.

Any other carriers from anywhere coming to Canada?

Are there any new destinations on the horizon for AC that would require bilateral adjustment or even use of the current bilateral? I'm sure AC does not use all of our bilaterals to their fullest (India, UAE, etc)

Kaiarahi · Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:33 pm

Quoting threepoint (Reply 10):
Not mentioned here are the recently improved relations with the UAE

UAE seem finally to realize that they were the laughing stock of the diplomatic community over the way they handled EK/Mirage, and were furiously sucking up to Canada during the Libya intervention.

Quoting threepoint (Reply 10):
which may see the continuation of discussions re EK and EY service to Canada

Not likely anytime soon in EK's case - the PM has a long memory. John Baird (Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the closest minister to the PM) was adamantly opposed to increased EK access. Recent bilaterals have given enhanced access to EK rivals/alternatives in the region - QR, TK, etc.

connies4ever · Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:45 pm

Quoting pnd100 (Reply 18):
Are there any new destinations on the horizon for AC that would require bilateral adjustment or even use of the current bilateral? I'm sure AC does not use all of our bilaterals to their fullest (India, UAE, etc)

Existing bilaterals that won't require change to permit AC access include AUS (to MEL), Lebanon (to BEY), India (to DEL, possibly BOM). AC is interested in all of them. I suppose China too (to CAN).

Some work would be required to service SIN (likely via INC from YVR), but I'm not sure how big the market would be. Likely OK if 5th freedom INC-SIN is thrown in, but given the Singapore-Canada aviation history, I'm not sure how likely that would be. Additional work might be required with France if AC looked seriously at YVR/YYC-CDG, but I'm not sure about that. Also not sure of the status of any bilateral with Russia, YYZ-SVO might be a 787 candidate.

Kaiarahi · Sun Nov 27, 2011 8:03 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 20):
Additional work might be required with France if AC looked seriously at YVR/YYC-CDG, but I'm not sure about that.

Canada has open skies with the E.U.

RP TPA · Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:04 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 20):
Existing bilaterals that won't require change to permit AC access include .......Lebanon (to BEY),

The Canada/Lebanon bilateral isnt exactly the reason why AC isn't running this flight.

connies4ever · Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:49 pm

Quoting RP TPA (Reply 22):
The Canada/Lebanon bilateral isnt exactly the reason why AC isn't running this flight.

I understand that. The route will happen when 'my' government (although I didn't vote for them) stops grabbing its' ankles when Homeland Security start feeling frisky.

Emirates773ER · Sun Nov 27, 2011 11:49 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 19):
UAE seem finally to realize that they were the laughing stock of the diplomatic community over the way they handled EK/Mirage, and were furiously sucking up to Canada during the Libya intervention.

Oh how soon we forget?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ng-turn-for-harper/article1753222/

UAE rubbed our noses down pretty good and Harper got the message.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 19):
Not likely anytime soon in EK's case - the PM has a long memory. John Baird (Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the closest minister to the PM) was adamantly opposed to increased EK access. Recent bilaterals have given enhanced access to EK rivals/alternatives in the region - QR, TK, etc.

$$$ speak... The PM can have an elephants memory but in the end it is all about the $$$. Emirates will be in western Canada by end of 2012.

longhauler · Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:50 am

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 24):
$$$ speak... The PM can have an elephants memory but in the end it is all about the $$$. Emirates will be in western Canada by end of 2012.

Emirates was offered both YYC and YVR two years ago, which they declined. As far as I know, that offer still stands.

Kaiarahi · Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:35 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 23):
The route will happen when 'my' government (although I didn't vote for them) stops grabbing its' ankles when Homeland Security start feeling frisky.

AC actually abandoned its plans for BEY under a previous government.

connies4ever · Mon Nov 28, 2011 2:22 pm

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 26):
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 23):
The route will happen when 'my' government (although I didn't vote for them) stops grabbing its' ankles when Homeland Security start feeling frisky.

AC actually abandoned its plans for BEY under a previous government.

Sure about that ? AC had sold tix and were promoting the inauguration of YUL-BEY, and the day before the launch the whole thing was called off, presumably at the behest of the US government, afraid that the backhaul from BEY would include terrorists. I have not seen anything from AC indicating they have abandoned their interest in BEY. And given the size of the Lebanese community in the YUL catchment area, they shouldn't.

This goes back to 2003, so, yes, previous government. But the current one has had a spinectomy w.r.t. dealings with the our 'cousins'.

Kaiarahi · Mon Nov 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 27):

You're right - I should have been more precise. Part of the problem, as we discovered with the evacuation in 2006, was the very large number of Canadian passport holders in Lebanon, many of whom had not lived in Canada for years and whose background/activities could not be checked.

yowza · Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:07 pm

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 24):
$$$ speak... The PM can have an elephants memory but in the end it is all about the $$$. Emirates will be in western Canada by end of 2012.

Money where your mouth is? I'll put $100 on that.

On a side note what exactly does the current arrangement between Canada and Kuwait allow? As good as open skies?

YOWza

[Edited 2011-11-28 07:10:16]

mogandoCI · Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:34 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 25):
Emirates was offered both YYC and YVR two years ago, which they declined. As far as I know, that offer still stands.

if EK is truly determined in serving broad interests of canadian consumers instead of just routing Toronto to India, then EK would accept flying to YVR and YYC. That's the correct way of winning over Canadian political support for expanded YYZ access, not in strong-arming and bullying.

a government has fiduciary responsibility not just to its consumers (enabling more or even unlimited EK access), but also to its domestic economy (protectionist stance). Why would a country agree to one-way outbound transfer of wealth ? (let's not pretend there are UAE tourists who are so eager to visit Canada)

Australia is the textbook case study of how wide open access for EK/EY destroys the local carrier (QF) - forcing it to shrink European flights to merely LHR plus a token service to Frankfurt. Does Canada want to become the next Australia ?

pnd100 · Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:34 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 25):
Emirates was offered both YYC and YVR two years ago, which they declined. As far as I know, that offer still stands.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 30):
if EK is truly determined in serving broad interests of canadian consumers instead of just routing Toronto to India, then EK would accept flying to YVR and YYC. That's the correct way of winning over Canadian political support for expanded YYZ access, not in strong-arming and bullying.

I've often defended EK's request to have expanded service, however I did not have this information.
It was my understanding that the bilateral only allowed for 6x weekly service into Canada, 3 by EK, 3 by EY.

A quick check of the bilateral available here; https://www.otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/united-arab-emirates shows that while they are free to serve any points in Canada, the frequency is still capped at 6, maximum 3 by each carrier.

Was there any amendment to the bilateral? Is there any link to the refusal by the UAE to expand to YVR / YYC?
Please provide if possible. Appreciated.

polaris · Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:37 pm

In reply to the subject line, countries are constantly negotiating and revising bilateral agreements. Most major countries sign many new and/or revised bilaterals every year. Canada is no exception in negotiating agreements.

For aviation enthusiasts, it's always exciting to see new carriers begin or expand services, isn't it.

mogandoCI · Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:12 pm

Quoting pnd100 (Reply 31):
Was there any amendment to the bilateral? Is there any link to the refusal by the UAE to expand to YVR / YYC?

i don't believe the bilateral was officially amended. It was just a counter-offer to EK's request for more access to YYZ. But just EK never accepted it, they had no need to update the agreement.

EK should only blame itself for arrogance. Instead of gladly taking 6x weekly, they were snobbish to insist on daily slots, and thus allowing EY to take half of it and now both end up with half-baked services to Canada. Why give more slots if you already refuse to serve 6x weekly ?

777way · Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:38 pm

Quoting polaris (Reply 32):
In reply to the subject line, countries are constantly negotiating and revising bilateral agreements. Most major countries sign many new and/or revised bilaterals every year. Canada is no exception in negotiating agreements.

True but in Canada's case its a little different, they gave the impression of being ok with restricting airlines.

WestJet747 · Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:04 pm

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 33):
EK should only blame itself for arrogance. Instead of gladly taking 6x weekly, they were snobbish to insist on daily slots, and thus allowing EY to take half of it and now both end up with half-baked services to Canada. Why give more slots if you already refuse to serve 6x weekly ?

I wouldn't necessarily say "half-baked services", but they certainly are nowhere near fulfilling their potential.

And until the UAE lifts the ridiculous visa requirements on Canadians, they probably wouldn't be able to sustain daily flights anyway, even if substituting the A380 for a 777.

tayser · Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:43 pm

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 30):
Australia is the textbook case study of how wide open access for EK/EY destroys the local carrier (QF) - forcing it to shrink European flights to merely LHR plus a token service to Frankfurt. Does Canada want to become the next Australia ?

hahah. Oh god. Qantas would never have started scissor hubbing services into other mainland European ports from SIN or HKG had there been no EK/EY or QR. We've now got white-hot competition to Europe and Africa thanks to EK/EY/QR - without them everyone would still be flying to LHR and then backtracking to the continent with QF and BA.

mogandoCI · Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:08 pm

Quoting tayser (Reply 36):
hahah. Oh god. Qantas would never have started scissor hubbing services into other mainland European ports from SIN or HKG had there been no EK/EY or QR. We've now got white-hot competition to Europe and Africa thanks to EK/EY/QR - without them everyone would still be flying to LHR and then backtracking to the continent with QF and BA.

let' see.... QF has previously served Vienna, Paris, Athens, Rome, Amsterdam, and Manchester. EK is only a new phenomenon within the past 10 months. didn't SYD-SIN-LHR exist before that ?

also, SQ/TG/CX and other east Asian airlines are more than happy to route you 1-stop Aussie to Europe with no backtracking whatsoever, and has been doing so way before EK got big

longhauler · Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:18 pm

Quoting 777way (Reply 34):

True but in Canada's case its a little different, they gave the impression of being ok with restricting airlines.

Canada does not restrict airlines.

Canada has a set bilateral agreement framework, that is in place and has been for a long time. It is between countries, not airlines. Presently, O&D traffic between Canada and the UAE does not warrant more than the "starting" 6 times per week. The reason Emirates chose not to accept all 6 is only known by them, but I am certain they regret that pouting incident now.

If O&D traffic grows between two countries, then the country can apply for enhanced frequencies, and allot those frequencies to the airlines they dictate. To date, that level has not been reached between Canada and the UAE.

Interesting that you are from Pakistan. There is a large amount of O&D traffic between Canada and Pakistan, (and India) and for that reason, the bilateral allows more traffic between the two countries. It has been noted both locally and internationally that the biggest recipients of Canada's bilateral agreement restrictions on the UAE, have been the airlines of both Pakistan and India.

A recent editorial stated that Air India, Jet Airways and PIA should be allowed to carry their own people between their country and Canada, without the airlines of the UAE wiping them off the map first.

777way · Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:39 pm

^ Fair enough, but I would much rather fly with EK, EY or QR from Canada over PIA.

[Edited 2011-11-28 13:42:38]

Gemuser · Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:49 pm

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 37):

let' see.... QF has previously served Vienna, Paris, Athens, Rome, Amsterdam, and Manchester. EK is only a new phenomenon within the past 10 months. didn't SYD-SIN-LHR exist before that ?

Most of those were refueling stops, with traffic rights. When the need to stop so often disappeared with the arrival of the B742 in the mid 1970s, most of these ports became uneconomic to serve directly from Australia. It had nothing to do with EK AT THAT TIME.

Since that time it's a different matter and there is no real doubt that the relatively generous traffic rights accorded to Gulf carries has affected QF development.

Gemuser

Emirates773ER · Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:06 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 25):
Emirates was offered both YYC and YVR two years ago, which they declined. As far as I know, that offer still stands.

Yes the offer still stands from what I know, Emirates is asking for more flights to western canada with Alberta being on their radar for some time now. However, Canada wants to restrict the number of seats, so if EK starts flying to Calgary that would mean a reduction in seats from toronto. These ripples are being sorted out though.

Quoting YOWza (Reply 29):
Money where your mouth is? I'll put $100 on that.

Never bet on a politician. Personal advice.

Emirates773ER · Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:09 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 38):
A recent editorial stated that Air India, Jet Airways and PIA should be allowed to carry their own people between their country and Canada, without the airlines of the UAE wiping them off the map first.

That decision is not for the government to make. I will choose my own airline thank you.

saloman · Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:42 pm

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 41):
Never bet on a politician. Personal advice.

Another piece of personal advice, never underestimate a politicians sense of pride. Being kicked out of Camp Mirage was nothing short of a slap in the face to the Canadian Government, and I wouldn't expect two years and cooler heads to change any minds.

Kaiarahi · Tue Nov 29, 2011 12:28 am

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 41):
These ripples are being sorted out though.

Evidence?

Quoting saloman (Reply 43):
Being kicked out of Camp Mirage was nothing short of a slap in the face to the Canadian Government, and I wouldn't expect two years and cooler heads to change any minds.

The PM was actually leaning in favour of expanded rights until UAE/EK kicked him in the nuts with their misbegotten "diplomacy". The diplomatic community in Ottawa is still laughing about their ineptitude.

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 41):
Emirates is asking for more flights to western canada with Alberta being on their radar for some time now.

Rubbish.

WestJet747 · Tue Nov 29, 2011 12:54 am

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 44):
Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 41):
These ripples are being sorted out though.

Evidence?

John Baird just met with UAE officials a few days ago. A brief media release here

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 44):
Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 41):
Emirates is asking for more flights to western canada with Alberta being on their radar for some time now.

Rubbish.

I haven't seen anything tangible to suggest it, but I don't think it's an overly preposterous possibility.

longhauler · Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:44 am

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 42):
That decision is not for the government to make. I will choose my own airline thank you.

Actually ... yes it is up to the government to decide. That is why you can't fly from Chicago to Miami on Singapore Airlines, no matter how much you really really like them.

Thenoflyzone · Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:50 am

Quoting pnd100 (Reply 31):
the frequency is still capped at 6, maximum 3 by each carrier.

EK had a chance to lock in all 6 frequencies, but didn't start YYZ because it wanted the 7th frequency as well. The airline got too greedy, and in the meantime, EY started with 3 flights on AUH-YYZ.

You snooze, you loose.

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 41):
Emirates is asking for more flights to western canada with Alberta being on their radar for some time now. However, Canada wants to restrict the number of seats, so if EK starts flying to Calgary that would mean a reduction in seats from toronto. These ripples are being sorted out though.

You do realize that the demand between YYC-DXB couldn't even fill an A332 operating twice a week. No matter how much EK says it wants to start flights to YYC, i would be highly surprised to see it actually happen.

YVR would make more sense for EK, with the huge Indian community.

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2011-11-28 17:52:34]

StarAC17 · Tue Nov 29, 2011 2:03 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 6):
QF's previous attempt in 2000 to serve YYZ (via HNL using 763s) was quickly dropped. I think it only lasted a few months.

The introduction of OneWorld and the demise of CP I reckon killed that and QF could hub traffic via LAX on AA to YVR and YYZ making even sending a daily 763 to YVR and YYZ very inefficient.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 8):

Personally, I doubt AC has any major desire now to operate LAX-Australia considering all the capacity on that route. I expect it's very far down their list of priorities for new service. Fifth freedom carriers almost always generate lower yields.

Very True, its a sauturated market now and there is little room for additonal competition also factor in NZ on this route through AKL because often transfering there is easier than in SYD.

Quoting pnd100 (Reply 14):
5th freedom is critical to any Australia to Canada via USA route. Personally I think an Australia to YYZ via SFO would work for whatever airline chose to start it.

It failed when QF ran SYD-SFO-YVR and more Aussies visit YVR than YYZ. Also people don't like to transit the US on the way to another country because its a royal pain in the @$$ to do especially for an Australian.

This is why NZ manages to run AKL-YVR quite sucessfully, no customs in NZ when transiting. Also they have the *A partner with AC.

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 26):
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 23):
The route will happen when 'my' government (although I didn't vote for them) stops grabbing its' ankles when Homeland Security start feeling frisky.

I wish Canada would tell the US to get stuffed regarding this route.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 30):

a government has fiduciary responsibility not just to its consumers (enabling more or even unlimited EK access), but also to its domestic economy (protectionist stance). Why would a country agree to one-way outbound transfer of wealth ? (let's not pretend there are UAE tourists who are so eager to visit Canada)

Quoting 777way (Reply 34):
True but in Canada's case its a little different, they gave the impression of being ok with restricting airlines.

It doesn't block anyone out! Canada just doesn't have a nothing to unlimited attitude when it comes to airlines and we are a soverign nation and can do what we please.

Gr8Circle · Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:26 am

Quoting pnd100 (Reply 11):
What about those that may drop Canada? I am looking in the direction of financially troubled Indian carriers like AI / 9W.

With AI, it's hard to tell....but why would 9W discontinue service ? They are going through some negative earnings right now, but nothing like AI's pitiful condition......and moreover, they seem to be doing quite well on their YYZ flights (not sure of the loads).......just because a carrier is going through some tough times doesn't mean it's a prime candidate for discontinuation....by that logic, quite a few other carriers should be discontinuing flights to YYZ.....

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net