Why Hasn't B6 Started Service To Canada

doulasc · Sat Aug 17, 2013 2:46 am

Has JetBlue ever cosidered Canada like to Toronto or Montreal ? What are the possibilities of that happening.

[Edited 2013-08-16 19:47:51]

opethfan · Sat Aug 17, 2013 2:56 am

I'd like to see something like YVR - LGB, for sure.

However, I'm sure it's been deemed not a priority or else it would have happened already. Probably taxes or something like that.

usflyer msp · Sat Aug 17, 2013 4:49 am

They do serve Toronto and Montreal, its just via the Buffalo and Burlington Airports.

ORDTLV2414 · Sat Aug 17, 2013 5:58 am

market is pretty well saturated in all of its hubs with legacies. maybe it is more comfortable trying some underserved markets.

flyguy89 · Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:49 am

Perhaps because Canada is so expensive to serve? Fees at YYZ are sky high on top of Canadian taxes, so maybe they just don't believe they'll be able to generate the revenue to cover those costs. It seems like US LCC's have steered pretty clear of Canada, VX was the only recent one that has ventured service to Canada which flopped unfortunately.

It's interesting though that Canadian LCC's don't seem to have issues entering markets all over the US, yet American LCC's seem to steer clear of the Great North, save for attracting driving Canadians to cities just across the border in Buffalo and Bellingham.

opethfan · Sat Aug 17, 2013 8:26 am

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 4):
It's interesting though that Canadian LCC's don't seem to have issues entering markets all over the US, yet American LCC's seem to steer clear of the Great North, save for attracting driving Canadians to cities just across the border in Buffalo and Bellingham.

I suppose the market in Canada is willing / able to pay the higher prices, and many of the legacies have to pay the taxes as well so no matter what airline you're flying with the prices are going to be higher.

And now the popularity of cross-border airports is growing to millions per year and government officials have stated "why should we subsidize [cut taxes on] people's vacations to the Caribbean" (paraphrased). Stupidly he's also neglecting the thousands of jobs lost / not created because they're going to Allegiant in BLI rather than WS in YVR.

GentFromAlaska · Sat Aug 17, 2013 2:28 pm

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 4):
Perhaps because Canada is so expensive to serve?

From my vantage point its more the passport requirement needed to enter Canada. The price of a U.S. passport recently increased again; which now cost upwards of $150.00 for the ten year document.

Current passport holders can renew fairly cheap when compared to applying for a new or expired passport. If you let your existing passport expire you will pay the higher price. In a sluggish economy the passport is not high on my need list.

srbmod · Sat Aug 17, 2013 2:33 pm

A few US LCCs have served Canada in the past, but never seemed to maintain the service. America West was one of the few LCCs to have a measure of success with Canadian service (after pulling out of Canada for a time during their bankruptcy and rebirth as an LCC). US LCCs have opted to use "alternative" airports on the US side of the border to service Canadian markets since it is cheaper.

jfklganyc · Sat Aug 17, 2013 2:39 pm

Most expensive airports in the world to serve.

That's why BUF sees 10 flights a day to JFK. Who do you think they're serving? The booming metropolis of Buffalo?

When you tax people or businesses to death...they move elsewhere. When NY State and Buffalo is the place with LOWER taxes and fees, you know you are in BIG trouble.

lightsaber · Sat Aug 17, 2013 2:41 pm

Quoting srbmod (Reply 7):
US LCCs have opted to use "alternative" airports on the US side of the border to service Canadian markets since it is cheaper.

Agreed, but I haven't really seen that from B6 other than offering connecting service from upstate New York airports and possibly some Canadian customers utilize SEA.

I see a potential in the market. In particular, now that B6 has wingleted A320s, say YVR/YYZ to JFK and possibly a few others.

Lightsaber

longhauler · Sat Aug 17, 2013 3:38 pm

I see the crappy edit function of airliners.net is still not working, let's try this again:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 8):
Most expensive airports in the world to serve.

They are, but they are expensive for all carriers, so everyone is on the same playing field. I would put Westjet on about the same level LCC as JetBlue, and WS has 8 flights a day from LGA.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 8):

That's why BUF sees 10 flights a day to JFK. Who do you think they're serving? The booming metropolis of Buffalo?

There are around one million Canadians that live closer to BUF than YYZ, I would guess that BUF is serving them, as well as upstate New York.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 8):
When you tax people or businesses to death...they move elsewhere.

On those same days that BUF has 10 flights at day to NYC, there are 57 flights from Toronto to NYC, so apparently they are not moving elsewhere.

I always chuckle when I recall a quote from a Westjet official, it was something along the lines of ... "We are not so sure we want to compete for a passenger that would drive 2 hours plus to BUF, braving snow (winter) and long Customs line (year round) just to save $20."

I would guess therefore, that in the Toronto-NYC market, BUF is more competition for Greyhound or Via/Amtrak, than American or Westjet.

Flytravel · Sat Aug 17, 2013 4:54 pm

I could see it offering BOS-YYZ, as B6 tries to extend it's portfolio of business routes from BOS.

United sells tickets for flights operated by Air Canada, and that will be competition, but B6 faces competition on all it's business BOS routes, like BOS-Houston or BOS-DEN, which has longer stage length, competing against UA and WN, and all the connection itineries.

BOS-YYZ on B6 could help strengthen other B6 BOS routes where pax might connect in BOS to YYZ, e.g. EWR-BOS-YYZ for lower fares.

pnwtraveler · Sat Aug 17, 2013 5:18 pm

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 4):
Perhaps because Canada is so expensive to serve? Fees at YYZ are sky high on top of Canadian taxes, so maybe they just don't believe they'll be able to generate the revenue to cover those costs.

The AC and WestJet dominance of the cross border market make it very hard for anyone to break into the market. Both Canadian airlines beat the US competition in most cross border surveys done by people on both sides of the border. AA still maintains good levels of volume because it has significant business traffic with people on their Frequent Flyer program, who are willing to take a difference in service in order to build points. Now I know that isn't JetBlue but when you add all of the three airlines, plus Delta's volume there really isn't a lot left. So JetBlue to make a go of it has to take people away from all 4.

To the customers with the leisure time to waste up to 3 hours "commuting" to Buffalo to take a flight, they aren't going to fly Jet Blue out of YYZ with higher taxes and fees because they will fly with a level playing field and fares won't differ much. These people with this level of leisure time are going to continue to take the time to travel to Buffalo to save a buck. The much more lucrative business travel market isn't going to waste executives time with that sort of penalty. Those companies are willing to charter a small jet to save that kind of time and move executives more efficiently. My Dad's company had a chart they used for cost rationalization and 3 or 4 business people with a time savings of two hours each warranted chartering a Cessna or Learjet.

And frankly the US airlines look at the massive volume of business available in the US and look at the smaller volume in Canada and deploy their aircraft to more meaty feeding grounds. This is exactly the decision that Virgin America took after trying to break into the AC/WestJet/AA hold on YYZ to LAX.

JetBlue caused a stir when they got rights to YYZ but it turned out only for charter business.

spinkid · Sat Aug 17, 2013 5:19 pm

Quoting GentFromAlaska (Reply 6):
Current passport holders can renew fairly cheap when compared to applying for a new or expired passport. If you let your existing passport expire you will pay the higher price. In a sluggish economy the passport is not high on my need list.

I never let mine expire. Nobody should. What if you need to flee the country?

connies4ever · Sat Aug 17, 2013 6:39 pm

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 4):
Perhaps because Canada is so expensive to serve? Fees at YYZ are sky high on top of Canadian taxes, so maybe they just don't believe they'll be able to generate the revenue to cover those costs. It seems like US LCC's have steered pretty clear of Canada, VX was the only recent one that has ventured service to Canada which flopped unfortunately.

That's exactly the reason. As well, both AC and WS beat US carriers on service.

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 4):
It's interesting though that Canadian LCC's don't seem to have issues entering markets all over the US, yet American LCC's seem to steer clear of the Great North, save for attracting driving Canadians to cities just across the border in Buffalo and Bellingham.

B & B and Burlington area becoming significant players in the Great Lakes markets, but Iè;m not willing to drive for 2-3 hours to save $20 or $30.

Quoting GentFromAlaska (Reply 6):
From my vantage point its more the passport requirement needed to enter Canada. The price of a U.S. passport recently increased again; which now cost upwards of $150.00 for the ten year document.

Our passports are north (no pun intended) of $100 now, for a 5 year document. You could always get a Nexus pass, they're cheaper I believe.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 11):
I always chuckle when I recall a quote from a Westjet official, it was something along the lines of ... "We are not so sure we want to compete for a passenger that would drive 2 hours plus to BUF, braving snow (winter) and long Customs line (year round) just to save $20."

Per my initial comment.

willzzz88 · Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:00 pm

spinkid, LOL! Yeah the passport cost thing isn't a issue because a passport is also needed for other B6 destinations south of the border in Mexico/Central America/Carribean/LatAm, etc.

If the cost differential in taxes for YYZ versus BUF is really only $20 then maybe B6 should considering serving it if they can have a cost advantage in other things.

usflyer msp · Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:27 pm

Quoting willzzz88 (Reply 16):
If the cost differential in taxes for YYZ versus BUF is really only $20 then maybe B6 should considering serving it if they can have a cost advantage in other things.

The difference is more than $20; its usually more like $100+. To be exact, the taxes on BUF-LGA are $21.80 and taxes on YYZ-LGA are $102.10 and that is before you consider BUF's generally cheaper base fares and cheaper parking.

No one would drive from the GTA to Buffalo to save $20 as the drive costs more than that in petrol. Now when you are saving $100 per ticket for 4 people the equation changes.

This $20 talk is a red herring....

ElPistolero · Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:52 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 11):
I always chuckle when I recall a quote from a Westjet official, it was something along the lines of ... "We are not so sure we want to compete for a passenger that would drive 2 hours plus to BUF, braving snow (winter) and long Customs line (year round) just to save $20."

->

Quoting usflyer msp (Reply 17):
The difference is more than $20; its usually more like $100+. To be exact, the taxes on BUF-LGA are $21.80 and taxes on YYZ-LGA are $102.10 and that is before you consider BUF's generally cheaper base fares and cheaper parking.

I was just making the same observation after comparing prices.

And while I agree with the argument - this is essentially a market that AC has no interest in serving, which is fair enough - I nonetheless marvel at the cynicism inherent in Rovinescu/AC's stance on the matter:

"Air Canada’s chief executive took aim at Canadian airport fees Tuesday, likening them to “sin” taxes that add to ticket costs and contribute to driving almost five million Canadians to use U.S. border airports.
“Airport improvement fees, airport rent, security surcharges, navigation fees and the list goes on, all serve to make airline tickets in Canada more expensive,” Calin Rovinescu said in a speech to the Metropolitan Montreal Board of Trade.
As a result, Quebec’s fastest growing airport is located in Plattsburgh, N.Y., just over an hour by car from Montreal, Rovinescu told his audience. Montreal is served by Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport."

Why cite that market, when you're not interested in serving it? Will cutting the taxes make AC offer flights at US rates? Extremely unlikely. Will it keep those 5 million in Canada? Extremely unlikely. Its common knowledge that one of the reasons Transport Canada and the Government are wary of cutting the taxes is because they genuinely doubt the savings will be passed on to the consumer. YYZ is a classic example where the airport has actually been working to reduce costs and done a decent job (24% over the last six years). Not that its had any impact whatsoever on airfares.

srbmod · Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:59 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 15):
You could always get a Nexus pass, they're cheaper I believe.

I have Canadian friends that come to the US on a semi-regular basis and they've opted to get a NEXUS card. It can be bit of a PITA to get the process started, but if you travel between the US and Canada fairly regularly, it makes sense.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 9):
I see a potential in the market. In particular, now that B6 has wingleted A320s, say YVR/YYZ to JFK and possibly a few others.

DL flies JFK-YYZ seasonally, Cathay Pacific flies the route year-round HKG-YVR-JFK-YVR-HKG. AC and UA do YVR-EWR (UA does it seasonally). If there was any need for additional service, DL would fly the route year-round.

THEFLLFLYER · Sat Aug 17, 2013 8:31 pm

Think about the routes B6 would think of serving Canada with:

JFK-YYZ/YUL
BOS- YYZ/YUL
MCO- YYZ/YUL
FLL-YYZ/YUL
LGB-YVR/YYC/YEG
SJU-YYZ/YUL

Lets start with JFK-YYZ/YUL. There would be very few O&D pax on these flights. These would probably feed to Florida and Caribbean destinations that WG, WS and AC already serve N/S. All of the premium passengers are going to pay the extra money for the nonstop, even if B6 can manage lower fares than WG, WS and AC. Thus, most like trash yields on this flight.

BOS-YYZ/YUL- see above. Although probably more O&D.

MCO-YYZ/YUL & FLL-YYZ/YUL - these markets are saturated by the Canadian carriers and the yields can't be any good with 4 competitors already on the route.

LGB-YVR/YYC/YEG - this seems like the most logical choice for B6 to enter the Canadian market but they don't have the slots and B6 management has stated that they are more interested in serving LGB-Mexico.

SJU-YYZ/YUL- This is a very thin route and probably won't happen. If YYZ/YUL-JFK/BOS happens then pax can be routed through those cities

The most logical thing for B6 to do is codeshare with WS on routes from FLL, MCO, SJU and BOS (WS doesn't serve JFK) so connections can be made on routes from these cities. This will give B6 exposure to the Canadian market.

Viscount724 · Sat Aug 17, 2013 8:54 pm

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 4):
It's interesting though that Canadian LCC's don't seem to have issues entering markets all over the US

It's the opposite situation for Canadian carriers. Serving U.S. markets helps them reduce their average costs, since they have to absorb many of the higher Canadian taxes and airport charges to remain competitive in Canada. AC serves almost as many U.S. destinations as they do in Canada and is by far the largest foreign carrier in the U.S.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 18):
YYZ is a classic example where the airport has actually been working to reduce costs and done a decent job (24% over the last six years). Not that its had any impact whatsoever on airfares.

Again, the fee reductions at YYZ help Canadian carriers keep more of the revenue which they often now have to absorb to offer fares low enough to be attractive to consumers.

chrisair · Sat Aug 17, 2013 9:34 pm

Quoting srbmod (Reply 19):
It can be bit of a PITA to get the process started, but if you travel between the US and Canada fairly regularly, it makes sense.

I thought the NEXUS application process was a breeze. Unfortunately I don't live anywhere near the Canadian border so I had to wait for a trip to SEA to do my interview.

That being said, I don't know why I waited so long to get it. NEXUS and GE make the trip through customs (and security in Canada) a non event. PreCheck access stateside is also a great benefit!

flyguy89 · Sat Aug 17, 2013 9:38 pm

Quoting GentFromAlaska (Reply 6):
Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 4):
Perhaps because Canada is so expensive to serve?

From my vantage point its more the passport requirement needed to enter Canada. The price of a U.S. passport recently increased again; which now cost upwards of $150.00 for the ten year document.

This is true as well, I believe someone mentioned on here once that as a percentage of total population, Canadians hold more passports than Americans and travel internationally more frequently. This is why smaller cities such as Calgary, Edmonton and Ottawa support TATL service while even larger sized US markets such as Kansas City, Cleveland and St. Louis do not.

brilondon · Sat Aug 17, 2013 10:07 pm

It does sort of, we call it Westjet.

StarAC17 · Sat Aug 17, 2013 10:50 pm

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 4):
It's interesting though that Canadian LCC's don't seem to have issues entering markets all over the US, yet American LCC's seem to steer clear of the Great North, save for attracting driving Canadians to cities just across the border in Buffalo and Bellingham.

The US marketplace is 10 times the size of Canada so that is the natural marketplace Canadian carriers will go is the US.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 13):
To the customers with the leisure time to waste up to 3 hours "commuting" to Buffalo to take a flight, they aren't going to fly Jet Blue out of YYZ with higher taxes and fees because they will fly with a level playing field and fares won't differ much. These people with this level of leisure time are going to continue to take the time to travel to Buffalo to save a buck. The much more lucrative business travel market isn't going to waste executives time with that sort of penalty.

Agree 100% Time is money!!

If you take into account the travel time even without a wait at the border and the fact you likely have to overnight in BUF unless its a big group or you live on the Buffalo side of Hamilton it would have to be $200-$300 cheaper to make sense. That's my

.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 18):
Extremely unlikely. Its common knowledge that one of the reasons Transport Canada and the Government are wary of cutting the taxes is because they genuinely doubt the savings will be passed on to the consumer.

There is truth to that but if customers are willing to pay what you are charging why lower the price.

Also taxpayers who do not fly a lot probably do not want to foot the bill for airport improvements which is what will happen if the government changes their policy to simply lower fares.

The airports could also be privatized and that is a debate we should have.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 8):
That's why BUF sees 10 flights a day to JFK. Who do you think they're serving? The booming metropolis of Buffalo?

When you tax people or businesses to death...they move elsewhere. When NY State and Buffalo is the place with LOWER taxes and fees, you know you are in BIG trouble.

WS and AC combined probably have double the amount of flights to LGA (closer to Manhattan than JFK, which matters for business traffic) add in PD' YTZ-EWR and there are approximately 3 times the flights out of the Toronto Market. Furthermore most of that traffic is hi-yeilding and may only be gone for the day in some cases as Toronto and New York are the biggest financial centers in North America.

The traffic lost is low yield and if an airline can fill another seat with a high yielding client then every airline will do it, I'm betting that AC loses money on many of these pax.

avek00 · Sat Aug 17, 2013 11:04 pm

Quoting doulasc (Thread starter):
Has JetBlue ever considered Canada like to Toronto or Montreal ?

The structure of the transborder market favors new entrant activity from the Canadian side. Why? In a nutshell, the demand to US cities is diffuse, while the demand to/from Canadian cities is highly concentrated (Toronto, Montreal, Calgary, and Vancouver, with everything else a comparative sideshow). This leads to efficiency by basing a carrier in a Canadian hub where it can hit multiple cities with efficiently used crew and planes, rather than a US-based operation that would potentially have to maintain significant ops from multiple US operating bases to hit the Canadian metros.

Think about Porter Airlines transborder ops for a moment. Porter basically uses Q400s to hit various East Coast and Midwest cities within two hours' flying time of Toronto. It bases all of its crews and planes for transborder ops at a single site in Toronto, and can shift transborder capacity rather easily for operational or demand reasons. A US new entrant that tried to mimic Porter's rather simple transborder network would almost certainly be forced to maintain multiple aircraft and crew bases to ensure operational integrity, driving up costs and limiting flexibility.

[Edited 2013-08-17 16:09:12]

Viscount724 · Sat Aug 17, 2013 11:16 pm

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 25):
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 8):That's why BUF sees 10 flights a day to JFK. Who do you think they're serving? The booming metropolis of Buffalo?

When you tax people or businesses to death...they move elsewhere. When NY State and Buffalo is the place with LOWER taxes and fees, you know you are in BIG trouble.

WS and AC combined probably have double the amount of flights to LGA (closer to Manhattan than JFK, which matters for business traffic) add in PD' YTZ-EWR and there are approximately 3 times the flights out of the Toronto Market. Furthermore most of that traffic is hi-yeilding and may only be gone for the day in some cases as Toronto and New York are the biggest financial centers in North America.

Quick check shows 69 daily (weekdays, some weekend variations) nonstops in each direction between Toronto and New York (all airports combined).

AC - 23 (14 LGA, 6 EWR, 3 JFK)
AA - 14 (10 LGA, 4 JFK)
PD - 12 (YTZ-EWR)
WS - 8 (LGA)
UA - 9 (EWR)
DL - 3 (JFK)

There can't be many markets anywhere in North America with that much frequency.

flyby519 · Sat Aug 17, 2013 11:58 pm

Do Canadian carriers pay the same fees for service in YYZ/YUL/etc as a US based carrier would pay? I thought they had some protectionist laws and fees in place that made it so ridiculously pricey for foreign carriers to serve these airports.

ElPistolero · Sun Aug 18, 2013 12:04 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 21):
Again, the fee reductions at YYZ help Canadian carriers keep more of the revenue which they often now have to absorb to offer fares low enough to be attractive to consumers.

Be that as it may, any cost-benefit analysis would have to factor in the cost (to taxpayers/government) of lowering the taxes, against the benefits for them. As such, there's no guarantee that the savings will be passed on to consumers/taxpayers, so why bother? I mean, we've all seen the VX case, where the airfares fell to $350 when VX entered, and then rose to $700 when they left (more than a hint of predatory pricing there - pity it was never investigated). In light of that, trying to lower taxes to bring more actors - in this case US LCCs - doesn't strike me (or, I imagine, the government) as the best approach, given that the government will likely end up not only losing revenue, but will also risk seeing new entrants leave in short order, AND risk having to spend a fair bit of money investigating potential unfair practices (not an unknown in Canada, where at least one major airline has been found guilty of predatory pricing since 2000 - out in Atlantic Canada IIRC).

As things stand, perhaps its better for the government to pocket the $1bn that Calin claims he is losing by virtue of being in Canada. If prices are going to stay the same, the money might as well go to tax coffers - strikes me as offering a better return than handing it over to an airline.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 25):
There is truth to that but if customers are willing to pay what you are charging why lower the price.

I agree - if you can charge that much, you would be foolish not to. The government likely agrees too, which is why its not going to be offering tax relief, since there won't be much (or any) relief at all.

Sevensixtyseven · Sun Aug 18, 2013 12:17 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 27):

The only route pairs I can think of is LA-Bay area, with my weekday rough estimate north of 130.

YYZatcboy · Sun Aug 18, 2013 12:24 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 27):
There can't be many markets anywhere in North America with that much frequency.

Actually you are wrong...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_busiest_passenger_air_routes

Some examples:

HNL-OGG - 550 flights per week
MEX-CUN- 500
YYZ-YUL - 480
LAX-SFO - 440
LAX-SAN - 430
LAX-JFK - 420
LAX-LAS - 370

93Sierra · Sun Aug 18, 2013 12:51 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 9):

This makes me scratch my head... Why would the winglets/shark lets make them all of a sudden decide to ," lets serve Canada "?

Why not just try and establish a code share?

MCOflyer · Sun Aug 18, 2013 1:02 am

I would think in this case it would be beneficial for B6 to establish a partnership with WestJet or Air Canada. This way B6 does not have to pay high landing fees etc......

Routes that come to mind:

JFK-YYZ/YUL
MCO-YYZ/YUL
BOS-YYZ/YUL
FLL-YYZ/YUL

KH

pnwtraveler · Sun Aug 18, 2013 1:42 am

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 28):
Do Canadian carriers pay the same fees for service in YYZ/YUL/etc as a US based carrier would pay? I thought they had some protectionist laws and fees in place that made it so ridiculously pricey for foreign carriers to serve these airports.

Do you honestly think for one minute that the US would allow that to happen? The Mars Rover could have picked up the squawking if that were the case. Fees are equal and the Canadian carriers probably pay more federal tax on top of that.

flyby519 · Sun Aug 18, 2013 1:47 am

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 34):

When it comes to aviation policy the US does a lot of stupid stuff, so no it wouldn't surprise me. Thanks for the clarification

lightsaber · Sun Aug 18, 2013 4:16 am

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 18):
"Air Canada’s chief executive took aim at Canadian airport fees Tuesday, likening them to “sin” taxes that add to ticket costs and contribute to driving almost five million Canadians to use U.S. border airports.

There... we have a number to discuss to. 5 million (I assume passengers per year). While not huge, that is still a notable amount of 'spillage.'

Quoting usflyer msp (Reply 17):
Now when you are saving $100 per ticket for 4 people the equation changes.

And that is probably the customer B6 is picking up in BUF.

Quoting 93Sierra (Reply 32):
This makes me scratch my head... Why would the winglets/shark lets make them all of a sudden decide to ," lets serve Canada "?

It makes longer haul routes more cost effective such as YVR or YYC. For shorter routes, you would be correct in that it makes no difference. I do not see B6 serving nearly the routes in Canada that WS does.

But you are correct in that a code share partner might be 'good enough' for now. Long term, I see B6 expanding into Canada. But not for another few years.

Lighsaber

longhauler · Sun Aug 18, 2013 1:15 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 36):
There... we have a number to discuss to. 5 million (I assume passengers per year). While not huge, that is still a notable amount of 'spillage.'

The "spillage" is actually both ways. There are shuttle buses and transport that go from Buffalo/Niagara to YYZ. This is not surprising as the international options are far better from YYZ than BUF.

If one wanted a non stop or direct flight, there are far more options to Asia, Europe and Latin America from YYZ than BUF. And a quick check on travelocity shows that fares from YYZ are no higher than BUF and often cheaper. The biggest price edge for BUF is to American destinations, where there are far fewer taxes.

lightsaber · Sun Aug 18, 2013 9:38 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 37):
The "spillage" is actually both ways. There are shuttle buses and transport that go from Buffalo/Niagara to YYZ. This is not surprising as the international options are far better from YYZ than BUF.

Typically, long haul international is but 10% to 15% of the traffic, so while I'm sure BUF passengers do transit to YYZ (thanks to phenomenal connections), I'm surprised YYZ is cheaper. They are known as a 'high yield' international market...

But BUF lacking international flights vs. YYZ is no surprise.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 37):
And a quick check on travelocity shows that fares from YYZ are no higher than BUF and often cheaper. The biggest price edge for BUF is to American destinations, where there are far fewer taxes.

Now that is interesting. Is that a quirk of the two countries tax systems? I would have assumed the Canadian taxes would also have applied to international flights. Your insight is appreciated.

Lightsaber

Viscount724 · Sun Aug 18, 2013 9:46 pm

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 31):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 27):There can't be many markets anywhere in North America with that much frequency.Actually you are wrong...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_busiest_passenger_air_routesSome examples:HNL-OGG - 550 flights per weekMEX-CUN- 500YYZ-YUL - 480LAX-SFO - 440LAX-SAN - 430LAX-JFK - 420LAX-LAS - 370

You are comparing apples and oranges. My number of 69 flights between Toronto and New York was daily in each direction, that's 483 a week each way (866 both directions combined). Total would be a bit less with a few flights not operating on weekends. I also said "there can't be MANY other routes" with greater frequency. Please explain how I was wrong in that statement? Even based on your weekly numbers translated to daily, I think Toronto-New York is still near the top.

Whiteguy · Sun Aug 18, 2013 11:32 pm

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 31):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 27):
There can't be many markets anywhere in North America with that much frequency.

Actually you are wrong...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_busiest_passenger_air_routes

Some examples:

HNL-OGG - 550 flights per week
MEX-CUN- 500
YYZ-YUL - 480
LAX-SFO - 440
LAX-SAN - 430
LAX-JFK - 420
LAX-LAS - 370

Actually I think he's pretty much bang on!

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 15):
Our passports are north (no pun intended) of $100 now, for a 5 year document. You could always get a Nexus pass, they're cheaper I believe.

A 10 year Canadian passport is now $160, a 5 year is $120.

As far as I know you still need a passport to cross regardless if you have a Nexus.

YYZatcboy · Sun Aug 18, 2013 11:47 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 39):
Even based on your weekly numbers translated to daily, I think Toronto-New York is still near the top.

Well then I am surprised it's not on the chart on wikipedia. Actually I think I know what happened. It's not counting city pairs but rather airport pairs. Thus YYZ-NY is not on the list because YYZ- each NY airport is lower than the combining of all three.

longhauler · Mon Aug 19, 2013 3:48 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 38):
Now that is interesting. Is that a quirk of the two countries tax systems? I would have assumed the Canadian taxes would also have applied to international flights. Your insight is appreciated.

Just for fun, I was using BUF-LHR or BUF-FRA in comparison to YYZ-LHR or FRA, it was it either equal to or, less from YYZ.

But you nailed it when you mentioned international flights. A BUF-US flight is domestic and domestic taxes, (if any) are paid. YYZ-US flight is international, and international taxes are paid. So YYZ-US will always be more expensive than BUF-US, as the dfference is mostly tax.

However, BUF-International pays international taxes, like YYZ-International flights do ... that evens the board a lot.

yyz717 · Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:37 pm

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 13):
The AC and WestJet dominance of the cross border market make it very hard for anyone to break into the market.

JetBlue could leverage their huge JFK hub as a market entry "strategy" for the YYZ market thus avoiding or complimenting the high frequency shuttle-type service AC and WS offers primarily aimed at the O/D business traveller.

Hence, I'm also surprised that JetBlue has not entered the JFK-YYZ market with 3x daily E190 service, or sim. I bet it will come in due course. This would not add much capacity to the market.

On that note, I suspect PD has perhaps looked at YTZ-JFK, and we know they want YTZ-LGA. Also, now that the UAEx Q400 is back at EWR, will UAEx resurrect their earlier plans for EWR-YTZ?

brilondon · Mon Aug 19, 2013 9:36 pm

Quoting flyby519 (Reply 27):
Do Canadian carriers pay the same fees for service in YYZ/YUL/etc as a US based carrier would pay? I thought they had some protectionist laws and fees in place that made it so ridiculously pricey for foreign carriers to serve these airports.

No. They charge by the seat thus resulting in the plethora of RJs to YYZ and no larger aircraft. I remember the situation the way it was back in the late 70s, I remember AA sending a DC-10-10 from NYC to YYZ onwards to ORD. It was due to the price of fuel in YYZ was cheaper than in the US. I could be wrong but that is what I had heard from a gentleman who I was sitting beside one of my flights.

Viscount724 · Mon Aug 19, 2013 9:47 pm

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 40):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 39):
Even based on your weekly numbers translated to daily, I think Toronto-New York is still near the top.

Well then I am surprised it's not on the chart on wikipedia. Actually I think I know what happened. It's not counting city pairs but rather airport pairs. Thus YYZ-NY is not on the list because YYZ- each NY airport is lower than the combining of all three.

Yes, I'm sure that's the issue.

Skywatcher · Tue Aug 20, 2013 12:59 am

I'd like to share a few comments on this issue;

-Both the U.S. government and Canadian government gouge all airfares between the two countries with a myriad of fees and taxes. I check every time I fly to the U.S. (3 times this year so far) and all the various fees add up to about the same amount for each government. U.S. domestic airfares are taxed lightly and arguably contribute to the horrendous U.S. Federal government deficits.

-I tried the B6 Burtlington Vt. alternative rather than flying non-stop from Montreal to Los Angeles a few years ago. I had to transfer in JFK (nightmare), stay overnight in Burlington, pay outrageous airport food prices, suffer poor flight time choices, land in Long Beach (got lost in early morning hours), missed connection in JFK on the way back and so on.
I flew with 2 of my kids so I did save maybe $400 (less driving costs of say .50/km or around $150 plus hotel room of $100) but the inconvenience/hidden extra fees/wasted time/crappy food was not even close to being worth the trouble. Never again. Most of the Canadians on the Burlington B6 flight were from border towns (Magog/Sherbrooke/St.Jean/Granby etc.) rather than Montreal.

I highly doubt that B6 will penetrate any of the highly served/competitive eastern markets and from what I saw at Long Beach they're maxed out there already.

airbazar · Tue Aug 20, 2013 1:48 pm

Quoting usflyer msp (Reply 16):
The difference is more than $20; its usually more like $100+. To be exact, the taxes on BUF-LGA are $21.80 and taxes on YYZ-LGA are $102.10 and that is before you consider BUF's generally cheaper base fares and cheaper parking.

Apples and Oranges. YYZ-LGA is an international flight while BUF-LGA is a domestic flight. International flights have a very different tax structure than domestic flights. Just the Intl Arr/Dep tax adds $34.40. Immigration and Customs fees add another $12.50.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net