Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
VCEflyboy
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:23 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:18 am

Quoting 9252fly (Reply 46):
We may accuse AC of rouging us,but we the consumer are our own worst enemy as airlines respond to our desire to pay less and less.

It is a chicken and egg dilemma. One could claim YVR consumers have been ditching AC and therefore AC has no interest in serving but just some basic routes ex YVR, operated with their bottom-of-the-line Rouge equipment just to feed their few trans-pac and regional flights.

On the other hand, one might say YVR was a great chance for AC to build what essentially DL is doing at SEA - that is a strategic trans-pac hub with a huge potential market spreading from Canada to most of the USA and possibly further south - and wasted it to adopt and protect their fortress-hub approach at AS-DL war and AA expansion, while their JV partner UA unsurprisingly already has a foot out of the door and could care less about this region because they see the writing on the wall with this bloodbath building up.

[Edited 2014-07-15 23:10:28]
 
opethfan
Topic Author
Posts: 940
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:35 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:58 am

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 50):

I agree. The issue is several-fold.

Leisure passengers head to BLI with G4 because on many routes the prices are 25 - 50% lower. There goes around 1 million pax a year, if you add the few who go as far as SEA.

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 50):
On the other hand, one might say YVR was a great chance for AC to build what essentially DL is doing at SEA - that is a strategic trans-pac hub with a huge potential market spreading from Canada to most of the USA and possibly further south - and wasted it to adopt and protect their fortress-hub approach at YYZ.

On the money. The geographical location is there, the infrastructure is there, but the Canadian government has decided it would rather not be competitive, by both keeping taxes up the wazoo ("We won't subsidize people's Caribbean vacations" leading to point #1) and by ignoring calls from airport authorities like YVR to ease or make transit exceptions for pax passing through YVR on the way to Asia. At a conference last year, Craig Redmond said that he has specifically called on the government to ease up on visa requirements for citizens of countries such as Brazil so that they can use YVR as an Asian connecting point without needing costly and time-consuming paperwork. If you're going to need a visa to pass through somewhere, you may as well go through LAX or some other US hub where the prices are lower.

DL have seen AC's focus on YYZ and are taking advantage with the SEA feeder. AA's LAX route is probably as much about Asian feed as it is the entertainment industry.

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 50):
while their JV partner UA unsurprisingly already has a foot out of the door and could care less about this region because they see the writing on the wall with this bloodshed building up.

Which leads to the uncomfortable question of why AC's partner's main west coast hub, as well as the busiest transborder route, are deemed as being unable to support a standard premium product. I understand HNL, LAS, OGG, PHX, et al. but SFO? I find it troubling that there isn't the market for hub carrier in the 4th largest west coast city to send a premium-equipped a/c to their partner's hub in the 2nd largest west coast city. That screams to me that something's not quite right, or that Rouge is more of an attempt to fight labour costs across the board than just be a leisure carrier.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6489
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:53 pm

Quoting Opethfan (Reply 51):
Which leads to the uncomfortable question of why AC's partner's main west coast hub, as well as the busiest transborder route, are deemed as being unable to support a standard premium product.

Again. That's just it ... the route can not support the mainline product. Don't look at it as a Rouge product at mainline fares ... to me, it's more Rouge fares that could not support a mainline product.

I grudglingly admit, AC very rarely makes marketing mistakes. Do you really think this is a "mistake" or just something long time coming? If the premium market really was there, do you think they'd send in the B Team?

Quoting Opethfan (Reply 51):
On the money. The geographical location is there, the infrastructure is there, but the Canadian government has decided it would rather not be competitive, by both keeping taxes up the wazoo

In a lot of markets, like South America to Asia, it is shorter to connect them through YYZ than YVR. The advent of the ULH airliner has reduced the necessity of YVR.

But you are right about taxes, as long as the Government sees fit to tax anything that touches Canada, Air Canada will never be a true connection international carrier like, EK, SQ, KL, etc.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
multimark
Posts: 467
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 1:53 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Thu Jul 17, 2014 5:15 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 44):
I agree, and AC markets Rouge as a low-cost brand with more basic service. It's only an issue during the introductory phase when passengers originally booked on AC mainline flights find themselves on Rouge. Even there, I doubt the

I had the misfortune of getting Rouged on my last flight to LA. It was the most uncomfortable flight I have been on in years.

Any business person who contemplates Rouge Y on this route (or SFO) needs their head examined, there are now better options.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 1981
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Thu Jul 17, 2014 11:19 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 52):
to me, it's more Rouge fares that could not support a mainline product.

And how does it compare to products around the world that can be had at what you call "Rouge" fares.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 12:16 am

Quoting multimark (Reply 53):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 44):
I agree, and AC markets Rouge as a low-cost brand with more basic service. It's only an issue during the introductory phase when passengers originally booked on AC mainline flights find themselves on Rouge. Even there, I doubt the

I had the misfortune of getting Rouged on my last flight to LA. It was the most uncomfortable flight I have been on in years.

Any business person who contemplates Rouge Y on this route (or SFO) needs their head examined, there are now better options.

I think AC is quite happy if you use those options as you're not the primary market on routes being transferred to Rouge and AC mainline can't operate those routes profitably with their cost structure and lower-density seating.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 1981
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 12:21 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 55):
I think AC is quite happy if you use those options as you're not the primary market on routes being transferred to Rouge and AC mainline can't operate those routes profitably with their cost structure and lower-density seating.

If AC starts losing pax to competitors, it would not be a stretch to suggest that its going to have to start dropping prices to replace them. That would affect the profitability of the flight (in effect, offsetting the savings from the Rouge model savings). Kind of defeats the purpose no?

Unless the market is undersupplied and there are boatloads of people waiting to fly at that price point (which could well be the case, given per capita rates of flying in Canada).
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6489
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 12:21 am

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 54):

And how does it compare to products around the world that can be had at what you call "Rouge" fares.

Doesn't matter does it?

Fares are set on a city pair basis, and as long as Rouge is competitive with respect to its competitors in each market it serves it really doesn't matter that travel on a comparable length Spirit flight might be more expensive, or Singapore cheaper.

That's why I always chuckled when people went off on a rant .... "OMG, Rouge is charging mainline fares". No ... Rouge is charging what the market on that city pair will bear. It doesn't matter whether Rouge or mainline Air Canada flies the route, the fare will likely be the same as its competitors.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 1981
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 12:49 am

Quoting longhauler (Reply 57):
Doesn't matter does it?

It does if you make statements like this:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 52):
to me, it's more Rouge fares that could not support a mainline product.

The term 'Rouge fares' is inconclusive in and of itself. It could either mean that passengers are underpaying, or that the airline is so inefficient it needs to charge Lexus prices for a Nissan Micra product. The difference is that one tries to prescribe blame to the consumer; the other holds the supplier responsible. Given your own claims about AC's RASMs, I suspect the latter might be true.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 57):
Fares are set on a city pair basis, and as long as Rouge is competitive with respect to its competitors in each market it serves it really doesn't matter that travel on a comparable length Spirit flight might be more expensive, or Singapore cheaper.

I'm completely familiar with the market concept and I really don't have an issue with Rouge charging whatever it can. That doesn't, however, stop me from pointing out that it is still one of the worst value-for-money products out there in the world, which is an indicator of a poorly functioning market (itself a function of how government treats a sector).

That said, this entrance of capacity (and its curious that DL hasn't actually made it clear if this announcement relates only to their holiday service) is going to chew away at the savings attained through the cost cutting measures. Which may well land AC right back at square one - instead of a mainline product that costs more than people are paying for it, you could end up with a Rouge product that costs more than people are willing to pay for it.

Very, very interested in seeing how this plays out (as, I'm sure, are you). Interesting times, indeed.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 57):
That's why I always chuckled when people went off on a rant .... "OMG, Rouge is charging mainline fares". No ... Rouge is charging what the market on that city pair will bear. It doesn't matter whether Rouge or mainline Air Canada flies the route, the fare will likely be the same as its competitors.

If that's the case, why not Rouge all of the routes? Premium cabin you say? I'm sure AC wouldn't find it hard to put a proper J cabin with 29" seat pitch/no IFE etc in Y.

[Edited 2014-07-17 17:51:12]
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 2:10 am

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 58):
I'm completely familiar with the market concept and I really don't have an issue with Rouge charging whatever it can. That doesn't, however, stop me from pointing out that it is still one of the worst value-for-money products out there

If that was the case they wouldn't be recording record load factors almost every month. And just looking at Rouge, I checked this weekend's (Sat/Sun) 16 Rouge A319s YVR-LAX-YVR (4 daily each direction). Average Y load factor is about 96%. In the 60-65% range for the 12 "Premium Rouge" seats on each flight.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6489
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 2:13 am

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 58):
The term 'Rouge fares' is inconclusive in and of itself.

And that's exactly what I am trying to say. There is no such thing as a "Rouge fare".

Fares are set on a city pair basis. Statistics have shown time ad nauseum that no matter what you offer on your flight, customers are not likely to choose you over your competitor if you are more expensive. So, if you are losing money on a route, you have two choices ... stop flying the route, or find a way to reduce your unit cost. (Rouge)

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 58):
The difference is that one tries to prescribe blame to the consumer; the other holds the supplier responsible. Given your own claims about AC's RASMs, I suspect the latter might be true.

I have said this time and time again ... the passenger sets the fare, not the airline. Passengers will not pay a higher price for a "better" product, the lower fare stands ... as set and decided by the passenger.

If passengers did buy a seat for anything other than price, then that parameter would now be the standard.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 58):
which is an indicator of a poorly functioning market

In other words ... the customer is to "blame".

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 58):
That doesn't, however, stop me from pointing out that it is still one of the worst value-for-money products out there in the world,

I don't know why you keep saying that. I flew Rouge from LAX-YVR, and I found it quite pleasant. the flight was safe, on time, in a new, clean cabin served by quirky eager Flight Attendants. I paid about $170, taxes in and for $15 I bought a bottle of California Chardonnay and Sushi. (with chopsticks and killer wasabi) I am 6'1" tall and 180 lbs. The seat was not lie flat J, but it was fine for 3 hours. Have you flown Rouge yet? I mean YOU, not third party reports.

But, with regard to poor value, the 85+% load factors would indicate otherwise. It would appear that Rouge is giving the passenger exactly what he wants ... and as we both know, it is any company that is doomed that tells the customer what he wants instead of listening.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 58):
If that's the case, why not Rouge all of the routes?

Look very closely at the Rouge routes, and you will find your answer ...

The B767 operation is basically flying new routes. The rest of the B767 routes and the A319 is doing flying, that in my opinion should never have been flown by mainline. Its hard to make money on a Cuba flight with a 120 seat A319 when your competition is flying a 189 seat B737.

Looking at the Rouge operation with interest, it all seems to make sense .... except YVR-LAX/SFO. And as I said previously, given that HQ has all the numbers, one can only assume that it is no longer the premium high yield route it once was, and is now a low yield free-for-all!

I have been watching the loads closely, and while it would be improper to quote exact numbers, it does appear to be doing well.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 58):
If that's the case, why not Rouge all of the routes? Premium cabin you say? I'm sure AC wouldn't find it hard to put a proper J cabin with 29" seat pitch/no IFE etc in Y.

Be careful what you predict!
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 1981
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 5:04 am

Quoting longhauler (Reply 60):
So, if you are losing money on a route, you have two choices ... stop flying the route, or find a way to reduce your unit cost. (Rouge)

Yes, but lowering that unit cost doesn't mean the airline is no longer inefficient. Like I said, if you need to charge a Lexus price to provide a Nissan Micra, you're still more inefficient than the guy who charges a Nissan Micra price for a Nissan Micra.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 60):
I have said this time and time again ... the passenger sets the fare, not the airline. Passengers will not pay a higher price for a "better" product, the lower fare stands ... as set and decided by the passenger.

Lets consider this. The consumer sets the price (ie what he is willing to pay). The supplier decides what he can provide at that price. Ergo the consumer is driving the product.

Theres two fundamental flaws in this argument:

1. A consumer who needs to get from point A to point B does not have the luxury of turning away and walking off without incurring a cost (ie not getting to point B). That reduces the consumer's pricing power.

2. Your argument does not account for supplier inefficiencies. AC may not be able to provide anything more than a Rouge product at that price, but other airlines might be able to. AC is relatively inefficient relative to those airlines. You're not accounting for that. I suppose a better example of this would be the Canadian telecoms companies - lions at home; unable to compete abroad. How much pricing power does the consumer have there?

That's not to say that consumers don't have any pricing power; I'm simply pointing out that it is a two-way street, and in countries with high barriers to entry, like Canada, the supplier has more control over the situation than the consumer unless a challenger decides to brave the barriers to entry and enter (although the government discourages/prohibits that in some cases). That's whats happening with AA and, presumably, DL. They announce their entry and next thing you know, AC is back to providing a 'real' J product on the route (by virtue of putting in a 767 on the route).

Quoting longhauler (Reply 60):
In other words ... the customer is to "blame".

High barriers to entry are skewing the market in favor of airlines. These sudden boosts of capacity do point to an undersupply situation (which would correlate with the fact that Canadians fly less than Americans on a per capita basis). I think you'll find that it has more to do with high barriers to entry (taxes, protectionism) than it does with consumer choice.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 60):
I paid about $170, taxes in and for $15 I bought a bottle of California Chardonnay and Sushi. (with chopsticks and killer wasabi) I am 6'1" tall and 180 lbs. The seat was not lie flat J, but it was fine for 3 hours. Have you flown Rouge yet? I mean YOU, not third party reports.

2 points

1. I assume you mean $185 each way. If its $185 return, then I think its a terrific product. Sign me up as a fan. If, however, its $340/$370 return, then I will simply point out that I paid a staggering $420 to do an LHR-IST-LHR (oh, APD) run earlier this summer (travel peak in Europe). I flew on a TK 333 and TK 777, each with 32" pitch, AVOD, 6" recline (I believe the recline is on par with Premium Rouge on a 767) and a full Do&Co catered meal. Not one for alchohol, so I enjoyed a mint lemonade instead. See any difference in the value for money?

2. No, I have never flown in Rouge and I never will. In some cases, one can spot bad value for money from a mile away. Trying it just to prove a point is still a waste of money. I've flown Ryanair for under 50 euros STN - Barcelona satellite (can't remember the name) -STN so I know what 29" feels like.
 
Prost
Posts: 2560
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 5:16 am

By the way this thread has transpired, you'd think Rouge was a Delta subsidiary.
 
User avatar
VCEflyboy
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:23 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 5:47 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 59):
Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 58):
I'm completely familiar with the market concept and I really don't have an issue with Rouge charging whatever it can. That doesn't, however, stop me from pointing out that it is still one of the worst value-for-money products out there

If that was the case they wouldn't be recording record load factors almost every month. And just looking at Rouge, I checked this weekend's (Sat/Sun) 16 Rouge A319s YVR-LAX-YVR (4 daily each direction). Average Y load factor is about 96%. In the 60-65% range for the 12 "Premium Rouge" seats on each flight.

I have explained this in a previous post. It is the honeymoon phase: most customers don't even know that AC Rouge is around - let alone the difference between Rouge and mainline.

AC has indeed been ordered to refund all those tickets (incl non-ref) booked on AC mainline and "rouged".
Those clever AC marketing people think it is an astute marketing technique, while it is actually called fraud.
Lots of US airlines have been fined lately for not clearly disclosing the flight's actual operator.
 
opethfan
Topic Author
Posts: 940
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:35 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 6:17 am

The way I see the Rouge situation is that the Canadian marketplace is being kept unpleasantly expensive due to taxes, both from the Canadian government and the US levies on international flights, so the only way AC can deliver a product at the prices passengers want to pay is to cut service levels. Just like how passengers don't WANT to sit in 10 abreast 777 Y class to save $15, but external forces are making that the only affordable way to travel nowadays.

We've seen AC's business model shift toward lower yield on the 777s and 787s, but time will tell how leisure passengers will react next vacation season.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 52):
Again. That's just it ... the route can not support the mainline product. Don't look at it as a Rouge product at mainline fares ... to me, it's more Rouge fares that could not support a mainline product.

I grudglingly admit, AC very rarely makes marketing mistakes. Do you really think this is a "mistake" or just something long time coming? If the premium market really was there, do you think they'd send in the B Team?

I would expect there to be a high density Y with a traditional J product... it's hard for me to believe that there isn't enough premium feed for two sizable cities, with a Star hub at each end, to fill a dozen or so premium seats per sector. Of course, UA still have premium seating on their metal.

California is obviously a popular vacation destination, but Rouge isn't really focused for the premium traveler at all. Perhaps it's been agreed to just have J fly on UA so as to let AC focus on just the vacationers since that's how they've equipped the a/c?

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 61):
I suppose a better example of this would be the Canadian telecoms companies - lions at home; unable to compete abroad.

Speaking from my experience in the telecom sector, this particular example is more because the same greasy techniques that Canadian telecoms pull to become so rich wouldn't slide elsewhere. Collusion and protectionism at its worst.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 52):
In a lot of markets, like South America to Asia, it is shorter to connect them through YYZ than YVR. The advent of the ULH airliner has reduced the necessity of YVR.

This is true. YYZ-Asia is now not only viable, but often successful (apart from reports such as of YYZ-NRT being shelved for parts of the year) however the west coast benefits by not needing anyone to backtrack to get to their destination. It's probably a big reason why DL chose to build SEA despite their offerings out of DTW.
 
User avatar
VCEflyboy
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:23 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 6:40 am

Quoting Opethfan (Reply 64):

Quoting longhauler (Reply 52):
In a lot of markets, like South America to Asia, it is shorter to connect them through YYZ than YVR. The advent of the ULH airliner has reduced the necessity of YVR.

This is true. YYZ-Asia is now not only viable, but often successful (apart from reports such as of YYZ-NRT being shelved for parts of the year) however the west coast benefits by not needing anyone to backtrack to get to their destination. It's probably a big reason why DL chose to build SEA despite their offerings out of DTW.

Well except there is no huge S. America-Asia demand to begin with, and most of it gets routed via Europe, ME or JBN anyway. On the other hand, YVR is geographically as good as SEA if not better to connect California to Asia, which if I am not mistaken represents half of the entire US Asia demand.

YYZ is so successful that AC had to axe their NRT flight as soon as they started flying to Haneda.
YVR, on the other hand, could serve as a hub and also has lots of Asian O&D to all major East Asian destinations.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 1981
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 12:53 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 59):
f that was the case they wouldn't be recording record load factors almost every month. And just looking at Rouge, I checked this weekend's (Sat/Sun) 16 Rouge A319s YVR-LAX-YVR (4 daily each direction). Average Y load factor is about 96%. In the 60-65% range for the 12 "Premium Rouge" seats on each flight.

Interesting (thought these numbers were proprietary?), but what does it mean?

1. Are other airlines losing market share? Are people choosing to fly Rouge over others? The entrance of new carriers suggests neither.
2. Are fares bottoming out or staying at 'mainline' levels? If they're staying at mainline prices, we're essentially looking at an undersupplied market that, given recent increases in capacity by both major Canadian carriers, indicates a long history of lost economic potential due to airline mismanagement and a decision to not let the airline fail, or we're witnessing emerging market levels of growth.

While I am critical of the Rouge product, I very much prefer its existence to its non-existence. Its entry has demonstrated the state of the Canadian market so thoroughly that we now have foreign carriers willing to brave high barriers to entry, and domestic start ups thinking they can secure domestic funding (if they do, it will be no small feat) to capitalize on the market.

Its almost like DL (if it plans to stay past the holidays), AA, Jetnaked etc are looking at Rouge and thinking: "if they can get away with charging those prices for those products, the market must be full of opportunities".

A good thing, undoubtedly.

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 63):
Those clever AC marketing people think it is an astute marketing technique, while it is actually called fraud.
Lots of US airlines have been fined lately for not clearly disclosing the flight's actual operator.

I think the blame on the marketing folk is misplaced. More likely an executive ivory tower decision made by folk who think that a Rouge product is a perfectly acceptable substitute for a mainline product, and customers who think otherwise just need to be 'educated'.

Quoting Opethfan (Reply 64):
Speaking from my experience in the telecom sector, this particular example is more because the same greasy techniques that Canadian telecoms pull to become so rich wouldn't slide elsewhere. Collusion and protectionism at its worst.

Throw em open to full scale foreign competition and they ll sort themselves out.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 60):
Be careful what you predict!

Called it a long time ago.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6489
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:37 pm

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 65):
Well except there is no huge S. America-Asia demand to begin with, and most of it gets routed via Europe, ME or JBN anyway.

In the world market, AC is a pretty small player. So when I mention that the last trip I did out of South America to YYZ, there were more connections to Asia than anywhere else, it sounds impressive .... except, still we are talking only a few dozen passengers on one of three flights north.

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 65):
On the other hand, YVR is geographically as good as SEA if not better to connect California to Asia, which if I am not mistaken represents half of the entire US Asia demand.

Yes, it is. And anywhere west of ORD would be quicker through YVR than YYZ. The big problem here is the tax advantage American carriers have over Canadian carriers. The only advantage Canadian carriers have is the easier visa restrictions for transit passengers.

But it really is a balance. YVR vs. YYZ. If you acknowledge that the distance is roughly the same you go with the one with the most O&D traffic, and the most cargo traffic ... that would be YYZ.

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 65):
YYZ is so successful that AC had to axe their NRT flight as soon as they started flying to Haneda.

You're kidding, right?

I thought it was explained on here, but maybe it wasn't.

With the delay of B787 deliveries, AC is in a huge widebody shortage. The very desirable HND slots had to be used, or lost. The B77W alloted to NRT was routed to HND. The NRT flights were replaced with a B763 through YVR. This was for 14 days, then both non-stops were restored.

Both are currently flying daily non-stop.

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 65):
YVR, on the other hand, could serve as a hub and also has lots of Asian O&D to all major East Asian destinations.

As does YYZ.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:37 pm

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 65):

YYZ is so successful that AC had to axe their NRT flight as soon as they started flying to Haneda.

So far the indication is that NRT-YYZ is only suspended for winter ... but who knows if it'll return next summer
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6489
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:41 pm

Quoting Jetblue1965 (Reply 68):

So far the indication is that NRT-YYZ is only suspended for winter ... but who knows if it'll return next summer

It really depends on how fast the B787s arrive. Given the equipment, NRT will remain.

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 66):
Called it a long time ago.

That is where the market is headed in my opinion. Satisfying the demands of two types of Customers; the ones only looking for a cheap seat, and those that will pay a premium for premium cabins.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:58 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 69):
It really depends on how fast the B787s arrive. Given the equipment, NRT will remain.

Agreed. YYZ-ICN is another one that may make sense to do 77L summer and 788 winter.
 
travelin man
Posts: 3238
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 10:04 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 3:43 pm

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 65):
On the other hand, YVR is geographically as good as SEA if not better to connect California to Asia, which if I am not mistaken represents half of the entire US Asia demand.

California has plenty of direct connections to Asia, so not many people going to/from California will need the time nor expense of connecting via YVR.
 
User avatar
VCEflyboy
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:23 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 7:25 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 67):
In the world market, AC is a pretty small player. So when I mention that the last trip I did out of South America to YYZ, there were more connections to Asia than anywhere else, it sounds impressive .... except, still we are talking only a few dozen passengers on one of three flights north.

What I am saying is why is AC trying to lure those South Americans who have far better options in terms of connectivity, value, fares and time, when they are sitting next to the richest country in the world, with huge volumes and strong demand?

Quoting longhauler (Reply 67):
Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 65):
YYZ is so successful that AC had to axe their NRT flight as soon as they started flying to Haneda.

You're kidding, right?

I thought it was explained on here, but maybe it wasn't.

With the delay of B787 deliveries, AC is in a huge widebody shortage.

No I don't buy it. Obviously there is just not enough demand to sustain two daily flights to Tokyo, so they came up with this ridiculous explanation. AC has plenty of widebody airplanes for Rouge. If the route was profitable they would scrap a plane in no time, or they would lease one. Truth is there is just not enough demand.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 67):
Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 65):
YVR, on the other hand, could serve as a hub and also has lots of Asian O&D to all major East Asian destinations.

As does YYZ.

Oh yeah? Does YYZ have over a million Chinese people living there too?
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 8:31 pm

Quoting Jetblue1965 (Reply 68):
Oh yeah? Does YVR?

Almost 600,000 in YVR.

715,000 in Ontario, and 460,000 in BC!

[Edited 2014-07-18 13:32:57]


[Edited 2014-07-18 13:33:41]
 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 8:36 pm

Quoting whiteguy (Reply 73):

Thanks, but I didn't say any of that stuff in your quote.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6489
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 8:49 pm

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 72):
No I don't buy it. Obviously there is just not enough demand to sustain two daily flights to Tokyo, so they came up with this ridiculous explanation.

Again ... you're kidding, right?

So, AC wet-leased some B767s this summer, just 'cause it would be cool? Are you the only one on here that is not aware that not only are the B787s 5 years late, but at the last minute they were another 9 months late?

And so you know, HND started on July 1, as planned. From July 1 there has been a YYZ-HND and a YYZ-NRT flight EVERY DAY! So I don't know why you keep saying this:

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 65):
YYZ is so successful that AC had to axe their NRT flight as soon as they started flying to Haneda.

When it simply is not true.

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 72):
AC has plenty of widebody airplanes for Rouge.

Rouge B767s are running in the high 90s load factors right now.

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 72):
Truth is there is just not enough demand.

Truth?

Both HND and NRT are running almost full daily.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
Whiteguy
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 6:11 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:10 pm

Quoting Jetblue1965 (Reply 74):

Quoting whiteguy (Reply 73):

Thanks, but I didn't say any of that stuff in your quote.


Yeah I know sorry. Not sure why it quoted you. It was directed at VCEflyboy.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sat Jul 19, 2014 12:29 am

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 63):
Those clever AC marketing people think it is an astute marketing technique, while it is actually called fraud.
Lots of US airlines have been fined lately for not clearly disclosing the flight's actual operator.

Try booking a flight on the AC website on a route operated by Rouge. It can't be any clearer that the flight is operated by Rouge.
 
User avatar
VCEflyboy
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:23 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sat Jul 19, 2014 2:28 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 77):
Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 63):
Those clever AC marketing people think it is an astute marketing technique, while it is actually called fraud.
Lots of US airlines have been fined lately for not clearly disclosing the flight's actual operator.

Try booking a flight on the AC website on a route operated by Rouge. It can't be any clearer that the flight is operated by Rouge.

And yet apparently there are still some dumb folks who dont get it..

http://www.vancouversun.com/technolo...ed+Canada+rouge/9824614/story.html

VANCOUVER — Two months ago, Tae Oum booked a regular Air Canada flight from Vancouver to Los Angeles.

He paid about $90 more than the cheapest fare available, hoping to use Aeroplan points to upgrade to an even higher seating category.

But when he arrived at the airport for the May 1 flight, he discovered the service had been switched to the airline’s low-cost Air Canada rouge carrier, which offers about two to three inches less leg room — or pitch — than regular Air Canada economy seating.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...ry-over-bumping-to-rouge-1.2633845

Some Air Canada passengers are seeing red after the airline moved them to its new low-cost Rouge carrier, but the airline denies service is suffering.

Many customers who purchased Air Canada flights months in advance say they have found themselves bumped onto Rouge flights and given no choice but to accept the smaller seats, limited in-flight entertainment and lack of complimentary food. Jim Noon, who booked a regular Air Canada flight from Vancouver to Los Angeles on points in March, says the company subsequently moved him to a Rouge flight without his knowledge or consent.

"It's frustrating, and it makes you feel deceived," Noon told CBC News.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sat Jul 19, 2014 2:33 am

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 78):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 77):
Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 63):
Those clever AC marketing people think it is an astute marketing technique, while it is actually called fraud.
Lots of US airlines have been fined lately for not clearly disclosing the flight's actual operator.

Try booking a flight on the AC website on a route operated by Rouge. It can't be any clearer that the flight is operated by Rouge.

And yet apparently there are still some dumb folks who dont get it..

As already mentioned, those are probably people who booked before Rouge had taken over from AC mainline, or business people who had their secretary or travel department make the reservations. And if not mistaken they're entitled to full refunds if they're not happy with the change from AC mainline to Rouge.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6489
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sat Jul 19, 2014 4:04 am

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 78):
Rouge flights and given no choice but to accept the smaller seats, limited in-flight entertainment and lack of complimentary food.


In my opinion the only gripe transferring from mainline to Rouge is the J class seat. On Rouge it is a convertible seat, on mainline it is a dedicated J seat. Everything else is the same for J passengers. They get priority ground handling, baggage handling and Maple Leaf Lounge access. The catering is identical. The only difference is the seat.

I asked on an internal forum, just how many people this affected. Namely how many people actually booked J YVR to LAX/SFO on mainline and got Rouge ... it was less than 4 dozen!!! This is really not all that surprising as the majority of J passengers book flights in the 4 days before flying. All of those passengers were offered a full refund, the majority declined.

On YVR-LAX/SFO, in economy, again, the catering is identical. The seat pitch is less, but with the new slimline seat, I found it comfortable. Probably because in an A319, the seat is wider than a Boeing narrowbody. At 6'1" and 180 lbs, I found it fine, perhaps some would not.

IFE is a very different concept. Use your device and watch the same offering as on mainline. Eventually, there will be a charge for this, $5, currently it is free.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
multimark
Posts: 467
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 1:53 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sat Jul 19, 2014 4:22 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 80):
In my opinion the only gripe transferring from mainline to Rouge is the J class seat. On Rouge it is a convertible seat, on mainline it is a dedicated J seat. Everything else is the same for J passengers. They get priority ground handling, baggage handling and Maple Leaf Lounge access. The catering is identical. The only difference is the seat.

Maybe you should try riding in the back sometime. Rouge Y is way worse than the AC Y it replaced.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6489
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sat Jul 19, 2014 4:31 pm

Quoting multimark (Reply 81):
Maybe you should try riding in the back sometime.

You didn't read my post above?
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sat Jul 19, 2014 11:18 pm

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 78):
and lack of complimentary food.

The person mentioned in that CBC report must not fly much in North America if he's complaining that Rouge means losing complimentary food. AC has been buy-on-board in Y class on domestic and transborder routes for several years (more recently on Mexico/Caribbean routes).
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26117
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 1:33 am

Quoting Opethfan (Reply 51):
as well as the busiest transborder route,

Los Angeles-Vancouver is not the busiest transborder route. It's fourth busiest after New York-Toronto, Miami-Toronto and Miami-Montreal.

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 78):
And yet apparently there are still some dumb folks who dont get it..

They get it. They booked Air Canada flights that were later switched to Rogue with little notice. Air Canada is obligated to give them a full refund.
a.
 
opethfan
Topic Author
Posts: 940
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:35 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 1:41 am

Quoting Mah4546 (Reply 84):
Los Angeles-Vancouver is not the busiest transborder route. It's fourth busiest after New York-Toronto, Miami-Toronto and Miami-Montreal.

From YVR. Toronto / Montreal have nothing to do with this thread.
 
Prost
Posts: 2560
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 2:05 am

Quoting Opethfan (Reply 85):
From YVR. Toronto / Montreal have nothing to do with this thread.

I'm trying to figure out how Air Canada and Rouge are pertinent to the thread.
 
HVNandrew
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:05 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 3:22 am

Quoting Mah4546 (Reply 84):
Los Angeles-Vancouver is not the busiest transborder route. It's fourth busiest after New York-Toronto, Miami-Toronto and Miami-Montreal.

Where would NYC-YUL fall on that list? AC, DL, AA, and UA all have multiple daily flights on that route.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 3:28 am

Quoting Prost (Reply 86):
I'm trying to figure out how Air Canada and Rouge are pertinent to the thread.

Because the thread involves new DL service YVR-LAX and AC (now operated by Rouge) is a significant competitor on that route with 4 daily A319s and 544 seats a day in each direction.
 
acws777
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 6:43 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 3:43 am

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 78):

This is exactly why the route when Rouge. The gentleman in the first article bought the cheapest ticket then use points to upgrade, the other gentleman using aeroplan points and just payed the surcharge. This route is no longer premium based, mostly tourist etc. If the route was making money it would still be mainline.

Most passengers want 1st class for peanut price. You can't please them.
 
cabochris
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:17 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 5:34 am

What's the big deal here? DL already code shares with WS. So DL wants to add on, look at the traffic numbers on this route, its busy and in demand, why not try and grab some pie....?
 
KLSMB
Posts: 82
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:34 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 11:25 am

Quoting cabochris (Reply 90):
What's the big deal here? DL already code shares with WS. So DL wants to add on, look at the traffic numbers on this route, its busy and in demand, why not try and grab some pie....?

I agree. Let Delta try to grab a piece of the pie. They codeshare with WS and have no doubt looked into the market situation on this route - as have all of the airlines flying the route. For those who are so upset with YVR-LAX being operated by Air Canada Rouge instead of Air Canada mainline, no one is forcing you to fly with them. There are other options, so if you are upset, vote with your wallet and fly with a different airline.
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 1981
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 3:51 pm

Quoting Opethfan (Reply 51):
DL have seen AC's focus on YYZ and are taking advantage with the SEA feeder. AA's LAX route is probably as much about Asian feed as it is the entertainment industry.

Scrolling through a CAPA report, I came across this interesting line:

"At the very least the capacity Delta is adding from the US west coast to Asia is likely to pressure prices in the North America-Asia market. Air Canada’s unit revenues on Pacific routes dropped 2.8% year-on-year in 1Q2014."
http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...fic-but-new-pressures-await-177679

This suggests that DL is trying to capture TPAC traffic through SEA. Maybe AA senses an opportunity as well.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 80):
On YVR-LAX/SFO, in economy, again, the catering is identical. The seat pitch is less, but with the new slimline seat, I found it comfortable. Probably because in an A319, the seat is wider than a Boeing narrowbody. At 6'1" and 180 lbs, I found it fine, perhaps some would not.

Plenty of rumours about the length of the seat cushion. Some claim its shorter than the cushion on a regular Y seat, which makes it look like there is sufficient legroom, until one sits and finds ones legs jammed into the seatpocket in front of them. Plenty of pictures of people with their knees jammed into the seat in front of them around the internet. How do the measurements of the cushion compare?

Quoting acws777 (Reply 89):
Most passengers want 1st class for peanut price. You can't please them.

FR etc have shown us that passengers will happily take peanuts at peanut prices. They tend to get upset when you ask them to pay caviar prices for peanuts (the complaints about "mainline" prices). Looks like AA and DL are trying to capitalize on this negative sentiment. Its the simplest explanation for what we're seeing: namely an entry of new operators and capacity into a market in which the dominant carrier recently increased capacity. Markets don't tend to behave like this in mature economies.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6489
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 3:51 pm

Quoting KLSMB (Reply 91):
There are other options, so if you are upset, vote with your wallet and fly with a different airline.

This is what I always suggest.

Don't like the product, don't use it. But, I don't mean it rudely. I mean it as a method to push any vendor to change their product. Any time you elect not to use an airline (or any product) advise them why. If enough people resist against Rouge, 10 abreast, inedible meals, etc etc etc ... the vendor will get the message.

But I don't know how many times on here I have read, "I chose airline XX because it was the cheapest", then complain about the product. The buyer got what he wanted, the cheap price. If a better meal, or a larger seat was more important then he could have flown another carrier for a higher price, but that clearly was not his biggest concern.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6489
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 5:22 pm

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 92):
FR etc have shown us that passengers will happily take peanuts at peanut prices. They tend to get upset when you ask them to pay caviar prices for peanuts (the complaints about "mainline" prices). Looks like AA and DL are trying to capitalize on this negative sentiment. Its the simplest explanation for what we're seeing: namely an entry of new operators and capacity into a market in which the dominant carrier recently increased capacity. Markets don't tend to behave like this in mature economies.

This is a fair assessment.

A couple points though, Rouge bookings are very strong over the next few months ... it doesn't look like any consumer resistance so far. And, looking a month ahead in the lowest fare level, Rouge is getting $91 CDN (plus taxes) to fly someone over 1000 miles from YVR to LAX. That sounds like peanuts to me.

It almost looks to me that AC is using Rouge's low unit costs to stop any further competition. Like I said before ... a blood bath, and the consumer wins.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 5:45 pm

Quoting HVNandrew (Reply 87):

But mostly with tiny RJs ... NYC-YUL is high frequency very high yield but painfully low volume (function of no suitable hubs between them to offer 1-stop competition at moderated prices)
 
ElPistolero
Posts: 1981
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:44 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 7:38 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 94):
A couple points though, Rouge bookings are very strong over the next few months ... it doesn't look like any consumer resistance so far. And, looking a month ahead in the lowest fare level, Rouge is getting $91 CDN (plus taxes) to fly someone over 1000 miles from YVR to LAX. That sounds like peanuts to me.

$91 each way strikes me as a very reasonable price for that route, when you consider how much YYZ/YOW/YUL-LGA/ORD/BOS go for. If that was the price for the route all along (ie - the 'mainline' price) then the deployment of Rouge was probably a foregone conclusion. However, if that represents a price depreciation since Rouge came online, its going to eat into the savings achieved through Rouge, and the Americans have a tax advantage.

I can't help but feel that while AC has done the smart thing (assuming, of course, that the pre-Rouge product didn't cost significantly more than the current $91 product), the implementation has been less than optimal. The negative coverage probably hasn't helped, and the decision to deploy the 767 with a more appropriate J class suggests some degree of damage control. While Rouge may have kept AC alive on the route, it also looks like its attracted unwanted (and possibly unanticipated) competition.
 
opethfan
Topic Author
Posts: 940
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:35 am

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:52 pm

It's nice to see Rouge now charging the lower prices that the concept was supposed to provide. I wonder if it means that we'll be seeing YVR-SAN and YVR-SNA with the new leisure focus. I'm a big fan of WS' SNA service, and it's suited to the kind of leisure passenger Rouge is aiming for.
 
User avatar
VCEflyboy
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:23 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Mon Jul 21, 2014 12:02 am

Quoting longhauler (Reply 94):
It almost looks to me that AC is using Rouge's low unit costs to stop any further competition.

If that is the case, it certainly ain't working, with AA and DL jumping on the bandwagon.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: YVR Announces DL To LAX

Mon Jul 21, 2014 12:28 am

Quoting ElPistolero (Reply 96):
However, if that represents a price depreciation since Rouge came online, its going to eat into the savings achieved through Rouge, and the Americans have a tax advantage.

What tax advantage are you referring to? Fares of all carriers are subject to the same airport taxes and various other government fees and charges (most of which are imposed by the U.S. authorities on transborder routes).

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos