First CA cancels PVG-SJC, now CZ cancels CAN-YYZ. Are Chinese airlines choosing their routes by throwing darts at a dartboard?
http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/...o-schedule-for-august-2016-launch/
Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
-
- Thenoflyzone
- Posts: 3048
- Joined:
China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
I wouldn't say YYZ is a "dartboard" destination (there's huge amount of Asian diaspora there), but the lead time between announcement and launch seemed too short for forward bookings to even pick up. Maybe a combination of poor marketing effort as well.
PVG-SJC on the other hand, was a knee-jerk response to stop HU in the tracks.
PVG-SJC on the other hand, was a knee-jerk response to stop HU in the tracks.
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
CAN-YYZ isn't technically cancelled, its on hold. The current China-Canada bilateral agreement needs amending before the route can fly, talks are scheduled for next month. Why they announced it before receiving authorization is a bit beyond me, it has been suggested that it was a bully tactic to try and push their cause for bilateral expansion. I personally expect it to go through, early sales seemed strong.
-
- MaverickM11
- Posts: 18279
- Joined:
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
| Quoting thenoflyzone (Thread starter): Are Chinese airlines choosing their routes by throwing darts at a dartboard? |
Pretty much...just a politically driven dartboard.
I don't take responsibility at all
-
- HeeseokKoo
- Posts: 823
- Joined:
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
| Quoting whywhyzee (Reply 2): The current China-Canada bilateral agreement needs amending before the route can fly, talks are scheduled for next month. |
Thanks for the info.
| Quoting a380787 (Reply 1): PVG-SJC on the other hand, was a knee-jerk response to stop HU in the tracks. |
Same story here. CA's PVG-SJC needs further bilateral talk to be established. CA shouldn't start selling the ticket before US allows more frequency than the current 180/week. It's completely filled up for the summer.
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
| Quoting HeeseokKoo (Reply 4): Same story here. CA's PVG-SJC needs further bilateral talk to be established. CA shouldn't start selling the ticket before US allows more frequency than the current 180/week. It's completely filled up for the summer. |
Really interesting, exact same reason, Canada-China is 100/week iirc, and its full. The way I see it, China wants into these markets bad, and they are trying to push their way in. Sell tickets now so US/Canada authorities have their hands tied.
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
| Quoting HeeseokKoo (Reply 4): CA's PVG-SJC needs further bilateral talk to be established. |
DOT approved the CA PVG-SJC request back in early April.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
-
- HeeseokKoo
- Posts: 823
- Joined:
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
| Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6): DOT approved the CA PVG-SJC request back in early April. |
Then I must have misunderstood. CA might have decided to use 3/w frequency to somewhere else. Or CZ took the 3/w and increase summer frequencies albeit subject to government approval:
http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/...ds-us-flights-august-october-2016/
Either way, Chinese airlines fully use 180/week this summer.
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
| Quoting whywhyzee (Reply 5): Really interesting, exact same reason, Canada-China is 100/week iirc, and its full. The way I see it, China wants into these markets bad, and they are trying to push their way in. Sell tickets now so US/Canada authorities have their hands tied. |
To my calculation the current frequencies from Canada to China only adds up to 82 Weekly?
And the reservation for China Southern CAN-Top
-
- loonytoon44
- Posts: 24
- Joined:
-
- Thenoflyzone
- Posts: 3048
- Joined:
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
| Quoting ac033 (Reply 8): To my calculation the current frequencies from Canada to China only adds up to 82 Weekly? |
When everything is said and done, with the addition of 3x weekly HU to YYC and 3x weekly XiamenAir to YVR, it will add up to 89x weekly, briefly 92x weekly for August and Sept, as CA will operate 17x instead of 14x weekly on PEK-YVR.
28x from YYZ (14x CX, 7x HU, 7x MU)
55x from YVR (14x CX, 14x CA (briefly 17x weekly in Aug and Sept), 14x MU, 7x CZ, 3x MF, 3x 3U)
3x from YYC (HU)
3x from YUL (CA)
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
| Quoting ac033 (Reply 8): To my calculation the current frequencies from Canada to China only adds up to 82 Weekly? |
I must have made an error, I think they are pushing for 100, they don't have 100 yet. I can't remember exactly, I got this information in a conversations with an official who was a part of the discussions, but it was some months ago. Either way, numbers aside, bilateral is maxed out and the Chinese government wants more. Sorry for the confusion, I got a little trigger happy and didn't fact check before posting!
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
The problem is that the Chinese have to scrounge up some better slots at PEK in particular if they want more frequencies. A liberal bilateral is possible, but the primary obstacle is access for AC and maybe WS to more commercially useful opportunities in exchange.
RE: China Southern Cancels CAN-YYZ
| Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 10): Quoting ac033 (Reply 8): To my calculation the current frequencies from Canada to China only adds up to 82 Weekly? When everything is said and done, with the addition of 3x weekly HU to YYC and 3x weekly XiamenAir to YVR, it will add up to 89x weekly, briefly 92x weekly for August and Sept, as CA will operate 17x instead of 14x weekly on PEK-YVR. 28x from YYZ (14x CX, 7x HU, 7x MU) 55x from YVR (14x CX, 14x CA (briefly 17x weekly in Aug and Sept), 14x MU, 7x CZ, 3x MF, 3x 3U) 3x from YYC (HU) 3x from YUL (CA) |
Hong Kong is not in China and, regardless, Hong Kong negotiates its own air treaties.
a.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: 717atOGG, adipasqu, AirCal737, airzim, alasizon, AVENSAB727, Bing [Bot], DBCooper, F9LASDEN, iamjoeym, jameijeirasc, JetAmericaS80, Jonnyville8, JoseSalazar, jumoser, MAH4546, MatheusLPV, MD80MKE, Newark727, opticalilyushin, Planeboy17, qf789, RainerBoeing777, SELMER40, spinotter, unusualattitude, USPIT10L, william and 219 guests