http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060322.RWESTJET22/TPStory/Business

Sorry about the replacement thread, but the original one got off-topic right from the beginning. The topic of this forum is WestJet, not other forum participants.

FewMiles..
Moderator, WestJet forum

From the article:

WestJet Airlines Ltd.'s revenue could jump one-fifth this year as it expands its seat capacity to stave off competition from Air Canada, WestJet chief executive officer Clive Beddoe said yesterday.

The Calgary-based carrier's 2006 revenue may rise to $1.7-billion, compared with $1.4-billion last year, he said during a transportation webcast organized by National Bank Financial Inc.

WestJet forecasts that its capacity this year could climb 14 per cent to 12.2 billion available seat miles.

...

The combative Mr. Beddoe took the opportunity to jab Jazz Air Income Fund, which is 79.7-per-cent owned by Air Canada's parent, ACE Aviation Holdings Inc.

He described the new trust as "an artificial way to sell off a piece of the business. But fundamentally, it doesn't make any sense."

Seems to be working for AC...

;) From the article:



...



Seems to be working for AC...


Indeed. To the tune of a $122m operating loss in 4Q, or $15.69 a second for those counting. If that's working, I'd like to see what failure looks like..... ;)

Let's see, how about YYZ-LAX and YYZ-LGA?

After all, you're now talking about the micro.

How much did AC make per second for all of 2005? WS?

Simon

Let's see, how about YYZ-LAX and YYZ-LGA?

After all, you're now talking about the micro.

How much did AC make per second for all of 2005? WS?

Simon

Including or excluding the one time gain from the sale of Aeroplan?

How about AC YEG-YYJ? How about AC YEG-YLW? How about AC YYC-YXX? How about AC YXU-YYC? What about AC to Glasgow? AC to Taiwan? AC to Copenhagen? How about AC YLW-YYJ? YYJ to SEA?

I could go on for hours, but what's the point..... ;)

I thought we were talking about 2005.

Due to your bizarre fixation with YXX though, it has to come into every discussion.

And again, though you seem to have trouble dealing with this, you are talking about a smattering of ROUTES. We speak of an entire STRATEGY.

Yes, yes, the planes were redeployed. But the strategy is over.

What's the website?

I thought we were talking about 2005.

Due to your bizarre fixation with YXX though, it has to come into every discussion.

And again, though you seem to have trouble dealing with this, you are talking about a smattering of ROUTES. We speak of an entire STRATEGY.

Yes, yes, the planes were redeployed. But the strategy is over.

What's the website?

No more than your bizarre fixation that WJ had a entire strategy that revolved around 2 city pairs and less 3% of the network capacity. Are you serious?

Do you really think WJ thought 1x daily YYZ-LAX or 2x daily LGA with no early evening departure constituted a business schedule? Did 2x daily YYC-YVR constitute a business sched in 1996?

Even if seat capacity was equal, 1 YYZ-GLA trip creates more ASM's than one YYZ-LAX trip and the 2 YYZ-LGA trips. Does that mean ACE's international strategy is on the ropes?

Loads up, capacity up, yields up during a period when WestJet has never operated more transborder flights.

If that's failure, I'd like to know what success looks like in ytour mind. Maybe $199 walk up fares from YVR-HNL tonight? Meanwhile, the YVR-YYZ redeye is $506 one way.

Looks like YVR-HNL is an unmitigated disaster this quarter. Yields a fraction of domestic flying.

;)

;)


Indeed. To the tune of a $122m operating loss in 4Q, or $15.69 a second for those counting. If that's working, I'd like to see what failure looks like..... ;)

Which airline stock in Canada seems frozen in a price warp and which one is moving up recently.

;) Which airline stock in Canada seems frozen in a price warp and which one is moving up recently.

You must have loved the dot.com bust. High cost stock backed by invisible earnings.
;)

;)

You must have loved the dot.com bust. High cost stock backed by invisible earnings.
;)

Those of us who were nimble made lots of money..........and with airline stocks one must also be nimble and not have their retirement funds locked into an airline stock. Make sense?

No more than your bizarre fixation that WJ had a entire strategy that revolved around 2 city pairs and less 3% of the network capacity. Are you serious?

You're the one who tells us that WS starts strategies small and then grows them, frequency by frequency. These routes failed, as did other transborder business routes that others have mentioned. There was no frequency by frequency growth, or even passenger by passenger growth.


Do you really think WJ thought 1x daily YYZ-LAX or 2x daily LGA with no early evening departure constituted a business schedule?


So why'd they launch it?


Even if seat capacity was equal, 1 YYZ-GLA trip creates more ASM's than one YYZ-LAX trip and the 2 YYZ-LGA trips. Does that mean ACE's international strategy is on the ropes?


;) this is really hard for you, isn't it? What % of AC's international routes did that flight, or speaking in terms you love, those ASMs represent? What % of WS' transborder business routes did those flights, or speaking in terms you love, those ASMs represent?

What's the website?

What's the website?

www.lookingfoolish.com :D

Who here is looking foolish? ;)

You're the one who tells us that WS starts strategies small and then grows them, frequency by frequency. These routes failed, as did other transborder business routes that others have mentioned. There was no frequency by frequency growth, or even passenger by passenger growth.

So why'd they launch it?



For the same reason they launched routes in 1996 with 2 aircraft and now have 60.

Launching a route with 1x daily, or even 2x daily is not going to attract a business clientele. Leisure market. Understand yet? Some work, some don't. YYC-YWG didn't work in 1996, they pulled out for 18 months and now, WS owns it.

Why did Zip launch 3x daily YYC-YXX a few years back? Why did AC launch N/S YYZ-DEL last year? Why did AC launch YYZ-Copenhagan a few years ago? Toronto-Burbank? Ottawa - San Jose?

Ask ACPLT. He seems to have figured it out by telling us all a few days ago what ACE loads look liked in the future.

Looks like you're outta da loop, old chum.

;)

Ah, ok, now I get it. Revisionist history. YYZ-LGA is a leisure route. YYZ-LAX is a leisure route. Now it all makes sense. A lot of holidayers on those LGA flights I'm on :o

We were never at war with Oceania.

Name the website. Unless you're too superior to the rest of us, and don't want to help frequent flyers because you don't want to share. ACPLT presumably has access to an internal system.

Interesting how you go all quiet whenever anyone asks about WS hacking into said internal system. Afraid any comments you make may get used in a court case for someone real close at hand?? "Working stiff" ;)

Who here is looking foolish? ;)

Well you did appoint yourself OP of this thread :rolleyes:

Ah, ok, now I get it. Revisionist history. YYZ-LGA is a leisure route. YYZ-LAX is a leisure route. Now it all makes sense. A lot of holidayers on those LGA flights I'm on ;)


News flash, Si Guy.

NYC is one of the most popular leisure destinations on the planet. I'm there at least twice a year for my Broadway fix. Last time I checked, LA is a fairly popular leisure destination too.

However, if they don't perform, reallocate the resources. Revisit them when circumstances allow it to work better. Just like Winnipeg in 1996. If you remember, (you don't), it started as a YEG-YWG non stop and was stopped in early June 1996. It restarted in the fall of 1997 as a non-stop from YYC with far more connection opportunities.

If you can't spend 5 minutes to go through public documents, I'm not about to do it for you. Too bad about ACPLT. If he is publishing ACE loads on a public forum, he'll be centre ice in a union greviance pretty soon.

;)

NYC is one of the most popular leisure destinations on the planet. I'm there at least twice a year for my Broadway fix. Last time I checked, LA is a fairly popular leisure destination too.

If that's the case, why have you spent the last X months calling them business routes, and asserting that WS has done fabulously on the non-business routes, and why would WS want to get into that market as the legacy carriers have all bankrupted themselves doing it?

So perhaps this is a subset of leisure routes -- the family of four on a cheap vacation leisure routes succeed, but the couple going to NYC for a Broadway weekend type leisure routes out of YYZ didn't work?

And on it goes.

If you can't spend 5 minutes to go through public documents, I'm not about to do it for you.

Do you think if anybody other than you on these board was asked this question, they would refuse to help out their fellow FF? It would appear that either you don't know, or you're not able to comment on things involved in the lawsuit.

If you are not here to help and learn from fellow FF, why are you here?

That is the point of Flyertalk. Hijacking threads with CASM, RASM, etc. every time that AC launches a new route is not.

You've already had two events take place involving TOS. Will the third last only a week? ;)

[QUOTE=Simon]If that's the case, why have you spent the last X months calling them business routes, and asserting that WS has done fabulously on the non-business routes, and why would WS want to get into that market as the legacy carriers have all bankrupted themselves doing it?

Well, not to put too fine a point on it but you continually ask CB for "the website" perhaps you providing a link where CB called these "business routes" would be appropriate and perhaps set a new tone? ^

YYZ-LGA leisure, and only a leisure route? :rollseyes:

YYZ-LGA leisure, and only a leisure route? :rollseyes:

Any airline that launches an O & D sched that makes a same day return impossible within the confines of the normal business day is not after the business market, just the leisure component of that market.

;)

[QUOTE=Simon]If that's the case, why have you spent the last X months calling them business routes, and asserting that WS has done fabulously on the non-business routes, and why would WS want to get into that market as the legacy carriers have all bankrupted themselves doing it?

Well, not to put too fine a point on it but you continually ask CB for "the website" perhaps you providing a link where CB called these "business routes" would be appropriate and perhaps set a new tone? ^


CB need someone to defend himself now?

Any airline that launches an O & D sched that makes a same day return impossible within the confines of the normal business day is not after the business market, just the leisure component of that market.

;)
And WS offered that option, with convienent westbound cnx?

http://investdb.theglobeandmail.com/invest/investSQL/gx.estimate_prof?symbol_in=WJA-T&company_id_in=197077

http://investdb.theglobeandmail.com/invest/investSQL/gx.estimate_prof?symbol_in=WJA-T&company_id_in=197077


The more interesting food for thought will not be conjecture of analysts who are beholden to their investment banker bosses who all want their piece of the next $250m furniture sale at ACE, and the 6% fees, but the comparison of how WJ did over the nast 6 months of the winter vs ACE.

That'll seperate the men from the boys.

:D