Originally Posted by
YXUFlyboy
I have never understood why Jazz and AC are separate entities. They are virtually unrecognizable by most travelers as the same airline. Airports now use "Air Canada" to describe the flights. Most U.S. airlines have regional affiliates but they don't pretend it's not the same airline. You book Jazz flights on aircanada.com, the same as Air Canada flights.
Further, the term "regional" is not well-defined. Air Canada flies YYZ-YOW, but that's only a five hour drive. Yet Jazz did YYZ-YQR for most of the summer. It completely has to do with which plane AC is using... so why not just integrate the fleets and call it Air Canada? Seems like the the Jazz/AC capacity agreement is just smoke and mirrors.
The are separate entities because they are separate entities. I know I am being sarcastic but they are two legally separate corporate entities. However, Jazz is effectively a captive of AC due to the almost total activity of Jazz being under AC control through the CPA (Capacity Purchase Agreement). I would disagree that most US airlines don't distinguish their regional partners, as many do have name variations that do distinguish them from mainline service. A few US carriers have multiple regional partners with a variety of ownership structures.
From a passenger perspective the CPA may be smoke and mirrors but it is certainly not for their respective shareholders and accountants. Would it make sense to re-integrate Jazz into AC? Perhaps, but it really makes no difference to the passenger.