Originally Posted by
yulred
Was it profit driven or political? Your guess is as good as mine. AC referenced 'subsidized competition' as a reason, and also indicated the market wasn't big enough. The folk at KL (who may or may not know what they're doing) paid little notice to AC's claim about year-round service...by launching year round service, which makes one wonder how much truth there is in AC's claim?
C'mon yulred. Don't play these games.
You know very well AC's unit costs on a 767 service in/out LHR are significantly higher than KLM's A330 service to AMS. And that's before the incentives EIAA greased them up with.
Originally Posted by
yulred
Maybe it's a simple case of KL being a more efficient carrier, effectively making the route more viable for it than it was for AC.
By more efficient, you mean KLM's advantage of having denser, less-premium cabin configuration, right?
Originally Posted by
Wpgjetse
Maybe KL does not fully understand the market, and will cut YEG at the end of summer.
Remember, KLM's "market" for TATL operations exYEG includes the undisclosed incentives.
I will be the first to admit there is true viable demand for KLM in YEG if they a) permanently upgauge services beyond A330, b) increase frequency, OR c) continue to operate the route thru the W16/17 season
Until then, we know AC had TATL services. We know YEG incentivized FI to come to town. We know AC said the market wasn't there for Winter operations with another player in the Market. We know EIAA incentivized KLM to come. We know AC clawed back a previously profitable Summer operation.