Will AC continue to ignore YYC?

Old Jul 25, 2017, 9:58 pm
  #61  
m.y
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC 75k, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,153
Originally Posted by YXUFlyboy
Vancouver is about 60% bigger than Calgary. Not double.

Yes, we get the local market is going to have more traffic. But the post is around hubs, which implies routing traffic through other places.
Connecting flights commands lower yield than non-stop flights. Hubs need a healthy percentage of originating passengers to sustain sufficient yield, especially for long haul flights that are more costly. Currently AC can route lower yield connecting passengers thru existing hubs in YVR and YYZ, both offer greater connectivity than YYC, and have local passengers who can fill the Business and premium economy cabins at higher yield.

Most hub airports have less than 50% connecting passengers.

http://elib.dlr.de/96939/1/Maertens_...estimation.pdf
m.y is offline  
Old Jul 25, 2017, 10:14 pm
  #62  
m.y
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC 75k, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,153
Originally Posted by YXUFlyboy
It does, and what you describe is what the YYC hub is for AC. But - back to my question - why is that way for AC, but not for WS or other carriers? Why did Hainan add PEK and AM add MEX and AC added nothing? Are they trying to add these routes to funnel Asia traffic thru PEK and South American traffic thru MEX?
AC might have higher costs comparing to WS, HU and AM.

Secondly, PEK and MEX each have population that is much greater than YYC, implying greater shares of originating passengers, even adjusting for the lower wealth. This is important because local carriers enjoy greater advantage among sales from its home country, especially for high yield business travelers due to more sales channels, bulk contract or FFP considerations. Thus HU and AM can draw more high yield passengers from its hub comparing to AC from YYC, a much smaller city.
m.y is offline  
Old Jul 25, 2017, 10:22 pm
  #63  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: YYC, Canada
Programs: AC 35k
Posts: 1,883
Originally Posted by keitherson
Umm... actually Hainan wanted to fly to YVR. But the rules from the Chinese government don't allow it. YYC, whether you like it or not, was sloppy seconds.
Interesting! I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.
YXUFlyboy is offline  
Old Jul 25, 2017, 10:23 pm
  #64  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: YVR
Programs: UA Premier Platinum
Posts: 3,756
Originally Posted by m.y
AC might have higher costs comparing to WS, HU and AM.

Secondly, PEK and MEX each have population that is much greater than YYC, implying greater shares of originating passengers, even adjusting for the lower wealth. This is important because local carriers enjoy greater advantage among sales from its home country, especially for high yield business travelers due to more sales channels, bulk contract or FFP considerations. Thus HU and AM can draw more high yield passengers from its hub comparing to AC from YYC, a much smaller city.
Also, AM can offer a good selection of onward connections throughout Latin America via MEX whereas AC has no interline partner with a hub there. Flying out of YVR, AM has much better connection times via MEX than the other major Latin American gateway - UA via IAH - which usually requires taking the 6:00am flight to IAH then having an all-day layover before evening departures to South America.
eigenvector is offline  
Old Jul 25, 2017, 10:29 pm
  #65  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: YYC, Canada
Programs: AC 35k
Posts: 1,883
Originally Posted by m.y
Connecting flights commands lower yield than non-stop flights. Hubs need a healthy percentage of originating passengers to sustain sufficient yield, especially for long haul flights that are more costly. Currently AC can route lower yield connecting passengers thru existing hubs in YVR and YYZ, both offer greater connectivity than YYC, and have local passengers who can fill the Business and premium economy cabins at higher yield.

Most hub airports have less than 50% connecting passengers.

http://elib.dlr.de/96939/1/Maertens_...estimation.pdf
Interesting paper! Although a little dated now, I am actually surprised YYC manages 19-20% in transfer traffic. Since YVR is not a whole lot higher (26%), it gives credence to the local market being an important factor. I would have thought transfer would be higher.

I suppose airports like AMS (with transfer traffic > 70%) are relatively rare.
YXUFlyboy is offline  
Old Jul 25, 2017, 10:52 pm
  #66  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: AC SE*2MM. SPG Plat life
Posts: 4,644
Originally Posted by YXUFlyboy
Vancouver is about 60% bigger than Calgary. Not double.

.
I think you took different math? Metro YYC pop is 1.4m. Metro YVR pop is 2.5M The diff is more than 60 %.
Wpgjetse is offline  
Old Jul 25, 2017, 11:04 pm
  #67  
m.y
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC 75k, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,153
Originally Posted by YXUFlyboy

I suppose airports like AMS (with transfer traffic > 70%) are relatively rare.
Actually, according to their 2016 annual report, connecting traffic only accounted for 38%

http://www.annualreportschiphol.com/...f?docId=145598

If you look at the SWOT analysis on page 33, many of the factors are applicable to YYC as well.
m.y is offline  
Old Jul 25, 2017, 11:13 pm
  #68  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: west coast best coast
Programs: TINDER GOLD, STARBUCKS GOLD, COSTCO EXECUTIVE!!
Posts: 3,987
Originally Posted by YXUFlyboy
Interesting! I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.
You're welcome. It's often called the 'one airline one route' policy by China. It also explains why many Chinese carriers will launch as many routes as possible to squat on them, even if they are immediately unprofitable.

Such as Los Angeles to Changsha, Vancouver to Zhengzhou, Seattle to Shenzhen. This is independent of government-influenced routes such as Beijing-Montreal-Havana.
keitherson is offline  
Old Jul 25, 2017, 11:18 pm
  #69  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: YVR
Programs: UA Premier Platinum
Posts: 3,756
Originally Posted by keitherson
You're welcome. It's often called the 'one airline one route' policy by China. It also explains why many Chinese carriers will launch as many routes as possible to squat on them, even if they are immediately unprofitable.

Such as Los Angeles to Changsha, Vancouver to Zhengzhou, Seattle to Shenzhen. This is independent of government-influenced routes such as Beijing-Montreal-Havana.
We're gonna get YVR-URC before we get a 2nd Chinese carrier on YVR-PEK or PVG.
eigenvector is offline  
Old Jul 25, 2017, 11:19 pm
  #70  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: west coast best coast
Programs: TINDER GOLD, STARBUCKS GOLD, COSTCO EXECUTIVE!!
Posts: 3,987
Originally Posted by eigenvector
We're gonna get YVR-URC before we get a 2nd Chinese carrier on YVR-PEK or PVG.
Perhaps the Canadian government will also shut that down for "national security"
keitherson is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2017, 8:35 am
  #71  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: AC SE*2MM. SPG Plat life
Posts: 4,644
Originally Posted by m.y
Actually, according to their 2016 annual report, connecting traffic only accounted for 38%

http://www.annualreportschiphol.com/...f?docId=145598

If you look at the SWOT analysis on page 33, many of the factors are applicable to YYC as well.
The problem with the 38% figure is that connecting pax using a different ticket out of AMS don't count as connecting pax. Therefor the 38% figure is actually higher for connecting pax.
Wpgjetse is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2017, 9:49 am
  #72  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: YSB & YAM, Northern Ontario, Canada
Programs: Aeroplan, IHG Gold Elite, Marriott Rewards
Posts: 1,100
Originally Posted by stinger
YYC should consider themselves lucky, they are not ignored as much as YEG.

We don't have any AC flights outside domestic! Thankfully other airlines do.
Thoroughly agree! Calgary should thank their lucky stars that AC provides the service that they do, usually to YEGs disadvantage!

Why on earth anyone could even dream that Calgary should be any sort of AC hub is totally incomprehensible.

Years ago Canada's only two government designated (air)ports for international travellers (except US) were YUL and YVR. YYZ was given an exception in that BA - then as BOAC, was allowed to fly there from LHR, usually via PIK.

Times have certainly changed in that while YVR is the primary hub for Asia-Pacific the primary hub for Europe and Middle East is now YYZ. YUL is still a hub, secondary to YYZ but it's location makes it and YYZ complimentary to each other.

YVR will remain the only logical hub for AsiaPacific travel and most practical to have all the TPAC metal interchangeable in one location. Ditto for crew placement.

The only change that might be advocated for YYC is the restoration of AC9/10 as a through flight between YYZ-NRT! Why it terminates in YYC is illogical, other than for crew time.

As far as MEL, there is absolutely no logic in operating this from anywhere other than YVR or YYZ!

This discussion would best be ended by questioning why anyone would ever voluntarily connect through YYC given their ridiculous AIF charges for connecting passengers!
TemboOne is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2017, 10:10 am
  #73  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,742
Originally Posted by TemboOne
This discussion would best be ended by questioning why anyone would ever voluntarily connect through YYC given their ridiculous AIF charges for connecting passengers!
Does YYC have a charge for connecting passengers?

If it's the case, blame YYZ which started that. And AC, which obliges by agreeing to charge it with the ticket. Instead of refusing and having the airport find a way to collect. The way YVR used to.
Stranger is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2017, 10:19 am
  #74  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: AC SE*2MM. SPG Plat life
Posts: 4,644
Originally Posted by Stranger
Does YYC have a charge for connecting passengers?

If it's the case, blame YYZ which started that. And AC, which obliges by agreeing to charge it with the ticket. Instead of refusing and having the airport find a way to collect. The way YVR used to.
I think they all do(YUL,YYZ,YYC,YVR).
Wpgjetse is offline  
Old Jul 26, 2017, 11:02 am
  #75  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: YSB & YAM, Northern Ontario, Canada
Programs: Aeroplan, IHG Gold Elite, Marriott Rewards
Posts: 1,100
Cagary's $30 AIF is a one-size-fits none rip-off for short haul!

Originally Posted by Stranger
Does YYC have a charge for connecting passengers?

If it's the case, blame YYZ which started that. And AC, which obliges by agreeing to charge it with the ticket. Instead of refusing and having the airport find a way to collect. The way YVR used to.
Currently the YYC AIF charge is a fixed $30 for everyone departing from there or connecting domestically through YYC in more than four hours or internationally in more than 24 hours! Timing is based upon scheduled and not actual. No mention of what happens if a connecting flight is cancelled and the new flight is ouside the allowed window.
TemboOne is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.