Will AC continue to ignore YYC?
#61
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC 75k, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,153
Most hub airports have less than 50% connecting passengers.
http://elib.dlr.de/96939/1/Maertens_...estimation.pdf
#62
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC 75k, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,153
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?
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.
#63
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: YYC, Canada
Programs: AC 35k
Posts: 1,883
#64
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: YVR
Programs: UA Premier Platinum
Posts: 3,756
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.
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.
#65
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: YYC, Canada
Programs: AC 35k
Posts: 1,883
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
Most hub airports have less than 50% connecting passengers.
http://elib.dlr.de/96939/1/Maertens_...estimation.pdf
I suppose airports like AMS (with transfer traffic > 70%) are relatively rare.
#66
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: AC SE*2MM. SPG Plat life
Posts: 4,644
#67
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC 75k, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,153
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.
#68
Join Date: May 2013
Location: west coast best coast
Programs: TINDER GOLD, STARBUCKS GOLD, COSTCO EXECUTIVE!!
Posts: 3,987
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.
Such as Los Angeles to Changsha, Vancouver to Zhengzhou, Seattle to Shenzhen. This is independent of government-influenced routes such as Beijing-Montreal-Havana.
#69
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: YVR
Programs: UA Premier Platinum
Posts: 3,756
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.
Such as Los Angeles to Changsha, Vancouver to Zhengzhou, Seattle to Shenzhen. This is independent of government-influenced routes such as Beijing-Montreal-Havana.
#70
Join Date: May 2013
Location: west coast best coast
Programs: TINDER GOLD, STARBUCKS GOLD, COSTCO EXECUTIVE!!
Posts: 3,987
#71
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: AC SE*2MM. SPG Plat life
Posts: 4,644
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.
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.
#72
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: YSB & YAM, Northern Ontario, Canada
Programs: Aeroplan, IHG Gold Elite, Marriott Rewards
Posts: 1,100
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!
#73
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,742
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.
#74
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: AC SE*2MM. SPG Plat life
Posts: 4,644
I think they all do(YUL,YYZ,YYC,YVR).
#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!
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.