YXUFlyboy

Absolutely. It makes complete business sense; I'm simply stating facts and the OP was initially asking if we'd see any new routes ex-YYC. Based on AC's network strategy and WS's network strategy, the answer is, probably not. AC will add capacity on routes it can drive with existing connections, everything else will go YVR/YYZ/YUL. This is why we've seen some new routes for sun destinations and if we are lucky, NRT will remain in 2020. It is AC's smallest hub by a long shot.

Comparing to the U.S. market is a bit challenging; YYC punches well above its weight given the population (it nips at YUL's heels but YUL has way more international traffic) and we don't have the population centres to support different hub cities based on carrier. There are only 6 markets in Canada with metro populations > 1 Million - YYZ, YUL, YVR, YYC, YOW and YEG. In fact, I'd say based on population in comparison with U.S. cities, all of our major airports punch above their weight in terms of international connections.

CZAMFlyer

This does not describe Air Canada's target demographic. Besides, there are plenty of Thomas Cook/Condor/Transat/Edelweiss types of carriers serving YVR with nonstop flights to Europe. Who'd want to stop in Calgary?
Is it though?
AC, indeed any airline, would invest in Calgary if it made economic sense to do so. I agree this likely won't be for a few more years yet.

We've seen multiple threads on this over the years, but this is due to Calgary's lack of proximity to most places people want to go and lack of timely ground transportation options. It's not because of any economic or adventuresome reasons.

I think you've accurately predicted the future 2-3 years from now. Perhaps we should start a thread on which long haul routes AC might lose in the next 5 years (not as many as they'll gain, of that I'm certain).

YXUFlyboy

I don't think AC fills their planes with American traffic clamouring for AC's premium product in the back. They don't care where they are connecting via as long as they get to Europe for cheap.

YYC Transborder
WS year-round: ATL, DEN, IAH, LAS, LAX, JFK, MCO, PSP, PHX, SAN (10)
WS seasonal: FLL, HNL, BNE, AZA, SFO (5) total 15
AC year-round: LAX, EWR, IAH, PDX, PHX, SFO (6)
AC seasonal: OGG, PSP, SEA (3) total 9

AC is not. But WS is. YYC > YYZ > YVR, putting YVR as the smallest WS hub. WS has increased capacity out of YYC a ton this winter and is surprisingly launching 789s out of YYC and not YYZ. Whether or not this is smart or not remains to be seen, but my point is - after a certain critical mass of O&D and geography - you can grow a hub in many places if you are willing to push a lot of connecting traffic through it. At this time, WS seems to be doing that at YYC; AC has chosen YVR in the west. Note I am not judging the soundness of these business decisions, I simply stating the facts as I can see them.

Depends on the WS Asia strategy which is as of yet, unclear, and whether or not they join SkyTeam. I would expect their first hit will be ICN with JV on Korean.

CZAMFlyer

Ah, I thought you were comparing WS' transborder connectivity in YYC vs their YVR operation, but you meant WS vs AC in Calgary. Sorry bout that.

stelkaYOW

I came across this an anna.aero article that lists the 100 unserved routes from Asia's top 10 airports (I can't post the hyperlink as I'm a newbie). Here are the Canadian ones of interest:

• YOW-PEK (the 13th busiest unserved PEK route, with 25,850 passengers flying indirectly)
• YYC-HKG (the 5th busiest unserved HKG route, with 41,814 flying indrectly)
• YUL-HKG (the 10th busiest unserved HKG route, with 34,782 flying indirectly)
• YYC-SIN (the 4th busiest unserved SIN route, with 40,841 flying indrectly)
• YVR-SIN (the 5th busiest unserved SIN route, with 39,790 flying indirectly)
• YYC-ICN (the 12th busiest unserved ICN route, with 34,950 flying indirectly)
• YVR-BKK (the 14th busiest unserved BKK route, with 59,820 flying indirectly)
• YYC-DEL (the 9th busiest unserved DEL route, with 55,154 flying indirectly)
• YEG-DEL (the 14th busiest unserved DEL route, with 42,050 flying indirectly)

asovse1

https://www.anna.aero/2019/03/06/100...-stop-service/

Here's the link. Those ridership numbers are a one-year sample (unclear if exhaustive but I'll assume it is).

Taking a simple, naive average of 59,820 (YVR-BKK) and 25,850 (YOW-PEK) yields 164 passengers per day and 71 passengers per day, respectively. I don't know much about airline economics, but I doubt these numbers support a daily route between these city pairs, and general non-business pax might find the savings returned to them if they hub in YYZ or YVR for these Asian routes.

Transpacificflyer

As previously discussed, HKG is not feasible. Airport is overcapacity.
Route to SIN is interesting, with the numbers posted. Combine YYC/YVR and it is possible. IF BKK as a transit point can be added, similar to what BR does for LHR and AMS and it's even more interesting.
Forget China routes because Canada is currently under political and economic attack, so there is no way a publicly trade company in Canada is going to be investing, let alone the government approving additional routes.
Until the Pakistan-India airspace issues are resolved, there will be no Indian expansion. TG just posted some massive losses due to the additional costs of the airspace disruption on its European routes, so I expect that AC has also taken a hit.

stelkaYOW

Some of this info is likely reported in A220 and B373Max threads, but thought I'd bring it together in this thread.

According to the 2019 AC Investor Day Presentation (February 2019), the following routes are under consideration:

• YYZ to Africa (not sure where)
• YHZ-FRA - 737M

(which aligns with speculation here )

• YUL-NTE (737M)
• YYC-MCO (737M)
• YVR-MCO (737M)
• YEG-HNL (737M)
• YYZ-MTY (A220)
• YYZ-SJD (A220)
• YUL-SEA (A220)
• YYC-BOS (A220)
• YYC-IAD (A220)
• YVR-IAD (A220)

vernonc

The YYZ-BOM route is back seasonally (winter). Not sure how this works and if PAK airspace has opened up. Otherwise would AC have to fly with a lighter load since they likely will not want to stop to refuel.

mgn2000

The lighter load is only 1 free checked bag in economy if Ticketed after Mar 31 2019. Last year it was 2 free checked bags. The flight time has increased 1 hour in each direction right now. Pak airspace still closed. If it opens by the time service is resumed ( Oct 27 ), the flight time will go down. And Praying the 2 free checked bags are re instated.

ChrisA330

YYZ-BOM flies a different path than YYZ/YVR-DEL, so it's not impacted by the airspace closure nearly to the same degree, if at all.

vernonc

One free back instead of two will be a show stopper for traffic to India. I believe all other airlines offer 2 bags. Not well thought off and likely to be changed. I do not think people will pay standard fare and then have to pay for a bag ($200+ round trip) and seat selection when they can get 2 bags with all other carriers that I can think off. Also AC flight is at or more expensive than some of the alternatives - however with 9W shutdown there is a lack of enough flights into India, specially everywhere other than DEL so the flights may still go full. AC fares to BOM for the holidays are $2k plus (some dates are $2800) in economy. $3k in PE.
Its stuff like this which will end up costing them business and the 'route is not profitable' comments.

RatherBeInYOW

It is slightly impacted. I flew it with the airspace closure before it ended for the summer and it added a bit of time, but not enough to require the tech stop that DEL needs.

mgn2000

About 10 days ago the dates I am looking at AC was C $1492 round trip in Economy. Right now is C $ 1207

vernonc

I was referring to the Christmas season.
Bottom line is that the bulk of India routes is leisure. I would guess that the avg traveler is going 'home' for 2-3 weeks. One suitcase will not cut it specially if other carriers are offering 2 bags. People will fly other carriers for the same price or less with one stop if it saves them $200 for a bag v/s AC direct.
If AC is considering new routes like BOM (seasonal) or BKK they need to consider their total offering. Otherwise they wonder why the route is either not meeting loads or is unprofitable. This would apply to most long haul leisure routes.