Toronto - Mumbai route ending
 

Per Airlineroute just now:

Air Canada cancels Toronto – Mumbai service in S19

Posted 31 October 2018 03:00

Air Canada since mid-October 2018 removed reservations and schedules for Toronto – Mumbai route, for summer 2019 season. Previously the Star Alliance carrier planned to operate 4 weekly flights during summer season, with 777-200LR operating from 31MAR19 to 30APR18, 787-9 from 01MAY19.

Based on current schedule and inventory listing, last flight for winter 2018/19 season departs Toronto on 29MAR19, Mumbai on 30MAR19.

AC046 YYZ2115 – 2130+1BOM 789 x246
AC047 BOM2330 – 0515+1YYZ 789 x357

India has generally been a highly price-sensitive market, so it's not surprising that AC couldn't make the route work. Or putting a positive spin on it: perhaps they are spoiled for choice and have sacrificed BOM for an even more lucrative route?

(side note: the proposed use of the 777-200LR, would that mean frames would have been removed from the 15/16 or 33/34 routes I wonder?)

Perhaps we should start a 'pessimist's counterpoint' to the New AC Routes in 5 Years thread: Which routes will be removed within the next 5 years?

Well that sucks. How did they go from upguaging the route and adding frequency to canceling it altogether ?

Under-utilized planes?
Last-gasp effort to increase market share?
Incompetence?

AC has the only non-stop from YYZ-BOM. How hard could it be ? Many posts here talk about non-stop being a premium.

A premium only for a select few travellers. Apparently not enough of them.

My experience with many passengers to India is that they will happily accept a one-stop or fly the 'long way round' to shave a hundred bucks off the cost of the airfare. Also, I suspect that culturally, AC may lack the cachet of alternative airline options via Asia or even Europe.

Undermining my own theories is the fact that AC recently announced an increase in the nonstop YVR-DEL to daily year-round service; perhaps that's the 'positive spin' to which I referred above.

The ability to charge a premium does not equal the market accepting it.

Is Summer considered low season for India? Perhaps this is going back to a seasonal route.

From another forum:

"​​​​​​It's yet to be known of the route is fully canceled, or just moving to seasonal.

In order to maintain their S19 flying program, they had to free up roughly 1 frame, which they did by cancelling BOM andthebdirect EZE flight, returning it to a tag from SCL."

All about PRASM and that simply isn't there for this route. Operating an airframe at less than capacity in order to gain operating range is an expensive proposition and he number of people willing to pay that premium to avoid a connection is limited.

ULH routes don't have a great deal of long-term success and this is just one more of the ones which didn't work out. Maybe it will come back in season, maybe not.

As an aside, I'm surprised "one frame" (assume they mean a pair of airplanes) could satisfy a YYZ-BOM and a YYZ-EZE route. Is there enough time in a day to do a BOM turn and an EZE turn from Toronto?

Unless (light bulb very slowly illuminates) both cities were less than daily...oh never mind.

Typically Indian school holidays are in April and May so there should be a lot of flying out of India. I would think Jun and July would be low season in India.
I suspect this is going to seasonal due to air frame utilization and AC will try and route BOM traffic via DEL, DXB or thru Europe. They did increase DEL flights.

Could be any of the below really (in no particular order):

1. Better yield elsewhere
2. Tied to another rotation that got canned and can't get utilisation up
3. Fuel cost for the 77L is killing the yield
4. Demand too low
5. Revenue gained by having YYZBOM is lower than dumping everyone on YYZDEL and cranking up the cost
6. Not enough US/Canada-BOM OD, with onwards connections better served elsewhere
7. Flight had to be canned, and this one was the least impact for schedule changes ticket reissues
8. Crew Scheduling issues (book offs, rotations, layover, etc)
9. Ground ops staff issues
10. Gate/Slot cost unfavourable
11. Negotiation issues between AI/AC for access to onwards traffic
12. Too much damage by pax to the aircraft interior
13. Etc.

Good list, SparseFlyer.
I don't know about AC, but at another airline I've consulted to, decisions like this are pre-prepared by algorithm, which runs scenarios based on various choices what to remove / redeploy (the one I've seen wouldn't have looked at SparseFlyer's #9 and #12 , but would include the others). The final choice would be a human being, of course, but if the delta on metrics that matter is better with the route gone, once in the cross hairs, it will go out.

It doubtless means the route hasn't been performing up to the rosy projections in its initial business case, since after previous problems I'm sure the expected economics had to be pretty darn good for them to commit to it in the first place. But exactly what killed it off may well be unknowable. A shame, nevertheless.

How are YYZ-DEL and YVR-DEL doing? My understanding is that there is less demand, but also less options from YVR.

12 is funny.
For 3, the frame used was the 789 and was upguaged to 77 so either they needed the 789 elsewhere or there was enough demand for 77.
For AI connecting traffic, sounds like AI will take any and all comers. They offer connections to AC from both DEL, DXB and unless I am mistaken from LHR too.
I think 1, 2 are more likely. I thought demand was good since I heard that EK lost some of the connecting pax to BOM so might have affected EK load.
EK is also going to 5 days from YYZ so perhaps they have capacity and efficiency to make the YYZ-DXB-BOM pricing more aggressive. Everything else is via DEL or thru multiple points in Europe with Star Alliance partners, predominantly LH.