Air Canada and Canadi>n: In talks
Mar 23, 1999, 9:25 pm
#1
Original Member
Original Poster
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,652
Air Canada and Canadi>n: In talks
A very interesting article in The National Post today regarding talks between AC and CP with respect to anything from route distribution to some form of joint-venture.
http://www.nationalpost.com/home.asp?f=990323/2402367
The next few months should be very interesting for Canadian aviation.
I am both an Aeroplan Elite and Canadian Plus Gold, so this has implications for me either way. Does anyone have any thoughts on what may happen.
The National Post, may however be way off. When Canadi>n released its new colours this past January, the day prior to the release, The National Post reported that the aircraft would be painted with an all silver background to resemble the fleet of American Airlines, its close financial and operating partner. That was just a bit off, I would say!
[This message has been edited by Fisch (edited 03-23-99).]
http://www.nationalpost.com/home.asp?f=990323/2402367
The next few months should be very interesting for Canadian aviation.
I am both an Aeroplan Elite and Canadian Plus Gold, so this has implications for me either way. Does anyone have any thoughts on what may happen.
The National Post, may however be way off. When Canadi>n released its new colours this past January, the day prior to the release, The National Post reported that the aircraft would be painted with an all silver background to resemble the fleet of American Airlines, its close financial and operating partner. That was just a bit off, I would say!
[This message has been edited by Fisch (edited 03-23-99).]
Mar 24, 1999, 6:59 am
#3
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Half the World & More and then some.
Programs: BA, SQ, AA, QF, CX, VS
Posts: 1,202
Canada needs 2 airlines. Otherwise everything would be a monopoly and airfares will go up.
What joint 'ventures' both CP and AC are talking about could very well be the redistribution of rights to international destinations.
Even though Canada and USA have unlimited access to each other's airports, it does not work the same way for international destinations. Appointed cities are designated by Ottawa and who can serve which city and when.
Europe is most dominated by Air Canda and Asia Pacific by Canadian. With the exception of a few cities, you might note that AC and CP do not have the same international destinations. That was done with intention so that each airline get their own rights.
Hence, CP serves TYO and AC serves OSA.
HKG/BKK/PEK are CP destinations.
Only recently after heavy lobbying, AC got HKG and then soon, TPE. But there are still certain cities that are given to the respective airlines who hold the rights to fly there but are not using it. The Canadian government therefore institued a "fly it or lose it" policy to prevent 'hoarding' of unserved cities.
Canadian currently holds rights to fly to these cities but have not initiated services.
KUL, AMS, DEL, SHA, PAR.
Air Canada holds rights to these cities but do not fly there.
SIN, JKT, BOM. (there are a few more)
So I think these 2 airlines have to sit down and swap cities so that they can be better served.
Please correct me if I'm wrong...! Thx.
What joint 'ventures' both CP and AC are talking about could very well be the redistribution of rights to international destinations.
Even though Canada and USA have unlimited access to each other's airports, it does not work the same way for international destinations. Appointed cities are designated by Ottawa and who can serve which city and when.
Europe is most dominated by Air Canda and Asia Pacific by Canadian. With the exception of a few cities, you might note that AC and CP do not have the same international destinations. That was done with intention so that each airline get their own rights.
Hence, CP serves TYO and AC serves OSA.
HKG/BKK/PEK are CP destinations.
Only recently after heavy lobbying, AC got HKG and then soon, TPE. But there are still certain cities that are given to the respective airlines who hold the rights to fly there but are not using it. The Canadian government therefore institued a "fly it or lose it" policy to prevent 'hoarding' of unserved cities.
Canadian currently holds rights to fly to these cities but have not initiated services.
KUL, AMS, DEL, SHA, PAR.
Air Canada holds rights to these cities but do not fly there.
SIN, JKT, BOM. (there are a few more)
So I think these 2 airlines have to sit down and swap cities so that they can be better served.
Please correct me if I'm wrong...! Thx.
Mar 24, 1999, 7:16 pm
#5
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX DM, JGC Sapphire, FWC Gold
Posts: 329
Celestar340, you are right, as I know CP should have held the right flying to KUL, PAR, SHA and DEL, in fact CP has just recently stopped code-sharing with MAS to KUL. I think they did fly to Paris a long long time ago. Do u know if CP has any right flying to Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh City, as it also lists as a future destination on their route map.
For the AC, I am not really sure if they have the right flying to SIN, JKT, BOM, but it it really does, for sure, they won't fly there unless the Asis flu has completely gone.
By the way, is your nickname, Celestar340, comes from the way that Singapore names their aircraft?
For the AC, I am not really sure if they have the right flying to SIN, JKT, BOM, but it it really does, for sure, they won't fly there unless the Asis flu has completely gone.
By the way, is your nickname, Celestar340, comes from the way that Singapore names their aircraft?
Mar 24, 1999, 9:53 pm
#6
Join Date: Jan 1999
Posts: 409
Interestingly, it seems that while Canadian is suffering financially, its regional partners appear to be doing much better.
A Southam News article by Dan Westell appeared on Monday called "Bigger and Better - Regional airlines in Eastern Canada restructure to improve service".
It mentions the streamlining both Air Nova and InterCanadian have undertaken. InterCanadian is described as a "revitalized independent" that is now making money. And they've certainly improved their service here in Atlantic Canada, with bigger planes (44-seat ATR) and more flights.
I support the competition of two national airlines (gotta keep Air Canada honest!). Nonetheless, if worse comes to worse and Canadian were to fold, regional airlines like WestJet and those in Eastern Canada should be able to take up much of the slack. International routes could be served by Oneworld. Actually, most of them are already, judging by the number of Canadian codeshare flights.
A Southam News article by Dan Westell appeared on Monday called "Bigger and Better - Regional airlines in Eastern Canada restructure to improve service".
It mentions the streamlining both Air Nova and InterCanadian have undertaken. InterCanadian is described as a "revitalized independent" that is now making money. And they've certainly improved their service here in Atlantic Canada, with bigger planes (44-seat ATR) and more flights.
I support the competition of two national airlines (gotta keep Air Canada honest!). Nonetheless, if worse comes to worse and Canadian were to fold, regional airlines like WestJet and those in Eastern Canada should be able to take up much of the slack. International routes could be served by Oneworld. Actually, most of them are already, judging by the number of Canadian codeshare flights.
Mar 25, 1999, 7:38 pm
#7
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Half the World & More and then some.
Programs: BA, SQ, AA, QF, CX, VS
Posts: 1,202
Hey Chatter - Good guess!
AC does have rights to SIN, BOM and JKT. many years ago (1983-8), it operated thrice weekly flights YYZ-LHR-BOM-SIN on an ageing L1011-500 aircraft. AC cancelled the service due to low yields. I couldn't understand why because LHR-BOM-SIN was always chock-a-block full.
You're right there. CP also holds rights for SGN (Ho Chih Minh City) and was at one time supposed to be codesharing through to Vietnam but as always, fizzled out. CP really does not have enough aircraft. PARIS was also an ex-CP destinations. It bought Wardair just so that it could secure this right to fly there but cancelled it due to low yields from YUL and YYZ with competition from AC and charters.
AC does have rights to SIN, BOM and JKT. many years ago (1983-8), it operated thrice weekly flights YYZ-LHR-BOM-SIN on an ageing L1011-500 aircraft. AC cancelled the service due to low yields. I couldn't understand why because LHR-BOM-SIN was always chock-a-block full.
You're right there. CP also holds rights for SGN (Ho Chih Minh City) and was at one time supposed to be codesharing through to Vietnam but as always, fizzled out. CP really does not have enough aircraft. PARIS was also an ex-CP destinations. It bought Wardair just so that it could secure this right to fly there but cancelled it due to low yields from YUL and YYZ with competition from AC and charters.
Apr 7, 1999, 2:09 pm
#8
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 98
Each small country has one airline:
Germany -> Lufthansa
France -> Air France
England -> British Airways
Spain -> Iberia
Argentina -> Aerolineas Argentinas
Russia -> Aeroflot
Poland -> LOT
Italy -> Alitalia
Why should Canada have 2? With 1, we can consolidate all our points and have the opportunity to compete stronger on the world margin against the world's biggest carriers. With 2, we have 2 week carriers which do not meen anything on the world scale.
Germany -> Lufthansa
France -> Air France
England -> British Airways
Spain -> Iberia
Argentina -> Aerolineas Argentinas
Russia -> Aeroflot
Poland -> LOT
Italy -> Alitalia
Why should Canada have 2? With 1, we can consolidate all our points and have the opportunity to compete stronger on the world margin against the world's biggest carriers. With 2, we have 2 week carriers which do not meen anything on the world scale.
Apr 7, 1999, 8:18 pm
#9
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX DM, JGC Sapphire, FWC Gold
Posts: 329
Huh? I don't think those 'small' countries have only got one airline:
France: AOM (which is a very strong domestic airline)
UK: Virgin (a very great international airline competing with BA)
Russia: Transaero (another international airline in Russia with clean safety record)
For the rest of them, though I don't know the name of the other players, I am sure that they should have more than one airline running. As Canada is not a small country (2nd largest in the world), having two airlines is not a problem at all.
Almost ten years ago, China only got one government owned airline, and the services were as bad as the Aeroflot in the Soviet period. However, they are now broken up with many smaller airlines which compete with each other, and the result is better services than before.
I really don't want to see a monopoly airline in Canada.
France: AOM (which is a very strong domestic airline)
UK: Virgin (a very great international airline competing with BA)
Russia: Transaero (another international airline in Russia with clean safety record)
For the rest of them, though I don't know the name of the other players, I am sure that they should have more than one airline running. As Canada is not a small country (2nd largest in the world), having two airlines is not a problem at all.
Almost ten years ago, China only got one government owned airline, and the services were as bad as the Aeroflot in the Soviet period. However, they are now broken up with many smaller airlines which compete with each other, and the result is better services than before.
I really don't want to see a monopoly airline in Canada.
Apr 7, 1999, 9:14 pm
#10
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: New York - DL Gold, AA Gold, AC Prestige, VS Silver
Posts: 811
I believe that all the airlines you mention
Germany -> Lufthansa
France -> Air France
England -> British Airways
Spain -> Iberia
Argentina -> Aerolineas Argentinas
Russia -> Aeroflot
Poland -> LOT
Italy -> Alitalia
are or were owned by the government of the country involved (admittedly even Air Canada was government-owned). At least three of them - BA, AF and LH have been heavily criticized for using their monopoly power to crush competition.
Germany -> Lufthansa
France -> Air France
England -> British Airways
Spain -> Iberia
Argentina -> Aerolineas Argentinas
Russia -> Aeroflot
Poland -> LOT
Italy -> Alitalia
are or were owned by the government of the country involved (admittedly even Air Canada was government-owned). At least three of them - BA, AF and LH have been heavily criticized for using their monopoly power to crush competition.
Apr 8, 1999, 1:55 am
#11
Join Date: Jan 1999
Posts: 3,065
Megamiles: Criticised yes. But only by their competitors.
In BA's case Virgin Atlantic; British Midland; Easyjet; KLM UK etc etc don't seem to be doing to badly.
I don't think every country needs two airlines, but I believe every route does!
Nick
In BA's case Virgin Atlantic; British Midland; Easyjet; KLM UK etc etc don't seem to be doing to badly.
I don't think every country needs two airlines, but I believe every route does!
Nick