3Cforme

Regrets to the Canadian naysayers, but SEA-Western Canada seat count is not a meaningful fraction of Alaska's total SEA count. Do the math.

robsaw

I think perhaps that is the point. Canada is a decreasing market of significance for AAG and more competition on cross-border due to Delta/Westjet tie-up isn't going to help. The other aspect is how much the overall impact is on Alaska when you also consider Canadians driving across to BLI and SEA. Maybe a small cut but as they say, you can die a death of a thousand cuts.

PDXpress

Assuming you're talking about MFR-LAX, which UA is starting, it has gone through an interesting transition from May 2017- May 2018.

From 1x AS
to
1x AS and 1x AA
to
1x AA
To
​​1x AA and 2x UA

So yeah, doesn't seem like there's any room for AS/QX there anymore.

rustykettel

EricTheNerd

Has the RNO/SNA route already been pulled? Neither the airport website nor the wikipedia page for RNO suggest that the route is gone, but there is no option to book a ticket for any date and I can't find evidence that flights are even operating on flightstats. I don't suppose there's been any kind of press release? I'd like to edit the wikipedia page if possible as that seems to be the most reliable place to find information about which routes are operating.

JPat

SNAnghbr

I am pretty certain it is gone. The SNA-STS flight use to come in from RNO and route RNO-SNA-STS-SNA-RNO but the flight now goes STS-SNA-STS

EricTheNerd

It looks like somebody has taken the liberty of removing it from the RNO wikipedia page, so thanks if that was an FTer!

I'm actually headed to the area this weekend, but taking JetBlue to LGB. Maybe Horizon will consider bringing the SNA route back for ski season?

CZBB

Actually WJ have operations in none of the major Canadian hubs, and I'm sure that AAG don't consider Air Labrador's fleet of Twin Otters and King Airs a major threat, nor is it likely that AAG would want to operate into YYR.

However, WS have positioned themselves quite well with DL for Canadian access into the US. Alaska/Horizon only serve western Canada right now (long time AS flyers might remember LAX-YYZ), and there's been quite a lot of reduction of services (out of YVR, they've dropped SFO, LAX, LAS and ANC), and even dropped the service from the South Vancouver (BLI) to LAS.

Potential flights where they could do well are
YYZ-SEA, LAX, SFO
YVR-JFK HNL

An interesting point is that WS is the largest international carrier at LAS -- think about that.

rustykettel

eponymous_coward

VX bombed horribly on YYZ from SFO and LAX, which was predicted in advance:

http://crankyflier.com/2010/04/21/wh...irgin-america/

(You may recognize one of the posters in that thread like I did. )

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranc...o-toronto.html

Not sure it's going to do better in 2017. As I recall AC started running 767s to SFO/LAX and flooded the market with capacity. Cranky's quote here applies to AS in 2017 much like VX in 2010:

'If you’re a low fare carrier, you want to avoid high cost airports in high tax markets. This is the king of high cost airports in a high tax market. You can’t just “adjust the fares” to cover costs – it’s never that simple when it comes to supply and demand.'

AC was flying an E190 not too long ago on SEA-YYZ and has just now upgraded to an A320, so I have to wonder if it would support ~300 seats per day in the market instead of ~150.

The one thing I note about AS's HNL exploits is that they avoided SFO and LAX quite deliberately for markets like SJC, SAN and SMF. Going into AC's back yard is even worse than going into SFO; you're taking on a dominant carrier (AC) in their hub (and the ticket prices are high due to taxes). Watch AC start flying all the 767s to Hawaii they can get their hands on and try and crush AS. Should be good for airfares out of YVR though if they do that.

Frequentlander

As someone based near YVR and who tries very hard to fly AS/QX, I find it's getting harder and harder to get decent connections. Putting LAX back and introducing SFO would be a very welcome addition and probably prevent bleed over to WS/DL. But of course, preventing bleed of YVR PAX would have to be on the AS radar, and I don't think it is.

eponymous_coward

The California markets AS is involved in (SFO, LAX, SJC, SAN, plus some SNA/SMF/OAK stuff, in approximate order of what AS is interested in) offer something like 10x the passenger and growth potential of YVR, and don't impose the high cost of cross-border taxes that service to/from Canada does on a ticket, which, as mentioned, is a burden to a US-based carrier that's having to compete based on cost as opposed to lie-flats and corporate contracts.

AS is already having enough problems as it is getting the merger squared away and dealing with a combination of DL/UA/WN/B6 in their markets. I don't think "let's pick fights with AC and WS over YVR based pax too while we're at it" is very high on their lists.

Flying for Fun

YLW is also an International Airport and one of the five airports originally serviced by WS. About 1.4 million people pass through every year. WS won't get you non-stop to Seattle from Kelowna but will get you non-stop to Mexican destinations during the winter. From YLW WS offered seasonable non-stop service to PHX & LAS. This year they kept PHX but dropped LAS. WS will be happy to sell you a ticket YLW-LAS if you don't mind flying NE to go S with a 16 hour overnight layover in Edmonton. Also happy to charge you mainline pricing for an LCC experience. Such a joke and a good fit for Sky Pasos.

I believe there is less demand for Canadians flying south and hence too much capacity; lower yields given the strength of the USD and the political environment. Airlines will adjust their schedules accordingly. BLI non-stops to LAS and the Hawaiian Islands (which I have used many times) were possible due to the proximity to Greater Vancouver. It is easier to get to BLI from the Valley than to get to YVR. Flights would have never been possible based solely on the population in NW Washington state. When Canadian demand ebbs it is no longer viable. The price differential has narrowed significantly on most consumer products in the US and with the current exchange rates many items cost more than in Canada; or the savings are insignificant. Gas in Vancouver when I was there last weekend was CAD $1.54 per litre. That works out to USD $4.55 per gallon. Who wants to pay that to drive to Bellingham and save $0.50 cents on a pound of butter?

Getting a little off track here but the diminished AS service into/out of Canada has other factors that aren't completely tied to the VX acquisition.

James

CZBB

Absolutely VX bombed, and it's not surprising. The only other west coast destinations that VX could connect through SFO to were SEA,PDX,LAX,SAN,LAS, all of which already had non-stops from Toronto. VX were a very small player back in the day (VX Route Map 2012) and VX (by itself) never stood a chance against AC and their UA partner via SFO.

AS have a huge number of connecting potentials via SEA and PDX (including partners to Asia). However, I will admit AS stand a much better chance on YYZ-LAX/SAN/SEA/PDX than they do vs AC/UA on YYZ-SFO. I'd guess than AS could even pick up a fair bit of Hawaii traffic via SEA, with YYZ-SEA-<OGG/KOA/HNL/LIH>, or even from some of the Canadian airports w/o non-stop to Hawaii like YLW and YYJ