Big Changes expected in Canada
 

After the longest time of Harper's Conservative Parties rule in Canada the Liberals have finally won a landslide majority vote with the newly elected Prime Minister Trudeau at it's helm yesterday.

I think now we can expect big changes in the Canada-UAE air transport relationship. Let's hope for the best.

I'm not an expert in Canadian politics but I imagine the priority will be on domestic matters. I'm sure the domestic carriers will attempt to slow any opening up of Canadian air travel so I'm not sure how quickly any change will come - or how big it will be.

I think the most significant change will be that passengers will be able to roll and smoke a fatty in airport smoking lounges in the future.

Really? Such as?

First a government in Canada the UAE can sit at a table with, and talk to in a meaningful manner.

Second Air Canada management is very close to the Conservative Party. They won't have as much lobbying power as they did in the past.

If I ware a smart mod - which I am not - I would probably tell you to take such political propaganda to OMNI.;)

Careful what you ask for and remember how the airlines on the other side operate. If in doubt... review EY's annual report for 2014. Can't find it? Ha. What a surprise...

Please don't teach me about the politics in my own country, I view this more as an economical/business topic.

From what I see Down Under Qantas is doing well with it's Emirates tie up so where are the sour grapes on your side coming from???

No attempt to "teach" in my earlier post... but now I might be tempted.

No sour grapes either.

Let's get back to your little post-electoral Liberal rah-rah for a moment: Once the new-and-oh-so-much-better Liberal government sits down for a chat with their counterparts from UAE, what do you expect to be the resulting positive changes?

l didn't say the Liberals were better, the context of my post was the approach will be different.

Well what they will talk about??? Your guess is as good as mine, but I'm sure they won't be taking about the Conservative's for the next four to five years now because they're irrelevant. and out the door now.

Why will the new lib. government be different than the old lib. government before the Harper government. Libs did not let these airlines into Canada unregulated.

funny how ignorance and indignation go hand in hand...

Indignation no, but ignorance, and arrogance have cost us a lot when it comes to relations with emerging countries, and economies.

Enough said, I'll just agree to disagree with your point of view.

Its funny people talk about ME3 and subsidies. The Canadian govt is effectively doing the same thing to Air Canada by stopping EK from flying 2 x A380 daily. They know it would put AC out of business.

Where did you hear this? How? Actually it was 3 times per week, but not daily flights.

Exactly. Air Canada is subsidized in the form of protectionism.

AC management cronies belong to the same country club as the politicians in Ottawa, and gather at the same trough. While hopeful, I dont expect much to change sadly.

Tim Clark said on Emirates radio in board that they want to do double daily a380 to Toronto.

OT: I think I have found literally the only other person other than me who listens to that channel ^ :D

+1, guilty as charged

:D

+2

+3 ;)

Flanagan, in one of his last interviews at the beginning of the year stated EK could justify double daily to YYZ and YVR, and daily to YYC and YUL if they had the traffic rights. That would seriously put a dent in AC's transatlantic traffic and Star Alliance tie up with LH, who are the ones who would really suffer.

It would put them out of business so it's a form of govt subsidy.

I wouldn't go as far as to say it would put AC out of business, but it would bring welcome competition to the consumer, and force AC to be more competitive.

If BUF airport had a long enough runway you bet EK would start BUF-DXB purely to get people from the Golden Horseshoe.

It seemed to me that one of the primary concerns surrounding the competition of Emirates entering the Canadian market was the worry that yields would fall, and that certain routes wouldn't be feasible to operate. It was also mentioned that Air Canada wouldn't have have been able to economically serve the key markets that Emirates would be connecting traffic to/from, ie. the Indian subcontinent.

However now, the Dreamliner has entered Air Canada's fleet, the airline is profitable, routes are now being started to Delhi and Dubai, and Air Canada's low cost carrier Rouge is making many once uneconomical routes, economical for Air Canada.

It seems to be pretty evident that it would be almost a no-brainer for Canada to increase the number of frequencies allowed to Emirates/Etihad, to bring in some more competition on a market that's unfairly polarized towards Air Canada.

I think it would be great that Emirates even go daily to YYZ rather than 3 times a week. Increased competition is always good for AC

Air Canada cannot/could not compete with EK/EY. Any increase in flights for those two would seriously put a dent in traffic on their TATL routes which are used to funnel people onto LH into Places like India, etc. This is why management got their buddies to give them a subsidy a couple years back in form of protectionism.
This is not about what benefits the customer (heck, even Canadian taxpayers lost billions when AC received the subsidy - we got kicked out of a base in the UAE) - its about protecting Air Canada, a private company with friends at the top.

Indirectly, or directly, AC has evidently decided they're willing to compete with EK/EY by starting their own flights to DEL and DXB. Furthermore, if that rhetoric is to be used, it wouldn't make sense for AC to undertake the risk of opening new routes, if they know they wouldn't be able to withstand current, and/or possible future competition.

There is speculation, they are only starting DXB to "prove" that there is no demand on the route in the next round of lobbying the govt to continue with the subsidy (and blocking EK/EY)

Just thinking. Maybe AC is starting this route to fail. Then they can say to the government that the traffic is not great enough for more flights. Then AC cancels flight and government doesn't let more EK/EY flights into Canada. Possibility?

In an airline dictated by investor returns, I would personally be surprised to see this be the case. I appreciate the opinion, it is a possibility.

Connections have told me that AC's first month at YYZ-DXB have advance bookings ranging anywhere from 50-90%, whilst DXB-YYZ seems to be more stagnant around the 50% range. Evidently, we only have the metric of load factors to prove, and no yield information, but for a first month's operations advance bookings, it's nothing to complain about. I can testify that EK has run lower load factors to destinations in their first month of operations that have since been upguaged. Nevertheless, it is still telling that there is a demand for AC's DXB flights with the information I have been provided.

I cant imagine a load of 50 is hard to achieve when you are selling SFO-DXB for <$500 RT. So yes, demand at those prices perhaps exists.

I bought YYZ-DXB RT for <CAD600 on AC nonstops. At that price, yes, I ll suffer the horrible 787 Y seats. So yes, some demand may be there - but what kind of demand?

And yes, I wouldnt put it past AC to start this route and lose money, just to prove a point. Lose the battle, win the war - there is far more at stake here.

EK/EY free access into Canada would be the end of AC/LH TATL beyond Europe.

Hold on, hold on...

Ignoring the posturing over UAE/Canada traffic rights, I had to flag up rankourabu's post about SFO-DXB fares!

SFO-DXB for 500 USD round trip?!? Please give me the name of your travel agent, because he/she is clearly absurdly well connected!!

By my last reckoning, SFO-DXB was 1.4k USD in Y, 15k USD in J and 30k in F!

I want AC to prosper but at the same time I think a truly Open Skies Policy will benefit everyone. I would like daily ME3 flights, lets give people a choice here. I also want SQ to start its flight back into Toronto & Vancouver.

No need for a travel agent. Absurdly well connected is FT ;)

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/milea...16k-miles.html

Now you see how AC is able to fill planes.

Even YYZ-DXB alone has been hovering around USD630 RT, well below EK's nonstop prices.
I have a friend who paid USD530 from BOS as well about a month ago.

Indeed ^

I thought you meant EK was 500 USD, in which case I would expect them to go 100% every flight instead of the c. 80-85 I think they are hovering at at the moment!

Pity EK don't award miles based on miles :D

It doesn't make sense for AC to start DXB just to fail deliberately to sabotage EK/EY from getting a chance of flying to YYZ daily in the future.

Look at the big picture, DXB, or even better DWC will be the busiest airport in the world very soon. If I were an airline executive I would make sure my metal is flying to that airport no matter what.

But SQ doesn't want to fly into Canada.

Arguably it's only the busiest airport due to the weight of connecting traffic - actual O&D demand into DXB doesn't I think show the same growth rates as EKs connecting traffic growth.

What might be interesting is if an alliance flew into DXB on one side and another partner flew out on the other ;)

How would that help? EK has lots of traffic at DXB because it connects from many places to many places.

2 alliance airlines flying into DXB are likely to only be connecting their hubs.

It was a tongue-in-cheek hypothetical, not a serious plan - I only wanted to highlight that DXB's rise to the top of passenger number tables is on the back of connecting traffic through DXB, mainly on EK, and that other airlines I don't think are basing fleet deployment decisions based on pax numbers at DXB, as NOIR implied, since other airlines will mainly be servicing O&D demand given the lack of onward connectivity...unless another airline alliance were to move into DXB and turn it into a hub for them as well :D