DanJ

I'm assuming A400 was a typo in the article. Wouldn't want people to think they will board the (as yet unbuilt) Airbus version of a Hercules LOL.

superdawg

He worked for Beddoe at his real estate company:

see pages 12-16 here:
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:...0470834366.pdf

Coffeebean

The article is a bit simplified, but basically accurate.

Dagger and I could go back and forth, point by point, for hours illustrating why Porter is doomed to failure. The gang at WJ and AC already know it.

It's a dumb business plan.

BTW Volaris is an Airbus operator.

Shareholder

I was quoting the article, which did contain that error. It is a Q400 series aircraft, of course.

(BTW, on that other site, someone is calling the TCA Lockheed L14 (or L10) at DC3. Just to clear the record on aircraft recognition.)

LeSabre74

Though implied by an earlier post of yours, only because the wonderful 737 was not available.

"Mr.Hill" may very well have developed an expertise in WS style start-ups but seems to have become blinded to other business models. Porter may be doomed to failure, but not every turboprop operation is. Beddoe's public scorn of props is typical of the arrogance that used to be directed at AC. Trouble for them is the industry doesn't stay still, and what may have been great for the mid-90's may not be so great in an era of sustained high fuel prices.

Bytepusher

I don't buy it. The target customer values time above all else, if they can be cost competetive with AC and offer decent frequencies to YUL and YOW, with morning flights that can get a customer to a 9AM meeting they can run decent loads on those routes if they market it right, the time savings YTZ offers over YYZ has huge competetive potential. OK that doesn't account for 10 planes but it's a start.

Yes AC will drop fares as they did in reaction to any number of other attempted competitors up to and inluding JetsGone. But they can only keep that up so long before they are in effect BBQing their own cash cow. Past competitors have not been as well capitalized as Porter seems to be so there is some chance they can outlast the storm. If your target customer is big company reimbursed employee travel then passes are mooted as most of these travellers can't use passes anyway, and if your main business is same day downtown to downtown round trips then yes, a big chunk of your customer base is people who work for Bell and IBM and the banks and the governments, non-pass users all.

Downtown based same day round trip business travellers. Yah, those are sure a bunch of awful customers to limit yourself to.

With only YOW and YUL as destinations they can easily do a 70 hour flying week with limited weekend ops. Not for 10 planes obviously but frankly that's an overly simplistic view of the economics.

Don't get me wrong I think there's about a 50/50 chance that this is exactly what the critics say it is, but this is not the automatic joke that most commentators seem to think it is.

Simon

...who likely have discounted bulk pricing from AC.

Simon

The Lev

That Porter could not match. @:-)

marbuck

Well, Alakska/Horizon Airlines has turned me off the Q400 and Porter!

Mechanical problems because of overheating kept me in the departure lounge at SEA for eight hours overnight on a flight to BZN (Bozeman, Montana), and when I finally boarded I found a stiff leather seat in a cramped noisy cabin. I did my business on arrival with two hours sleep. No way would I pay a premium fare to fly on this plane. Sure, Island Airport has some advantages from YOW but I sure wouldn't rush to make it a 'hub' airport for travel from YOW to US destinations. In fact, despite the inconveniences of Pearson, the offsetting advantages to business travelers of the possibility of J seats, MLL and other services, makes the 'inconvenience' of a YYZ transfer for transborder trips not an overwhelming hassle.

So Porter won't be able to count on connecting traffic for its US routes, narrowing the load potential to people in downtown Toronto where time is absolutely more important than comfort.

This may have worked if they had chosen a better plane. Maybe they are going to fancy it up and put some J seats in it, but all I can see is rock-bottom fares and real problems with filling seats especially mid-day.

Of course, if it is a ploy to make money by playing around with Island Airport status, it may be a smart business move. But right now I see the only winners here are, for a brief time, flyers as the fare war heats up. I'll stick with AC.

The Lev

Sorry to hear about your negative travel experience, but I think it is more a reflection of Horizon Air than of the Q400.

Every aircraft goes mechanical once in a while. It is how the airline deals with the situation that makes the difference between a minor irritant and a major PITA. I am not aware of the Q400 going mechanical any more often than other regional aircraft (certainly would be less than the E180's as CB calls them).

Similarly, the seating (pitch and seat comfort) are the responsibility of the airline not the manufacturer. If you flew a 737NG from Ryanair, you'd probably swear never to fly on one of those aircraft again. If they choose to, I'm sure Porter can make their aircraft quite comfortable. It will depend on whether their business plan focuses on lowest possible cost per seat mile or if they want to attract high yield passengers with increased comfort and service.

Bytepusher

It's my understanding that these are all but gone post CCRA, and what still exists is so minimal that it's not really a factor.

Coffeebean

Actually, there is a very good reason why Volaris selected 319's.

Boeing NG's are far better for airlines with asl under 1,000 miles. When the asl gets into 1,000 - 1,200 mile range, it's a toss up.

Boeings are built heavier to withstand cycles generated on shorter haul flying. I doubt you'll ever see an Airbus with 80,000 cycles on it.

Coffeebean

AC has quietly operated YTZ-YOW for years with 37 seaters and about 5x daily. There is a greatly reduced weekend sched and they typically cxl most flying over the Xmas season.

If there was a market for 10x daily with 70 seaters, believe me, they would have done it. The lads in Dorval didn't fall off the back of the turnip truck.

Oh sure, you could probably create traffic with $69 fares, but with the unit costs of the Q400, the cash drain would be enormous, and as I've said before, I've never seen investors enjoying losing money. If there was money to be made launching a low fare turbo prop airline, someone would have done it. Unit costs, not trip costs.

I don't care how much shark repellent you claim to have, and I don't believe for a second there's $125m of paid in capital for a turbo prop start up.

I don't know many folks who will fight rush hour from the 'burbs all the way into d/t Toronto, find parking, fly to YOW, then fly back same day and fight traffic all the way home, when they can bypass much of the traffic both ways and fly from YYZ or even YHM for the same fare and get their AP points.

Theoretically, with one hour stage lengths and 30 minute turns, you can get 11 hours a day out of a Q400. The key is to get profitable flying.

I'll bet they'll have about 4 hours a day profitable flying weekdays, and none on weekends because they'll be virtually no business or leisure demand out of YTZ between 19:30 Friday and 7:00am Monday morning.

They may do ok on their 7:00am departure from both ends, but the next one doesn't get the passenger d/t before 10:00am.

Then there are 4 flights from 10 to 15:30 that will stink. I'll be able to smell the spoiling seats from the west coast. P U.

Then there will be a 16:00, a 17:30 and arguably an 18:30 flight that may do ok, though most people leave YOW way before 18:30.

Then there are two other departures after 7:00pm. They'll stink too.

This all assumes that a) they capture every single ex Jazz passenger, which is unlikely, and B) Jazz doesn't find a way to relaunch in YTZ with the right sized aircraft, (37-50 seats). They will. Count on it. But maybe not until Porter has blown through 8 figures.

The 10x daily won't last for long.

Then they'll scramble to figure out what to do with 70 seat Q400's for about 5 hours a day in the late morning / early afternoon, and for 2 hours after 19:00.

The airplanes have, at best, a practical range of about 500 miles, and there is no time zone hopping. Mid day leisure flights from YTZ to YAM? YQG? YSB? US destinations? Competing with AC - US airlines / pricing out of YYZ?

It'll be like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

The Lev

I thought the Airbus narrow body was significantly heavier than the equivalent 737NG, although I would agree that Boeing seems to have figured out how to build a rugged aircraft. mind you IIRC, you were the one scoffing at 737-300 and its lack of durability in some posts about Canjet.

LeSabre74

OMG, my thermometer says 22, but it appears Hell has frozen over