TS serves no purpose to me and has no value proposition to meet my travel needs. Yes I know they've changed over the years, but I have no need for them.

A real traveler (ok, flyer - we're just mincing words) is someone who takes a holistic approach to the cost/benefit of travel and who values a combination of frequent flyer programs, benefits, in-flight product, and convenience.

I am in no way justifying the HD aircraft, but I am just offering a likely view from the AC executive office - that they can fill this airplane with enough people to make money (incrementally more money than using their current equipment) no matter how many other customers whine and complain about the tiny seats and other discomforts.

If you work for ABC Company, and this company sends you from YVR to HKG every month for work in paid business, how many people are going back to ABC Company and asking to be routed on the more expensive CX flight or sent via SEA or SFO to avoid this 'uncomfortable' J seat - not that many, and I think AC knows this too. Their options were to either add another flight to increase lift and capture market share, or just cram more people into the existing one - and having done the latter, I don't think any number of complaints will have an effect until they see revenue suffer on these HD flights because enough people are actively avoiding them.

In total agreement here - AC knows exactly what they are doing.

On the contrary, the rest of the country (particularly those in Montreal and Vancouver) are profoundly grateful.

I agree. Incredibly, the flights continue to be packed even with the HD configuration. As already mentioned by another poster, it seems that most people in Y are completely unaware, and AC probably knows this. Unless those aircraft really start being avoided by the general public, as well as the BC pax, it is just a slow progression downward. At least I have a double on AC.B... I will be avoiding this aircraft like the plague, and I was upgraded.

Marketing executives at a number of airlines have operated under the impression that travellers would pay extra for a better experience. Most of them managed their airlines directly into the scrap heap. How many examples would you like?

My old argument finally comes home.

It wasn't so long ago that coffee was indeed a commodity -- it was what you got free of charge when you ordered a slice of pie. Then Starbucks very deftly converted coffee from a commodity to a specialty item. So now people happily and repeatedly pay more for a "cup of coffee" than they used to pay for pie (with a free coffee).

As long as airlines, Air Canada in particular, try to lower costs by offering less, there will be less and less to distinguish them from any other airline. Clearly most people already think Air Canada is no better than the worst of them, otherwise they'd be prepared to pay more.

But Air Canada (and the rest) have successfully reversed Starbuck's trick and commoditized the airline industry. Most passengers think one airline is as bad as another, so they're not prepared to spend a penny more just to get a particular airline.

Which means they are all competing on cost. And Air Canada will never win that battle. They may be successful in the short term when pretty much every airline on the planet is reporting ever increasing loads, and most are making money (with some of them making tons of money.) (Keep in mind that Air Canada is still not making money on operations.)

But once the current ride is over, or even just slows down a bit, then Air Canada will pay dearly as they'll no longer have packed planes, and with thin margins they'll be losing money where others will still be profitable.

Then Air Canada will still have large numbers of very uncomfortable seats. Only many of them will be empty.

But that's next quarter.

So who cares?

ouch. the truth hurts. ^

and yes, who cares, current management will long be on the golf course laughing all the way to the bank

Then they were selling the wrong thing.

That's a problem with the marketing people.

Airlines for years operated under the impression that travelers would pay more for certain benefits. Frequent flyer programs proved that in spades -- so much so that many employers employed third-party agencies to police their employees air travel buying habits, and governments the world over prohibited civil servants from participating in FF programs.

But now airlines are trying to offer less and less, including with their frequent flyer programs. As long as people need to fly, and as long as all airlines march downwards in lock step that might work. But as soon as fewer people need to fly, and/or one airline decides to try to win back some of that "unused capacity" (as American Airlines did in 1984) then it will all fall apart.

I doubt that most people would be prepared to pay more, actually. Their buying decisions make that clear. I meet many travellers who prefer AC to all US carriers who will still fly US carriers when they're cheaper.

We all saw how the "they'll pay more for a better product" thing worked out for HMY and Roots..

Sorry, Roots is a better product than... what exactly? It is the same made in China stuff as everybody else has, with a logo slapped on it. Not many people pay extra for that.

Now look at Arcteryx - people pay 200% more than the made in China stuff (Columbia, North Face, etc) for it. That's a better product, and they can't keep any stock on hand.

So true. Marketing, schmarketing.
AC deployed their 77W for years on MTL-Paris. Their % market share on the route could be counted on their fingers.
How does an airline with abysmal comfort/experience like TS lap AC on the route when AC were offering 9 wide 777 with flat biz?
Guess TS has a brilliant 'marketing' dept ... LOL

LOL.
Go back and read your prognostications of AC, their performance, their stock potential.
You're what we call an auto-fade in the equity game ...
Wish you would have put your money where your mouth was and shorted AC @ $4 when you were "confident they'd give back their gains".
But you'll sit here predicting doom for an airline stock. Gee, what a bold prediction for an incredibly cyclical segment. Just wait it out, might be months, might be years but it will happen. And then you can tell us all how "you knew this would happen all along". Perhaps when the AC labour relation issue rear their ugly heads again? Perhaps if oil spikes? Perhaps if Canada slips into recession? But, you sir are way ahead of it all. Much sharper than us - you know it's coming. You've been predicting it for many months.
In the meantime, we'll just have to take your wise word for it I guess.

A few years ago Roots launched an airline. Its come-on was that it was a luxury, boutique airline, or something to that effect. It lasted about 6 weeks.