spreadsheet

I'm surprised AC is only cutting 50% of capacity. Who is going to be flying in the next 30 days? That's still a lot of seats flying around.

No slots in AMS, plus future TALT JV partner already serves AMSYYC. FCO could also be a JV partner hub if both Alitalia and WestJet are part of it.

Looking back to 2008 and it's been at least daily year round that whole time. WS has less than daily service in the winter, so maybe it's more WS service you'd like to offset the AC 'outrageous return airfares'?

Am I missing something? AC has flown YYZ-YYG year round forever.

Picking up connections after the morning bank in YYC, then bringing them back in before the YYC bank in the morning.

It's to pick up connections on both sides. From another forum: "The OGG schedule is pretty typical for longer mainland-OGG flights, actually. DFW/PHX/ORD-OGG all run on similar schedules as do lots of inland-HNL flights."

Saw some route cancels today I'm assuming are associated - YQQYYC, SEAYYC, YEGYYJ, YWGYQT, and YWGYXE. https://globalnews.ca/news/4998235/air-canada-cuts-direct-flights-from-winnipeg-to-thunder-bay-saskatoon/

The excess returns are being used at WS to back fill the owned aircraft being transferred to Swoop to ensure there is still fleet growth at WS.

The data I have shows the fuel burn per seat on a MAX 8 is lower than on a CS300, so an increase in fuel will actually help a MAX 8, let alone a -9 or -10, unless again the aircraft is being used for lower demand route and a MAX is not the right aircraft for the mission in the first place. Agree though, vs. older equipment it will provide an advantage. I saw a guy speak back in the summer of 2014 that predicted the drop in oil when it was sitting at around $100. Saw him again this past summer and he thinks we'll hit $90-$100 again due to the shortage of investment in oil overall, but long term we'll settle in around $60 with the US (and Middle East) ability to turn on the taps and then increase advancements in battery technology potentially tampering demand. Won't claim to be an expert in any of these areas, but it seemed quite reasonable to me.

I don't think you can consider these interchangeable narrow-body aircraft. I think the C-Series will be a great aircraft and there are many routes it will do well on, but that 'old technology' will hold a seat cost advantage the C-Series will not be able to match making it the superior aircraft on many routes.

Was it not stealing existing flying or not shrinking the 737 fleet? I think a basic premise of Encore was the opening of new opportunities and the right sizing of aircraft on some routes.

Technically more pitch, but with those old seats not more legroom.

There are 6 blocked seats (174 sellable) so just 5 more seats than Air Canada.

Why was the Florida from Hamilton route cancelled?

Without wide-body growth there won't be much 737 growth.