Jetsgo to Fly Agaian?

[dagger]

Exactly. Wouldn't work , would it.

Because without the international flying AC is not profitable.

Thanks for proving my point.

Rubbish

When AC is profitable, domestic and international are profitable.

When AC is unprofitable, all sectors are usually unprofitable. There are routes which may buck the trend. International as you define it - anything that isn't domestic - is hampered by the poor performance of the transborder since 2001.

[Guest directlaw]

Because without the international flying AC is not profitable.

....and without the calgary hub WJ is.......

What is your point?

[AIP]

You guys and gals are wasting your time with the koolaid crowd.

First it was LF and when they couldnt win that one after getting their AS%$es kicked down east, they moved on to CASM.

They need to feel as though they are a leader of something in this country perceived or otherwise.

Big hairy deal, this whole discussion is much ado about nothing. AC does not and does not need to have the same cost levels as WJ to make a buck.

Revenue comes from many wide and varied sources.

ML was more of a thorn to WJ than he ever was to AC.

[Guest Kilo Mike]

Sambuca.

You're reaching here, or I'm unsure of what your point is.

Quote - "Because without the international flying AC is not profitable."

What are you basing your opinion on? Just to take your logic and reverse it on yah, you realize the same could be said about WJ? Take away your charter flying and you aren't profitable. Does that mean WJ isn't profitable domestically? Hard to say because profitability takes in the whole she-bang now doesn't it

Not sure why you are bent on dissecting AC's domestic ops. Our loads come from a mix bag of international and domestic feed. Trying to seperate which comes from where is a waste of time IMO.

[Cargo Agent]

I keep reading all these blanket statements from sambucca, but not once has he/she posted anything concrete to support them. I don't suppose we ever will see any kind of "proof" that those statements are true.

If you ask me how I know this I can only say "because it has always been so"

I hope your not using this argunment when you talk about your WS profits and your profit sharing cheques for 2005.

Go ahead and believe what you want about AC. Whether you get it from the WS hymm book, from drinking the Koolaid, or thought it up yourself, it doesn't matter. The more misconceptions you folks have about us the better.

[chockalicious]

Geez and the WS crowd gets accused of being touchy. I enjoy how the dagger fluffers are using his "sing from the hymn book" phrase.

Now if you will excuse me I have to flip to page 332 and mix another batch for my fellow WestJetters, we have guests to look after.

[sambucca]

....and without the calgary hub WJ is.......

What is your point?

Another day another dollar...

Anyway , I actually had to look back in this thread myself to answer your question as to what set me off on this trail. It has been an attempt to provide a few reasons for Dagger as to why we won't lower prices.

The first was the most obvious. If we do , AC does and the race to the bottom begins again. I honestly believe that no one can dispute the likelyhood (sp?) of this happening. We have all seen this happen a thousand times before and before anyone starts flipping out , yes WestJet does it to their competition too.

Secondly , AC and WestJet are apples and oranges. AC has so many more revenue streams than WestJet , the major one being it's intnl. flying which is higher yielding and more profitable. Anyone that doubts this only has to read Milton's book where he blames AC's bankruptcy on 911 and SARS devastating the intnl. trade.

Therefor , I stand by my original statement. It would be foolish for WestJet to unilaterally lower prices just to reclaim the title of having "Cheap Fares" as suggested by Dagger. Domestic is our bread and butter. To AC it is only part of their business.

[sambucca]

I keep reading all these blanket statements from sambucca, but not once has he/she posted anything concrete to support them. I don't suppose we ever will see any kind of "proof" that those statements are true.

If you ask me how I know this I can only say "because it has always been so"

I hope your not using this argunment when you talk about your WS profits and your profit sharing cheques for 2005.

Go ahead and believe what you want about AC. Whether you get it from the WS hymm book, from drinking the Koolaid, or thought it up yourself,  it doesn't matter. The more misconceptions you folks have about us the better. 

Well , I don't see you asking for proof from Dagger , but that's OK because I'm sure he is like me and has neither the time or inclination to provide you with references.

Yup , I use blanket statements based on 25 yrs in the business and reading just about everything I can ever get my hands on regarding it. But I'll tell you what. If you don't like my views , don't read them.

[Guest directlaw]

sambucca,

Now that makes sense......and yes I agree with you.

AC does have many revenue streams. AC does have higher costs as well but we also cater to higher yield customers. It costs money to provide J class seating. CASM goes up as soon as you remove a seat. CASM goes up when you provide lounges,concierge and frequent flier programs. But part of our business model is to go after the "premium" paying pax. Does it drive up our costs...yes. Does it provide for higher yield.....yes. Should AC stop all these high yield generating things just to drop CASM to WJ's level......no. Does it mean we must be subsidizing domestic with international.....no.

WJ and AC are different airlines....apples and oranges. To assume that AC is not making money domestically just because our CASM is higher than WJ's is way way way to over simplified.

I think the reason you got so much flack (which started you in circles) is because your original post smelled of the " WJ is so hard done by mantra" "AC is trying to kill us" ect.

Any hint of this kind of attitude will only bring out anger from AC employees

Or we are overly sensitive to it?

[sambucca]

sambucca,

Now that makes sense......and yes I agree with you.

AC does have many revenue streams.  AC does have higher costs as well but we also cater to higher yield customers.  It costs money to provide J class seating.  CASM goes up as soon as you remove a seat.  CASM goes up when you provide lounges,concierge and frequent flier programs.  But part of our business model is to go after the "premium" paying pax.  Does it drive up our costs...yes.  Does it provide for higher yield.....yes.  Should AC stop all these high yield generating things just to drop CASM to WJ's level......no.  Does it mean we must be subsidizing domestic with international.....no. 

WJ and AC are different airlines....apples and oranges.  To assume that AC is not making money domestically just because our CASM is higher than WJ's is way way way to over simplified.

I think the reason you got so much flack (which started you in circles) is because your original post smelled of the " WJ is so hard done by mantra" "AC is trying to kill us" ect.

Any hint of this kind of attitude will only bring out anger from AC employees

Or we are overly sensitive to it?

My intention was never to cry "We are so hard done by". In fact I think we have it pretty good and its going to get a lot better.

The intention was just to point out the differences and how they affect each airline. I agree that AC should provide all those services as they are all part and parcel of what they do. Even WestJet is diversifing with the Transat work and there is a lot more of that to come. I am convinced that our fourth quarter would have been worse if not for the Transat flying.

As far as AC's domestic profit I'm still not conviced that there is one due to yields and oil but I believe that it is possible considering the large increase in load factors.

[Fido]

..... AC has so many more revenue streams than WestJet , the major one being it's intnl. flying which is higher yielding and more profitable. .....

The long haul International routes are the lowest in Yields. The highest Yield comes from shorthaul.

The long haul international routes are more profitable because the cost drops faster than the Yield does.

[Spinnaker]

So, how long before LCC's try doing international flying? (BTW, I'm trying to stay out of the mudslinging, it's just an honest question here)

After reading Milton's book; he speculates it will happen but doesn't say when. What will it do to the market? It's also rumored the 7E7 would be the future airplane for that work.

[Fido]

So, how long before LCC's try doing international flying? ....

HMY will be starting as soon as they get route rights from the government for the Pacific. Their new president is very well connected.

Zoom is already operating

One or two others are just about ready to start.

As for WestJet and CanJet. Not likely anytime too soon.

[Trader]

Who are the 'other two'---we keep hearing the rumours!

[Guest]

The new 737's are already flying some pretty long haul stuff.

Westjet could possibly be our first scheduled "International" low-cost carrier.

Time will tell.

[AIP]

The new 737's are already flying some pretty long haul stuff.

Westjet could possibly be our first "International" low-cost carrier.

Time will tell.

Brilliant.

That is opposed to HMY and Zoom of course.

[sjsa]

AIP, Im not really sure how you define "low cost carrier".

The traditional LCC is more closely associated with the SWA type operation.

Usually one type of aircraft, non-union, non traditional compensation packages (profit share, stock purchase and the like) and and a more casual or horizontal management structure.

I don't know a lot about Harmony and Zoom, do they fit in that mold or is your definition more broad (ie: anything not Air Canada)?

[Fido]

The currently accepted description of a LCC is:

A simplified airline. with only some complexity.

They don't have a whole bible of rules, just a small red book.

Their fare structure is based upon one way itineraries, but they will build connections.

They base their point of sale through their own internet portal and do not rely on a GDS, although they will display there.

They interline and code-share if needed.

They preach the 'single airplane type', but then have different marks that create their own inefficiencies.

They won't go international unless it is only within the European community or just across one or two borders.

They offer one fare all the time unless the flights are selling out and then they switch fare buckets to a higher yield.

In other words the line between an LCC and a Legacy carrier only exists in those Legacy carriers that have not changed as yet.

[Spinnaker]

I flew HMY recently and although a good airline, I felt the service more inline of a Canada 3000... free drinks, 2 course meal, lots of K Town Grape Juice for free, 3 movies. It's hard to get away with not feeding someone on long flights, even WestJet does it... but they charge money for it. So I don't think Harmony qualifies if there is an actual definition.

I don't know anything about Zoom but would love to hear it. Does anyone know if someone from Zoom posts here?

[Super 80]

Meals that cost $2-$4 to prepare are not where LCC's save the bulk of their money.

The term LCC, atleast in terms of fares seems to be obsolete as all airlines, atleast as far as economy service goes, no matter what their legacy or "LCC" credentials offer an inflight product that is for all practical purposes the same.

Personally, the only difference between AC and WJ to me is that AC has Aeroplan whereas I have something like a grand total of 14 Airmiles. Plus, AC has this really good Pasta and Asparagus salad I get on my flights to Toronto from time to time.

[Dropzone]

The new 737's are already flying some pretty long haul stuff.

Westjet could possibly be our first scheduled "International" low-cost carrier.

I don't know about you but 5 hours in economy on a 737 is not my idea of a good time.

[Spinnaker]

I did 14 hours on AC in economy and that's no cake walk for sure. However, the seat pitch never seems to be a problem on the 737 for over 6 hours Calgary-Cuba or even Halifax-Calgary, it's just fine for me at 6'2". I'm not saying WestJet will do international, it's going to be charter work and maybe seasonal Hawaii skeds with ETOPS imo.

[Guest rattler]

I see AC has the following Seat Pitch.

..................................Pitch Width

A330 42 2x2x2...........31-34" 17.2"

A340-300 30 2x2x2.....32-34" 17.2"

A340-500 42

2x2x2 ......................31-34" 17.2"

B767-300 ER. 2x2x1 or 1x2x2 32-34" 17"

Westjet only shows that their seat pitch is 32". Do they also publish the seat width ???

[Dropzone]

I've always found a widebody to be preferable for anything over 3 hours. For me it's just something about all that extra room in the cabin and the two isles. It's not so much about the seat pitch.

[AIP]

I see AC has the following Seat Pitch.

..................................Pitch Width Recline

A330 42 2x2x2...........31-34" 17.2" 151º

A340-300 30 2x2x2.....32-34" 17.2" 151º

A340-500 42

2x2x2 ......................31-34" 17.2" 180º

B767-300 ER. 2x2x1 or 1x2x2 32-34" 17" 151º

Westjet only shows that their seat pitch is 32". Do they also publish the seat width and recline???

Rattler, are those not the J-class cabin numbers your are quoting there ??

International "Y"

Aircraft

No. of Seats places

Seating Configuration

Seat Pitch

Seat Width

A330 228 2x4x2 31"-34" 17.2"

A340-300 252 2x4x2 32"-34" 17.2"

A340-500 225 2x4x2 31"-34" 17.2"

B767-300ER 159 or 175 or

179 or 187

2x3x2 32"-34" 17"

Hospitality Service- North America

Aircraft Specifications*

Aircraft

No. of Seats places

Seating Configuration

Seat Pitch

Seat Width

B767-200 162 2x3x2 31"-32" 17"

B767-300 185 or 188 2x3x2 31"-32" 17"

A321 142 3x3 32" 17"

A320 120 3x3 31"-32" 17"

A319 106 3x3 31"-32" 17"

CL-65 50 2x2 31" 17"

As you can see, seat pitch is basically the same on all aircraft including the RJ. Seat style is a bit of a different issue though.

SJSA, As for the definition of LCC, other than what is termed the "legacy" carrier, what else is there ?? Charter ?? That seems to be passe. I would say Zoom is an international version of LCC, also Thomas Cook, and Thompson (UK) would probably fall into that category as well wouldn't they ??