Porter going public via IPO

[MD2]

I must say I envy the naiveté of some who perceive being an "old-timer" on a forum as a sign of distinction and forget past experiences. A decade ago the same "experts" thought pay-cuts would never come at AC or that the ONEX deal was bad and buying CAIL this way would be great and so on. Do they ever wonder how that worked-out? Speaking of great quotes, how about "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results"?

ACSideStick, not that it is any of your concern what I do or where I do it, but since you brought it up, doesn't it bother you to have been lied to, asked to take pay-cuts and work harder while your executives have given themselves million dollar bonuses and retreated to their palaces in Europe? No, I suppose not! I'm no aviation guru, but have you never wondered if your corporation focused on its own business and made its product more appealing, as opposed to trying to drive competition out of business, people would actually want to fly it? Perhaps not! I'm happy for you that you got yourself a back door pass into AC and somehow or other a seat next to a "sidestick" as you say, but never mind arrogant comments about the Dash8 which is even more troubling coming from a Canadian knowing that the Dash8 is the back bone of Aviation in this country and many others around the world and frankly there is such a thing as the right aircraft for the mission.

And if Mr. Bean is one of the four founders of WJ doing a little ranting here on the side, can you ask him please how was his own IPO any more special? WJ started on about 35 millions and three old "footballs", and went public in about the same time, how was that so much more special? Although as said by rudder, this is a risk that such well-known underwriters have agreed to take, so it must have been well wroth their while. Enjoy the ride.

[Thebean]

I must say I envy the naiveté of some who perceive being an "old-timer" on a forum as a sign of distinction and forget past experiences. A decade ago the same "experts" thought pay-cuts would never come at AC or that the ONEX deal was bad and buying CAIL this way would be great and so on. Do they ever wonder how that worked-out? Speaking of great quotes, how about "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results"?

ACSideStick, not that it is any of your concern what I do or where I do it, but since you brought it up, doesn't it bother you to have been lied to, asked to take pay-cuts and work harder while your executives have given themselves million dollar bonuses and retreated to their palaces in Europe? No, I suppose not! I'm no aviation guru, but have you never wondered if your corporation focused on its own business and made its product more appealing, as opposed to trying to drive competition out of business, people would actually want to fly it? Perhaps not! I'm happy for you that you got yourself a back door pass into AC and somehow or other a seat next to a "sidestick" as you say, but never mind arrogant comments about the Dash8 which is even more troubling coming from a Canadian knowing that the Dash8 is the back bone of Aviation in this country and many others around the world and frankly there is such a thing as the right aircraft for the mission.

And if Mr. Bean is one of the four founders of WJ doing a little ranting here on the side, can you ask him please how was his own IPO any more special? WJ started on about 35 millions and three old "footballs", and went public in about the same time, how was that so much more special? Although as said by rudder, this is a risk that such well-known underwriters have agreed to take, so it must have been well wroth their while. Enjoy the ride.

If you can't see the difference, which is as obvious as a raisin in a box of Uncle Ben's rice, there's not much point attempting to point it out to you.

[Kip Powick]

I must say I envy the naiveté of some who perceive being an "old-timer" on a forum as a sign of distinction and forget past experiences. A decade ago the same "experts" thought pay-cuts would never come at AC or that the ONEX deal was bad and buying CAIL this way would be great and so on. Do they ever wonder how that worked-out? Speaking of great quotes, how about "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results"?

ACSideStick, not that it is any of your concern what I do or where I do it, but since you brought it up, doesn't it bother you to have been lied to, asked to take pay-cuts and work harder while your executives have given themselves million dollar bonuses and retreated to their palaces in Europe? No, I suppose not! I'm no aviation guru, but have you never wondered if your corporation focused on its own business and made its product more appealing, as opposed to trying to drive competition out of business, people would actually want to fly it? Perhaps not! I'm happy for you that you got yourself a back door pass into AC and somehow or other a seat next to a "sidestick" as you say, but never mind arrogant comments about the Dash8 which is even more troubling coming from a Canadian knowing that the Dash8 is the back bone of Aviation in this country and many others around the world and frankly there is such a thing as the right aircraft for the mission.

And if Mr. Bean is one of the four founders of WJ doing a little ranting here on the side, can you ask him please how was his own IPO any more special? WJ started on about 35 millions and three old "footballs", and went public in about the same time, how was that so much more special? Although as said by rudder, this is a risk that such well-known underwriters have agreed to take, so it must have been well wroth their while. Enjoy the ride.

[Guest ACSideStick]

M2,

Im sitting on my deck, after a nice steak, trying to avoid the dishes. I'm wondering how to respond or if I should even bother.

Where to start - - -hmm ok, lets go with backbone of the Canadian Aviation industry.

As near as I can tell, there are 115 Dash 8s in Canada. That is broken down into 62 100s, 35 300s, and 18 400s. If you sit them all in the same spot and fill them with bums, youll have about 5304 seats filled.

Here is a breakdown of Air Canada Fleet

777s =5808 seats

300-300 =2120 seats

767-300 =6330 seats

A319,20,21 = 11826 seats

EMJ =5280 seats

Total for AC =31364seats

Jazz

CRJ 705/100/200 =4050

WestJet

I based this number on the 737-700 as I dont know the breakdown of the 88 aircraft.

88x140seats=11968

I wont bother to add in the 320s and 737s flown by other Canadian operators, but clearly, the -8 doesnt even make an dent as far as a total canadian-wide fleet goes, not to mention that both AC and WJ are flying utilizing these aircraft on about 20 hrs per day.

Only about 82 of the -8s are used as serious sked machines, the others are charters or take weekends off etc.

Clearly the 320s or the 737s are the Backbone of Canadian aviation. Followed next by the 767s, 777s, and EMJ all which carry more per day than -8s.

Lets not even get started on the ASM per aircraft, but as Bean has mentioned elsewhere, 1 777 out of Vancouver to Heathrow has more in 1 flight than Porters entire combined fleet day.

I point this out, because youve made quite a statement that no one wants to fly AC. Based on ACs high load factors (on many routes nearing 100%), If no one wants to travel on AC, who are these 100000+ per day that are doing so, and how come the people I meet at the door are so pleasant and grateful for a exceptional travel experience?

You seem quite offended that I would dare disparage the -8. None of what I said about the aircraft can really be disputed, no matter how badly you want it not to be so. Just the facts maam.

If YTZ had an 8000 ft runway, and people were given a same-price choice, but one trip to YHZ was an hour and a half shorter with movies etc on a wide body, do you really think anyone would choose the turboprop through YOW?

They choose it for convenience only and shortly, as other choices become available in YTZ, they will choose that convenience strictly on price. Do you not think its quite a coincidence that the IPO announcement happens about the same time as new competition is announced?

A quick check of Porters website shows them matching AC dollar for dollar on any given routes. What is going to happen to Porters already proven weak financial position when Jazz begins operating for a lower, sustained price, when Porter couldnt fill airplanes 50% full before they arrived.

As you said, hang on for the ride (or was that slide?). Just remember to put your feet down in the sand so you dont bump you rear too hard.

Porter has stepped out of the Right aircraft for the right mission quite early in the game. Taking people from YTZ to YHZ via YOW is way too far for the crowd now used to movies, real toilets etc.

The Dash-8 program was on it's last legs a few years ago, before Porter. A good friend of mine, and I won't say his name, but his initial are SG if you should happen to know him, was the head of development for deHavilland on the -400 project. I remember when he was resigning to move to Wichita to a new Company because the -400 program was about to be closed down. Porter's order changed all that, and now he still lives in Brampton. He was the first one to tell you that the -8 was finished.

Lastly, No one would be happier than me to see a certain exiled thief off to the Clink, just like the CEO of Swissair, who pulled some similar moves.

BTW, I didnt manage any back door anything. I was hired with over 7000 hrs of heavy turbine command time. I was interviewed, medically assessed, assessed in a simulator, and then told it was enough. Your snide comments of my career path, while completely false, show a bias against AC for whatever reason you seem to have.

[Lakelad]

......off to the Clink, just like the CEO of Swissair, who pulled some similar moves.

Understand the sentiment, but...

[rudder]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/investment-ideas/porter-aviations-ipo-figuring-the-flight-plan/article1539038/

[Thebean]

Regardless, it is a "bought deal" so the only parties that will lose if there is no belief that the deal is properly valued are the group of underwriters.

What makes you think this is a bought deal?

[AvWatcher]

Let's go back to Porter's financial statements. Their accounting is the classic reason so many airlines run into financial problems. They don't account for maintenance correctly. Every hour you fly an aircraft, is an hour closer to an A, B, C or D check (or whatever checks must be done) and another hour on time/landing limited parts. When you start out as an airline with brand new equipment, if you don't account for those future maintenance expeditures, you fool yourself into thinking you're making (or in Porter's case, losing less) money, when your true situation is much worse. What happens now using their "charged as incurred" philosophy, is that at one point in the future, when a bunch of aircraft all hit "D" checks at the same time, as well as engine overhauls, their financial statements tank, and everyone wonders why.

The only airlines that should use "charge as incurred" maintenance accounting are airlines who have a mix of new and old aircraft, and whose maintenance expenses as a result are fairly consistent.

It's not only just maintenance materials etc. that go up; salaries, in the form of mechanics, aircraft needed for maintenance spares for repairs, and for planned checks will tank Porter's CASM as well. So having a fleet with an average age of 1 1/2 years is good - but what is coming around the corner needs to be recognized for potential investors.

Note that while Porter has entered into a "power by the hour" arrangement for their engines, they are only accounting for the expense when the engine goes in for work, which again is delaying their costs instead of accounting for them when the hours are incurred.

It's classic startup airline philosophy, and one reason so many airlines don't make it very far down the runway. And one would think why Porter wants to get its money now, before those costs start showing up on their statements. I'm not saying Porter won't make it, it just would be nice to see what the true financial situation is now, in order to project what it could be in the future.

[SkyBlazer]

I doubt you know much about economics and finance. You and other "cloak & dagger" type characters are more than likely some low level managers of your said companies,

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Thanks MD2 for entering the game late into the third period with all the knowledge of a 4yr old ! It appears your passionate outburst is about as accurate as a blind man golfing !!!

SB

[rudder]

What makes you think this is a bought deal?

PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION

Pursuant to an underwriting agreement dated , 2010 between the Corporation and the Underwriters (the

“Underwriting Agreement”), the Corporation has agreed to sell and each of the Underwriters has severally agreed

to purchase the Offered Shares on or about , 2010 or such later date as the Corporation and the Underwriters may

agree, but in any event not later than , 2010, at a price of $ per Offered Share payable in cash to the Corporation

against delivery of the Offered Shares. RBC Dominion Securities Inc. is lead manager and sole book runner of the

Offering.

The obligations of the Underwriters are several and neither joint nor joint and several and may be terminated at their

discretion on the basis of their assessment of the state of the financial markets and may also be terminated upon the

occurrence of certain stated events.

The Underwriting Agreement provides that the Underwriters must buy all of the Offered Shares if they buy any of

them. However, the Underwriters are not required to take or pay for the Offered Shares covered by the Over-

Allotment Option described below. The Underwriters are entitled under the Underwriting Agreement to

indemnification by the Corporation against certain liabilities and expenses.

[Thebean]

The Porter deal is not a bought deal.

Let’s take a hard look at Porter's numbers.

Before doing so, let’s be clear that no one is criticizing Porter’s product. As was the case with Roots, all accounts suggest it is a fine product and a well respected brand.

This is not an attack on the people who work at Porter. The issue is the economics at play.

Porter and the media like to point out its low break even load factor as if it were locked in stone. It isn’t.

BELF is simply a function of two completely variable metrics: cost per asm including interest expense divided by yield per RPM.

There are three significant issues facing Porter moving forward that will dramatically change their BELF.

1. Maintenance

As of the end of May 2010, Porter will have a total of 20 Q400’s, all of which remain under manufacturer’s warranty. Four aircraft will fall off warranty over the balance of the year. As it stands, Porter’s maintenance costs are significantly understated, resulting in a lower reported casm. Porter is not offside in the way it reports its maintenance expense as you can’t expense costs that haven’t yet occurred. However, the increased costs will occur as the fleet ages.

Note that Porter’s maintenance costs represented 3.06% of revenues in 2009. Horizon, with a larger fleet of identical Q400’s, as well as 70 seat RJ’s, had maintenance costs representing about 8.5% of total costs. Porter’s maintenance expense will increase to a number much closer to Horizon’s than the numbers currently reported. This will force casm, and therefore, their BELF up.

2. Fuel

It’s going up, for everyone. This will force casm and BELF up.

3. Yields

This is the big one. Porter has been able to extract enormous yields due to its status as the monopolist airline operating from the downtown airport in Canada’s largest aviation market, Toronto. Their 2009 yield per RPM was 48.14 cents with an average fare of $167.54 over a 348 mile asl, (about the same as Calgary-Saskatoon). If an airline attempted to operate Calgary –Saskatoon with an average fare of $167 each way, it would be bankrupt in 3 months or less.

Compare this to Jazz, with a 392 mile asl and 2009 yields of 40.3 cents, or Horizon with 26.7 cents on a 322 mile asl.

The monopoly is coming to an end and with competition, yields will fall. There is no getting around this.

Although falling yields will result in lower fares, the very nature of Porter’s product makes any significant price stimulation due to lower fares unlikely. Dropping an average fare of $167.54 between Montreal and Toronto by $25 results in an average fare of $143.41 each way, excluding taxes. This is not going to stimulate a mad rush of new passengers to YTZ, especially when fares from YYZ to YUL are as low as $29 each way.

Passengers purely motivated by low fares will tend to gravitate to YYZ. There is a finite amount of price insensitive traffic to be fought over in any aviation market and the addition of competition in the marketplace, in of itself, will absorb pretty much all the new traffic generated.

So what happens to Porter’s numbers as these issues start to appear?

Using 2009 as a baseline, with its operating loss of $4.48m, let’s assume that maintenance costs will swell to 5% of expenses, (still well below Horizon’s 8%), and fuel costs increase 5% over the year. Let’s say that the introduction of competition in the marketplace knocks the average fare down by a modest $25.13 cents each way, but that lower fares increase the load factor by 5% points. We’ll ignore additional costs incurred as a result higher load factors.

Such a scenario would result in the annual operating loss ballooning to -$18.2m, with the loss including interest jumping to -$27.49m. Margins would be -12.84% and -19.37% respectively. BELF would jump to 63.2% with loads up 5% pts to 52.9%. In order to break-even, loads would have to jump 15.5% points from 47.9% to 63.4%.

Supposing all costs staying the same but with the same $25 reduction in average one way fares as a result of competition, with loads up 5% points. Margins would be -9.7% and -16.2%. BELF would inflate to 61.5% with loads up 5% pts to 52.9%. In order to break-even, loads would have to jump 13.5% points.

The numbers can be “what if’d” forever, as permutations and combinations of these three major issues can be developed ad nauseum. You can be sure the same math is being done by others both on Bay Street and elsewhere.

To add a little fuel to the fire, it would appear that Porter has about 8,085,965 shares outstanding, (a net loss of $4.609m divided by a reported eps of -57 cents).

Let’s say the IPO is successful raising $120 million at $10 a share, which would be outstanding given its history of producing negative EPS.

That would result in 20,085,965 shares floating in the marketplace and a market cap of $200.1m. Growth airlines tend to trade in the 15x eps range, meaning in order to support the $10 share price, Porter needs to produce an EPS of at least 66 cents, or a net profit of $13.4m a year.

If the stock goes public at $5, they need earnings of $10.7m to support the share price. The market cap would be $160.4m.

I’d be curious to see who can develop a plausible scenario that could result in Porter generating a net profit of $10.7m a year, let alone $13.4m a year given the situation facing them.

Then there's the other exit strategy: Acquisition. Buying 51% of the company, even with a 20% lift, would cost someone $96.4 million at a $5 stock price and $120.7m at $10. That’s petty cash for a number of prospective buyers if they chose to do so. You can see why suitors might not be particularly interested in paying even that price given the scenarios noted above.

So, once again, you can see why there is a tremendous amount of skepticism in the marketplace when it comes to Porter story. The numbers just don’t add up.

[SkyBlazer]

Changing Gears again....

I understand that some of the Pilots Hired received shares at a reduced value as an incentive (much like WS pre IPO)

What were the value or list price on those shares and surely there is a large amount of money to be made here no?

Heck I hope that lightening strikes twice and some of you can actually pay off your homes.... is that a possibility?

SB

[Thebean]

Changing Gears again....

I understand that some of the Pilots Hired received shares at a reduced value as an incentive (much like WS pre IPO)

What were the value or list price on those shares and surely there is a large amount of money to be made here no?

Heck I hope that lightening strikes twice and some of you can actually pay off your homes.... is that a possibility?

SB

Page 65 of the Prospectus has the details.

3 directors split 60,000 shares at a strike price of $5.

5 former and existing executive officers split 519,500 shares at $5.36

51 other employees, as a group, split up 2,391,675 shares at $4.93.

The options expire Nov 1 2015 and are locked up for at least 6 months after the IPO. If the shares leap out of the gate, it is possible that the lock up would be waived after about 45 days. If the shares sink like a stone, it is possible the consortium might demand that the lock up be extended well beyond 180 days in order to protect the folks who bought in to the deal.

Once public, Porter will be issuing quarterly numbers like the other 18 or so publicly traded airlines out there so it will be pretty easy to follow their progress. The claims of profitability will have to be backed by solid data.

As alluded to above, I challenge anyone to develop a plausible scenario that has Porter producing an EPS of 33 cents that, with a 15x multiple, would justify a $5 share price, or a 50 cent EPS that would justify a $7.50 share price.

Unless they are going to be able to maintain the YTZ monopoly in perpetuity, that's going to be a tough one to buy into.

[MD2]

ACSideStick, you amuse me! I think I may remember you and likes of you from a decade ago. Is there enough room for you and your ego in your flight deck, or do you have to buy a seat for it in the back? Are you one of those that kisses itself in the mirror and sends flowers too? You should change your handle to "ACE + SideStick". There is no doubt that the 737 is the back bone of aviation in the world and is the most successful airplane ever built. We were talking about planes made in Canada chum. It amuses me that you use the 767 and EMJ in the same sentence, perchance fly one? I'm sure it's a sporty little thing, but comparing it with B767? There is no doubt about Boeing product that interestingly enough had a role at de Havilland which may have been before your time ace. The story of you and your thousands of hours reminds me of the thousands of hours I've spent in the bathroom of my corporate Boeing. Have fun with your side stick all the same ace!!

[MD2]

Good post Mr. Bean. It looks like you made up the missed culture classes!! I don't know how close you are to your board room, but as you speak, they may looking at this deal with great interest. For pure investment purposes, it seems that Porter is going to surpass Westjet. All the numbers so far seem to indicate that. Compare the initial capital (Porter was the highest ever in Canada and second in NA only to Jetblue not by far), the initial IPO which dwarfs Westjet's IPO, the bankers endorsing the deal, the big names behind it, all seem to indicate Porter is going to do really well at the TSX. I've decided to buy into it, just not sure how much. Why else would all these big banks endorse it? What think you?

[Cargo Agent]

ACSideStick, you amuse me! I think I may remember you and likes of you from a decade ago. Is there enough room for you and your ego in your flight deck, or do you have to buy a seat for it in the back? Are you one of those that kisses itself in the mirror and sends flowers too? You should change your handle to "ACE + SideStick". There is no doubt that the 737 is the back bone of aviation in the world and is the most successful airplane ever built. We were talking about planes made in Canada chum. It amuses me that you use the 767 and EMJ in the same sentence, perchance fly one? I'm sure it's a sporty little thing, but comparing it with B767? There is no doubt about Boeing product that interestingly enough had a role at de Havilland which may have been before your time ace. The story of you and your thousands of hours reminds me of the thousands of hours I've spent in the bathroom of my corporate Boeing. Have fun with your side stick all the same ace!!

What a pathetic reply. Keep up the personnel attacks and never dispute the actual numbers that seem to point to Porter being the house of cards many here suspected it was.

[Kip Powick]

ACSideStick, you amuse me! I think I may remember you and likes of you from a decade ago. Is there enough room for you and your ego in your flight deck, or do you have to buy a seat for it in the back? Are you one of those that kisses itself in the mirror and sends flowers too? You should change your handle to "ACE + SideStick". .............................. We were talking about planes made in Canada chum. It amuses me that you use the 767 and EMJ in the same sentence, perchance fly one? I'm sure it's a sporty little thing, but comparing it with B767? There is no doubt about Boeing product that interestingly enough had a role at de Havilland which may have been before your time ace. The story of you and your thousands of hours reminds me of the thousands of hours I've spent in the bathroom of my corporate Boeing. Have fun with your side stick all the same ace!!

[Guest ACSideStick]

Interesting talk of mirrors, egos, and arrogance. Perhaps a little self-assesment for yourself would be in order.

And no, I don't fly an EMJ, though it is a great airplane, and folks really like flying in them.

If your spending thousands of hours in the lav, I suggest you stop or you'll go blind.

BTW Did you get an interview 10 years ago, or just a standard PFO. Sounds like the system worked.

[dr1]

If your spending thousands of hours in the lav, I suggest you stop or you'll go blind.

[chockalicious]

We used to get a better class of troll around here.

[Guest ACSideStick]

MD2, I just went back to reread your post to see if I had infact misunderstood your intent went you said that the Dash-8 is the "Backbone of Canadian Aviation" I have included your quotes in my reply so that you cannot edit after the fact to make your case.

Quote

"which is even more troubling coming from a Canadian knowing that the Dash8 is the back bone of Aviation in this country and many others around the world"

In your next reply, you said

Qoute

"There is no doubt that the 737 is the back bone of aviation in the world and is the most successful airplane ever built. We were talking about airplanes made in Canada, Chum!"

So which is it,

The Dash-8 is the backbone of the Canadian Aviation Industry because;

a) we were talking about airplanes made in Canada - if that is the case, then it cannot be the backbone of other countries aviation industries as you have claimed as the qualifier that the airplane has to be made in those countries.

Or Choice B

You've claimed the Dash-8 is the backbone of the Canadian Aviation Industry because it it "carries the load" which I have shown, in a previous post, clearly it does not. Not even close.

I offered a realworld evaluation of a Dash-8. I've listened to people for years complain about it, and am simply repeating the comments I've heard THOUSANDS of times. I'm telling you that people can't wait to get off it, and your trying to make the point that people can't wait to get ON it.

You have taken repeated swipes at me personally for reasons I have no idea why. You don't know me, you can't even guess what airplane I fly, though you've taken several stabs at it.

I think I did Porter a disservice when I accused them of being associated with the likes of you. I am starting to see your picture a bit clearer now, as are the rest of this community. It was quite telling when you said "I think I may remember you and likes of you from a decade ago." You seem to have a very deep-seeded hatred of all things AC (and maybe WJ as well). Very telling, Very Small.

When you spend those thousands of hours in the Lav, does your Joystick wire reach that far, or do you just hit escape and pause your FltSimX while you finish.

Years ago we had two world class trolls on this board who fished for responses. Eventually they got bored and left. Maybe your time is up.

[SkyBlazer]

Page 65 of the Prospectus has the details.

3 directors split 60,000 shares at a strike price of $5.

5 former and existing executive officers split 519,500 shares at $5.36

51 other employees, as a group, split up 2,391,675 shares at $4.93.

The options expire Nov 1 2015 and are locked up for at least 6 months after the IPO. If the shares leap out of the gate, it is possible that the lock up would be waived after about 45 days. If the shares sink like a stone, it is possible the consortium might demand that the lock up be extended well beyond 180 days in order to protect the folks who bought in to the deal.

Once public, Porter will be issuing quarterly numbers like the other 18 or so publicly traded airlines out there so it will be pretty easy to follow their progress. The claims of profitability will have to be backed by solid data.

As alluded to above, I challenge anyone to develop a plausible scenario that has Porter producing an EPS of 33 cents that, with a 15x multiple, would justify a $5 share price, or a 50 cent EPS that would justify a $7.50 share price.

Unless they are going to be able to maintain the YTZ monopoly in perpetuity, that's going to be a tough one to buy into.

Thanks Bean,

Missed that - so assuming the other 51 are indeed pilots that gives them just under 47k shares each..... a two or three dollar rise .. while being much better than my existing options certainly isnt a winfall. I had thought that the shares were issued to the pilots at pennies - but must have been something I was told by a Porter Captain after a pint or two at the GluePot in YOW.

SB

[MD2]

MD2,...You have taken repeated swipes at me personally for reasons I have no idea why. You don't know me, you can't even guess what airplane I fly, though you've taken several stabs at it...

The same can be said about you ace. It is not my intention to engage in futile arguments. I read the comments here from time to time but usually find them very predictable and boring involving Air Canada cool aid drinkers fighting with others. Years ago, it used to be with CAIL, then C3, Westjet, etc. I'm sure there are normal Air Canada folks who know their system is broken and want to fix it and have a rewarding life, but some just keep drinking that cool aid! To each their own. And no chum, Air Canada could not afford me. I don't hate Westjet either, in fact I like them since their stock has always made me money and their initial rise in a very competitive environment and a tough time was admirable. Porter also does really well with business people. In the past, Wardair, CAIL, even C3 were quite good and in fact the ONEX deal with CAIL culture might have worked better, but that's an old story.

As for the DH8, I'd say you have not flown in the back of a Q400. People only care about their seat area and comfort and service. They prefer the generous space on a Q400 than being couped up on a 757. The DH8 is the back bone of aviation in this country because of its ability to reach remote places and the fact that it is home made, where is your patriotism?! B737 undoubtedly is the most successful airplane in the world stage. I don't have to tell you that, stats do. To my mind, Boeing is a better product, but I'm sure some swear by the Airbus. Anyhow, Anything else you want to know, please don't ask me! I wish you well, enjoy your airplane with the sidestick, enjoy your stake, and safe flying.

[ILB]

As for the DH8, I'd say you have not flown in the back of a Q400. People only care about their seat area and comfort and service. They prefer the generous space on a Q400 than being couped up on a 757. The DH8 is the back bone of aviation in this country because of its ability to reach remote places and the fact that it is home made, where is your patriotism?!

I've ridden in the back of Horizon's Q400s. I enjoyed the ride, but then I've enjoyed riding in the back of Metro IVs too. I'd rather ride in the back of a jet, particularly when icing or CBs or flight duration are an issue.

If you were to informally survey the pilot, the aviation, and the non-aviation communities, I think very few Canadians would consider the DH8 the backbone of Canadian aviation. There are other DeHavilland products that come to mind far more readily, even if their claim to being the "backbone" are now more nostalgic than practical.

I don't understand your comment about "ability to reach remote places..." Are you saying that the DH8s can and do go places other twin-turboprops can't? I've seen other DeHavilland products do some amazing things, but the DH8 isn't really used in that role in Canada, unless you call YTZ remote.

And patriotism? Are you serious? Patriotism doesn't pay the bills in aviation. Patriotism, when it isn't being used as a refuge for scoundrels, is fine and good. Keep in mind though that patriotism only sells very sporadically in Canada. When the emotions fade, he who has the best price will sell the most seats, Canadian-content or no Canadian-content. Whether he who has the best price can sustain those prices and remain viable is another story...

[Thebean]

Thanks Bean,

Missed that - so assuming the other 51 are indeed pilots that gives them just under 47k shares each..... a two or three dollar rise .. while being much better than my existing options certainly isnt a winfall. I had thought that the shares were issued to the pilots at pennies - but must have been something I was told by a Porter Captain after a pint or two at the GluePot in YOW.

SB

That assumes those shares are allocated equally amongst the pilot group. I don't know if that's the case, but I'd be willing to bet you lunch at Huggos on the Rocks that it isn't.