Jump to content

Are some of AC's 787s on their way to Rouge?


FA@AC
 Share

Recommended Posts

We all knew to expect it eventually, but is it about to happen?  From the article:  "Separately, ST Aerospace announced that, through its US affiliate company, VT San Antonio Aerospace, it has secured a contract from Air Canada to perform interior reconfiguration services on part of the airline's Boeing 787 Dreamliner fleet."

http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/companies-markets/st-aerospace-secures-contracts-from-lufthansa-cargo-air-canada

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, j.k. said:

AC cannot just "send" 787s to rouge.

My understanding is that AC is free to transfer 787s or 330s to Rouge once the mainline 777/787 fleet reaches (67?) aircraft.

Glad to hear that this is probably just about wifi nonetheless,  

Thanks.

 

Edited by FA@AC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe the reconfiguration contract is for the install of wifi. It is my recollection that a specified number of dreamliners were going to Rouge and were to be reconfigured for that purpose.

But....I am NOT "well-informed"!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rouge can’t have 787’s until Mainline has all 37 deliveries of 787’s.  This won’t occur till mid 2019.  Mainline then must maintain a total of 62 777’s and 787’s. ( 25 and 37)

So 787’s can’t be transferred unless more are ordered for mainline or Rouge oders their own. No order has been placed.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Homerun said:

Rouge can’t have 787’s until Mainline has all 37 deliveries of 787’s.  This won’t occur till mid 2019.  Mainline then must maintain a total of 62 777’s and 787’s. ( 25 and 37)

So 787’s can’t be transferred unless more are ordered for mainline or Rouge oders their own. No order has been placed.   

Question......"can't" is subject to a " let", is it not? And if there is no " cost" to ACPA, might it not find certain offers in consideration of such a let beneficial to the interests of its membership?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:

Lot of variables there.....

Look up all - resident/non resident.... CRA regulations  before signing on....;)

I also recommend you get some company like: The Expatriate Group to give you advice, their fees are well worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, anonymous said:

Why do you care?

You're a funny little guy, aren't you? From questioning if I had any role in the AO lawsuit to suggesting I'm a troll because of posts about SFO, you appear unduly concerned with my interest in aviation-related issues and participation in discussions. You, conversely, don't hesitate to suggest others are foolish if they don't share your vision of the future.

A mild suggestion....give it a rest or simply ignore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, UpperDeck said:

Question......"can't" is subject to a " let", is it not? And if there is no " cost" to ACPA, might it not find certain offers in consideration of such a let beneficial to the interests of its membership?

Anything in the contract can be changed by mutual agreement.  But I don’t think AC would be willing to pay the price that such a change would cost them.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Rich Pulman said:

CRA is easy. If tax is paid on your Chinese income (which it is), none is owed in Canada, even if you remain a Canadian resident

First....what does TAX FREE with regard to the China employment mean if going abroad ?? China and Canada have a tax agreement so what does TAX Free mean in the advertisement??

..

7 hours ago, JL said:

Hi Rich, would that tax rate be accurate if you maintained a Canadian residence?

Residency is an important concept for the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA).

Canadians, of course, can travel and do business far and wide — but never quite far enough to avoid paying taxes. Whether working in a bar in Bangkok or on an oil rig in the Mideast, you may still owe tax on that income because the CRA expects to see a return from all "factual residents" of Canada

Factual residents are those who might be living and working outside Canada for the time being but still have ties to Canada, including, for example, a home, a spouse or dependents who remain in Canada, personal property such as a car, bank accounts, health insurance or a Canadian driver's licence.

To avoid paying tax in Canada on income earned abroad, you have to sever all residential ties. This means you must no longer have a place to live in Canada, must have a residence somewhere else, must have opened financial accounts there, and, if married, must have taken your family with you.

To be considered a non-resident, the time you spend in Canada must be less than 183 days in the tax year. Unlike the U.S., which requires all U.S. citizens to file a tax return even if they have not lived or earned income in the U.S., Canada does not require non-residents to file a tax return unless they earned income in Canada.

Most Canadian snowbirds and other casual travelers — indeed, even some hard-core globetrotters — will not meet the non-resident criteria. They will remain Canadian residents as far as the CRA is concerned and 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/02/2018 at 1:26 AM, FA@AC said:

My understanding is that AC is free to transfer 787s or 330s to Rouge once the mainline 777/787 fleet reaches (67?) aircraft.

Glad to hear that this is probably just about wifi nonetheless,  

Thanks.

 

Not exactly correct.

The LCC is still limited to 20-25 WB jets (WJA) in the contract.

After all 787 deliveries arrive and AC operates a minimum of 62 777/787 combined three LCC may start a WJA replacement and subject to conditions.

LCC WJA may be replaced 1:1 for every Mainline 767/330 that is replaced with a newer WJA (less than 10,000 hour). The LCC WJA must be equivalent or smaller than the Mainline replacement and is limited to 767/330/787.

or, if 787s are added in addition to the firm orders, options are exercised etc, 767s may be replaced at the LCC 1:1.

AC is getting 6 new (used) 330s. If they are under 10k hours, where they go and how they use them is anyone's guess. But I suspect mainline replacements for the 767.

 

I believe AC is far more likely to move toward NJA ETOPS - ie. 321neo LR at the LCC: They have the authority/ability to grow that fleet now from the last contract, it will allow the 767s - which were are all best 767s from mainline and some newer incremental aircraft from Hawaiian (ie. not in dire need of replacement) to deploy on further routes, plus airplanes are expensive, a 787 is really expensive. Having to buy 2 787s to get one to Rouge is even more expensive. 321s, while still expensive, are cheaper and they won't have to grow mainline to get them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, UpperDeck said:

I don't believe the reconfiguration contract is for the install of wifi. It is my recollection that a specified number of dreamliners were going to Rouge and were to be reconfigured for that purpose.

But....I am NOT "well-informed"!

You clearly aren't.

Could be interior installation on new 787s too. I don't know the exact details of the contract you're referring to, but it's definitely not rouge interiors for 787s.

Nice try.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, j.k. said:

Not exactly correct.

The LCC is still limited to 20-25 WB jets (WJA) in the contract.

After all 787 deliveries arrive and AC operates a minimum of 62 777/787 combined three LCC may start a WJA replacement and subject to conditions.

LCC WJA may be replaced 1:1 for every Mainline 767/330 that is replaced with a newer WJA (less than 10,000 hour). The LCC WJA must be equivalent or smaller than the Mainline replacement and is limited to 767/330/787.

or, if 787s are added in addition to the firm orders, options are exercised etc, 767s may be replaced at the LCC 1:1.

AC is getting 6 new (used) 330s. If they are under 10k hours, where they go and how they use them is anyone's guess. But I suspect mainline replacements for the 767.

 

I believe AC is far more likely to move toward NJA ETOPS - ie. 321neo LR at the LCC: They have the authority/ability to grow that fleet now from the last contract, it will allow the 767s - which were are all best 767s from mainline and some newer incremental aircraft from Hawaiian (ie. not in dire need of replacement) to deploy on further routes, plus airplanes are expensive, a 787 is really expensive. Having to buy 2 787s to get one to Rouge is even more expensive. 321s, while still expensive, are cheaper and they won't have to grow mainline to get them.

You obviously well understand the limitations on the Rouge fleet which eminate from the ACPA collective agreement.

How do you see the Rouge fleet evolving as well as the application of the RRA provisions?

I guess it is a two part question - what should AC do vs what will AC do? It seems on the analyst calls that Ben Smith makes reference to AC being able to manage capacity response (both upwards and downwards) by keeping a limited stable of low cost of ownership fleet inventory. The 767’s seem to be the main component of that low cost of ownership fleet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no tax expert, far from it actually, but I'm pretty sure there are ways to reduce, or eliminate the tax burden if you work offshore.

Regardless, you can either elect to pay some sort of minimal tax on 500K US, or give away a significant percentage of your substantially smaller & lower value earnings to Canada and the province of your choosing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, j.k. said:

You clearly aren't.

Could be interior installation on new 787s too. I don't know the exact details of the contract you're referring to, but it's definitely not rouge interiors for 787s.

Nice try.

Don't understand " nice try". I didn't reference contract. You said that work to be done in San Antonio was wifi install. I looked at company website and they advertise expertise in reconfigs and heavy maintenance. No reference to 787's or ife. Someone told me that wifi installs to date done in Far East. And so....question asked...why this contract?

Homerun politely made it clear that contractual provisions restricted Rouge access to 787 aircraft and variation of the contractual terms was very unlikely. That was helpful in assuaging concerns.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, j.k. said:

Not exactly correct.

The LCC is still limited to 20-25 WB jets (WJA) in the contract.

After all 787 deliveries arrive and AC operates a minimum of 62 777/787 combined three LCC may start a WJA replacement and subject to conditions.

LCC WJA may be replaced 1:1 for every Mainline 767/330 that is replaced with a newer WJA (less than 10,000 hour). The LCC WJA must be equivalent or smaller than the Mainline replacement and is limited to 767/330/787.

or, if 787s are added in addition to the firm orders, options are exercised etc, 767s may be replaced at the LCC 1:1.

AC is getting 6 new (used) 330s. If they are under 10k hours, where they go and how they use them is anyone's guess. But I suspect mainline replacements for the 767.

Thanks for the detailed explanation.

I'm sure AC would find the 321 LR a good fit for Rouge's TATL routes, but I wonder if they'd be too much airplane for the parts of the Rouge network that don't need the LR's range.  I understand that the 321 LR is considerably more expensive than the 321 NEO.

Some of Rouge's 319s are getting long in the tooth as well.  Any inklings as to what their eventual replacement might be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of legal ways but that is why I suggested folks should spend a $$$ and get advice from the people who counsel expats for a living re tax laws, residency etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FA@AC said:

I'm sure AC would find the 321 LR a good fit for Rouge's TATL routes, but I wonder if they'd be too much airplane for the parts of the Rouge network that don't need the LR's range.  I understand that the 321 LR is considerably more expensive than the 321 NEO.

I'm not sure it is the right plane at the density Rouge would operate it at. To get the A321LR to 4000nm you're losing an additional LD3-45 worth of cargo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...