Subsidizing AC

[Seeker]

taking advantage of a situation....is morally wrong

!!!!!!

Do you really want to start discussing morality?

[Guest kevbert]

Here's one: 16 million dollar granite wall in terminal new. How about 16 million dollars towards cell phone coverage?

[Guest kevbert]

I agree. Maybe the GTAA will realize they don't need a 16 million dollar granite wall in terminal new. Maybe an investment in cell phone towers would be better?

Airports and Navcan are the only businesses where they think that every cost is fixed and has to be recovered (well, maybe the 407 ETR too). How about if your customer is suffering, maybe you should cut back a bit?

[Guest kevbert]

I've never said that AC wasn't bloated and inefficient - it is.

But what has shocked me for the past two years is the airports and Navcan have seen AC shrink and lose money (remember, it is major customer) and never thought that if their customer goes down, so do they. Costs weren't cut, they were just allocated over fewer flights and landings. They should have woken up and realized that their main source of revenue was in real trouble - and now it is. Not only does this help inefficient AC get its house in order, same with the airports and Navcan.

[dagger]

Actually c3 was in significant arreas to the airports and NavCda, and those fees were never recovered. Nor was service ever denied C3 because it was in arrears.

Just for the record.

[dagger]

Air Canada liquidation could act like a reverse pyramid scheme on the entire Canadian air sector - assuming foreign carriers mainly upgauge and the replacement domestic capacity is less than what disappears with AC. NavCda can't reduce ATC coverage just because there are fewer flights. It has billions of dollars in equipment. therefore, like the airports whose revenues are primarily volume based - they need to maximize activity, maximize takeoffs and landings, etc - any liquidation of AC will see the existing burden of infrastructure costs borne by a reduced number of flights. The cost per flight will go up, hence the burden carried per passenger.

This whole system of ATC and locally controlled airports was devised when we had two national carriers, AC and CP, but the merger didn't remove much capacity or activity (though it should have in order to produce a sounder AC). When absorbed Royal and Canjet (version 1), then went under, the loss of activity was reflected in higher fees on the remaining carriers. But that activity is being replaced slowly. The key is whether an AC liquidation would see each and every AC and Jazz flight replaced by an equivalent number of flights. Like I said, some intl carriers will merely upgauge. Domestically, Clive Beddoe keeps saying there is too much capacity. I'll take him at his word. That means the replacement capacity for a liquidated AC won't be 100% of what leaves the market.

[dagger]

Air Canada liquidation could act like a reverse pyramid scheme on the entire Canadian air sector - assuming foreign carriers mainly upgauge and the replacement domestic capacity is less than what disappears with AC. NavCda can't reduce ATC coverage just because there are fewer flights. It has billions of dollars in equipment. therefore, like the airports whose revenues are primarily volume based - they need to maximize activity, maximize takeoffs and landings, etc - any liquidation of AC will see the existing burden of infrastructure costs borne by a reduced number of flights. The cost per flight will go up, hence the burden carried per passenger.

This whole system of ATC and locally controlled airports was devised when we had two national carriers, AC and CP, but the merger didn't remove much capacity or activity (though it should have in order to produce a sounder AC). When C3 absorbed Royal and Canjet (version 1), then went under, the loss of activity was reflected in higher fees on the remaining carriers. But that activity is being replaced slowly. The key is whether an AC liquidation would see each and every AC and Jazz flight replaced by an equivalent number of flights. Like I said, some intl carriers will merely upgauge. Domestically, Clive Beddoe keeps saying there is too much capacity. I'll take him at his word. That means the replacement capacity for a liquidated AC won't be 100% of what leaves the market.

[Guest mars]

NAVCAN get it's house in order? Well yes, exec salaries are ridiculously high and labour relations is pitiful, but costs to the user? Boy, people have short memories or else have no idea of what they are speaking.

When NAVCAN took over from TC there were about 6500 people who transfered being deemed essential to the ANS. Well, that was soon down to less than 5200, a 20% cut. The fees charged, even after the recent 3% hike, are still lower than the previously existing air tax (can't remember it's name). In fact during the years 99-01 NAVACN returned over 500 million in excess collected fees to the airlines. Was it returned to the ticket holders who paid an extra levy? No, I didn't think so. Unfortunately for the airlines the current structure of NAVCAN will mean higher fees in rough times as the company must break even under federal legislation.(something that was drilled into employees when they refused to negotiate contracts while giving the 'extra' fees back).

Oh, and those of you who speak of NAVCAN folding are partially right. The company known as 'NAVCAN' could fold, but the provision of ATC and other ANS services would have to continue either under another federally mandated company or maybe even returned to TC. So as a result the vast majority of NAVCAN employees, operational personel such as ATC's, FSS, techs etc. would shed few tears.

[Guest b52er]

Sure......what's your beef?

[Pager]

Costs were not cut!! ... give me a break!! what about the fee reductions of the past years (reported as $53 million). Perhaps, maybe, the airline board members at NavCanada have been sticking their heads in the sand and have been in a conflict of interest situation? Maybe to them the $44 million that ACA owes NavCanada (prior to the CCAA filing) is not important.

Maybe the effect on others is not important ...The CCAA filing of ACA has far reaching effects on others (CATCA/CAW, IBEW etal)... those that have no input to the outcome. Best Wishes to the ACA employees. I wish you no ill and hope you get what is coming to you, you have earned it! ... you did not create this but are found ins! as are the employees of Airports and NavCanada.

Cheers

Rick
CYHM Tower

[Guest b52er]

Fees going forward are paid? Who says. What's to say Nav Canada, all airports should not be on gaurd this time around, and not place so much "good faith" and "reliance" on the good ol' red machine paying their way. Perhaps focusing on the ones with money should be the order of the day!

[Cargo Agent]

All Goods and Services AC contracts for as of the CCAA filing are to be paid by the administrator of the bankruptcy filing. That's the way CCAA works. Perhaps you could check the facts yourself, as you don't seem to believe it the numerous times you've been told here.

[Seeker]

OK, great. Read this and then we'll have something to discuss.

http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/s/solipsis.htm

[Guest Pull Up]

Hello B52er. Hello, Hello, you still their mister genius? Don't forget what happened after Sept. 11th.- travel was down, so revenues at Nav Can went down. They ended up increasing fees to make up for the shortfall. Give your head a shake.