Gronk!
Senior Member
London/Gatwick is another viable option. I do prefer London/Heathrow but only because of their Tube terminal.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
Beltline_B
Senior Member
Don't let your hatred of Calgary get in the way of the truth
Load factors for YYC-YYZ are the same as YEG-YYZ. There are far more flights from YYC-YYZ and thus more opportunity to discount flights, but if the flights from YYC-YYZ had continuously low load factors the airlines would cutback the amount of flights rather than discount them. They're running a business not secretly conspiring to help out Calgary.
Beltline_B
Senior Member
TBH, I don't think that it would harm YEG very much, if any. It might even help YEG's tourism overall. Tourism to Banff has been rising rapidly, partly due to the new overseas direct flights. With a train from YYC-Banff, and to YEG, there's a better possibility of getting tourists to make a stop in Edmonton. I could be wrong, but it's a possibility, if the train is fast and efficient.
Beltline_B
Senior Member
Airline prices never make sense to the purchasers, but there's always business reasons behind it. A couple of years ago I was in Nova Scotia for a month, and looked into visiting a friend who lives in Maine. It was cheaper to go from Calgary to Boston than Halifax to Boston. Not just for a particular day, it was like that for all flight times. It defies logic.
David A
Senior Member
It doesn't make good sense, but the logic could be if an airline wants to sustain or increase flights to a certain city. I feel that is something the Calgary based airline does there and other competitors may respond to that too.
David A
Senior Member
First of all Heathrow is not the only airport in London and I suspect way more people want to go to there than Dublin. An Iceland stop over or connection could be good for flights to various European destinations.
David A
Senior Member
I disagree, neither actually have anything to do with us really. It will make it more convenient for those going to Banff or downtown Calgary already which is good for them.
However, people don't choose to go to Jasper instead of Banff based on how convenient it is to get there, but because it is less crowded and is a more natural environment.
David A
Senior Member
Well if they have the same load factor and one has lower prices, I don't think it is as profitable then. I suspect it is not all seats, but they are trying fill some remaining seats possibly with people from other cities.Don't let your hatred of Calgary get in the way of the truth
Canadian airlines really don't have a great business history, lots of mergers and bankruptcies there and for the most part it is still a duopoly so also not as much competitive pressure to provide good service. Some of our airlines are not publicly traded now, so not even subject to financial market discipline. I don't know if the ones that are not publicly traded are even profitable now.
blue12
Active Member
I think you completely missed what he was saying. Yes similar load factors, but the important part is one route has a larger volume of seats which brings down prices. It's not that YYC-YYZ is "more empty" or "less profitable".
David A
Senior Member
Actually I believe what was said was more flights, nothing about the volume of seats on the planes. Having more flights in itself would not reduce operating costs.
I realize it is possible the planes are not similar sizes, but I didn't miss what was not said.
EdmTrekker
Senior Member
Only if you buy the ticket …. Look to Porter.
I did the connection several times.
Beltline_B
Senior Member
Yes, that's it in a nutshell. Because of the hub status, there are lots of flights from YYC that can be backfilled much easier with connecting passengers. The response to Maclac was more about flights not being empty. From WS's point of view it's probably economical for them to have lower prices and backfill multiple flights, but it still has to be make business sense for them to do it.
I know sometimes here there's the feeling that WS is secretly trying to screw Edmonton, but they didn't just say, 'hey let's give Calgary 3 times the flights to Toronto' and then realized the flights were empty so they decided to discount the tickets. It's only airport hub economics.
Dkeirle
New Member
It's simply the way the cookie has crumbled. Calgary was always going to be the hub for Alberta and has been since the new airport was built in 1975, with or without WS
WS is probably the reason for YYC being the main hub for the prairies and the interior of BC. They executed a long range plan very well, first by filling the west with short haul flights and taking over that market, later shifting many those to the YYC hub and spoke model while adding more US and sun destinations making YYC the connection point and turning it into an international hub. Once wide body overseas flights came into the picture, the full on hub model was cemented for good.
When WS's new 789's arrive, they'll probably add some to other cities, maybe YEG will pick up a flight. There's talk that maybe YEG to LGW is something that could happen.
David A
Senior Member
Sorry, I have never been one for defeat-ism or the way things are now is how they must remain forever. However, perhaps that is what our society is becoming people who grumble but don't make much effort to try improve things.
BASE
Active Member
I am getting a little nervous about the YEG December passenger numbers. The end of the year tends to be longer but it isn't usually this long and they are verging on YYZ timeframes which is notoriously slow to release passenger numbers. I saw YYC has already posted their January 2026 numbers for reference.