daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Airports and Aviation

Airports and Aviation Airports | Photos and Videos



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 15th, 2006, 05:24 AM   #161
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,889
Likes (Received): 18156

Quote:
Originally Posted by Filip View Post
Doesn't make a difference.. Those carriers will most likely expand to Toronto in the near future, while many lucrative international airlines will stay away from Vancouver because it doesn't have nearly the international pull of Toronto.
JAL, Philippine, SQ, and mainland Chinese carriers do not have plans to expand to Toronto yet.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old December 15th, 2006, 06:40 AM   #162
Filip
Torontonian 4ever
 
Filip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,891
Likes (Received): 435

I heard JAL is interested. Mainland Chinese carriers will follow, once they have aircraft that can make the trip. I mean, the population base is there.
Filip no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2006, 01:21 AM   #163
ACT7
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,402
Likes (Received): 77

Quote:
Originally Posted by Filip View Post
I heard JAL is interested. Mainland Chinese carriers will follow, once they have aircraft that can make the trip. I mean, the population base is there.
That's exactly what I heard. Hong Kong Oasis Airlines is another one that's announced plans to fly to Toronto as well as Cathay going double daily. Singapore at the moment only has rights to fly to one Canadian city from what I understand but that should change once Canada signs more open skies agreements.
ACT7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2006, 03:52 AM   #164
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,889
Likes (Received): 18156

Quote:
Originally Posted by Filip View Post
I heard JAL is interested. Mainland Chinese carriers will follow, once they have aircraft that can make the trip. I mean, the population base is there.
There is no indication as of yet of any expansion from the mainland carriers. It's not even at a speculation stage yet. The tourism market is heavily weighted over the west coast, and any flights to the east coast will consume a lot of long-haul aircrafts, which aren't available right now for those airlines.

Then, there are the landing charges. Airlines typically don't want to fly at a loss.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2006, 04:03 AM   #165
TObermuda37
Canadian in Bermuda
 
TObermuda37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 88
Likes (Received): 0

Why do people not give up on the Expensive thing?

Again, lets look at the facts. If you go and add together all the fees that airports charge the airlines, you will see that what YYZ charges is on par with other airports. Don't take my word for it, go discover it, it is all there and can be viewed as a not for profit organization.

If the airport was so expensive, why is KLM doubling their flights and Air France upgrading to a 747 in the summer? I must assume that they are able to generate a profit. If it was so expensive, why is EL AL still there? We have all heard about CP going double daily to HK effective in the summer. What is prompting them to do that? JAT cannot wait to get back into YYZ.

With over 500,000 people of asian decent, are you telling me that Chinese carriers cannot come up with a reason to fly to YYZ? I think the reason has more to do with the freezing of relationships between Mr. Harper and the Chinese Gov't.

YYZ is doing a great job and I am sure things will get a lot better. Just give it some time.
TObermuda37 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2006, 04:48 AM   #166
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,889
Likes (Received): 18156

Quote:
Originally Posted by TObermuda37 View Post
Again, lets look at the facts. If you go and add together all the fees that airports charge the airlines, you will see that what YYZ charges is on par with other airports. Don't take my word for it, go discover it, it is all there and can be viewed as a not for profit organization.

If the airport was so expensive, why is KLM doubling their flights and Air France upgrading to a 747 in the summer? I must assume that they are able to generate a profit. If it was so expensive, why is EL AL still there? We have all heard about CP going double daily to HK effective in the summer. What is prompting them to do that? JAT cannot wait to get back into YYZ.

With over 500,000 people of asian decent, are you telling me that Chinese carriers cannot come up with a reason to fly to YYZ? I think the reason has more to do with the freezing of relationships between Mr. Harper and the Chinese Gov't.

YYZ is doing a great job and I am sure things will get a lot better. Just give it some time.
On par with international airports yet the most expensive in the world - even moreso than Tokyo.

Airlines are not all non-profit organizations. Even the government ones are not going to operate routes at a significant loss. Hence, a lot of the Chinese diaspora on the east coast either fly cheaper airfares through New York or connect in Vancouver. At this point only AC offers direct routes to Chinese cities. They even scrapped their YYZ-ICN route shortly after its debut last year.

Also, tourism and business between China and Canada are still fairly small. The push these days is for US-China and Europe-China routes, where the market size and potential are far greater. Deploying long-range aircraft such as an A340 is a very costly measure when the financials don't add up. You need at least 2 alone just to serve one China-East Coast route. Those 2 aircraft can be used for more profitable runs to Europe / US.

El Al has been complaining about Toronto's airport charges, and has been the most threatening to reduce frequencies and even pull out altogether. Cathay has not been able to deploy a long-range aircraft to fly non-stop, and along with Korean, are the only 2 non-Canadian airlines that fly direct to East Asia at the moment from Toronto.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2006, 05:22 AM   #167
nitzomoe
Scarebarian
 
nitzomoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Calgary
Posts: 598
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by TObermuda37 View Post
Again, lets look at the facts. If you go and add together all the fees that airports charge the airlines, you will see that what YYZ charges is on par with other airports. Don't take my word for it, go discover it, it is all there and can be viewed as a not for profit organization.

actually if you have any links that show the breakdown of landing costs for say a 747 I'd like to see it. I realize that its an all-in-one package but i havent seen any figures to say that jus the landing rights is more or less than the rest of the world.
nitzomoe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2006, 03:22 PM   #168
ACT7
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,402
Likes (Received): 77

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
On par with international airports yet the most expensive in the world - even moreso than Tokyo.

Airlines are not all non-profit organizations. Even the government ones are not going to operate routes at a significant loss. Hence, a lot of the Chinese diaspora on the east coast either fly cheaper airfares through New York or connect in Vancouver. At this point only AC offers direct routes to Chinese cities. They even scrapped their YYZ-ICN route shortly after its debut last year.

Also, tourism and business between China and Canada are still fairly small. The push these days is for US-China and Europe-China routes, where the market size and potential are far greater. Deploying long-range aircraft such as an A340 is a very costly measure when the financials don't add up. You need at least 2 alone just to serve one China-East Coast route. Those 2 aircraft can be used for more profitable runs to Europe / US.

El Al has been complaining about Toronto's airport charges, and has been the most threatening to reduce frequencies and even pull out altogether. Cathay has not been able to deploy a long-range aircraft to fly non-stop, and along with Korean, are the only 2 non-Canadian airlines that fly direct to East Asia at the moment from Toronto.
Well, first of all, Air Canada hasn't scrapped their YYZ-ICN route, it's always been a seasonal route. As for freeing up aircraft to fly non-stop to Toronto, even Cathay's "non-stop" from Hong Kong to NY makes more refuelling stops in Toronto than you think. So I do agree that available long range aircraft are part of the reason that asian carriers have traditionally flown to Vancouver over Toronto in the past, the fact remains that, while Vancouver may have a higher percentage of its population that's asian, Toronto simply has a higher asian population and continues to do more business with that part of the world than any other Canadian city.

Also, I think that this point has been proven to death, but to date no airline has pulled out of Toronto because of fees, and in fact there's an unending list of airlines that are either adding Toronto to their list, increasing frequency and increasing capacity.

KLM - double daily next summer
Cathay - double daily next summer
Air France - 340 to 747 next summer
Emirates - Service by November 2007
Etihad - daily by next summer
JAT - Service by next fall
EL AL - considers Toronto a mini hub and would like to upgrade to triple 7's by next fall
Lufthansa - 380 by next year?? (Don't quote me on that one)
JAL - Already has charter rights to Toronto for next year
Jet Airways - 2 flights from India (one via Hong Kong)
Hong Kong Oasis Airlines - Service by 2008 once they obtain new aircraft

Not to mention Air Canada's proposed new routes to Sydney via L.A. and non-stop to Mumbai.

I've even heard about Ethiopian and Uzbekistan Airlines trying to get landing rights to Toronto.

...and the list goes on.
ACT7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2006, 10:04 PM   #169
TObermuda37
Canadian in Bermuda
 
TObermuda37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 88
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitzomoe View Post
actually if you have any links that show the breakdown of landing costs for say a 747 I'd like to see it. I realize that its an all-in-one package but i havent seen any figures to say that jus the landing rights is more or less than the rest of the world.
Unfortunately, I do not have a link. I requested the information from the GTAA and got it. Unless the figures they quoted are lies, I have to take their word for it.
TObermuda37 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2006, 10:15 PM   #170
TObermuda37
Canadian in Bermuda
 
TObermuda37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 88
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
On par with international airports yet the most expensive in the world - even moreso than Tokyo.

Airlines are not all non-profit organizations. Even the government ones are not going to operate routes at a significant loss. Hence, a lot of the Chinese diaspora on the east coast either fly cheaper airfares through New York or connect in Vancouver. At this point only AC offers direct routes to Chinese cities. They even scrapped their YYZ-ICN route shortly after its debut last year.

Also, tourism and business between China and Canada are still fairly small. The push these days is for US-China and Europe-China routes, where the market size and potential are far greater. Deploying long-range aircraft such as an A340 is a very costly measure when the financials don't add up. You need at least 2 alone just to serve one China-East Coast route. Those 2 aircraft can be used for more profitable runs to Europe / US.

El Al has been complaining about Toronto's airport charges, and has been the most threatening to reduce frequencies and even pull out altogether. Cathay has not been able to deploy a long-range aircraft to fly non-stop, and along with Korean, are the only 2 non-Canadian airlines that fly direct to East Asia at the moment from Toronto.
As was quoted in a later post, EL AL threatened yet they are still here. Strange don't you think? And to make it even more interesting, they want to make it a mini hub!

Now that has to be the comment to top it all. They complain about the airport, threaten to pull out, yet still fly there and want to make it a mini hub. Must be a really badly run airport.

As for the most expensive airport in the world, well, they just rebuilt the place. If we were to break down the fees and show it like the other airports do, would it be that far off? Or are we relying on the media which broadcast that it is the most expensive? I reply to that and say, look at the facts which the GTAA can provide to you. Then make the decision based on that information, not what was in the paper and sent around the globe via the Associated Press.

But anyhow, that is my 2 cents. Take it as you wish. I am not trying to say anything about anyone and everyone is entitled to their opinions.

Cheers.
TObermuda37 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2006, 01:08 AM   #171
AltinD
The Modecator
 
AltinD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: TIRANA / Dubai / Vienna
Posts: 31,832
Likes (Received): 6077

Why are you being so protective?

If hkskyline says that Pearson is one of, if not, the most expensive Airport in the World, I belive that based on his (hks') reputation alone. The mentioning of "...they just rebuild the place..." as a justification is useles, since dosens of other Airports around the world have spend even more, not to mentioned that I didn't see the Terminal 1 as such a grandeous place, compared to Terminal 2 that I flown from 3 years earlier.

Toronto is a big market in North America and it will be difficult to Airlines who already operate it to just leave it, despite losses they may occour. Sometime you have to be in the market even if at loss.
AltinD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2006, 01:12 AM   #172
AltinD
The Modecator
 
AltinD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: TIRANA / Dubai / Vienna
Posts: 31,832
Likes (Received): 6077

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACT7 View Post
...Jet Airways - 2 flights from India (one via Hong Kong)
I "wonder" how that works ...
AltinD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2006, 04:13 AM   #173
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,889
Likes (Received): 18156

Landing Fees Articles :

Pearson airport becomes world's most expensive

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories

This means it would cost more than $13,000 for an airline to land a 747-400 at Pearson -- something that has the airline industry furious.

In contrast, officials at Tokyo's Narita airport recently announced reductions that will drop the landing fee for a similar jet to the equivalent of $7,300.

"With its high prices, Toronto's task will become increasingly difficult. Remember that it does not have a market the size of Tokyo to anchor its operations. People will start to fly around it."


GTAA asks Ottawa to lower airport rent

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...iness/Canadian

Critics have slammed the GTAA for its high landing fees, saying it costs $7,965 (U.S.) for a Boeing 747-400 to land at Pearson last year. That's more than double the landing fees at most large North American airports.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2006, 04:16 AM   #174
ACT7
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,402
Likes (Received): 77

Quote:
Originally Posted by AltinD View Post
I "wonder" how that works ...
Why is Jet Airways routing through Hong Kong such a wonder? It's a perfectly legitimate route. Besides, I'm only quoting what I've read. Do a google search for Jet Airways to Toronto and you'll see the exact same thing.

Also, I doubt very much that so many airlines are operating a loss by flying into Pearson. Major hub or not, if it wasn't profitable, then airlines wouldn't do it. Obviously it's profitable, it always has been and it likely always will be.

One last thing too. While many other airports have undergone major reconstruction, certainly none in Canada have come close to the magnitude of Pearson. It was after all the single largest construction project in Canadian history (and that includes the Confederation Bridge). It's now one of the largest terminal buildings in the world, so yes, in my opinion, high landing fees are expected and justifiable. But as TObermuda37 correctly pointed out time and time again, Toronto fees are all inclusive and are much more on par with other major airports than the media has us believe. Terminal 1 is an absolute gem!
ACT7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2006, 04:43 PM   #175
nitzomoe
Scarebarian
 
nitzomoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Calgary
Posts: 598
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline View Post
Landing Fees Articles :

Pearson airport becomes world's most expensive

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories

This means it would cost more than $13,000 for an airline to land a 747-400 at Pearson -- something that has the airline industry furious.

In contrast, officials at Tokyo's Narita airport recently announced reductions that will drop the landing fee for a similar jet to the equivalent of $7,300.

"With its high prices, Toronto's task will become increasingly difficult. Remember that it does not have a market the size of Tokyo to anchor its operations. People will start to fly around it."


GTAA asks Ottawa to lower airport rent

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...iness/Canadian

Critics have slammed the GTAA for its high landing fees, saying it costs $7,965 (U.S.) for a Boeing 747-400 to land at Pearson last year. That's more than double the landing fees at most large North American airports.
those are 2005 and 2004 statistics. I did a bit of information gathering and found that Canadian Business tabulated costs of a 747 landing charge (excluding de-icing and other costs) and its $10986 (pg 41 Canadian Business Nov 20.) which is at least $3,000 more than any other airport. So this all-in-one argument doesn't correlate with the facts.

Last edited by nitzomoe; December 18th, 2006 at 04:46 PM.
nitzomoe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 17th, 2006, 11:11 PM   #176
TObermuda37
Canadian in Bermuda
 
TObermuda37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 88
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by AltinD View Post
Why are you being so protective?

If hkskyline says that Pearson is one of, if not, the most expensive Airport in the World, I belive that based on his (hks') reputation alone. The mentioning of "...they just rebuild the place..." as a justification is useles, since dosens of other Airports around the world have spend even more, not to mentioned that I didn't see the Terminal 1 as such a grandeous place, compared to Terminal 2 that I flown from 3 years earlier.

Toronto is a big market in North America and it will be difficult to Airlines who already operate it to just leave it, despite losses they may occour. Sometime you have to be in the market even if at loss.
Well, as I said, it was based on my information gathering.

Lets examine one major fact. How many other NA airports have had to go out and purchanse and existing terminal from a company and compensate them for lost profits? Pearson Terminal 3 ring as bell? This alone increases what they have to pay based on the bonds that they had to issue (at least a billion or more) considering that it costs about 500-700 million to build back in the late eighties. No other airport in Canada let alone North America had to start life that way.

As for the "they just rebuilt the place", it has to be taken into account. It costs money to build that new terminal, while keeping the place operational. There was no other space to build a new terminal cause the AC hangars were also operational. They could not build the new terminal in the infield, cause the money to go under existing runways without any operational impact and put in new roads to get the passengers there.

I am not being protective. I fly through there a whole lot and maybe it is not as much as others but I fly through there enough. If an airline can not operate the flight at a profit, I can assure you based on profit margins of listed companies on the stock markets, unless they are government subsidized, would not operate the route.

Anyhow, that will be the last I will say in defence to the GTAA. They were put in a bad position and now have to take the heat for the mistakes of others. I can assure you that I would not want to be in their position.
TObermuda37 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2006, 01:41 AM   #177
ACT7
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,402
Likes (Received): 77

Quote:
Originally Posted by TObermuda37 View Post
Well, as I said, it was based on my information gathering.

Lets examine one major fact. How many other NA airports have had to go out and purchanse and existing terminal from a company and compensate them for lost profits? Pearson Terminal 3 ring as bell? This alone increases what they have to pay based on the bonds that they had to issue (at least a billion or more) considering that it costs about 500-700 million to build back in the late eighties. No other airport in Canada let alone North America had to start life that way.

As for the "they just rebuilt the place", it has to be taken into account. It costs money to build that new terminal, while keeping the place operational. There was no other space to build a new terminal cause the AC hangars were also operational. They could not build the new terminal in the infield, cause the money to go under existing runways without any operational impact and put in new roads to get the passengers there.

I am not being protective. I fly through there a whole lot and maybe it is not as much as others but I fly through there enough. If an airline can not operate the flight at a profit, I can assure you based on profit margins of listed companies on the stock markets, unless they are government subsidized, would not operate the route.

Anyhow, that will be the last I will say in defence to the GTAA. They were put in a bad position and now have to take the heat for the mistakes of others. I can assure you that I would not want to be in their position.
TObermuda37, you know I agree with you 100% buddy. It's a phenomenal facility all 'round and no airline in the world, or any company for that matter, will continuously operate at a loss, so again, obviously Toronto is a profitable route for lots and lots (and lots) of airlines.
ACT7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2006, 08:34 AM   #178
deej
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: on a plane somewhere
Posts: 208
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACT7 View Post
TObermuda37, you know I agree with you 100% buddy. It's a phenomenal facility all 'round and no airline in the world, or any company for that matter, will continuously operate at a loss, so again, obviously Toronto is a profitable route for lots and lots (and lots) of airlines.
The question is a little bit more complex than that, I think. Of course most airlines wanting to service Canada will need to be at YYZ. And few airlines will continue to operate loss-making routes. But with landing fees so high, the more appropriate question is how much the exorbitant landing fees are inhibiting Pearson's growth.

So to take the El Al example where they were threatening to reduce frequencies or stop their route altogether, what would happen if YYZ reduced landing fees? Pure speculation, but perhaps they would consider going double daily instead. It's all about opportunity cost.

The other consideration is that airlines will also try to pass as much of the costs to passengers as possible. Business travel is relatively price inelastic. Tourist travel isn't. If ticket prices were that bit cheaper, what would be the impact on passenger traffic out of YYZ?

Note also that places like YVR are actually **reducing** their landing fees for international airlines. Do you think there will be increased interest for airlines to increase frequencies or start new routes as a result? I for one do.
deej no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2006, 09:42 AM   #179
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,889
Likes (Received): 18156

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACT7 View Post
Well, first of all, Air Canada hasn't scrapped their YYZ-ICN route, it's always been a seasonal route. As for freeing up aircraft to fly non-stop to Toronto, even Cathay's "non-stop" from Hong Kong to NY makes more refuelling stops in Toronto than you think. So I do agree that available long range aircraft are part of the reason that asian carriers have traditionally flown to Vancouver over Toronto in the past, the fact remains that, while Vancouver may have a higher percentage of its population that's asian, Toronto simply has a higher asian population and continues to do more business with that part of the world than any other Canadian city.
YYZ-ICN
AC never mentioned YYZ-ICN would be a seasonal service when the route was announced in July 2005. The press release indicated a non-stop service three times a week with no seasonal restrictions :
http://micro.newswire.ca/release.cgi...3213-0&Start=0

Air Canada Expands Service to Asia With The Inaugural of Non-Stop Toronto-Seoul Service
Builds Toronto Hub as Gateway to Asia

1 July 2005
Canada NewsWire

TORONTO, July 1 /CNW Telbec/ - With the departure today of flight AC065 en route to Seoul from Toronto, Air Canada inaugurates its first-ever non-stop service between eastern Canada and Korea. Air Canada will operate three times weekly non-stop service from Toronto complementing its daily non-stop flights from Vancouver to Seoul. With an elapsed time of 14 hours 15 minutes westbound and 12 hours 55 minutes eastbound, the non-stop flight will save travellers 3 hours 20 minutes compared to the Vancouver routing.

"With the inaugural today of Air Canada's non-stop service between Toronto and Seoul we continue to grow our international network linking Asia with Canada and the rest of the world, said Marc Rosenberg, "Vice President, Sales Product Distribution, at a ceremony today in Toronto to mark the inaugural flight. "Our growth in non-stop service between Toronto and Asia complements our extensive schedule of non-stop services from our main Asia gateway in Vancouver, and offers customers more flexibility and choice in their travel planning with convenient connections to points throughout Air Canada's global network."

With the addition of Toronto-Seoul non-stop service, Air Canada offers customers up to 13 non-stop flights per day in each direction between Canada and eight destinations in Asia. From its main hub in Toronto, the carrier also operates non-stop flights to Hong Kong, Tokyo, Beijing and Delhi, the only non- stop link between North America and India. From its Pacific Asian gateway in Vancouver, Air Canada serves Hong Kong, Shanghai, Beijing, Tokyo, Osaka, Nagoya and Seoul with daily non-stop flights.

Air Canada will operate the new route using 286-seat A340-300 aircraft. With a 09:45 departure from Toronto on Wednesday, Friday and Sunday, arriving in Seoul at 13:00 the next day, flight AC065 is timed to offer convenient morning connections to and from points throughout Air Canada's extensive North American network, particularly in eastern Canada and the United States. The eastbound flight, AC066, leaves Seoul at 14:40 on Monday, Thursday and Saturday and arrives in Toronto at 14:35 the same day, providing maximum connecting options.

Montral-based Air Canada provides scheduled and charter air transportation for passengers and cargo to more than 150 destinations on five continents. Canada's flag carrier is the 14th largest commercial airline in the world and serves more than 29 million customers annually. Air Canada is a founding member of Star Alliance providing the world's most comprehensive air transportation network.

Cathay Pacific's transpacific flights
Cathay has 2 HKG-JFK flights. 1 is a direct flight non-stop via a polar route on an A340, while another stops in Vancouver only using a 747. Passengers are allowed to fly the YVR-JFK segment, YVR-HKG, or JFK-HKG.

The Toronto route needs to make a refueling stop in Anchorage since the assigned aircraft cannot fly nonstop so far. The stopover used to be Vancouver when US security regulations made it impossible to stop in Alaska, but that has since changed and Anchorage is now the stopover once again.

Connecting to Asia
Although Vancouver has a smaller population than Toronto, more Asian carriers choose to fly there as their sole Canadian entry point since alliance partners will fly their passengers further, freeing up long-haul aircraft for more profitable routes. If the YYZ route is profitable, then airlines would have pushed their national governments to negotiate access rights (air service agreements) or launch the route already.

Demographics
Vancouver CMA 2001 Census Statistics
- Chinese 342,665
- South Asian 164,365
- Filipino - 57,025
- Korean 28,850
- Japanese 24,025

Toronto CMA 2001 Census Statistics
- Chinese 409,535
- South Asian 473,810
- Filipino - 133,675
- Korean 42,620
- Japanese 17,420

Relationships
A brief high-level search of the YVR schedules online revealed the following frequencies (not all inclusive) :
YVR-PEK (AC + CA) * Toronto only has AC service
YVR-PUD (AC + MU) * Toronto only has AC service
YVR-TPE (BR + AC + CI) * no service from Toronto
YVR-HKG (CX + CX + AC) * Toronto has one less daily flight
YVR-Manila (PR not daily service) * no service from Toronto
YVR-ICN (AC + SQ + KE) * Toronto only has KE service
YVR-Tokyo (AC + JL not daily service) * Toronto doesn't have JAL service
YVR-Osaka (AC) * no service from Toronto

A few anomalies
1. While Toronto's Japanese community is 73% the size of Vancouver's, Vancouver has one additional airline and one additional city connectivity.
2. While Toronto's Chinese community is larger than Vancouver's, services between Greater China and Vancouver are more frequent, and no mainland Chinese carriers fly to Toronto.
3. While Toronto's Filipino community is more than twice the size of Vancouver's, only Vancouver gets direct flights to the Philippines
4. While Toronto has a much larger Korean community than Vancouver, Toronto only gets 1 airline service while Vancouver has 3.

All these anomalies across several East Asian countries point to the success of the international airline alliances meant to funnel Asian traffic via Vancouver, then out to the rest of Canada via a domestic carrier. Given Toronto's market size and immigrant community, it is strange why many of the Asian carriers flying to Vancouver don't also fly to Toronto. I suspect it's more of a cost issue than air rights.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ACT7 View Post
Also, I think that this point has been proven to death, but to date no airline has pulled out of Toronto because of fees, and in fact there's an unending list of airlines that are either adding Toronto to their list, increasing frequency and increasing capacity.
El Al to reduce Toronto flights due to fees
17 June 2006
National Post

Israeli airline El Al says it has decided to cut Toronto out of its North American expansion plans because of sky-high fees at Pearson International Airport, stirring fears that other foreign airlines may soon decide to follow suit.

El Al said yesterday that, as of July 23, it will reduce the number of flights it offers from Toronto to Tel Aviv to five a week from eight a week, including two flights that originate in Los Angeles.

The number of non-stop flights between Toronto and Tel Aviv will be reduced on Sept. 1 to three a week as El Al's Los Angeles to Tel Aviv through Toronto route is scheduled to be scrapped entirely.

"Our operational costs on this route were just too high," explained Stanley Morais, the Canadian general manager of El Al and an outspoken critic of the Greater Toronto Airport Authority (GTAA), which operates Pearson.


El Al, known for its intense security procedures, has been warning for over a year that it may drop or reduce service to Toronto if something is not done to reign in rising costs at the country's largest airport, which holds the dubious title of being the most expensive airport in the world to land a plane.

The airline is hoping to save about $2-million annually because of the changes. In part, that's because the airline was considering flying the Los Angeles to Tel Aviv route with a stop in Toronto with a larger Boeing 747 aircraft because of rising demand from U.S. travellers.

But, according to Mr. Morais, landing a Boeing 747 in Toronto costs about $13,490 plus another $3,754 in terminal fees. That's compared to the $6,433, plus another $2,150 in terminal fees, that El Al now pays to land a smaller Boeing 767 in Toronto.

The good news is that, with the absence of U.S. passengers on the remaining flights, the number of seats available between Toronto and Tel Aviv will increase, although there will be fewer flights a week to choose from.

El Al's move came one day after Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government introduced a bill that seeks to increase oversight of airport authorities and the way they set their fees.

For its part, the GTAA has said its high costs are mainly driven by Ottawa's airport rent scheme, a vestige of Ottawa's decision to spin off the country's airports to not-for-profit authorities in the early 1990s. It has promised to pass any savings from the federal government along to airlines and their passengers.

However, critics say excessive spending by airport authorities has also contributed to the problem, citing massive capital projects like the $4-billion redevelopment program currently underway at Pearson.

Fred Gaspar, the president of the Air Transport Association of Canada, said there is more than enough blame to go around, but stressed Ottawa and the airport authorities need to work together to bring down the cost of commercial aviation in this country.

If not, Canadians can expect to see more foreign airlines trimming their service to Toronto. "We may very well see more international airlines following suit," Mr. Gaspar said. "Everybody has their breaking point."

Traffic Growth
While there may be speculation of flight increases to YYZ in the future, the fact is, airlines are now complaining about landing charges, and when the IATA issues a few scathing reports out about the irrational fees at YYZ, then it should be a cause for concern. The fact that there is growth isn't a sign that everything is all right, because other airports may be growing even more at Toronto's expense.


Air executives attack high fees at Pearson
30 June 2006
The Toronto Star

Toronto's Pearson International Airport was singled out as "the world's most expensive airport" at an international conference in Montreal.

Air Canada president Montie Brewer said that operating out of Pearson affects the fares consumers in the GTA have to pay. "And I truly believe it stunts the potential growth of the economy in Toronto and Ontario."

Jim May, CEO of the Air Transport Association of America, said Pearson charges more than double the rate charged at New York's La Guardia airport. "That adds tens of millions of dollars to the cost structure of the airport without any discernible aviation benefit."
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2006, 09:49 AM   #180
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,889
Likes (Received): 18156

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitzomoe View Post
those are 2005 and 2004 statistics. I did a bit of information gathering and found that Canadian Business tabulated costs of a 747 landing charge (excluding de-icing and other costs) and its $10986 (pg 41 Canadian Business Nov 20.) which is at least $3,000 more than any other airport. So this all-in-one argument does correlate with the facts.
The Globe and Mail reported on Dec. 14 that landing charges are rising again, so the #s are going to change once more. What won't change is the fact that YYZ is the world's most expensive airport to land.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
abu dhabi, dubai, emirates, gcc, middle eastern airlines, oneworld, qatar, uae

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium