Canadian Airport Thread II

[Myst]

I want healthy competition. Without it we don’t get served well. Unhealthy competition might be as bad as unhealthy uncompetition - at least new entrants are encouraged in a competitive vacuum.

Flair selling seats for less than the cost of fuel can’t be a good thing for the financial health of the industry. Or for people finding themself stranded by another collapse. Or for employees when payroll isn’t met…

[casper]

Originally Posted by Myst

I want healthy competition. Without it we don’t get served well. Unhealthy competition might be as bad as unhealthy uncompetition - at least new entrants are encouraged in a competitive vacuum.

Flair selling seats for less than the cost of fuel can’t be a good thing for the financial health of the industry. Or for people finding themself stranded by another collapse. Or for employees when payroll isn’t met…

The difficulty with flair (and other low cost airlines) has always been smaller cities. Places like Victoria, Saskatoon, even London Ontario.

What we need in places like these are competition from airlines that have onward connections through a hub with frequent service. Porter, Air Canada and WestJet are good examples of these.

A company like Flair coming into the Victoria market basically means you get service to Calgary (but only twice a week and only for 6 months of the year) or Las Vegas twice a week on a relatively large aircraft. These ULCC undermine the ability of the network airlines to real service.

Had Flair behaved like say Southwest with onward connections even if only within their their flights I may well have a different view of them.

Victoria currently has one daily on Porter. If flair going away means that goes to two daily or a second destination is added. That is a win-win.

The ULCC can provide real benefit to places like Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Calgary.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by casper

The difficulty with flair (and other low cost airlines) has always been smaller cities. Places like Victoria, Saskatoon, even London Ontario.

What we need in places like these are competition from airlines that have onward connections through a hub with frequent service. Porter, Air Canada and WestJet are good examples of these.

A company like Flair coming into the Victoria market basically means you get service to Calgary (but only twice a week and only for 6 months of the year) or Las Vegas twice a week on a relatively large aircraft. These ULCC undermine the ability of the network airlines to real service.

Had Flair behaved like say Southwest with onward connections even if only within their their flights I may well have a different view of them.

Victoria currently has one daily on Porter. If flair going away means that goes to two daily or a second destination is added. That is a win-win.

The ULCC can provide real benefit to places like Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Calgary.

Flair hasn't been any impediment to Air Canada offering more flights out of London (to use my local example). Air Canada used to offer 10-15 flights a day to Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa and not sure if the Calgary ever actually happened. Now they go to Toronto 3 times a day, granted on slightly larger aircraft. WestJet was broadening their horizons and then brought Swoop in, and switched and added flights with them. Then they folded Swoop back into Westjet, but they haven't continued any of those prior Swoop flights. That wasn't because of Flair either. Flair barely has a foothold in London. Flair might have had an effect on WestJet deciding to do anything else in Kitchener though.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Flair hasn't been any impediment to Air Canada offering more flights out of London (to use my local example). Air Canada used to offer 10-15 flights a day to Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa and not sure if the Calgary ever actually happened. Now they go to Toronto 3 times a day, granted on slightly larger aircraft. WestJet was broadening their horizons and then brought Swoop in, and switched and added flights with them. Then they folded Swoop back into Westjet, but they haven't continued any of those prior Swoop flights. That wasn't because of Flair either. Flair barely has a foothold in London. Flair might have had an effect on WestJet deciding to do anything else in Kitchener though.

So around 15-20 years ago I was regularly flying into London for a project I was doing there. Back then WestJet had their daily milk run, London-Winnipeg-Saskatoon-Calgary-Vancouver-Prince George. I would regularly use it to go between London and Saskatoon. Air Canada around that time had an Embraer that did London to Calgary and on to Vancouver. I used that one a few times as well.

If there is only so many passengers to go around, are you better off with sub-daily point-to-point flights or daily flights that provide connections? I would go for the network airlines any day.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by casper

The difficulty with flair (and other low cost airlines) has always been smaller cities. Places like Victoria, Saskatoon, even London Ontario.

What we need in places like these are competition from airlines that have onward connections through a hub with frequent service. Porter, Air Canada and WestJet are good examples of these.

A company like Flair coming into the Victoria market basically means you get service to Calgary (but only twice a week and only for 6 months of the year) or Las Vegas twice a week on a relatively large aircraft. These ULCC undermine the ability of the network airlines to real service.

Had Flair behaved like say Southwest with onward connections even if only within their their flights I may well have a different view of them.

Victoria currently has one daily on Porter. If flair going away means that goes to two daily or a second destination is added. That is a win-win.

The ULCC can provide real benefit to places like Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Calgary.

I think the problem is the fees in Canada. People would absolutely fill a Victoria to Calgary flight for $49 and the ancillary fees could make them profitable. But the $49 fare becomes $100. A few of my $69 flights on Flair were more than $60 in taxes.

The other problem is Flair is horrible at execution. There is no reason a ULCC needs to have so many delays. Ryan Air is as reliable as mainline carriers for getting you there on time.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Flair hasn't been any impediment to Air Canada offering more flights out of London (to use my local example). Air Canada used to offer 10-15 flights a day to Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa and not sure if the Calgary ever actually happened. Now they go to Toronto 3 times a day, granted on slightly larger aircraft. WestJet was broadening their horizons and then brought Swoop in, and switched and added flights with them. Then they folded Swoop back into Westjet, but they haven't continued any of those prior Swoop flights. That wasn't because of Flair either. Flair barely has a foothold in London. Flair might have had an effect on WestJet deciding to do anything else in Kitchener though.

Last summer Swoop had offered YXX-YXU as a "seasonal" service that launched in May and wasn't planned to run past October. I took it once, it was a full flight both ways. They also were competing with Flair's YVR-YXU route that ran last summer.

There is definitely demand for the route from YXU to the Vancouver area. Flying to Toronto and having to connect with either a connecting flight, or a bus or train can add so much time onto that trip, and on more than one occasion I've had to stay in a hotel near YYZ overnight because of bad flight timings (and more ideal timings having a cost difference far more than the cost of the hotel). Currently Air Canada's prices from YVR to YXU connecting at YYZ are hundreds of dollars more than their direct flights to YYZ - $362 difference I found in one case in May. Unless I were travelling for business traveler I just can't justify that additional cost when the direct flight to YYZ is already $400.

[JakeLRS]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

Last summer Swoop had offered YXX-YXU as a "seasonal" service that launched in May and wasn't planned to run past October. I took it once, it was a full flight both ways. They also were competing with Flair's YVR-YXU route that ran last summer.

There is definitely demand for the route from YXU to the Vancouver area. Flying to Toronto and having to connect with either a connecting flight, or a bus or train can add so much time onto that trip, and on more than one occasion I've had to stay in a hotel near YYZ overnight because of bad flight timings (and more ideal timings having a cost difference far more than the cost of the hotel).

Bingo.

Since 2016, I've been able to fly from YHM-YEG direct and at a fair price on both Flair and Swoop when they offered the route. The travel experience was easy and smooth.

This is the first summer in a long time where there is no direct YHM-YEG service (WS didn't re-introduce it post-swoop... as*****s). So my options are either a connection in YYC, which adds two hours to my journey alongside WS price gouging, the mad-house that is YYZ, or YKF but with Flair.

I've generally just been opting to fly Porter from YYZ because of their product and good loyalty program, but once there is direct service back to YHM, I'd hop back on whatever carrier decided to offer it.

I mentioned this in the YHM forum, but YKF will have on average 8 departures daily to destinations coast-to-coast, whereas YHM will only average 4 departures daily with service only to YYC, east coast, and Iceland. I never thought I'd see the day where YKF is doing better than YHM, but here we are.

[RomanR27]

Originally Posted by Dominion301

Big difference with Porter though is they have 17 years of 'street cred' in the east. They also made sure to capitalize themselves to close to a billion dollars to weather the losses during the couple of years of torrid expansion. I fully expect PD will still be around 2 years from now with zero aircraft repossessed in that time.

Interesting PD article in Wings: https://www.wingsmagazine.com/party-...001D3490978J5J

Highlights:
-YHU will see both jets and turboprops (no surprise there - at the very least to YTZ);
-No DH4s at YYZ for the foreseeable future and definitely none in 2024, but they plan to have them there eventually;
-60,000 pax transferred since the PD-TS interline agreement. Now with the full JV and codesharing, they're targeting 15-18% of TS pax transferring to/fom PD;
-They claim their Dash 8 wages are now the highest in Canada to help with pilot retention and internal promotions; and
-Are definitely eyeing acquiring more Dash 8s:

It was thrown around in this thread over the weekend, and indeed this article mentions Porter's interest in serving LGA and DCA after YTZ gets preclearance:

Last June, the Canadian government gave Toronto’s waterfront airport a long-awaited boost, announcing $30 million to build a U.S. customs preclearance facility that will put the airport on an equal footing with YYZ when it opens in 2025. Preclearance will open YTZ to American airports that do not maintain U.S. customs and border protection facilities, including New York La Guardia (LGW) and Washington Ronald Reagan (DCA). “We’re still working through the cost structure of bringing U.S. preclearance to Billy Bishop. That is the last step in the process,” Jackson says. “We are very interested in serving markets like La Guardia and DCA from downtown Toronto. But there are other smaller markets within reach of Billy Bishop that we also can’t serve without preclearance. This will create growth opportunities from the Island.”

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by JakeLRS

Bingo.

Since 2016, I've been able to fly from YHM-YEG direct and at a fair price on both Flair and Swoop when they offered the route. The travel experience was easy and smooth.

This is the first summer in a long time where there is no direct YHM-YEG service (WS didn't re-introduce it post-swoop... as*****s). So my options are either a connection in YYC, which adds two hours to my journey alongside WS price gouging, the mad-house that is YYZ, or YKF but with Flair.

I've generally just been opting to fly Porter from YYZ because of their product and good loyalty program, but once there is direct service back to YHM, I'd hop back on whatever carrier decided to offer it.

I mentioned this in the YHM forum, but YKF will have on average 8 departures daily to destinations coast-to-coast, whereas YHM will only average 4 departures daily with service only to YYC, east coast, and Iceland. I never thought I'd see the day where YKF is doing better than YHM, but here we are.

I guess it depends on what one considers a fair price. The one that is effectively being "dumped" on the market by a competitor with apparently no concern about turning a profit?

[Dominion301]

Originally Posted by RomanR27

It was thrown around in this thread over the weekend, and indeed this article mentions Porter's interest in serving LGA and DCA after YTZ gets preclearance:

The thing for PD is where will they get the slots from to LGA and DCA and at what cost? PD could do LGA out of YOW right now but still go to EWR where slots aren't controlled at present.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by casper

So around 15-20 years ago I was regularly flying into London for a project I was doing there. Back then WestJet had their daily milk run, London-Winnipeg-Saskatoon-Calgary-Vancouver-Prince George. I would regularly use it to go between London and Saskatoon. Air Canada around that time had an Embraer that did London to Calgary and on to Vancouver. I used that one a few times as well.

If there is only so many passengers to go around, are you better off with sub-daily point-to-point flights or daily flights that provide connections? I would go for the network airlines any day.

I don't remember the AC Embraer, I remember them bringing Tango and Zip in and doing things like Halifax-London-Vancouver for a season. But there was a point there where I wasn't keeping close tabs on the airport either.

But my point was, Flair's existence isn't really stopping Air Canada or even WestJet from offering more service from London. Flair hardly serves this place themselves and WestJet certainly isn't bothering to bring in any flights to almost any of the airports they served with Swoop. I really don't get how they shut down Swoop and totally abandoned the markets they were serving.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

I really don't get how they shut down Swoop and totally abandoned the markets they were serving.

I suspect the Swoop shutdown was one concession to Westjet's pilots in the contract negotiations last year.

Second, I suspect Swoop was not a particularly profitable venture when all was said and done. The markets served were likely pretty marginal from a profit standpoint.

Even though Swoop was nominally independent of Westjet, being indirectly associated with Westjet probably hurt the parent brand more than envisioned when Swoop's operations failed to deliver.

Given the continued flux about ULCC airlines in Canada, retreating from that space in light of acquiring Sunwing seems to be the best option.

[MonctonRad]

From the Halifax Stanfield thread in the Halifax section:

Originally Posted by Halifax12

BermudAir launching 1x weekly direct flights to Halifax

https://bernews.com/2024/03/bermudai...lights-canada/

"Starting May 17, the airline will begin operations between Bermuda’s L.F. Wade International Airport [BDA] and Toronto Pearson International Airport [YYZ], with flights to Halifax Stanfield International Airport [YHZ] commencing on May 25."

[J81]

Interesting. It has been a long time since AC operated that route. Anyone remember what year it was last served?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by J81

Interesting. It has been a long time since AC operated that route. Anyone remember what year it was last served?

I flew that route with AC a couple of times in the late 1970s. If I was to guess, I think they probably discontinued it in the 1990s.

[q12]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I flew that route with AC a couple of times in the late 1970s. If I was to guess, I think they probably discontinued it in the 1990s.

It definitely operated in the 2000's, I'm guessing roughly 2010 when Bermuda tourism started to decline.

[hehehe]

I believe AC last operated it in 2007/2008?

[LO 044]

Originally Posted by thewave46

being indirectly associated with Westjet probably hurt the parent brand more than envisioned when Swoop's operations failed to deliver.

A comment not mentioned enough. Can you imagine how happy WestJet staff were when Swoop was shut down and they didn't have to say to Swoop passengers "no we're not the same airline and there's nothing I can do for you even though your flight was cancelled and the next flight is in 3 days" lol.

[zahav]

I have a few random replies on various posts over the last several pages, but not going to quote each one. Sorry but it has been a chaotic month as my partner was in the hospital unexpectedly for over a month in critical condition; thankfully he's out now and recovering but it took a toll on me in many ways. Needless to say I was too occupied to check out the forum, which really sucked because I love this site, and love staying up to date on all different topics, but especially airports

-YUL is doing very well attracting different airlines/routes while AC continues to grow. As I have said times before, I've always considered that scenario the most ideal as an AV geek. You get a strengthened hub from the dominant local airline (ie. AC), but then it isn't such a cannibal that it eats up other airlines and just grows into more of a fortress. It's similar to YVR, same pattern of a strengthened domestic carrier building up transborder and international (and sometimes domestic, but not necessarily). YUL is proof that you don't HAVE TO have a massive domestic network to have a big international/transborder network. YUL is more unique in this sense, as both YYZ and YVR foster and require that domestic feed a lot more. There seems to be a sweet spot where growth by a dominant domestic carrier spurs growth from international airlines as well, rather than discourage or detract from it. But having a too strong local carrier can become a fortress hub, which are off putting to new entrants. So airports like ATL (or even where YYC is heading) are better off in terms of size, connectivity, and overall service offered. But it can cost them the airline variety and potentially routes. So really this is an AV geek POV, no one in the public would care about this conversation lol. As I said, a dominant strong hub but with a healthy mix of foreign tails/destinations as well is the best. YVR is also a major WS base (call it hub, focus city, whatever you want). Terminology aside, it is a clear 2nd to YYC whatever way you cut it. So it has AC huge, WS very healthy, and then all the randoms. I will take the YUL or YVR mix over a 90%+ fortress hub anyway, personally. No shade other airports, just my geeky preference

-Edelweiss made a very early S25 update:
Edelweiss Will Fly Its New Airbus A350-900s To Las Vegas and Vancouver
I can't help but be a brat any not like this, I was really hoping Edelweiss would be replaced by Swiss. Again, just because I'm an airport/airlines snob and SWISS>EDELWEISS. The fact they are deploying their newest, largest capacity plane to YVR is a sign of strong demand (they also said it will still be daily, so keeping the frequency from this summer, but slightly more pax and a much nicer plane). But then I'm sulking because this confirms the continuation of Edelweiss on the route, they wouldn't be assigning their new plane to YVR if they were planning to convert it to Swiss. Oh well, not the end of the world, still a unique carrier and a beefy plane. But RIP to what I think was our last A340 service

-Flair is like chaos personified, it's unsettling to watch them unravel. The collapse of Lynx can not save everything, their other cost burdens are a far bigger weight than the potential gain from Lynx pax. The summer route update on aeroroutes.net are dizzying, it's just changes all over the place and no clear direction still. Just swapping around frequency on a bunch of mediocre route pairings, as if that will actually save the day. Don't get me wrong, I am not revelling or relishing in their troubles, I worked for an airline that ended up shutting suddenly, I know how it feels. But objectively it seems pretty clear it's a matter of when, not if

-I must give a kudos to Porter Airlines for how they have executed this national expansion. It is an incredibly difficult thing to do, so many airlines try and fail, wash rise repeat. And they were very regional in the east, very well liked for service but still dwarfed by AC in size. Going from that hyper-regional focus to trans continental and a new fleet, it can be what takes an airline down. It was completely foreign to them, in all ways (new aircraft, destinations, market demographics, even establishing themselves at Pearson instead of just YTZ). A total 180 from their existence before the Embraers. Like a silent killer, they unveiled a big expansion, but kept it focused. And that appears to be working, they have maintained or added capacity on my routes compared to when they originally launch, plus keep adding destinations, but not in a chaotic non sensical way (ahem, Flair). I really hope their strategy is actually working from a financial perspective, and they are actually making money and not secretly bleeding money due to their expansion

-Google Flights came out with their top destinations this summer, based on based on data for trips booked between June and August:

These are the top five trending travel destinations in Canada this summer

Though it may not feel like it yet, summer is just around the corner, and as Canadians begin to book travel plans, they’re flocking to five cities in particular.

Google Flights has released its list of the top trending Canadian travel destinations based on data for trips booked between June and August.

Vancouver took first place as the top trending destination this summer. At number two was Calgary, followed by Toronto, Halifax, and Montreal.

According to Google Search Trends, Niagara Falls is a top-trending weekend getaway destination.

For lovers, Vancouver Island is reportedly the top romantic getaway destination in Canada.

Globally, Canadians are eyeing Paris, France, with Google Flights naming the city the top trending destination for Canadians.

Other top global destinations include London, Lisbon, Tokyo, and Rome.

Search interest also shows that more Canadians are traveling alone, with terms like “solo travel” hitting an all time high in February 2024,” Google Trends wrote.

“Top destinations for solo adventure seekers include Vienna, Machu Picchu, Brussels, Vietnam and Costa Rica.”

Have you made any summer plans yet? If not, where would you want to go? Let us know in the comments.

I do have to say I am surprised by this list, I thought Toronto would be ahead of Vancouver and Calgary. Yes I know it's a bit unfair because the GTA/Southern Ontario has the biggest share of the population, so they can't fly to Toronto, they are already there. So they fly out. But still, YYZ is incredibly busy domestically, it dwarfs everyone else in terms of # of destinations and traffic. So I am surprised all of that doesn't translate into Toronto being #1 in terms of most popular destinations. Vancouver is one thing, but for Calgary to beat it? Seems like a shock. Means the connecting pax are more important than I thought. Toronto is still a colossal visitor draw, don't get me wrong, its figures are staggering and it is incredibly connected. So really expected them to be #1 for Google Flight bookings

-I love how foreign airports publish their busiest destinations, go to Wikipedia and for most US and international airports, they list their top destinations and usually break them out domestically and internationally. Then there's Canada's airports, where they only have traffic stats. Come on Canada, not a good look to miss what is obviously an international standard that even the US can do. Anyways, I was in a Wikpedia hole and look at BNE airport (Brisbane). YVR is their top destination outside of Asia Pacific (which sounds impressive but since they only have 3 airports outside of Asia Pacific, all it really means is YVR is their top North American destination). But I was surprised YVR was so far ahead of SFO and LAX. For 2023, here are the route figures:

YVR - 176,437
LAX - 131,333

SFO didn't even make the Top 15, so I would have to individually calculate it and I don't have the energy. Suffice to say, they were well below YVR and LAX and others. I did do a quick experiment choosing key months to compare:

August
YVR - 16,539
LAX - 11,215
SFO - 4,971

December
YVR - 19,998
LAX - 13,698
SFO - 9,542

Over to Sydney, LAX is absurdly in the lead, no surprise there. In fact, LAX is SYD's 3rd busiest international route overall, which is actually a huge feat, they even snuck in front of DXB in 2023. But I was surprised YVR came ahead of SFO for SYD too:

LAX - 764,083
YVR - 286,748
SFO - 237,067

The YVR/SFO numbers are very close, the differences are small when you look at the gap with LAX. I just always thought SFO was commandingly ahead of YVR for Australia, but they seem to be quite even. Yes, SFO has has MEL service as well, so that would shave some off BNE and SYD. But even with that factored in, I really thought SFO-Australia traffic was higher than YVR's across the board, but not so. LAX has been getting more competition lately, namely from DFW which both AA and QF are servicing. But then YVR and SFO have likely also eaten away at the LAX-Oceania dominance.

I would just love to see a formal list for where Canadian cities rank on the top destinations for various airports around the world. I know YYZ is the top international airport for a zillion smaller US regional airports, often because it is one of only a few non US flights, or sometimes even their only one. But it's still an impressive chunk of US cities that put Toronto at the top. For Europe they have to change the methodology a bit, since there's such an enormous amount of flying within Europe that is technically international, they break out Europe international and intercontinental international. YUL is #2 for Paris, and I believe was #1 before. Dubai is now #1. But even mixing intercontinental with Europe, YUL would still be a respectable 4th place (behind Amsterdam, Dubai, and London-Heathrow). If the other random airports in Europe or North Africa split regional with intercontintental, I'm sure YUL would top many destinations lists (ie. the secondary French cities, and the North African cities).

I don't think YVR is near the top destination for any international city. YVR has a good mix of cities all over the world, but I don't think it has a commanding lead in any of the markets. But I think we are at or near the top for many US airports in the west.

I think that's all for now, I'm sure there's a zillion things I've thought to post over the last 5 weeks but of course this is all I can remember. Happy Saturday!

[hehehe]

Originally Posted by zahav

I have a few random replies on various posts over the last several pages, but not going to quote each one. Sorry but it has been a chaotic month as my partner was in the hospital unexpectedly for over a month in critical condition; thankfully he's out now and recovering but it took a toll on me in many ways. Needless to say I was too occupied to check out the forum, which really sucked because I love this site, and love staying up to date on all different topics, but especially airports

-YUL is doing very well attracting different airlines/routes while AC continues to grow. As I have said times before, I've always considered that scenario the most ideal as an AV geek. You get a strengthened hub from the dominant local airline (ie. AC), but then it isn't such a cannibal that it eats up other airlines and just grows into more of a fortress. It's similar to YVR, same pattern of a strengthened domestic carrier building up transborder and international (and sometimes domestic, but not necessarily). YUL is proof that you don't HAVE TO have a massive domestic network to have a big international/transborder network. YUL is more unique in this sense, as both YYZ and YVR foster and require that domestic feed a lot more. There seems to be a sweet spot where growth by a dominant domestic carrier spurs growth from international airlines as well, rather than discourage or detract from it. But having a too strong local carrier can become a fortress hub, which are off putting to new entrants. So airports like ATL (or even where YYC is heading) are better off in terms of size, connectivity, and overall service offered. But it can cost them the airline variety and potentially routes. So really this is an AV geek POV, no one in the public would care about this conversation lol. As I said, a dominant strong hub but with a healthy mix of foreign tails/destinations as well is the best. YVR is also a major WS base (call it hub, focus city, whatever you want). Terminology aside, it is a clear 2nd to YYC whatever way you cut it. So it has AC huge, WS very healthy, and then all the randoms. I will take the YUL or YVR mix over a 90%+ fortress hub anyway, personally. No shade other airports, just my geeky preference

-Flair is like chaos personified, it's unsettling to watch them unravel. The collapse of Lynx can not save everything, their other cost burdens are a far bigger weight than the potential gain from Lynx pax. The summer route update on aeroroutes.net are dizzying, it's just changes all over the place and no clear direction still. Just swapping around frequency on a bunch of mediocre route pairings, as if that will actually save the day. Don't get me wrong, I am not revelling or relishing in their troubles, I worked for an airline that ended up shutting suddenly, I know how it feels. But objectively it seems pretty clear it's a matter of when, not if

-I must give a kudos to Porter Airlines for how they have executed this national expansion. It is an incredibly difficult thing to do, so many airlines try and fail, wash rise repeat. And they were very regional in the east, very well liked for service but still dwarfed by AC in size. Going from that hyper-regional focus to trans continental and a new fleet, it can be what takes an airline down. It was completely foreign to them, in all ways (new aircraft, destinations, market demographics, even establishing themselves at Pearson instead of just YTZ). A total 180 from their existence before the Embraers. Like a silent killer, they unveiled a big expansion, but kept it focused. And that appears to be working, they have maintained or added capacity on my routes compared to when they originally launch, plus keep adding destinations, but not in a chaotic non sensical way (ahem, Flair). I really hope their strategy is actually working from a financial perspective, and they are actually making money and not secretly bleeding money due to their expansion

Aw sending hugs

YVR is in a great position with WS/AC/International carriers galore, I wish YYC was more like that but we're so small that having a WS fortress hub is a big deal, albeit probably not great to have that at the expense of AC...

I think most people on here would much prefer PD to survive over F8 but I'm still thinking that PD's expansion is too fast. But time will tell. I hope F8 lasts until the end of summer at least...