It's Time

[cjp]

Boeing and Airbus regularly supply airframes to competing airlines.

Case in point: both AC and WS operate the Max.

If Porter picked up the phone tomorrow, both Airbus and Boeing would happily sell them aircraft. You can be sure both airframers have sales people assigned to the Porter file

And I’ll also guarantee that both AC and WS have both had detailed sales pitches from the folks in SJdC .

With that 1,400 mile asl, I’d have been looking very strongly at the -800. I’m familiar with a couple airlines that have had no problem acquiring them over the past few years.

Is the E2 capable of operating with a 1,400 mile asl? Sure it is.

Could the Max 8 handle a strategy that entailed either a 450 and a 2,800 mile asl? Sure it could.

But it’d be the wrong aircraft for strategy that contemplated those ASL’s and it’d likely bankrupt who ever attempted such folly.

Selecting the right airframe is absolutely critical for long term success.

Running a 132 seat airframe head to head against at least 2 and as many as 4 airlines operating, in most cases, higher capacity aircraft with lower unit costs when, for most folks, price is king, on Canada’s highest density domestic and transborder routes is an impatient strategy.

I think you’ll find that only 4 of Porters 96 E2 departures on Saturday were on routes with no non-stop competitor.

Sometimes, it’s best to sit in the weeds and wait for the right time and space, and importantly, the right airframe.

Sometimes to avoid missing an opportunity you gotta be brave and try something different. Don't count us out cause you are busy finding statistics and metrics that meet your narrative. I know Azul is using the aircraft likely to its most economic potential, were using it to build something more.

While both Boeing and Airbus had people tasked with negotiating with Porter in 2019/2020, I disagree that they were prepared to meet timeline or the priority Porter required in delivering the quantity of aircraft at the pricepoint Porter needed.

Not to mention Boeing was in the middle of a couple different scandals IIRC around that time, and I'm pretty sure Airbus had/has a 5-10 year waitlist for factory new airframes with VVIP clients.

[CaptDukeNukem]

@realitychex

I don’t know who you’re actually trying to convince. Porter is working. Customer satisfaction scores are high and loads are generally quite full.

Take your stats and go play day trader on your computer.

[Realitychex]

@realitychexg

I don’t know who you’re actually trying to convince. Porter is working. Customer satisfaction scores are high and loads are generally quite full.

Take your stats and go play day trader on your computer.

Ask the folks in a recent E2 recurrent training class what managements answer was when asked about better compensation packages for pilots.

[8895]

@realitychexg

I don’t know who you’re actually trying to convince. Porter is working. Customer satisfaction scores are high and loads are generally quite full.

Take your stats and go play day trader on your computer.

Ask the folks in a recent E2 recurrent training class what managements answer was when asked about better compensation packages for pilots.

Just lost all credibility there kiddo

[cjp]

@realitychexg

I don’t know who you’re actually trying to convince. Porter is working. Customer satisfaction scores are high and loads are generally quite full.

Take your stats and go play day trader on your computer.

Ask the folks in a recent E2 recurrent training class what managements answer was when asked about better compensation packages for pilots.

I'll play along...what was the answer you heard?

[evilgravy]

Instead of wasting all our time with this, maybe go take your brilliant ideas to a lender and start another airline. Since Porter is destined to fail any day now, start in their back yard and call it EasyJet.

exactly... I think your pal TM is available.

[khedrei]

@realitychexg

I don’t know who you’re actually trying to convince. Porter is working. Customer satisfaction scores are high and loads are generally quite full.

Take your stats and go play day trader on your computer.

Ask the folks in a recent E2 recurrent training class what managements answer was when asked about better compensation packages for pilots.

Just lost all credibility there kiddo

This guy lost credibility when he said a statute mile was longer than a nautical mile. Then doubled down on that claim not once, but twice.

I would choose a flight on the Porter E2 over ANY other airline in NA. Period. So for now, they are doing something right.

[Realitychex]

Some folks are thick as a brick.

Shall we revisit this for the last time? And after that, shall we debate whether or not the earth is flat?

One example should suffice:

YYZ-YVR is 2,085 statute miles and 1,811 nautical miles.

When comparing the two, the statute mile distance, (ie the distance used in all ASL calculations), between two fixed points, will always be more than the nautical mile distance.

That hasn't changed in the last 500 years, and isn't going to change any time soon.

Comprendez?

It's always amusing to see hard quantifiable data countered by soft, unsubstantiated qualitative and subjective denials. Unless verifiable data is provided to substantiate claims, it's just noise.

As for the comment made by management to pilots in a very recent recurrent groundschool class , it was that pilots "need to be patient on the pay because the E2's aren't making money yet".

And with an asl of 1,342 miles on Monday, a peak day, with airborne utilization of 7hrs 19 mins per tail, just 427,281 asm's generated per tail and 21.4% of the fleet grounded for one reason or another, it's gonna be quite some time, if ever, before that's going to change.

By way of comparison, Flair generated 9hrs 25 mins airtime per tail, with an asl 169 miles shorter than Porter and their fleet of 42 stretched RJ's. One Flair aircraft is in check at YLW. And Flair's OTP was 5% pts better too.

Or how about this comparison? At the end of 2002, WS had 35 tails and generated an operating margin of 12.1% with a 73% l/f.

And Porter with 42 E2's is not making any money yet. Forgive me for not being impressed.

WJA stock peaked at $14.20 that year, after two 3 for 2 splits, meaning that the $10 IPO price was now worth $31.95 adjusted for the splits. Imagine how happy the pilot group were, given that their cost for their WJ stock was around $5 and they were being taxed not at income tax rates, but far lower capital gains rates.

Anyone getting rich at Porter?

To add insult to injury, management reported that the new benchmark pay won't come out till after Xmas, after the period when the pilot group have the most leverage to obtain what they need to stop the relentless right seat turnover to AC. Perhaps someone would like to report just how many people have left Porter in the past 90 days. I hear it's at least 2 dozen.

If the pilots had any brains, they'd be refusing overtime and not answering their phones until a satisfactory arrangement is concluded. Management would have no choice to accept their demands.

Last I heard, TM was invested in a nice 150 seat operation stateside that is doing quite well and is not living on a steady diet of Kraft dinner.

[rudder]

Some folks are thick as a brick.

Shall we revisit this for the last time? And after that, shall we debate whether or not the earth is flat?

One example should suffice:

YYZ-YVR is 2,085 statute miles and 1,811 nautical miles.

When comparing the two, the statute mile distance, (ie the distance used in all ASL calculations), between two fixed points, will always be more than the nautical mile distance.

That hasn't changed in the last 500 years, and isn't going to change any time soon.

Comprendez?

It's always amusing to see hard quantifiable data countered by soft, unsubstantiated qualitative and subjective denials. Unless verifiable data is provided to substantiate claims, it's just noise.

As for the comment made by management to pilots in a very recent recurrent groundschool class , it was that pilots "need to be patient on the pay because the E2's aren't making money yet".

And with an asl of 1,342 miles on Monday, a peak day, with airborne utilization of 7hrs 19 mins per tail, just 427,281 asm's generated per tail and 21.4% of the fleet grounded for one reason or another, it's gonna be quite some time, if ever, before that's going to change.

By way of comparison, Flair generated 9hrs 25 mins airtime per tail, with an asl 169 miles shorter than Porter and their fleet of 42 stretched RJ's. One Flair aircraft is in check at YLW. And Flair's OTP was 5% pts better too.

To add insult to injury, management reported that the new benchmark pay won't come out till after Xmas, after the period when the pilot group have the most leverage to obtain what they need to stop the relentless right seat turnover to AC. Perhaps someone would like to report just how many people have left Porter in the past 90 days. I hear it's at least 2 dozen.

If the pilots had any brains, they'd be refusing overtime and not answering their phones until a satisfactory arrangement is concluded. Management would have no choice to accept their demands.

Last I heard, TM was invested in a nice 150 seat operation stateside that is doing quite well and is not living on a steady diet of Kraft dinner.

Even a 50% raise is not going to keep an under-35 year old from leaving for AC. Completely different career and much of that decision has little to do with what their T4 will say in the next 2-3 years.

‘Benchmarking’ was to attract the experience necessary to spool up the E2 operation at break net speed. It was also occurring in a market of hiring competition from multiple carriers many of whom required DEC qualifications.

Nobody is quitting Porter to go to Jazz or Flair or CargoJet. I am guessing the destinations are predominantly AC with perhaps a trickle to Transat.

The biggest mistake is that pilots typically make is extrapolating the present out to infinity. In other words - current dynamics will remain forever, or at least for the foreseeable future. That paradigm has never been sustained.

The playing field is changing in 2025. Every player will be making adjustments. Porter will not be the exception. FOAG enhancements in the environment of potential unionization, growth, and pilot attrition must be carefully weighed.

[braaap Braap]

To add insult to injury, management reported that the new benchmark pay won't come out till after Xmas, after the period when the pilot group have the most leverage to obtain what they need to stop the relentless right seat turnover to AC. Perhaps someone would like to report just how many people have left Porter in the past 90 days. I hear it's at least 2 dozen.

Attrition in the last 90 days is going to be much higher than that. I've heard the number was around 30 alone in the last 4-5 weeks.

If the pilots had any brains, they'd be refusing overtime and not answering their phones until a satisfactory arrangement is concluded. Management would have no choice to accept their demands.

Great opportunity to get this thread back on track. The benchmarking delays highlight that the FOAG "flexibility" that is touted as being better than a contract and union representation are only better for the company.

With the growth to a major Canadian carrier, we need the stability of a contract for everyone to rely upon. That contract can be adjusted through LOU/MOAs in a bilateral collaborative fashion.

[evilgravy]

Last I heard, TM was invested in a nice 150 seat operation stateside that is doing quite well and is not living on a steady diet of Kraft dinner.

Last I heard, TM also cratered his nice 189 seat operation, and was not (likely) living on a steady diet of Kraft dinner, although it may have suited the ULCC model much better.



Until PD becomes public, you can continue speculating on ASL-based profitability or the lack thereof.

[khedrei]

Some folks are thick as a brick.

Shall we revisit this for the last time? And after that, shall we debate whether or not the earth is flat?

One example should suffice:

YYZ-YVR is 2,085 statute miles and 1,811 nautical miles.

When comparing the two, the statute mile distance, (ie the distance used in all ASL calculations), between two fixed points, will always be more than the nautical mile distance.

That hasn't changed in the last 500 years, and isn't going to change any time soon.

Comprendez?

It's always amusing to see hard quantifiable data countered by soft, unsubstantiated qualitative and subjective denials. Unless verifiable data is provided to substantiate claims, it's just noise.

As for the comment made by management to pilots in a very recent recurrent groundschool class , it was that pilots "need to be patient on the pay because the E2's aren't making money yet".

And with an asl of 1,342 miles on Monday, a peak day, with airborne utilization of 7hrs 19 mins per tail, just 427,281 asm's generated per tail and 21.4% of the fleet grounded for one reason or another, it's gonna be quite some time, if ever, before that's going to change.

By way of comparison, Flair generated 9hrs 25 mins airtime per tail, with an asl 169 miles shorter than Porter and their fleet of 42 stretched RJ's. One Flair aircraft is in check at YLW. And Flair's OTP was 5% pts better too.

Or how about this comparison? At the end of 2002, WS had 35 tails and generated an operating margin of 12.1% with a 73% l/f.

And Porter with 42 E2's is not making any money yet. Forgive me for not being impressed.

WJA stock peaked at $14.20 that year, after two 3 for 2 splits, meaning that the $10 IPO price was now worth $31.95 adjusted for the splits. Imagine how happy the pilot group were, given that their cost for their WJ stock was around $5 and they were being taxed not at income tax rates, but far lower capital gains rates.

Anyone getting rich at Porter?

To add insult to injury, management reported that the new benchmark pay won't come out till after Xmas, after the period when the pilot group have the most leverage to obtain what they need to stop the relentless right seat turnover to AC. Perhaps someone would like to report just how many people have left Porter in the past 90 days. I hear it's at least 2 dozen.

If the pilots had any brains, they'd be refusing overtime and not answering their phones until a satisfactory arrangement is concluded. Management would have no choice to accept their demands.

Last I heard, TM was invested in a nice 150 seat operation stateside that is doing quite well and is not living on a steady diet of Kraft dinner.

No revisit necessary. You still can't seem to say it, so let me help you.

The correct answer is:

"Sorry guys, I was wrong. I incorrectly stated that a statute mile is longer than a nautical mile"

There. All you have to do is copy and paste.

[evilgravy]

from chatGPT.

which is longer? a statute mile or a nautical mile?

ChatGPT said:

A nautical mile is longer than a statute mile.

A statute mile is 5,280 feet (1,609.34 meters).
A nautical mile is 6,076.1 feet (1,852 meters).

So, a nautical mile is about 1.15 times longer than a statute mile.

[330heavy]

I can't believe some of you don't know which is longer, nm or sm

[Ozinater]

I think you guys should spam the living hell out of this thread with NM vs. SM comments, to drown out the incessant Realitychex drivel, and copying and pasting of FR24 utilization data. At least he stopped posting unsubstantiated dollar figures.

Let's have a moment of silence for this thread that was supposed to be about the pros and cons of organized labour at PD. Perhaps let's filibuster it with a discussion about the history of units of measurement and then maybe the Avcan mods will finally take this topic behind the barn and shoot it (please).

Oh and while it's story time, I have it on good authority that MD walked into a recent Porter DH8 captain upgrade class, and announced the YTZ preclearance facility is opening next week. Also every newly upgraded Dash CA will be receiving a $50k retention bonus on the 1 year anniversary of their upgrade line check.

[carnie]

I don't know where you are getting your info from but internal.upgrade on Q is 10 k and DEC is 25 k. As for the preclearance no clue.

[Ozinater]

Lovely numbers and yes, all of the above drivers you allude to, and plenty more, are accounted for in any granular analysis.

You’ve accounted for them, have you? Once again invoking your favourite, infallible, unwavering, omniscient source of information: “trust me bro.”
Forgive me for having doubts. In the grand scheme of things, whether or not you have accounted for certain variables, you, me, and anyone else on the outside, is still basing this analysis on fluff. As I have already beat to death, aside from what data is publicly accessible (fuel burns, mx costs, landing fees, and so on), the parameters being inputted are guestimates, for lack of a better term. It was fun to watch you dance around the notion that operating an aircraft that, by almost every known metric, has significantly higher operating costs (on the order of 25-45%), but 57 more seats (all filled with happy low-yield pax), is a better ploy than PD’s E2. The lack of verifiable data (I am not talking about fuel burns) has essentially made your “analysis” null and void. So whether or not you’re accounting for certain costs is immaterial. I could just as well tell you that the tooth fairy has CPI-adjusted the amount of cash she left under your pillow.

You’ll find that regardless of the fee methodology at airports, (and even on the net acquisition cost of airframes), they are basically pricing per seat. It’s very close to a linear scale. It always results in lower trip costs, but not unit costs.

Very well. Good to know.

US$250k a month + reserves is a reasonable number for the E2 lease cost. But the additional dollars being provided as part of the sale/lease back has to be incorporated above and beyond that number. Add the forex and the c$365k a month being used isn’t a stretch. Indeed, it might be a little light.

So $258k USD rounded up. I’m glad we’re now converting this to Canadian dollars for some reason. That puts that 737 Max 8 at around $566k CAD ($400k USD).

I’m sure leasing a Max is only going to get cheaper given the demand for the airframe, the manufacturing backlog that Boeing has, and the fact that even post labour disruption they still are not being built. \s

No wonder Flair is making money hand over fist.

Fuel burns and maintenance costs come directly from
Embraer, and other proprietary sources. There’s really no mystery there. Every airline that’s assessed the E2 has those numbers.

I don’t think anyone is questioning the validity of the fuel burn data or mx costs.

The piece you may be missing in all of this, and why the operations numbers are so important, is that all these numbers and drivers have to be linked to a real world frequency schedule. Doing so generates a far more accurate picture of the costs (and with a separate and complex undertaking, the revenues), associated with ops at all the particular airports utilized and specific routes and frequencies flown.

That’s where it gets complex.

And this is where the numbers start to fall apart. Airplanes need to generate revenue to cover the fixed and variable costs of any airline’s operation. Aircraft don’t generate revenue on the ground. Once the fundamental design of the airline is set and operating, (ULCC, LCC, full service etc), its almost impossible to change and it becomes a pure revenue game.

Once the fixed and variables are covered, about 75% of the revenue is gravy. That’s the allure of the business and what keeps schemers and dreamers coming back for more.

In the US, an MIT study shows that aircraft with the size and range characteristics of the E2 average over 10 hours a day hours airborne. With this utilization, the aircraft cover all the costs of operations and a, (hopefully), nice profit over and above.

Porter’s problem is they aren’t getting enough utilization out of their fleet to accomplish this.

Even peak summer, it was around 8.5 hrs a day. It’s currently averaging about 6hrs a day. Yesterday it was about 5hrs 44 mins.

There are too many aircraft costing too
much money, all requiring people and infrastructure to support them that are underutilized or not flying at all.

Yesterday, there were 11 aircraft in the weeds for one reason or another.

If the operation was humming along with each tail operating an average of 10.25 hrs a day with their current asl, with a couple of spares and provision for heavy checks as they come due, things would be far more intriguing to filthy capitalists like myself. Porter’s fundamental problem is they haven’t found enough work for what they have, yet they keep adding more.

The bottom line is that they’re likely not generating enough revenue. But as long as there’s cash to underwrite the shortfall, (be it proceeds from the sale of YTZ or sale lease back cash, or someone winning the Powerball), it’s business as usual.

So what does this all mean?

Anyone making a career choice (and with options at other airlines available), should be aware that all the sunshine may not be as advertised. There may be a better long term career option available.

I totally understand why left seaters have no choice but to buy into the concept. No one wants, (or can afford), to vacate that seat and start again as an FO at AC, WS or elsewhere. So it’s natural that they’ll be a bit of denial going on.

The bottom line is to assess the info available out there and choose wisely.

I don’t think anyone would disagree that the utilization of the E2s is low. They should be squeezing another 3-4 hours out of each aircraft at least. There is very likely more to the story, I doubt porter is buying these airplanes with the intention of underutilizing them and having them sit and collect dust.

The first issue is with the somewhat fragmented structure of the route network. You mentioned already the long ASL. There are quite a lot of long transcontinental routes, and a handful of shorter ones out east. Quite a lot of the flying is YYZ/YOW/YUL to points west (YYC/YEG/YVR/YYJ + the western USA) or Florida. There are also not many redeyes with the exception of California and YVR/YEG (that I know of). While I gather they are likely trying to build up the network from YYZ, Ottawa and Montreal, it would probably be prudent to add some western flying as well. Porter already has a crew base in Vancouver, and people have long been asking when the YVR flying is going to expand beyond just Ontario & Quebec. I have heard rumours that the intention is to add more routes out of YVR (to YYC/YEG, transborder to the US, and some sun destinations). These are just rumours but it would certainly add some productivity to have an aircraft doing YHZ-YYZ-YVR-LAS-YEG (or something like that), rather than just YHZ-YYZ-YVR. Right now with everything feeding into Toronto/Ottawa/Montreal that is not possible. Building up YVR is just an example, the point being that more connectivity will get some more sectors out of each tail.

The transborder flying at the moment is pretty much all transcon as well. Based on the prospective routes porter initially published for the E2, that will not always be the case. PHL/ATL/DCA/BNA/MSP/IAH/DFW/AUS/SLC/DEN/PDX all appear to be on the radar, or were on the radar at some point in time. Getting LGA slots seems like kind of a pipe dream, but stranger things have happened I suppose. Maybe YYZ-JFK at some point in conjunction with YTZ-EWR. There is also sun flying, which I have heard is going to happen eventually.


Then there’s the issue of frequency. I jumpseated YYZ-YYC on the E2 last week. There were only 3 flights, all full, I managed to get one of two open seats on one of the flights. This isn’t an isolated occurrence either. YVR seems to have gotten increased frequency from YYZ, time to do the same for YYC (and potentially YEG) based on what I’m seeing. YYZ-YUL could also use a bump, at least to bring PD a bit more in line with what AC is doing (something like 26x daily between YYZ/YTZ and YUL).

Pretty sure PD has considered where an aircraft like the E2 performs best, and factored that into their network planning decisions. They are not looking to fly it YYT/YHZ-DUB/SNN just “because we can” (ETOPS 180 certification or whatever)- the airplane is just not designed for that. As the route network matures it is likely that that 1400 mile ASL will drop. The notion that there is nowhere to fly these aircraft or not enough work for them is pretty shortsighted. It has been fairly obvious over the last year or more that the expansion of Porter’s E2 network has been significantly curtailed by reliability issues with the PW GTF (see also: AC, TS, Spirit, Frontier, etc). It has gotten to the point where they are shelving or delaying the launch of new routes (YYZ-YQT for all the angry commuters out there) because of the number of aircraft that are down. You made mention of 11 aircraft “in the weeds”, there are (based on the information I’ve been given) at least 7 sitting waiting for one or both engines to be changed. As for the balance, maybe two in maintenance and two spares, I don’t know. What is clear is that it has gotten to the point where they need to enlist the Dash 8 to help cover the holiday schedule. Apparently the DH8 is coming back to YYZ for a month (probably longer) to cover YUL and YOW flying, allowing the jets to do the longer stuff.

Getting these airplanes flying 10 hours a day is not a monumental task. PD seems to have identified (even in the early days) a number of routes they would like to deploy the E2 on and a number of well-performing routes that they would like to boost frequency on. What they are capable of flying right now is a different story. With a number of airplanes sitting around waiting for engines and Dash 8s being sent to YYZ to cover flying, my guess would be that they seem to have their work cut out for them as it is (I think staffing/training throughput was an issue in the past, not sure if that is still a thing). It seems like with the airplanes they have that aren’t broken, they are focusing on launching a handful of new routes, established ones that have been performing well, or those that tie in closely with the Transat JV or other codeshares. Even when they had just ordered the E2, the prospective/planned route map they released to the public indicated that it was going to do more than just 5 hour transcons.

I don't know where you are getting your info from but internal.upgrade on Q is 10 k and DEC is 25 k. As for the preclearance no clue.

Don’t mind me. I’m just following another poster’s example by sharing “untruths”:

Ask the folks in a recent E2 recurrent training class what managements answer was when asked about better compensation packages for pilots.

[Realitychex]

Last I heard, TM was invested in a nice 150 seat operation stateside that is doing quite well and is not living on a steady diet of Kraft dinner.

Last I heard, TM also cratered his nice 189 seat operation, and was not (likely) living on a steady diet of Kraft dinner, although it may have suited the ULCC model much better.



Until PD becomes public, you can continue speculating on ASL-based profitability or the lack thereof.

TM had checked out of Lynx long before Merren ran it into the toilet, at least her second such train wreck. But don’t let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

If you’ve been around this industry for as long as I have with plenty of C suite access, it’s not difficult to reverse engineer ANY airline to a granular level. The only cost driver that’s new in the past 20 years is the cost of Wifi. And I happen to know the CEO of a couple of airlines, one of which also operates the E2.

It’s not rocket science. How do you think Linenberg, Baker, Shanker, Syth and a host of others both now and in the past decades working for Wall Street Investment outfits come up with their published analysis? Ya think they just regurgitated the published MD&A’s? Have you ever noticed how close their EPS usually are to what is subsequently announced?

As I’ve said countless times before, the only unknown is the appetite and quantum investors / owners are prepared to pony up in order to underwrite operating losses.

[Realitychex]

[/quote]

No revisit necessary. You still can't seem to say it, so let me help you.

The correct answer is:

"Sorry guys, I was wrong. I incorrectly stated that a statute mile is longer than a nautical mile"

There. All you have to do is copy and paste.
[/quote]



The statute mile distance between two fixed points will always be a higher number than the nautical mile distance between the same two fixed points. And it is stat miles that are used to calculate asl distance.

It was that way in 1994 when I wrote my first business plan and model that grew an investment of $400,000 into a company that was ultimately sold to Onex at a valuation of about $5b, it was the same deal when the identical model was used by the founders, and founding shareholders, (of which I am one), of JetBlue to launch that airline.

It was that way in the analysis of the launch of Mexico ‘s second largest airline, and it’s the same deal with the latest US venture that launched a few years back.

It’s hard to figure out why this has become a fixated red herring for some, other to deflect and obfuscate from various data supported inconvenient truths reported elsewhere.

To paraphrase from another well written post on this or perhaps another thread, (I don’t recall), “a condescending closer to explain what ever rubbish you’re explaining is a classic sign of someone running out of arguments. When you can’t refute an argument, resort to snark. And whilst it may feel satisfying, it doesn’t make your case any stronger”.

Porter managed 6hrs 38 mins per tail from their fleet of 42 E2’s on Tuesday with an ASL of 1,376 miles. By way of comparison, WS’s similar capacity 36 tail, near fully depreciated 737-700 fleet generated 6hrs and 30 mins……but with an asl of 965 miles.

Porter’s casm over that 1,376 mile stage length was around 17.46 cents, WestJet’s 737-700 casm over the 965 mile asl was around 19.63 cents. Stage length adjust 19.63 cent casm to a 1,376 mile asl, and once again, the -700 costs are virtually identical to, and I suspect a tad lower than the E2 casm.

I wonder who generated higher yields, given that 411 mile difference in asl?

Focus on the forest, not the trees.

[khedrei]

Of course the distance between 2 points will always be bigger when measured in statute miles than if it were measured in nautical miles...

I wonder why that is...?

BECAUSE A NAUTICAL MILE IS BIGGER THAN A STATUTE MILE!!

Why is it that there is any attention being paid to this by some? Perhaps it's because you seem to claim to know so much about SO much (hell, i even said that you seemed to know what you were talking about), yet you made this simple error in one of your claims. And even after having it pointed out to you many times by many people, you refuse to acknowledge that you said something incorrect. For someone that is getting blasted by almost everyone on all of the "big" claims you are making, one would think you could at least acknowledge one of the simple small errors that you made. But you can't even do that. You just insult the people who called you out on your obvious "ppl level" mistake.

Did you ever think that being humble and acknowledging a mistake might earn you some much needed credibility for all your other big claims?

I guess not.

Also, i didn't dispute anything you said other than your false claims that a statute mile is longer than a nautical mile, so you know where you can put that comment right? I definitely don't need a stronger case for my argument.

[Mac08]

https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=is+a+nau ... atute+mile

What a moron

[evilgravy]

It was that way in 1994 when I wrote my first business plan and model that grew an investment of $400,000 into a company that was ultimately sold to Onex at a valuation of about $5b, it was the same deal when the identical model was used by the founders, and founding shareholders, (of which I am one), of JetBlue to launch that airline.

so, then... how's JetBlue doing?

And it is stat miles that are used to calculate asl distance.

also... I don't think so, given the above

[evilgravy]

TM had checked out of Lynx long before Merren ran it into the toilet, at least her second such train wreck. But don’t let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

Chairman of the board = 'checked out'. This doesn't surprise me, given the circumstances. All shall now bow down to the great Realitychex.

[Bede]

TM had checked out of Lynx long before Merren ran it into the toilet, at least her second such train wreck.

He checked out? He was the major, but not sole, shareholder. That's a pretty major breach of fiduciary duty.

[Realitychex]

And you probably think Beddoe was the majority shareholder of WS. Sure he was. Until January 1996.

Why not pick up the phone and have a chat with TM, as those who know him well have done regularly over the past 30+ years?

Lynx was entirely controlled from a head office a few miles west of where I am, and let’s just say that it’s a place that sees very little rain and has never seen a snowflake other than occasionally on the peak of an iconic nearby hiking trail.

Every decision of consequence, be it the decision to hire a CEO who hadn’t a clue and had already run one airline into the ground, and her subsequent decisions, be it to use Australian based crew planners rather than long experienced Canadian ones who understood the practicalities of operating in the Canadian market, or route planners that wouldn’t be able to find Kelowna on a map and countless other idiotic decisions can all be traced back to the outfit that was calling all the shots.

Were he 25 years younger, I’d have far more faith and confidence in Porter’s ability to generate an operating profit from air operations were he COO. He’s forgotten more about that side of the business than most will ever know.

Meanwhile, the red herring obsessed, (or is it a typo obsessed?), mileage clowns are still at it. If you want to use NM to calculate asl, fill your boots. Simply multiply the calculated number by 1.15078 to convert to SM and then the number will be consistent with industry standards.

If there’s confusion as to why asl and utilization is critical when analyzing granular airline economics, we’re back to square one. Perhaps an undergrad economics degree, a couple years of grad school in aviation economics and a decade or more of practical analytical experience in the sector would be a start.

JetBlue had a fabulously lucrative stock run when I was a founding shareholder. That ended at least 12 years ago, perhaps more, when their ASL was 1,089 miles =/-, about 25% shorter than Porter's current asl. It was the same with Volaris with the last founding shares sold just prior to the 2016 US election.

WS's ASL prior to privatization in 1Q 2019 was 892 miles. The 737-700 fleet's current asl is around 950 miles, (but it ranges from at least 760 to 1,205 miles depending on DoW), and there are far fewer Q400's now than there were back then.

It takes a lot to move an ASL, especially as airlines grow. Had Porter launched YYZ-YQT with 7x r/t daily at 567 miles per trip, the asl would have dropped from 1,376 miles to 1,282 miles with utilization increasing to a still sub par 7hrs 2 mins a day. So adding YYZ-YQT in combination with the 2,100 mile YYZ-SAN/PSP sectors isn't going to move the dial anywhere but north.

The key to investing in startups is get out when growth slows down and juniority turns into seniority. That being said, having private equity roll in and buy a company out at the split adjusted price of $104.625 per share, with a cost base of about $3 a share doesn’t hurt either.

Virtually every one at WS who was there when the company was the same size as where Porter is now, (from investors to call center agents), made out like bandits with large capital gain profit, matching stock purchase plan and profit sharing paid 2x annually in cash.

Who’s getting rich at Porter these days?

Those are the sorts of returns anyone who has money invested in Porter wants, or at least returns 1/12th of those. A 5 bagger would be nice. It's simply a matter of how long their patience is before decisions are made that there are superior opportunities to generate returns and Christmas bonuses for themselves and their shareholders elsewhere.

Only they themselves know the limits of their fiscal patience and their tolerance for sticking with an investment with insatiable capex requirements with no exit strategy that is killing their money.