2026 PIT FLEET AC

[350driver]

Here's some numbers to extrapolate for your own purposes.

By 2030 720 retirements will have taken place (720 from 2026 numbers)
By 2035 1375 retirements will have taken place (655 from 2030 numbers)
By 2040 2024 retirements will have taken place (649 from 2035 numbers)

I think you're overestimating your 2030 numbers. More like 500 by the end of 2030 assuming everyone goes to 65.

Your other estimations are close I think though, again assuming everyone goes to 65. If people go early that will shift numbers forward obviously.

These numbers are straight from ALPA’s pension calculator. I would almost say they’re too conservative. Who knows in the end lol

[altiplano]

Well, I don't know what to tell you, but it's off by about 200 #s by my calculations.

Perhaps they are using a factor for expected early retirements.

Or maybe and probably most likely, whoever built the calculator input the mandatory retirements per year into the calculator at some earlier point and haven't adjusted it for guys that went early. Meanwhile your seniority number goes up in the system and they are still counting retirements that are already gone.

I hope I'm wrong...

[350driver]

Well, I don't know what to tell you, but it's off by about 200 #s by my calculations.

Perhaps they are using a factor for expected early retirements.

Or maybe and probably most likely, whoever built the calculator input the mandatory retirements per year into the calculator at some earlier point and haven't adjusted it for guys that went early. Meanwhile your seniority number goes up in the system and they are still counting retirements that are already gone.

I hope I'm wrong...

Where are you basing your numbers from? And what are they exactly for 2030/2035/2040?

Thanks!

[altiplano]

Reliable data that was once circulated and then working it out from there.

[Protonpilot]

Well, I don't know what to tell you, but it's off by about 200 #s by my calculations.

Perhaps they are using a factor for expected early retirements.

Or maybe and probably most likely, whoever built the calculator input the mandatory retirements per year into the calculator at some earlier point and haven't adjusted it for guys that went early. Meanwhile your seniority number goes up in the system and they are still counting retirements that are already gone.

I hope I'm wrong...

Anybody offering an estimate on this is going to be wrong. It's all a guess!

The estimator is updated every calendar year with the new seniority list which removes all the retirees from the previous year. That's why you see your correct (current) seniority number displayed. It hasn't been done at the time I'm writing this, but the new (2026) list just came out a few days ago. Should be corrected by the next bid I would think.

There are over 300 pilots older than age 60 on the property. They could all retire tomorrow, or work until age 65. The trend seems to be working to 65 for most. If you look at the latest CMSC files, the 'Line Status' file shows that for the 16 retirements that took place on that bid (not resignations/terminations or disability, management assignment, etc...) 14 of them flew to the ICAO limit. Only 2 are retiring before reaching age 65.

The seniority algorithm uses something less than 65 as an average for its predictions. But once again, it's just a guess when you're talking about the short term (less than 5 years out).

My guess would be somewhere between 500 and 700. I think you're both mostly right!

[altiplano]

I guess I read the first post at mandatory retirement numbers, and that is just over 500. Will we see another 200+ go early in the next 5 years? I think that would be above the norm, but who knows. Let's hope...

[350driver]

And while obviously retirement numbers are important for movement, there's something around the corner one can't ignore.

Whether this 'new frontiers' is just a brand play like 'fly the flag' to get everyone excited about a nothing burger, remains to be seen.

What I however do guess is that if AC wants to truly be a global player, they can't stagnate at 270-280 fins.

For example (and I get EK is not a DIRECT competitor, but it speaks to the market share they're hunting for with what I'm about to say), Tim Clark (their ceo) has made it abundantly clear that by 2042 they will have 700-800 airplanes at DWC. How can you as an Air Canada elect to stay at 270-280 airplanes, and compete with a beast like that? You simply can't.

If you look back at when our bids were exciting (24-01 to 24-03), those bids were as a result of our expected fleet size of 308 fins at Rouge/Mainline by 2030.

The retirement of these 18x319's makes 308 a whopping 290 final by 2030. If we are in fact going to only have 290 airplanes by 2030, I don't see how we will be able to capitalize on our 'new frontiers' plan which is currently selling investors on believing that we will surpass 30b in revenue by 2030, offer record capacity, and new markets developed.

I just watched a podcast with Mark Galardo, and something intriguing was said which I think points to how this management is currently thinking. They said if they can prove the margins and profitability on the XLR product which they are deploying this year and next, they want more of them and hope investors give them money to buy more of them.

I do genuinely think AC wants way more than 30 x XLR's. I'd wager those 18 retired rouge airplanes, will come by way of 18+ more XLR orders when they can prove the market. And those will likely hit AC by 2030-2032.

All of this is all just speculation and just maybe me putting lipstick on a pessimistic pig. But seriously, remember EK is aiming for 700-800 planes in DWC. And I don't think they're joking. If AC truly wants to compete for market share on the world scale, 300 fins are rookie numbers. They have to pump those numbers up.

Will they do it at the cost of profitability? Of course not. But as you know, if you can't profit, then something is off with your business model. I happen to think AC's business model actually is smart and it clearly makes them money; so then why not scale it up? They make a good point, why can't YYZ/YUL/YVR be the same hubs FRA/AMS/LHR/CDG are? Our product is already better than the airlines in those domiciles. This isn't about Canada's economy anymore. We are 73% a global airline as it currently stands. So I doubt the fleet delivery/delays is them intentionally staging off the growth. The growth is coming. Let's not forget the amount of fuel hedging that excess cash can be pushed into at these barrel prices now to ensure stability throughout our 2030-240 years.

All of this to suggest that it's time to go big, or time to go home for AC. This 250-270 fin consolidation they're stuck in right now, while responsible for the moment, can't pave a bright future, and they know that.

[thepoors]

And while obviously retirement numbers are important for movement, there's something around the corner one can't ignore.

Whether this 'new frontiers' is just a brand play like 'fly the flag' to get everyone excited about a nothing burger, remains to be seen.

What I however do guess is that if AC wants to truly be a global player, they can't stagnate at 270-280 fins.

For example (and I get EK is not a DIRECT competitor, but it speaks to the market share they're hunting for with what I'm about to say), Tim Clark (their ceo) has made it abundantly clear that by 2042 they will have 700-800 airplanes at DWC. How can you as an Air Canada elect to stay at 270-280 airplanes, and compete with a beast like that? You simply can't.

If you look back at when our bids were exciting (24-01 to 24-03), those bids were as a result of our expected fleet size of 308 fins at Rouge/Mainline by 2030.

The retirement of these 18x319's makes 308 a whopping 290 final by 2030. If we are in fact going to only have 290 airplanes by 2030, I don't see how we will be able to capitalize on our 'new frontiers' plan which is currently selling investors on believing that we will surpass 30b in revenue by 2030, offer record capacity, and new markets developed.

I just watched a podcast with Mark Galardo, and something intriguing was said which I think points to how this management is currently thinking. They said if they can prove the margins and profitability on the XLR product which they are deploying this year and next, they want more of them and hope investors give them money to buy more of them.

I do genuinely think AC wants way more than 30 x XLR's. I'd wager those 18 retired rouge airplanes, will come by way of 18+ more XLR orders when they can prove the market. And those will likely hit AC by 2030-2032.

All of this is all just speculation and just maybe me putting lipstick on a pessimistic pig. But seriously, remember EK is aiming for 700-800 planes in DWC. And I don't think they're joking. If AC truly wants to compete for market share on the world scale, 300 fins are rookie numbers. They have to pump those numbers up.

Will they do it at the cost of profitability? Of course not. But as you know, if you can't profit, then something is off with your business model. I happen to think AC's business model actually is smart and it clearly makes them money; so then why not scale it up? They make a good point, why can't YYZ/YUL/YVR be the same hubs FRA/AMS/LHR/CDG are? Our product is already better than the airlines in those domiciles. This isn't about Canada's economy anymore. We are 73% a global airline as it currently stands. So I doubt the fleet delivery/delays is them intentionally staging off the growth. The growth is coming. Let's not forget the amount of fuel hedging that excess cash can be pushed into at these barrel prices now to ensure stability throughout our 2030-240 years.

All of this to suggest that it's time to go big, or time to go home for AC. This 250-270 fin consolidation they're stuck in right now, while responsible for the moment, can't pave a bright future, and they know that.

That's all well and good except the clowns running this company don't have a WB order in anywhere. And that's what makes the company money. XLRs are a stop gap. The reality is they fumbled badly during covid when planes could have been had for cheap. Now we will be waiting a decade (at least) before we get more WBs. This management group is a bad joke and I don't understand how they still have jobs. I don't see where this growth could be coming from, they just keep shuffling things around but there's no substance there. The board is asleep, and I can't believe shareholders will fall for this much longer. It's all talk and anyone with basic sense can see right through that.

[350driver]

And while obviously retirement numbers are important for movement, there's something around the corner one can't ignore.

Whether this 'new frontiers' is just a brand play like 'fly the flag' to get everyone excited about a nothing burger, remains to be seen.

What I however do guess is that if AC wants to truly be a global player, they can't stagnate at 270-280 fins.

For example (and I get EK is not a DIRECT competitor, but it speaks to the market share they're hunting for with what I'm about to say), Tim Clark (their ceo) has made it abundantly clear that by 2042 they will have 700-800 airplanes at DWC. How can you as an Air Canada elect to stay at 270-280 airplanes, and compete with a beast like that? You simply can't.

If you look back at when our bids were exciting (24-01 to 24-03), those bids were as a result of our expected fleet size of 308 fins at Rouge/Mainline by 2030.

The retirement of these 18x319's makes 308 a whopping 290 final by 2030. If we are in fact going to only have 290 airplanes by 2030, I don't see how we will be able to capitalize on our 'new frontiers' plan which is currently selling investors on believing that we will surpass 30b in revenue by 2030, offer record capacity, and new markets developed.

I just watched a podcast with Mark Galardo, and something intriguing was said which I think points to how this management is currently thinking. They said if they can prove the margins and profitability on the XLR product which they are deploying this year and next, they want more of them and hope investors give them money to buy more of them.

I do genuinely think AC wants way more than 30 x XLR's. I'd wager those 18 retired rouge airplanes, will come by way of 18+ more XLR orders when they can prove the market. And those will likely hit AC by 2030-2032.

All of this is all just speculation and just maybe me putting lipstick on a pessimistic pig. But seriously, remember EK is aiming for 700-800 planes in DWC. And I don't think they're joking. If AC truly wants to compete for market share on the world scale, 300 fins are rookie numbers. They have to pump those numbers up.

Will they do it at the cost of profitability? Of course not. But as you know, if you can't profit, then something is off with your business model. I happen to think AC's business model actually is smart and it clearly makes them money; so then why not scale it up? They make a good point, why can't YYZ/YUL/YVR be the same hubs FRA/AMS/LHR/CDG are? Our product is already better than the airlines in those domiciles. This isn't about Canada's economy anymore. We are 73% a global airline as it currently stands. So I doubt the fleet delivery/delays is them intentionally staging off the growth. The growth is coming. Let's not forget the amount of fuel hedging that excess cash can be pushed into at these barrel prices now to ensure stability throughout our 2030-240 years.

All of this to suggest that it's time to go big, or time to go home for AC. This 250-270 fin consolidation they're stuck in right now, while responsible for the moment, can't pave a bright future, and they know that.

That's all well and good except the clowns running this company don't have a WB order in anywhere. And that's what makes the company money. XLRs are a stop gap. The reality is they fumbled badly during covid when planes could have been had for cheap. Now we will be waiting a decade (at least) before we get more WBs. This management group is a bad joke and I don't understand how they still have jobs. I don't see where this growth could be coming from, they just keep shuffling things around but there's no substance there. The board is asleep, and I can't believe shareholders will fall for this much longer. It's all talk and anyone with basic sense can see right through that.

100% agree with you. I just don't know how they're genuinely going to compete if we don't get larger. It would be a shame.

[flying4dollars]

What I however do guess is that if AC wants to truly be a global player, they can't stagnate at 270-280 fins.

For example (and I get EK is not a DIRECT competitor, but it speaks to the market share they're hunting for with what I'm about to say), Tim Clark (their ceo) has made it abundantly clear that by 2042 they will have 700-800 airplanes at DWC. How can you as an Air Canada elect to stay at 270-280 airplanes, and compete with a beast like that? You simply can't.


All of this to suggest that it's time to go big, or time to go home for AC. This 250-270 fin consolidation they're stuck in right now, while responsible for the moment, can't pave a bright future, and they know that.

Keep one thing in mind when comparing with EK (and I know you mentioned not a direct competitor), but they operate substantially in open skies agreements. We do not. Therefore they certainly need more planes for that network reach. However I do agree we need growth to stay competitive internationally over the sub 300 airplanes we have now and it most certainly needs to come from mid-large size aircraft.

[350driver]

What I however do guess is that if AC wants to truly be a global player, they can't stagnate at 270-280 fins.

For example (and I get EK is not a DIRECT competitor, but it speaks to the market share they're hunting for with what I'm about to say), Tim Clark (their ceo) has made it abundantly clear that by 2042 they will have 700-800 airplanes at DWC. How can you as an Air Canada elect to stay at 270-280 airplanes, and compete with a beast like that? You simply can't.


All of this to suggest that it's time to go big, or time to go home for AC. This 250-270 fin consolidation they're stuck in right now, while responsible for the moment, can't pave a bright future, and they know that.

Keep one thing in mind when comparing with EK (and I know you mentioned not a direct competitor), but they operate substantially in open skies agreements. We do not. Therefore they certainly need more planes for that network reach. However I do agree we need growth to stay competitive internationally over the sub 300 airplanes we have now and it most certainly needs to come from mid-large size aircraft.

Yep totally agree. I think by 2035 AC needs 350-370 fins to be a relevant operator internationally. They can be all talk (which Canada is full of), but to be relevant they have to be up there with the likes of Lufthansa mainline. I mean look at Lufthansa AG (our direct competitor), between Swiss, Lufthansa, Eurowings, Edelweiss, Austrian, etc they have over 1000 fins on property. Even AF/KLM (another competitor) have 600 fins today. If EK is going for 700-800 by 2042, you know Europe isn't just standing by. That's direct market share for them that they will lose. Hence it will hit AC indirectly to need more planes. I do think we have a consolidation game in front of us in Canada. I'm not sure who it will be. Jazz into AC? Porter into AC? Transat in to WJ? AC needs to step their game up their timidness if they want to play the global game. There's no way around it.

[flying4dollars]

What I however do guess is that if AC wants to truly be a global player, they can't stagnate at 270-280 fins.

For example (and I get EK is not a DIRECT competitor, but it speaks to the market share they're hunting for with what I'm about to say), Tim Clark (their ceo) has made it abundantly clear that by 2042 they will have 700-800 airplanes at DWC. How can you as an Air Canada elect to stay at 270-280 airplanes, and compete with a beast like that? You simply can't.


All of this to suggest that it's time to go big, or time to go home for AC. This 250-270 fin consolidation they're stuck in right now, while responsible for the moment, can't pave a bright future, and they know that.

Keep one thing in mind when comparing with EK (and I know you mentioned not a direct competitor), but they operate substantially in open skies agreements. We do not. Therefore they certainly need more planes for that network reach. However I do agree we need growth to stay competitive internationally over the sub 300 airplanes we have now and it most certainly needs to come from mid-large size aircraft.

Yep totally agree. I think by 2035 AC needs 350-370 fins to be a relevant operator internationally. They can be all talk (which Canada is full of), but to be relevant they have to be up there with the likes of Lufthansa mainline. I mean look at Lufthansa AG (our direct competitor), between Swiss, Lufthansa, Eurowings, Edelweiss, Austrian, etc they have over 1000 fins on property. Even AF/KLM (another competitor) have 600 fins today. If EK is going for 700-800 by 2042, you know Europe isn't just standing by. That's direct market share for them that they will lose. Hence it will hit AC indirectly to need more planes. I do think we have a consolidation game in front of us in Canada. I'm not sure who it will be. Jazz into AC? Porter into AC? Transat in to WJ? AC needs to step their game up their timidness if they want to play the global game. There's no way around it.

I'd buy that number of 350-370. Our problem is we are so fixated on being reactive and not proactive. That will be what stunts growth or leaves dollars on the table (revenue/profit) which in turn will hurt their vision for 2030

[altiplano]

These guys have no vision only risk aversion. And they don't want to compete, we are abandoning market share.

[crystalpizza]

... They make a good point, why can't YYZ/YUL/YVR be the same hubs FRA/AMS/LHR/CDG are? ...

Cause the latter airports can actually half function to handle the traffic volume they get. Waiting 30-60+ minutes for a gate or "flow time" is near unheard of in LHR, maybe a 10 minute hold on arrival is the most you'd see.. compare that to any hub in Canada. Our aviation infrastructure in this country is years behind even handling what we have now; would it be able to keep up with all this growth between all the various airlines in the next 10 years? It's also not fully within AC's control either much like aircraft deliveries.

[350driver]

... They make a good point, why can't YYZ/YUL/YVR be the same hubs FRA/AMS/LHR/CDG are? ...

Cause the latter airports can actually half function to handle the traffic volume they get. Waiting 30-60+ minutes for a gate or "flow time" is near unheard of in LHR, maybe a 10 minute hold on arrival is the most you'd see.. compare that to any hub in Canada. Our aviation infrastructure in this country is years behind even handling what we have now; would it be able to keep up with all this growth between all the various airlines in the next 10 years? It's also not fully within AC's control either much like aircraft deliveries.

Very good point

[350driver]

These guys have no vision only risk aversion. And they don't want to compete, we are abandoning market share.

At least we get Vimeo updates

[PostmasterGeneral]

This current C suite has been nothing but talk for years now. They love to come up with all of these grand plans, but with no way to actually execute them. The fleet is running at max capacity right now on all types. Delays are at an all time high, the network is stretched so thin that there’s zero wiggle room to take up the slack when a weather event happens or a plane goes mechanical.

These people operate in a fantasy land where everything looks good on paper and they can sell the profit forecasts to shareholders. In reality, it’s an absolute mess, but they continue to chant the mantra “everything’s fine, nothing to see here!”

[mel gibson]

Asked Chatgpt did Emirates destroy Quantas?

The Canadian government in the name of less Canada carbon emissions opened the door to middle east carriers.
These carriers who are state sponsored, have discriminatory flight attendant hiring practices, have state of the art pilot training , will be a considerable threat to Canadian aviation.






Short answer: No — Emirates did not “destroy” Qantas, but it seriously damaged Qantas’s international long-haul business, especially to Europe, and forced a major strategic reset.

Here’s the clear, aviation-industry view:

⸻

What Emirates did to Qantas

1. Europe routes were crushed

Before the 2000s, Qantas dominated Australia–Europe flying (via Singapore/Bangkok).

Emirates (and later Qatar/Etihad):
• Offered one-stop service via Dubai
• Flew newer aircraft, better cabins, better service
• Had lower cost structures
• Added huge capacity

Result:
Qantas could not compete profitably on Europe routes.

Qantas:
• Withdrew its own metal from most Europe services
• Ended the “Kangaroo Route” as a Qantas-operated network
• Shifted passengers onto Emirates flights instead

⸻

2. Qantas International lost billions

Between ~2008–2014:
• Qantas International lost ~$2–3 billion AUD
• Emirates, Qatar, and Singapore Airlines gained market share
• Qantas grounded aircraft and cut routes

This was existential pressure, not just competition.

⸻

3. The Emirates partnership (2013) was survival

Qantas didn’t beat Emirates — it partnered with them.
• Qantas moved its Europe hub from Singapore to Dubai
• Emirates fed Qantas passengers onward
• This stopped the bleeding

Alan Joyce (Qantas CEO) has openly said the deal:

“Saved Qantas International”

⸻

What Emirates did NOT destroy

1. Qantas Domestic
• Qantas still dominates Australian domestic flying
• Protected by geography, slots, loyalty program, and brand
• Emirates doesn’t compete domestically

Domestic profits have repeatedly propped up the airline.

⸻

2. Qantas as a company

Qantas today:
• Still Australia’s flag carrier
• Profitable in multiple recent years
• Strong loyalty program (one of the most valuable airline loyalty businesses globally)
• Expanding non-stop long-haul (Project Sunrise)

If Emirates had truly “destroyed” Qantas, it wouldn’t exist today.

⸻

The real story

Emirates exposed Qantas’s weaknesses, especially:
• High labor costs
• Inefficient long-haul fleet at the time
• Overreliance on legacy Europe routes

Emirates didn’t kill Qantas — it forced it to evolve or die.

Qantas:
• Abandoned being a Europe long-haul powerhouse
• Refocused on:
• Domestic dominance
• Ultra-long-haul niche routes
• Partnerships instead of head-to-head battles

⸻

Bottom line
• Emirates did not destroy Qantas
• Emirates ended Qantas’s dominance on Europe routes
• The pressure nearly broke Qantas International
• The Emirates partnership saved Qantas from collapse

If you want, I can also compare this to what happened to Air Canada vs Gulf carriers, or explain why Project Sunrise is Qantas’s attempt at revenge.

[Sinner]

That's all well and good except the clowns running this company don't have a WB order in anywhere. And that's what makes the company money. XLRs are a stop gap. The reality is they fumbled badly during covid when planes could have been had for cheap. Now we will be waiting a decade (at least) before we get more WBs. This management group is a bad joke and I don't understand how they still have jobs. I don't see where this growth could be coming from, they just keep shuffling things around but there's no substance there. The board is asleep, and I can't believe shareholders will fall for this much longer. It's all talk and anyone with basic sense can see right through that.

What do you mean no WB order? There is an order for 18 787-10s that are starting delivery in the next 9 months with options for 12 more. The 777s don't need to be replaced until 2035. Expect to see an order for 777X or 350-1000 within the next few years with deliveries in time for 2035.

[Daniel Cooper]

We have a Prime Minister set on destroying Canadian airlines for carbon emission reasons. It's a conspiracy theory until it isn't. This will greatly impact all of our career progressions.

[thepoors]

That's all well and good except the clowns running this company don't have a WB order in anywhere. And that's what makes the company money. XLRs are a stop gap. The reality is they fumbled badly during covid when planes could have been had for cheap. Now we will be waiting a decade (at least) before we get more WBs. This management group is a bad joke and I don't understand how they still have jobs. I don't see where this growth could be coming from, they just keep shuffling things around but there's no substance there. The board is asleep, and I can't believe shareholders will fall for this much longer. It's all talk and anyone with basic sense can see right through that.

What do you mean no WB order? There is an order for 18 787-10s that are starting delivery in the next 9 months with options for 12 more. The 777s don't need to be replaced until 2035. Expect to see an order for 777X or 350-1000 within the next few years with deliveries in time for 2035.

Yes that's an existing order that was made pre-covid and I'm pretty sure they recently cut the number to 14 fins. I don't think you realize the length of the waitlist and production delays for 350s...even if they got on the list yesterday they would not be getting airplanes in 2035. The 777X still isn't certified and will have a similar waitlist. AC will not be getting new WBs (beyond the 87s) for a very long time. They will have to buy or lease used airframes. This is a company that still has airplanes flying around in a livery phased out 9 years ago and operates 320s with early 90s build dates. They are not an enterprising bunch.

[altiplano]

AC manages to find ways to move up deliveries on new orders every time. Either Boeing or Airbus want to get the order and will meet the need somehow.

The used market can be an advantageous place to look too. Delta has used it extensively, works for them.

Nobody really cares about paint, why not get the most out of your paint job, wait until it needs to be done... there's some 8 year new 787s in toothpaste blue, who cares... that's what they said they would do, update as required.

[Sinner]

That's all well and good except the clowns running this company don't have a WB order in anywhere. And that's what makes the company money. XLRs are a stop gap. The reality is they fumbled badly during covid when planes could have been had for cheap. Now we will be waiting a decade (at least) before we get more WBs. This management group is a bad joke and I don't understand how they still have jobs. I don't see where this growth could be coming from, they just keep shuffling things around but there's no substance there. The board is asleep, and I can't believe shareholders will fall for this much longer. It's all talk and anyone with basic sense can see right through that.

What do you mean no WB order? There is an order for 18 787-10s that are starting delivery in the next 9 months with options for 12 more. The 777s don't need to be replaced until 2035. Expect to see an order for 777X or 350-1000 within the next few years with deliveries in time for 2035.

Yes that's an existing order that was made pre-covid and I'm pretty sure they recently cut the number to 14 fins. I don't think you realize the length of the waitlist and production delays for 350s...even if they got on the list yesterday they would not be getting airplanes in 2035. The 777X still isn't certified and will have a similar waitlist. AC will not be getting new WBs (beyond the 87s) for a very long time. They will have to buy or lease used airframes. This is a company that still has airplanes flying around in a livery phased out 9 years ago and operates 320s with early 90s build dates. They are not an enterprising bunch.

The 787-10 order was placed in September 2023, after covid. The order for 18 frames with deliveries between 2026-2028 was reduced to 14 but the 4 remaining fins will still be delivered after 2028. The latest 350 order with public deliveries was ordered June 2025 with deliveries starting 2031. There are no 350 orders with deliveries starting beyond 2031 yet.

[Airbusses]

And while obviously retirement numbers are important for movement, there's something around the corner one can't ignore.

Whether this 'new frontiers' is just a brand play like 'fly the flag' to get everyone excited about a nothing burger, remains to be seen.

What I however do guess is that if AC wants to truly be a global player, they can't stagnate at 270-280 fins.

For example (and I get EK is not a DIRECT competitor, but it speaks to the market share they're hunting for with what I'm about to say), Tim Clark (their ceo) has made it abundantly clear that by 2042 they will have 700-800 airplanes at DWC. How can you as an Air Canada elect to stay at 270-280 airplanes, and compete with a beast like that? You simply can't.

If you look back at when our bids were exciting (24-01 to 24-03), those bids were as a result of our expected fleet size of 308 fins at Rouge/Mainline by 2030.

The retirement of these 18x319's makes 308 a whopping 290 final by 2030. If we are in fact going to only have 290 airplanes by 2030, I don't see how we will be able to capitalize on our 'new frontiers' plan which is currently selling investors on believing that we will surpass 30b in revenue by 2030, offer record capacity, and new markets developed.

I just watched a podcast with Mark Galardo, and something intriguing was said which I think points to how this management is currently thinking. They said if they can prove the margins and profitability on the XLR product which they are deploying this year and next, they want more of them and hope investors give them money to buy more of them.

I do genuinely think AC wants way more than 30 x XLR's. I'd wager those 18 retired rouge airplanes, will come by way of 18+ more XLR orders when they can prove the market. And those will likely hit AC by 2030-2032.

All of this is all just speculation and just maybe me putting lipstick on a pessimistic pig. But seriously, remember EK is aiming for 700-800 planes in DWC. And I don't think they're joking. If AC truly wants to compete for market share on the world scale, 300 fins are rookie numbers. They have to pump those numbers up.

Will they do it at the cost of profitability? Of course not. But as you know, if you can't profit, then something is off with your business model. I happen to think AC's business model actually is smart and it clearly makes them money; so then why not scale it up? They make a good point, why can't YYZ/YUL/YVR be the same hubs FRA/AMS/LHR/CDG are? Our product is already better than the airlines in those domiciles. This isn't about Canada's economy anymore. We are 73% a global airline as it currently stands. So I doubt the fleet delivery/delays is them intentionally staging off the growth. The growth is coming. Let's not forget the amount of fuel hedging that excess cash can be pushed into at these barrel prices now to ensure stability throughout our 2030-240 years.

All of this to suggest that it's time to go big, or time to go home for AC. This 250-270 fin consolidation they're stuck in right now, while responsible for the moment, can't pave a bright future, and they know that.

That's all well and good except the clowns running this company don't have a WB order in anywhere. And that's what makes the company money. XLRs are a stop gap. The reality is they fumbled badly during covid when planes could have been had for cheap. Now we will be waiting a decade (at least) before we get more WBs. This management group is a bad joke and I don't understand how they still have jobs. I don't see where this growth could be coming from, they just keep shuffling things around but there's no substance there. The board is asleep, and I can't believe shareholders will fall for this much longer. It's all talk and anyone with basic sense can see right through that.

Couldn't agree more.

[awws_enthusiast]

Anyone have any info on calls for Feb or Mar PIT classes?