Triple 7's delivery schedule

[CanadaEH]

Lets see, Air Canada has NEVER practiced predatory pricing.....NEVER.

No?

Competition Bureau sets out policy on airfares

Sep. 23, 2004. 07:11 PM


MONTREAL (CP) — The federal Competition Bureau is clearing the way for Air Canada to cut its fares to match those of low-cost competitors, as long as it doesn't reduce prices to below the competitors' levels.

In a letter sent to airlines today, the bureau said it will come down on a "dominant carrier" that undercuts the fares of a smaller competitor, or floods the market with more capacity.

"As a general principle, where a dominant carrier's response to competition consists only of reducing fares to levels which match, but do not undercut those of a competitor (`fare matching'), the bureau will not take enforcement action," Sheridan Scott, Commissioner of Competition, said in her letter.

"However, if such fare reductions were accompanied by a significant increase in capacity or a significant increase in the number of seats offered at the lowest price, this `safe harbour' would not apply."

The bureau found Air Canada guilty in July 2003 of offering fares at below its cost on two routes in Atlantic Canada, acting on a complaint by WestJet Airlines of Calgary as it attempted to expand in Eastern Canada.

Air Canada argued that it had lowered its prices to remain competitive.

The Competition Bureau said Air Canada violated the Competition Act by cutting prices below its cost or by adding capacity on several eastern routes to drive its smaller rivals out of the business.

Air Canada's appeal of the ruling was stayed pending its bankruptcy protection, which is to end next week.

The Competition Bureau noted in its letter that the landscape has changed considerably since Canadian Airlines was taken over by Air Canada in 1999.

New competition has emerged, particularly in the Montreal-Ottawa-Toronto triangle, and discount airlines have developed their own loyalty programs.

It also notes that consumers are using the Internet to buy tickets, breaking down former restrictions on booking last-minute fares.

AND..

Roots Air charges Air Canada with predatory pricing
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2001/03/0 ... 10308.html

Canada 3000 wants 'Tango' airline declared illegal
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2001/10/2 ... 61001.html

Air Canada Faces Charges of Anti-Competitive Behavior
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... i_71570593

Air Canada Finds Dominance Comes at a Price - Brief Article
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/ ... i_62238201

WestJet Airlines: Toughen Competition Act to Prevent Anti-Competitive Practices, WestJet Airlines Chairman
Tells House of Commons Industry Committee
http://www2.cdn-news.com/scripts/ccn-re ... tml?cp=wja

Air Canada using predatory pricing: CanJet
http://cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cg ... njet010215

Once the predatory actions were definded by the Competition Tribunal, airlines were able to competitively match the competition in price. That is what allowed Jetsgo to fly for so long. Everyone knew that charging $49 to fly from YVR-YYZ wasn't covering costs, but the rules as defined by the Competition Tribunal allowed Jetsgo to price however it wanted and allow the competition to match. Since Jetsgo went bankrupt, I believe (without looking into it) that many changes were made to the rules of pricing, new entrants, and anti-competitive behavior.

[tonysoprano]

CanadaEh.
I wouldn't work so hard if I were you. Get a life. You'd be a happier Westjetter. Oh, I know, you're already happy. I'm happy for you. Actually, I'd like to thank you for posting this article. It shows how there really is no fair competition. Since when should the government tell any airline or other business what it can price? Does this mean the Dollar Store will go out of business? Fares below cost? Prove it! Our cost of doing business keeps changing. AC ( or any airline ) should be allowed to price whatever it wants if we want real competition. If anyone thinks that AC would keep pricing below cost just to compete, they really should think again. I seem to recall the famous WJ theory that the "market" sets prices. These accusations have been going on for years only because other airlines have gone away while AC is still around. If AC is under pricing, why doesn't everyone else? Since the lowcosts have a lower cost advantage,you could easily do it. Right? This is nothing more than the government's way of telling Canadians it's keeping competition alive and well. Ya right.

[Azure]

So, what happens if the current goverment opens "Blue Skies?"

Both AC and WJ stand to lose....sure cheap flights....would you put your family on a American Flight???

[tonysoprano]

Damn right Canadians will fly American. I don't see an ounce of pride towards our flag carrier in this country. It's all about nickel and dime. Thank God AC already has codesharing with Star Alliance members such as United and US Airways. And it sounds like Delta might be joining our team as well. Hey Clive, are you listening? Better start looking for a partner me thinks. But I'm sure Harper will accuse AC of unfair competition and somehow turn the pride of Alberta into a peach with some tax payer help. Get ready folks, it's Canadian Airlines all over again.

[yycflyguy]

So, what happens if the current goverment opens "Blue Skies?"

Both AC and WJ stand to lose....sure cheap flights....would you put your family on a American Flight???

Not sure I agree with that. Canadian carriers would have access to 300 million in the US marketplace whereas American carriers would only have access to 30 million. Key routes such as YVR-YYZ, YVR-YYC-YEG, YOW-YYZ-YUL are all very well served and another carrier would be hard pressed to make an impact. Just ask Harmony,Jetsgo and CanJet.

For those of you who feel that Air Canada service is lacking, try American Airlines. A 3 hour flight in a MD-80 is rather painful compared to the A320/EMJ. The situation in the US is still a mess and will take a lot longer to right itself.

[Hadji Ramjet]

No doubt "Blue (bleu?) Skies" will be implemented in a manner that will favor Tony's alleged "flag carrier" just as "Open Skies" was.

Behind the Embassy Door, pg 68 if you're interested.

Seen any F-16s over Kabul lately?

[Four1oh]

Well, I managed to read the entire 5 pages of this thread, and all I got out of it is undeniable proof that Rebel either has the smallest penis in aviation history, or, it's average size, but just doesn't work.

Which is it Ace?

[grammar boy]

Tony, you've gone mental. Serenity now man, serenity now.

"Canadian Airlines all over again", indeed.

[tonysoprano]

Grammar.
Ok man, I'm coming down. I'm ok now. Thanks.

[CanadaEH]

I wouldn't work so hard if I were you. Get a life. You'd be a happier Westjetter. Oh, I know, you're already happy. I'm happy for you.

Someone made a statement that was false and I provided many sources that proved him (her?) wrong. No need to take it personally.

Actually, I'd like to thank you for posting this article. It shows how there really is no fair competition.

You're welcome. What would you call the competition between WS/AC today? I'd say it's fair, wouldn't you?

Since when should the government tell any airline or other business what it can price?

In the context of predatory, I believe they can and should. There's a difference between being competitive and predatory - isn't that obvious?

Fares below cost? Prove it! Our cost of doing business keeps changing.

AC's costs are reported every single quarter. It's no secret that prior/during CCAA it was at least double that of WS's so consider it "proved" (FWIW - AC's costs are now about 25% higher than WS's while Jazz is about double).

AC ( or any airline ) should be allowed to price whatever it wants if we want real competition. If anyone thinks that AC would keep pricing below cost just to compete, they really should think again.

See above articles. Air Canada was predatory and that is a fact. If AC or anyone else wants to "compete" it should be done so in a sustainable manner. Jetsgo tried to "compete" but its prices weren't sustainable.

I seem to recall the famous WJ theory that the "market" sets prices.

The market has. People are flying for the prices that are being offered. If people think the price is too high; they don't fly and the prices fall until they do.

If AC is under pricing, why doesn't everyone else? Since the lowcosts have a lower cost advantage,you could easily do it. Right? This is nothing more than the government's way of telling Canadians it's keeping competition alive and well. Ya right.

Air Canada can "under price" all it wants as long as it isn't predatory. Competition may motivate AC to stimulate or gain or re-gain market share in a specific market by lowering fares. This is happening by both WS and AC and I see nothing wrong with that. In a commodity business where margins are paper thin; the airline with the lowest costs will always have an advantage (see WS's Q3 results vs AC's).

[tonysoprano]

Eh.
I see you still don't have a life, Eh. Well I guess that makes two of us. You say AC reports cost every quarter. How do you know what a particular route costs AC? I'd like to know how the competition bureau does it. Though I'm sure AC would be able to provide that info if asked to. Also, if a business in any other industry sells a service or good at below cost, does the bureau slap their hands? What happens when WJ has one of those hard to beat seat sales? I don't see the point in continuing to fly at below cost because it only hurts the company that's doing it, not the one they're trying to hurt. Look, predatory pricing is a fancy name over capacity. No different than that seat sale Clive and Robert are famous for. I disagree with your protectionist mentality. Companies should be allowed to price what ever they want. They would only be hurting themselves anyway. Predatory pricing did not put Canadian,Jetsgo, Canjet or C3 out of business. They had only their own business model and management to blame. Not WJ, not AC.
Cheers.

[WJ700]

AC breaks down there numbers by region. IE, Under International, the Atlantic travel will show CASM for those routes. If one had the time (Like Canada EH since he apparently has no life ) you could apply those figures to the stage length of the flight in that region and come pretty close to what the costs are. The numbers are available at

http://www.sedar.com/

However Tony, the analogy of over capacity doesn't make a lot of sense since both carriers are enjoying record load factor. WestJet is the highest operating margin in North America and Air Canada is well ahead of the American Airlines at around number 8. My opinion only but I think seat sales have to be done to keep the public happy with Canada's Airline duopoly. I find other seat sales are typical of new routes and seasonal returns for traffic stimulation.

[tonysoprano]

WJ700.
My statements refered to past airline practices. In recent years, the domestic competetion between AC and WJ has been pretty clean and healthy for both (except for some spying which apparantly doesn't mean much). Sorry dude, don't have time to look into that website for now. I'm busy trying to get a life.

[CanadaEH]

You say AC reports cost every quarter. How do you know what a particular route costs AC?

WJ700 beat me to it. CASM is a general indicator of cost but in some cases (YYZ for example) the cost is higher or lower depending on distance, aircraft type, airport costs, etc.

Also, if a business in any other industry sells a service or good at below cost, does the bureau slap their hands?

I believe the competition bureau was an entity that was created during or after Air Canada bought out Canadian, no? While I was searching for articles about predatory pricing, I came across some concerns by the government that if they allowed Air Canada to takeover Canadian the market would become very anti-competitive. The CB was created to ensure that didn't happen, IIRC.

What happens when WJ has one of those hard to beat seat sales?

Air Canada or any other airline can match.

I don't see the point in continuing to fly at below cost because it only hurts the company that's doing it, not the one they're trying to hurt.

Exactly. Air Canada tried to price below its cost in order to compete against a much lower-cost WJ and that only helped it lose billions of dollars (ok, maybe not billions domestically but it had to of been in the hundreds of millions). Like I said earlier, the airline with the lowest costs will always win if it comes down to a pricing war.

Look, predatory pricing is a fancy name over capacity.

No, they're completely different. Let's say that Airline A announces service to City ABC. Airline B (which already flies there) decides to increase capacity 100% and slash fares in half on the same day Airline A launches service. That is predatory. Over capacity would be flooding the market with seats when the market can't absord it. In that scenario you'd see prices fall (see Jetsgo) and the eventual bankruptcy of an airline. Analysts are suggesting that Canada may be on its way to a situation of overcapacity in the near future if our economy starts to slow down or go down the shitter. That wouldn't be pretty as both AC and WS are adding more aircraft.

I disagree with your protectionist mentality. Companies should be allowed to price what ever they want. They would only be hurting themselves anyway.

Companies should be allowed to price what they want. What they shouldn't be allowed to do is target competitors to stifle competition in order to put them out of business. Predatory pricing is an anti-competitive action that only has negative results - either both carriers lose money or one carrier withdraws service only to see the dominant/current carrier jack up prices once that airline stops service.

Predatory pricing did not put Canadian,Jetsgo, Canjet or C3 out of business. They had only their own business model and management to blame. Not WJ, not AC.

Agreed. And, FWIW, I'm quite happy with the way AC/WS are operating now. Nothing predatory about that.

[tonysoprano]

Companies should be allowed to price what they want. What they shouldn't be allowed to do is target competitors to stifle competition in order to put them out of business. Predatory pricing is an anti-competitive action that only has negative results - either both carriers lose money or one carrier withdraws service only to see the dominant/current carrier jack up prices once that airline stops service.

Well, (hhee,hhee) once again I have to ask,why can't the other company match the "predatory" price (not on every route of course) especially since they have a lower cost structure, and may the best one win. In reality though I doubt either company would be able to sustain the battle for very long making this an insignificant venture anyway but the government reacts in senseless, communist ways only to look good so they set up "The Competition Bureau". You state that AC lost hundreds of millions doing this. Wow, that's pretty stupid of AC. If AC plans to do this every time WJ (or whoever)starts up a new route, I better start looking for another job. Seems predatory pricing defeats the purpose of running the other guy out of business. I'm not an expert on this topic (no kidding) but I'd be reluctant to believe some of your theories or those of the CB. I would say the egsistance of the CB is senseless. You're right, the CB was set up when Canadian went tits up but only to serve as nothing more than political gain by the government of the day.Why doesn't the CB slap heavy fines on airlines for spying (sorry for bringing it up again)? Is that a fair business practice? I seem to recall AC management saying only in Canada can this happen. This, together with the different rules applied only to AC (language, routes etc.) are not what I would call a level playing field. You'd think we were still a crown corp only without the funding. It seems it doesn't pay to be big. So thanks for the education on predatory business Eh, but I still think it's a scham (and shame).

[CanadaEH]

Well, (hhee,hhee) once again I have to ask,why can't the other company match the "predatory" price (not on every route of course) especially since they have a lower cost structure, and may the best one win. In reality though I doubt either company would be able to sustain the battle for very long making this an insignificant venture anyway but the government reacts in senseless, communist ways only to look good so they set up "The Competition Bureau".

You pretty much answered your own question. If one company is being predatory, sure the other can (and probably would) match but that doesn't change the act of being predatory in the first place. I don't know how the CB defines/defined "predatory" but I would assume it would be something along the lines of either pricing below cost or trying to stifle competition with over capacity in a reactionary manner. To me - and I guess you disagree, but that's fine - I don't see how this action helps promote fair and equal competition (which is why the CB was created in the first place). If you fast forward to today, you see Air Canada offering its pass products, under $10 discounts on Tango fares (no baggage, no points, etc..), and a few other strategies that I think are designed to counter competition in a fair and equitable way. Gone are the days where one airline can flood a market with seats and drop fares to kill competition before it can get its foot in the door; the market now decides what airline flies where and how much based on demand.

You state that AC lost hundreds of millions doing this. Wow, that's pretty stupid of AC. If AC plans to do this every time WJ (or whoever)starts up a new route, I better start looking for another job.

It was pretty stupid. I think you're safe.. for now... but as an employee I'd be more worried about AC being a stand-alone entity outside of ACE, without the assistance of Aeroplan, Jazz, or ACTS when the times are tough. I hope AC can fund its pension obligations, add (and pay) for aircraft, and continue to operate profitably through the ups-and-downs of this industry.

Seems predatory pricing defeats the purpose of running the other guy out of business. I'm not an expert on this topic (no kidding) but I'd be reluctant to believe some of your theories or those of the CB. I would say the egsistance of the CB is senseless. You're right, the CB was set up when Canadian went tits up but only to serve as nothing more than political gain by the government of the day.

That's your opinion but I disagree for the many reasons I've been stating.

Why doesn't the CB slap heavy fines on airlines for spying (sorry for bringing it up again)? Is that a fair business practice? I seem to recall AC management saying only in Canada can this happen.

I'm not a lawyer so I have no idea.

This, together with the different rules applied only to AC (language, routes etc.) are not what I would call a level playing field.

I don't believe that Air Canada should have legislated rules applied to it, FWIW.

[tonysoprano]

Well, I don't believe that the predatory stunt has the nasty effects the CB claims it has. If AC (or others) wants to lose money untill the other guy quits, they would be pretty foolish and I highly doubt the intent would be worth the effort. Having said that, it is illegal and shouldn't be done. In the past they may have tried it, but the lessons have hopefully been learned. As for worrying about the standalone AC, no worries. The ACE group will continue to work as a team, ie Jazz feeds AC and vice versa, Aeroplan still AC, etc. The only thing changing is each company now provides more value to investors. Don't look for huge profits from AC but we'll do fine just the same. The big ship will keep sailing until someone puts a hole in it. I'll let you know when that happens. Untill then, your opinion is only biased speculation. Seems to be an epidemic around here. Who will be the one to bring the evil empire down?? Have a look back how this thread began and what it evolved into all because someone wishes AC would just go away. As for the pension, this seems to be a world wide epidemic with the legacy carriers. BA's pension fund is 2.1 billion pounds in the hole (that's about $5 billion). I take no comfort in sharing the problem, but I do take comfort in the long term goals of the overall situation particular to AC. But hey, your crystal ball is no better than mine. It's starting to wear a little thin actually. It's all us versus you isn't it?
Cheers, Eh.

[CanadaEH]

Well, I don't believe that the predatory stunt has the nasty effects the CB claims it has. If AC (or others) wants to lose money untill the other guy quits, they would be pretty foolish and I highly doubt the intent would be worth the effort. Having said that, it is illegal and shouldn't be done. In the past they may have tried it, but the lessons have hopefully been learned.

I think we've beaten that topic to death.. no more from me, but I will say that I do believe lessons were learned.

As for worrying about the standalone AC, no worries. The ACE group will continue to work as a team, ie Jazz feeds AC and vice versa, Aeroplan still AC, etc. The only thing changing is each company now provides more value to investors. Don't look for huge profits from AC but we'll do fine just the same. The big ship will keep sailing until someone puts a hole in it.

Maybe my understanding is different from yours but... Air Canada will continue to buy capacity on Jazz and both with continue to feed eachother. Aeroplan is no longer Air Canada; Aeroplan is now Aeroplan - a separate company that has no ties to Air Canada - with the exception that points on earned by flying on Air Canada. By spinning off Jazz and Aeroplan, the value unlocked went directly to ACE (note profits from the selloffs in previous quarterly results) and the ACE shareholders that were given shares in the two trusts. The spinnoff of Air Canada was different in that most of the capital raised went to Air Canada with the remaining to ACE. At least that's how I understand it. If you see it differently I'll try and get some clarification.

Untill then, your opinion is only biased speculation.

Not really. I don't wish anything bad on Air Canada. A healthy Air Canada means a healthy Westjet and a healthy industry overall. I've sat back and read some comments in other forums from people who know about these spinoffs that I ever will, so my "biased speculation" is only my understanding, no bias at all.

On the bright side, looks like we can discuss and keep this conversation civil after all.

[tonysoprano]

Aeroplan is no longer Air Canada; Aeroplan is now Aeroplan - a separate company that has no ties to Air Canada - with the exception that points on earned by flying on Air Canada.

Yes, that's what I meant as well. We are all reporting separate financial statements, but still work together. My understanding is eventually there will be no ACE but all the separate entities still work in support of each other.

I've sat back and read some comments in other forums from people who know about these spinoffs that I ever will, so my "biased speculation" is only my understanding, no bias at all.

I guess after a while, the same old song and dance wears thin on my patience. It came across as another one of those oppurtunities this forum is famous for. Now let's go do some real work,eh.

[WJ700]

AC's numbers are based on present numbers. With AC's present International Yield and L/F... taking out the now fuel hog A340's and adding 777's will make some huge profits by lowering CASM a lot. Add 787's and the International numbers will be huge if the demand remains. I'd think the pension issue will be resolved one way or another before 2009 when the contracts can be opened up again. It's probably about the same time AC will be showing some real benefit from the 777's on their balance sheet too. So I don't think anyone with an ounce of knowledge wants or expects AC to go anywhere but ahead. I think the rational goal of WestJet will be to maintain healthy competition for a healthy industry which there seems to be room for.

Only opinion of course.

[OMDBDUDE]

That sound you just heard was the Emirates machine gearing up for daily YYZ service, with the announcement of the Blue Sky plan today !! AC can test those 777's or the A345 on the YYZ-DXB route, and we shall see who the paxs choose. My money is that EK will do just fine.

and by the way Hadji boy, can you please try to sound half-intelligent when you spew forth your wisdom to the masses ... back on page one of this tread, you stated
One example, last time I had occasion to travel that way (spring), Emirates flies Bahrain - London twice daily and usually goes half-empty, BA does the same route once daily and is almost always oversold

Sorry but EK does not fly from BAH to LHR period, let alone twice daily ... the only place they fly to from BAH is DXB. They do however fly DXB-LHR 5 times a day and DXB-LGW 3 times a day, and they are all full, in 3 classes on every single flight ... THIS IS FACT! Bring it on !!

[/quote]

[EI-EIO]

could it be that this has wandered a bit off topic?

[tonysoprano]

2007
C-FITL B777-333ER March
C-FITU B777-333ER April
C-FITW B777-3Q8ER May
C-FIUA B777-233LR June
C-FIUL B777-333ER June
C-FIUF B777-233LR July
C-FIUR B777-333ER July
C-FIUJ B777-233LR Nov.

2008
1 B777-233LR January
2 B777-233LR February
1 B777-333ER March
6 more B777-233LR on order

2009
2 B-777F- January and March

Indeed. The above is how the thread started. Have a look back on page one. This is what Handjob RammerJet whats-his-name found so offensive and thus, once again, we got off topic. So I suggest no more AC good news on the AC forum.

[RB-211]

Tony my man. You going to be able to bid off the 76 for the 777?

How senior is it going? Are guys avoiding it to take commands on the bus? Are new hires being taken on it as cruisers? The aircraft is a gem and it will be enjoyed by all who get to fly it. Rumour is that the 777/787 may very well be common type rating. Mixed fleet flying is the balls.

The best part is you guys can rid yourselves of those land loving A340's.

[CanadaEH]

Read on another forum that AC won't be getting 777F's and that they'll be converted to either 773ER or 772LR.