equipment bid

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
User avatar
Sage
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 264
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 12:50 pm
Location: Centre of the Universe

equipment bid

Post by Sage »

Does anybody know what happened to the equipment bid that was supposed to come out last week?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Scope. Not just a mouthwash.
Glen Quagmire
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 3:32 pm
Location: YYZ

Re: equipment bid

Post by Glen Quagmire »

It says it has been postponed on the flight ops site with no other details. Since oil has gone out of control and 67's are now being parked things might be a changing.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Stick-Shaker
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 245
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 3:39 pm

Re: equipment bid

Post by Stick-Shaker »

My thoughts too. I think the 787 delays are creating some havoc.
---------- ADS -----------
 
If it ain't fried, it ain't chicken baby!
Brick Head
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 882
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 4:37 pm

Re: equipment bid

Post by Brick Head »

I'm thinking it is just as Montie said. Fuel prices are forcing a re evaluation of everything.

Passing on fuel prices to the consumer is not as simplistic as just raising fares. As you raise fares people gradually stop flying, which means the revenue increase is offset by empty seats.

Pretty basic. If fuel stays where it is, fairs have to go up. Some say 10-15%. If fairs go up less people will fly. If less people fly capacity has to be reduced.

Hence what is transpiring south of the boarder with all the consolidation taking place.

So far domestically, the consumer has been pretty resilient. But that can't last forever. Sooner or later if fuel keeps increasing, higher fares will lead to fewer people flying, and over capacity here as well.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Old fella
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2478
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.

Re: equipment bid

Post by Old fella »

Yup, that is what usually happens. Squeeze us too much and we(old useless f---ers like me) will deflect our scarce bucks somewhere else that is affordable - if there is such thing as affordable.

Having said that, I support the airlines adding extra $$$$ for those who insist in treating Air Canada, WestJet et al as cargo outfits with their oversized/heavy baggage. Some of the bags I have seen during last/this years travels are as heavy and big as the obese tools who bring them along. These people clog up the check-in counters and some poor female employee has to dead lift 100lbs bags, she struggles or ask that useless tool to put his way oversize bag on the belt. And what does this useless fat tool do - he bitches. I watched this very thing in CYHZ a few months back, make no wonder front line airline check-in staff get snarly. I don't blame them I don't give a fiddlers @#$! where you are going your skivvies, socks/shirts/slacks/suits/cleaning gear/condoms can all be had for less that 50lbs. If you insist in hauling the golf clubs/skis and the like, you pay big time not me.

FedEx, UPS and the like haul cargo not the passenger outfits
---------- ADS -----------
 
babybus
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 3:00 pm
Location: YUL

Re: equipment bid

Post by babybus »

Last I had heard was a status quo bid with lot's of retirements bringing a small upward movement.
What's the rumor now?A reduction in capacity means layoffs?What's the latest scoop?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Brick Head
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 882
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 4:37 pm

Re: equipment bid

Post by Brick Head »

babybus wrote:Last I had heard was a status quo bid with lot's of retirements bringing a small upward movement.
What's the rumor now?A reduction in capacity means layoffs?What's the latest scoop?
Naw. I doubt there will be layoffs.

The company can actually put out a reduction bid that is fully compensated for by retirements. In other words no movement. No openings.

A status quo bid would see movement from retirements with openings left over for hiring. A reduction bid of about 100 positions would create a stagnation bid with no openings for new hires. More than 100 would see a surplus.

My expectation is a reduction but not more than retirements and no openings for hiring.

IOW stagnation but as a group we will start to shrink.

All the above pure speculation on my part.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Jaques Strappe
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1847
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 6:34 pm
Location: YYZ

Re: equipment bid

Post by Jaques Strappe »

No question that the high price of fuel and the 787 delay will have an impact. Have you also noticed that most of the 767s are still in hybrid colors?

Ticket prices have to go up. If that means empty seats, so be it. The automotive industry was so scared people would stop buying cars that they created their own false economy. Now, nobody will even consider a new vehicle unless it comes with 0% financing, no payments for 90 days, no deposit, and a three month gas card. You can buy a 2009 model in March of 2008. Why? It helps the residual end value at the termination of the lease. Another example of creating a false economy.

The executives are bent on creating a business model that would see people paying bus fare for an airline ticket. Nobody wants to pay more for a ticket due to rising fuel costs but they seem to have no issue saddling up to the pumps in the latest SUV.

Rant Over :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Standby for new atis message
mighty mouse
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:43 am

Re: equipment bid

Post by mighty mouse »

Brick Head wrote:
babybus wrote:Last I had heard was a status quo bid with lot's of retirements bringing a small upward movement.
What's the rumor now?A reduction in capacity means layoffs?What's the latest scoop?
Naw. I doubt there will be layoffs.

The company can actually put out a reduction bid that is fully compensated for by retirements. In other words no movement. No openings.

A status quo bid would see movement from retirements with openings left over for hiring. A reduction bid of about 100 positions would create a stagnation bid with no openings for new hires. More than 100 would see a surplus.

My expectation is a reduction but not more than retirements and no openings for hiring.

IOW stagnation but as a group we will start to shrink.

All the above pure speculation on my part.

I'm also thinking the last 400 guys hired are on flat salary. It would cost more to train pilots bumping down than just to keep the flat pay pilots around. They are cheap.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Lost in Saigon
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 852
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 9:35 pm

Re: equipment bid

Post by Lost in Saigon »

In 2003, during CCAA most of the pilots who were laid off were on flat salary. The company probably did it for the "optics" to please the investors.

When you have CA, FO, and RP on 4 equipment types, there is a lot of seat changes when you have a downbid. As you said, it costs the company more to lay them off, and then "downtrain" everyone else. Then when they hire them back, they have to "uptrain" everyone.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: equipment bid

Post by Rockie »

Jaques Strappe wrote:Nobody wants to pay more for a ticket due to rising fuel costs but they seem to have no issue saddling up to the pumps in the latest SUV.

Rant Over :lol:
No kidding. And the same time I was listening to the news about $1.30/L gasoline while driving home at 100kph I noticed that no one, regardless what kind of vehicle they were driving, was going less than Mcrit on the 401.
---------- ADS -----------
 
mighty mouse
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:43 am

Re: equipment bid

Post by mighty mouse »

Rockie wrote:
Jaques Strappe wrote:Nobody wants to pay more for a ticket due to rising fuel costs but they seem to have no issue saddling up to the pumps in the latest SUV.

Rant Over :lol:
No kidding. And the same time I was listening to the news about $1.30/L gasoline while driving home at 100kph I noticed that no one, regardless what kind of vehicle they were driving, was going less than Mcrit on the 401.

On that note, just something to think about,
I drive a small aerodynamic car with an instantaneous fuel mileage display. When on the highway on level roads, no wind here’s what I see at different speeds with the cruise on:

80 KPH – 5.9 L/100KM
100KPH – 7.9 L/100KM
120 KPH – 9.8L/100KM
130KPH – 11.0L/100KM
140KPH- 13.5L/100KM
Just shows speed makes a huge difference on mileage and I imagine its much much more for SUVs/trucks.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Disco Stu
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:26 am
Location: Springfield, USA
Contact:

Re: equipment bid

Post by Disco Stu »

Rumour now is the bid will be out on or around the 14th.

Watch for a reduction bid too.....
---------- ADS -----------
 
"The South will boogie again."
priceless
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 9:51 pm

Re: equipment bid

Post by priceless »

What exactly does a reduction bid entail?
---------- ADS -----------
 
babybus
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 3:00 pm
Location: YUL

Re: equipment bid

Post by babybus »

A reduction bid as Lost in Saigon mentionned is really bad if the reduction is more than the retirements in wich case there could be layoffs.If the reduction is equal or less than the retirements then I believe in theory that everybody stays where they are...
Remember that it's just a rumor for now...
---------- ADS -----------
 
priceless
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 9:51 pm

Re: equipment bid

Post by priceless »

thanks, im new to this stuff!ill stay tuned.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Johnny767
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 283
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 1:50 pm

Re: equipment bid

Post by Johnny767 »

Aviation 101:

"If you have not heard a rumor by noon, start your own"

From a very reliable source.

The bid is delayed because, due to the delay of the 787's Boeing has made an offer of additional 777's or some 767-300's in the interm.

What impact this will have on the bid, who knows? Likely more of an impact on 02-08.
---------- ADS -----------
 
babybus
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 3:00 pm
Location: YUL

Re: equipment bid

Post by babybus »

Johnny767 wrote:Aviation 101:

"If you have not heard a rumor by noon, start your own"

From a very reliable source.

So true,so true

The bid is delayed because, due to the delay of the 787's Boeing has made an offer of additional 777's or some 767-300's in the interm.

What impact this will have on the bid, who knows? Likely more of an impact on 02-08.
I like your rumor the best though!
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Disco Stu
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:26 am
Location: Springfield, USA
Contact:

Re: equipment bid

Post by Disco Stu »

First 787 for AC is now moved back to 2012 from 2010.
---------- ADS -----------
 
"The South will boogie again."
Brick Head
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 882
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 4:37 pm

Re: equipment bid

Post by Brick Head »

Montie,
"These reductions will allow us to remove four older, less fuel efficient Boeing 767-200 aircraft in addition to what was originally planned in 2008."

Looks like we have the answer as to why the equipment bid was pulled.

Looks like a reduction bid fully compensated for by retirements.

Montie did mention being in talks with Boeing to mitigate the 787 delay on Air Canada with substitute aircraft.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Glen Quagmire
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 3:32 pm
Location: YYZ

Re: equipment bid

Post by Glen Quagmire »

That information regarding parking the 67's has been out for a while, It was mentioned in early April on a flight ops message from the VP so I don't see that as being the cause of the bid being postponed. That said it seems like a stretch to expect new or additional aircraft with the uncertainties surrounding the industry right now.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Brick Head
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 882
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 4:37 pm

Re: equipment bid

Post by Brick Head »

Pretty sure this is an additional 4 767's.

The new revised fleet plan (chart with Q1 results) now shows 10 less 767's by years end. I believe previous it was six less with 777's to compensate.

http://www.aircanada.com/en/about/inves ... MDA_q1.pdf

Page 15 shows the revised fleet plan.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Glen Quagmire
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 3:32 pm
Location: YYZ

Re: equipment bid

Post by Glen Quagmire »

Thanks, you might be right. AC did just extend a lease on a 300 to offset parking the 200's, I wonder if that is the 300 showing as being returned to lessor this year in the report?
---------- ADS -----------
 
sarg
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 273
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 10:44 pm

Re: equipment bid

Post by sarg »

mighty mouse wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Jaques Strappe wrote:Nobody wants to pay more for a ticket due to rising fuel costs but they seem to have no issue saddling up to the pumps in the latest SUV.

Rant Over :lol:
No kidding. And the same time I was listening to the news about $1.30/L gasoline while driving home at 100kph I noticed that no one, regardless what kind of vehicle they were driving, was going less than Mcrit on the 401.

On that note, just something to think about,
I drive a small aerodynamic car with an instantaneous fuel mileage display. When on the highway on level roads, no wind here’s what I see at different speeds with the cruise on:

80 KPH – 5.9 L/100KM
100KPH – 7.9 L/100KM
120 KPH – 9.8L/100KM
130KPH – 11.0L/100KM
140KPH- 13.5L/100KM
Just shows speed makes a huge difference on mileage and I imagine its much much more for SUVs/trucks.
Your car gets poor mileage my minivan does better than that at 120 kph about 8.3L/100km with 100kph about the fuel effiecent.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Glen Quagmire
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 3:32 pm
Location: YYZ

Re: equipment bid

Post by Glen Quagmire »

In Montie's latest message from May 8th he states that 18 aircraft will be removed from the fleet by the end of the year which is to include as we already knew all the 767-200's. Not sure if he is including the A340's in that 18, hopefully he is.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”