Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

U. S. Airlines to fly between Canadian cities

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Indapool

25 characters is not enou
Joined
Jul 17, 2002
Posts
225
U. S. Airlines to fly between Canadian cities

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica]U.S. airlines in Canada soon, minister says


CANADIAN PRESS

OTTAWA — Transport Minister Jean Lapierre says he intends to move "faster than you think" toward a deal with the United States that would allow American airlines to carry passengers between Canadian cities.

Lapierre plans to meet with his U.S. counterpart in about two weeks to kickstart negotiations toward a so-called open-skies treaty with Washington.

The travelling public and opposition politicians seem open to the idea of allowing U.S. airlines to compete with Canadian airlines on routes between Canadian cities, Lapierre said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

Current rules permit foreign carriers to fly in and out of Canada but forbid them flying between communities, such as Toronto-Vancouver or Halifax-Montreal.

An open-skies deal would also allow Canadian carriers to fly between American cities.

"I may be moving faster than you think," said Lapierre, who represents a riding in Montreal, home base for Air Canada, the country's biggest airline.

"I have a great opportunity because we're meeting (Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta) . . . in Ottawa," he added.

"At this time, I don't feel any opposition . . . I feel a consensus in the country that we could move."

Mineta is expected in Ottawa on Feb. 24 to speak at a conference marking the 10th anniversary of the current Canada-U.S. air services agreement. He's also scheduled to meet with Lapierre that day.

An open-skies deal that adds price competition could be good news for budget-conscious travellers.

But it's not clear how much progress they'll make since there haven't been any preliminary talks yet on the issue, said an official with the U.S. government.

"How far could we go in opening up our markets to Canada and how far would Canada go to opening up its markets to us?," said the official.

"At this point, we don't know and I don't think Canada knows because we haven't sat down and actually had a negotiation."

The timing also may be difficult. Air Canada only recently emerged from bankruptcy protection.

And industry observers have said the American airline industry — struggling with huge debts, high fuel prices and high labour costs — would oppose giving Canadian competitors full access to their market.

Lapierre first talked about an open-skies treaty last fall, saying he wanted the all-party Commons committee on transport to look into its feasibility.

But the committee didn't bite, said Lapierre.

"If there's no problem, if I can interpret that as a green light, then I'm ready to go."

Lapierre just hasn't been listening to opposition concerns, says New Democrat MP Bev Desjarlais, a longtime member of the transport committee since the tumultuous days when Air Canada first took over Canadian Airlines and its crippling debt.

That contributed to huge financial problems that drove the Montreal-based carrier into bankruptcy protection last year.

"We've been very clear that we are not in favour of open skies," said Desjarlais.

"Open skies will see a situation where we will have less and less service going to small communities," she said.

It would also "destabilize" an already troubled industry throughout North American, she added.

Critics of open skies have argued that Canadian carriers will have trouble competing if large American airlines are permitted to fly within this country.

It's feared they would cherry-pick only the most lucrative popular routes, such as Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal or Toronto-Calgary. Such new competition would hurt domestic carriers, making them even less likely to serve smaller communities into smaller cities that already complain they're already underserved.

Still Air Canada has said it favours open skies, so long as the deal is completely reciprocal, allowing it to fly between big American cities.

"It must be reciprocal or it's totally illogical and will defeat the Canadian industry. Whatever is done here has to be done on both sides of the border," Air Canada President Robert Milton said late last year.
[/font]
 
[font=verdana, arial, helvetica] An open-skies deal that adds price competition could be good news for budget-conscious travellers.[/font]

Uh, who needs cheaper tickets?!

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica]
And industry observers have said the American airline industry — struggling with huge debts, high fuel prices and high labour costs — would oppose giving Canadian competitors full access to their market.
[/font]

I guess they read the classy thread about W2's. They didn't think about averaging the rest of the "labours" pitful wages....like mine!

It starts with Canada, next is Mexico. Pretty soon we'll have Air Haiti pulling two week rotations making low twenties, living high on the hog on days off!
 
Last edited:
Umm, Air Canada is in bankruptcy. JetsGo is headed towards that abyss. As far as I know Skytour and Air Transat only do charters to warm places, which there aren't many in Canada. So that leaves WestJet as the only airline making money in the domestic Canadian market. OH PLEASE OPEN YOUR BORDERS MR. PRIME MINISTER.

Air Canada wants to come play down here, but they can't succeed in their own neighborhood despite little to no competition on their international flights. Right, that maple leaf will wither and die if it pokes its nose in the domestic US market. Hey the people will get cheap tickets though. That's all the powers at be care about.
 
Do you really think the leagacy carriers are going to allow cabatage laws to be usurped, just so a few canadian carriers can try their luck and add more competetion in the U.S.
 
Not so fast!

The disparity would be very large in relation to amount of cities U.S. carriers could benefit in the Canadian market versus what the Canadian carriers could benefit in the U.S.. It would have to be an even number of cities, not a free for all. It will more than likely not go anywhere because there is really no benefit for U.S. carriers. I guess the Canuks have a very short memory. Their arm chair quarterbacking during the last several years has not been taken very well here in the U.S.. Let them swim in their own mess since they know everything.
 
Indapool said:
U. S. Airlines to fly between Canadian cities

[font=verdana, arial, helvetica]U.S. airlines in Canada soon, minister says


CANADIAN PRESS

OTTAWA — Transport Minister Jean Lapierre says he intends to move "faster than you think" toward a deal with the United States that would allow American airlines to carry passengers between Canadian cities.

Lapierre plans to meet with his U.S. counterpart in about two weeks to kickstart negotiations toward a so-called open-skies treaty with Washington.
[/font]

This would be an absolute dissaster for the airlines of Canada. This must not be allowed to happen in Canada or down here in the US.
 
Tim47SIP said:
It will more than likely not go anywhere because there is really no benefit for U.S. carriers.

I suspect your wrong. FedEx today flys within Canada using FedEx 727s, but a contract Canadian operator supplies the crews. MD10s, or A300s may be a better fit and if restrictions were lifted they could use any type they wished. I suspect that FedEx is pushing strongly for this change. You may recall that FedEx and Fred Smith were a major force in airline deregulation in the mid 70s. These changes would be a positive for FedEx pilots, or future FedEx pilots.:)
 
We are all SO F&CKED its not even funny. Maybe Mineta hasn't noticed that American carriers have lost ELEVENTY BILLION dollars over the last 4 years!!! The Canadians aren't doing any better. And now he wants more price competition?
 
For the record Nimtz, Air Canada emerged from bankruptcy in October and faces competition on every international route from the likes of BA, AF, KLM, CX, etc...

The US will be asleep at the wheel if they allow this happen. It would benefit Canadian carriers much more than it would their US counterparts. The minister of Transport in the article thinks that US carriers would just jump at the chance to enter the Canadian market. But what market? Canada is a big country geographically, sparse population. There are only a handful of routes that are sustainable for major airline service, basically routes between Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal. You won't see United 777 service from Moose Jaw to Whitehorse. Plus, on the more lucrative routes, there are already at least 3 airlines competing, and as high as 6 (Toronto-Vancouver has AC, Westjet, Jetsgo, Air Transat, Harmony and soon, Canjet). Would it be wise for a US carrier to enter that kind of market? Doubt it, but hey, industry management hasn't exaclty been shrewd lately.

It would not make sense for American carriers, with most costs and labour in USD to compete in Canada where revenues will be in the weaker Canadian dollar. Likewise, the opposite holds true, too - how would it benefit the US to have Canadian carriers enter the US marketplace with most costs and labour in CDN, but revenues in the stronger USD?

Then there's the political part of it. As Tim47sip says, Americans won't be so keen to step on a plane with a maple leaf on the tail, and likewise Canadians will be equally leery of getting on a plane with the stars and stripes.

The whole idea just doesn't make sense.
 
J32driver said:
We are all SO F&CKED its not even funny. Maybe Mineta hasn't noticed that American carriers have lost ELEVENTY BILLION dollars over the last 4 years!!! The Canadians aren't doing any better. And now he wants more price competition?


I think I would dispute that number....er word...
 
Not so fast.....

"As Tim47sip says, Americans won't be so keen to step on a plane with a maple leaf on the tail, and likewise Canadians will be equally leery of getting on a plane with the stars and stripes."

I have to strongly disagree:

American=Canadian= Consumers

Americans and Canadians will get on whichever flying machine will cost them the least amount of money to get them from Pt A to B. Certainly the flag of Haiti or Guatemala on the tail of an airliner you're about to load you family on may cause you to back down the stairs and ask for a refund...but US/Canada???...I don't think so.

I don't know enough about the cabotage issue to speak with any certainty regarding its chances.....but I do know enough to think it means big problems for American pilots working for American Airlines.


 
"American pilots working for American Airlines".

Well, as longs as it only those from AA who cares:)

Norm Mineta is on drugs if he allows this. I can just see it now: "Well, the Canadian "experiment" worked out great, the consumer benefitted, now we will allow TACA, Singapore and all the other nations in, after all it is a great deal for America.

Just like the CEO at BA, he is all over it, open skies that is. As if US air carriers are seeing a great deal in flying domestic in England.

That dishonorable piece of shat from AK opened the door, let us make sure it hits his arse on the way out!
 
I have to agree here...

Tim47SIP, people just don't care what airline they board. If it's United codesharing with Air Canada, or Lufthansa, or anyone in that almighty star alliance, people don't even know the difference.

There are a precious few, MAYBE, that even think to look at the tail of the airplane before they board - heck, unless you watch with eagle eyes most times you can't even see the tail of the a/c from the boarding area. Certainly not from the jetway.

So, this thought that many Americans will refuse to fly xxx airline because it happens to operated by Air Canada is ridiculous.

There are far more revenue streams in the U.S., at least talking city pairs, than in Canada. Isn't that obvious? If they do agree to anything like this, it would, as someone else stated, have to be an even trade (pair for pair, or something like that).

This is truly a slippery slope. And as for FedEx, their interests have zero to do with the passenger carrying side of the world. Obviously it benefitted them to deregulate, and, quite obviously, it would be great if they could fly their packages between any point in the world with their own crews. Personally, I'd like a million dollars and a house in the Hamptons. Doesn't mean I'm going to get it, though. If anything, FedEx should fight for some sort of special exemption. If this passes, largely due to cargo companies and their expansion needs, it will slaughter the passenger carrying airlines in the process. As if we need _more_ bloodletting?

-brew3
 

Latest resources

Back
Top