waltthizzney
New Member
they will absolutely control the bookings for club med thunder bay
hope u dont mind stopping for gas twice
Toronto Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport | ?m | ?s | Ports Toronto | Arup
hope u dont mind stopping for gas twice
TOareaFan
Superstar
waltthizzney
New Member
jn_12
Senior Member
He said Club Med Thunder Bay
sjc
Active Member
They might be able to make Cancun from Windsor, although it would be a long flight. They could almost certainly do it with only one stop from any of their other airports. EDIT: They might even be able to sell tickets in both directions at their stop if it is in the U.S. I think we would see Bermuda before Mexico, though.
Last edited:
Jonny5
Senior Member
From the article:
No refuelling needed.
No refuelling needed.
jn_12
Senior Member
Unless you're flying an empty plane it'd be impossible. There's no way they can fly as far as Cancun and even Bermuda would be very doubtful. You'd have massive restrictions on weight (which is already a huge problem for flights to Halifax in particular) and they wouldn't make a cent.
Last edited:
sjc
Active Member
The Q400 has a 2500 km range. It just needs more runway than is available at YTZ to take off with that much fuel. At pretty much any other airport it isn't a problem (I think it needs 4600 feet to take off fully loaded).
Last edited:
voxpopulicosmicum
Senior Member
^So we're back to wondering whether Porter can convince the port authority to convince each of the federal, provincial and city governments to allow the port authority to fill in 5 acres of lake to extend the runway. Funny how plans keep tripping up on the same old logistical hurdles.
sjc
Active Member
No, it just means the focus will be on destinations within 500 miles of Toronto, as it always has been. Even if they could fly to Mexico out of YTZ, there is no way they could compete on price or time against the major vacation airlines like Sunwing. Their main opportunities lie in the closer, smaller destinations that are not attractive to airlines with big planes.
The primary exception to this has been Halifax/St. John's and I doubt they would have gone into those if Canjet had not pulled out of the scheduled airline business when they did.
EDIT: If they were to go to a more distant destination like Mexico or Bermuda, it would almost certainly have to be a situation where they could rely on significant business in both directions from the intermediate market. For example, if they flew Toronto-Boston-Bermuda, could they sell a significant number of Boston-Bermuda seats to fill up ones left empty by people getting off in Boston? (Whether you had to get off the plane to go through customs in the intermediate stop would be important too).
Code-sharing with a US airline through a Porter-destination connection city might be an option too.
The primary exception to this has been Halifax/St. John's and I doubt they would have gone into those if Canjet had not pulled out of the scheduled airline business when they did.
EDIT: If they were to go to a more distant destination like Mexico or Bermuda, it would almost certainly have to be a situation where they could rely on significant business in both directions from the intermediate market. For example, if they flew Toronto-Boston-Bermuda, could they sell a significant number of Boston-Bermuda seats to fill up ones left empty by people getting off in Boston? (Whether you had to get off the plane to go through customs in the intermediate stop would be important too).
Code-sharing with a US airline through a Porter-destination connection city might be an option too.
Last edited:
voxpopulicosmicum
Senior Member
I think cabotage restrictions mean that code-sharing is the only way they could pick up passengers in the US en route to a 3rd country.
sjc
Active Member
Cabotage restrictions ("Eighth Freedom") prevent you from picking someone up in the US and transporting them to another destination within the US (you can only do this if the passenger originated in Canada or will eventually end up there). Picking someone up in the US and taking them to a 3rd country is the "fifth freedom right" (as long as the flight originates or end in Canada).
Canada-US Agreement: http://www.otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/united-states-america (Other countries: http://www.otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/publication/report-air-relations-between-canada-and-other-countries)
I'm not sure that Mexico allows this though. I can't seem to find the text of the latest agreement we signed with them. (http://news.gc.ca/web/article-eng.do?nid=616219)
Several of the closer islands (such as Bermuda and Bahamas) would be covered by the Canada-EU agreement (http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air/i...try_index/doc/canada_final_text_agreement.pdf) and I can't really tell if fifth freedom rights are allowed or not. EDIT: It sounds from this ("Air carriers will also be able to pick up traffic in each partner's territory and continue to a third country as part of a service to or from their home territory" that it might be ok. I suppose it would apply to St. Pierre and Greenland for flights going to the US and stopping in Canada...
Last edited:
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
Wait why is this a discussion on if Porter can fly to the Caribbean from the island. The press release, as I read it, stated that they would focus on "touristy" services in areas they already fly to. I read that to mean that I'd be able to book a flight, hotel, and show in NY or Chicago through Porter, etc vs all of a sudden changing their corporate goals and flying to Mexico.
Porter can still make a pretty profit doing this sort of thing (hotel, show tickets, etc) in places like Boston, NY, Chicago, and Montreal.
Porter can still make a pretty profit doing this sort of thing (hotel, show tickets, etc) in places like Boston, NY, Chicago, and Montreal.
TOareaFan
Superstar
I think I need to hold my hand up and apologize here. When I read they were setting up a vacation division my mind instantly gave rise to images of sort of Porter version of Air Canada Vacations....knowing what Porter destinations are, I got what I consider a pretty funny notion in my head of all-inclusive resorts in places like Timmins and Thunder Bay...so, without reading the article, I cracked what I thought was a pretty funny and self explanatory joke about them controlling the Club Med Thunder Bay bookings.
The joke was (either or both) not as funny or self explanatory as I thought and someone thought I was saying that they would control all the bookings from Thunder Bay headed towards Club Med....and it started us down a path that we need not have travelled.....please accept my humblest apologies.
I do think there is an opportunity for Porter to do packages for fun weekend type vacations to many of their current locations.....Montreal is a city with a lot going on...like Chicago and NY and soon Washington.......and there are the obvious vacation features of Tremblant and Burlington VT ....and Myrtle Beach.
voxpopulicosmicum
Senior Member
SJC - Thanks for setting me straight on cabotage, etc. Very informative.
TOareaFan - I got the joke when you made it (it was good and timely, too), although I think the question of runway expansion is central to the expansion of Porter's operations, as they appear to have maxed-out the Q400's range without runway expansion.
TOareaFan - I got the joke when you made it (it was good and timely, too), although I think the question of runway expansion is central to the expansion of Porter's operations, as they appear to have maxed-out the Q400's range without runway expansion.