Toronto Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport | ?m | ?s | Ports Toronto | Arup

jn_12 said:
This wasn't the plan though. I'm fairly certain it's the result of what's going on in the US and the lack of foreseen success in new American markets like Boston or Washington considering how Chicago has done. And the planes keep coming. It's really really frowned upon in the airline industry to have a plane sit on the ground. So Porter has to send them somewhere, and the only thing they can do is put them into the Montreal and Ottawa rotations. It might be a case of too many planes, too fast. Mind you, they had to make sure they were in line for the new aircraft, so I don't blame them but they optioned a lot of planes that they might not have routes for. It'll be interesting to see what happens.
Click to expand...

They have options. They could have deferred delivery and paid the penalties for doing so. A lot of airlines are doing that these days. Or they could have leased out their Q400s. It is a popular aircraft and it would have been easy to find a customer for a dry lease.

I don't think its a terrible sign if they jumped the gun on their homefront plan because the US market was not panning out. These are planes that break even with a 40% load factor (Air Canada and Westjet need LFs of between 70-80% to break even). Even if the plane is less than half full, Porter is making money. It's a fairly sound business decision to take delivery and use them to bolster Porter's frequency to approach that of their competitors. One of the biggest complaints I hear from my friends who I have converted to Porter fans is about the lack of scheduled flights. With hourly flights, they will attract a lot of the government and military personnel who need to travel between Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa.
 
Maybe they are holding off opening a lot of new U.S. routes until the new terminal is built and the upgraded customs facilities are in place.

EDIT: If U.S. preclearance looked like something that might happen, waiting until you could launch with it in place might be a good idea. Of course, we likely wouldn't hear about preclearance happening until it happened.
 
Last edited:
^SJC - they're not waiting for the new terminal. It's the economic realities of the American financial situation that is causing them to hold back on more American routes. A Boston or Washington route should have started up in the spring. Back in the fall there was always talk of "where next?" and it seems like that has tailed off a fair bit.

kEiThZ said:
They have options. They could have deferred delivery and paid the penalties for doing so. A lot of airlines are doing that these days. Or they could have leased out their Q400s. It is a popular aircraft and it would have been easy to find a customer for a dry lease.

I don't think its a terrible sign if they jumped the gun on their homefront plan because the US market was not panning out. These are planes that break even with a 40% load factor (Air Canada and Westjet need LFs of between 70-80% to break even). Even if the plane is less than half full, Porter is making money. It's a fairly sound business decision to take delivery and use them to bolster Porter's frequency to approach that of their competitors. One of the biggest complaints I hear from my friends who I have converted to Porter fans is about the lack of scheduled flights. With hourly flights, they will attract a lot of the government and military personnel who need to travel between Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa.
Click to expand...

Good points. The problem becomes what to do with airplanes 12 thru 20 if you're unable to get yourself firmly placed in the 8-10 US destinations that they planned on going to. I guess they could lease them out, but what does that say to competitors and the public? This company since day one has always been about proving everyone wrong, and it would be a step back if they were to admit some defeat anywhere. Air Canada and Westjet will smell blood and do whatever's needed to knock Porter out.
 
:D
jn_12 said:
The problem becomes what to do with airplanes 12 thru 20 if you're unable to get yourself firmly placed in the 8-10 US destinations that they planned on going to. I guess they could lease them out, but what does that say to competitors and the public? This company since day one has always been about proving everyone wrong, and it would be a step back if they were to admit some defeat anywhere. Air Canada and Westjet will smell blood and do whatever's needed to knock Porter out.
Click to expand...

Smell Blood :eek: The anti-airport Island/Harbourfront folks would be the first ones to try to knock them out, Miller would be right behind :D I dont think any one is panicking yet over the extra aircraft, then again if they had not ordered the extra planes the critics would be complaining that the airline would not be competitive enough to secure additional routes. There are a lot of possibilities for Porter with the US/Canada open sky agreement. Overall things are a bit better in the States than they were 3 months ago, lets wait and see what happens by summer.
 
People forget the whole load factor profit gap. Porter can run planes half empty and still make money. So even if they have hourly service to Ottawa and Montreal and their planes only have 40 pax onboard they are making money. If AC or Westjet did that they would have to declare bankruptcy within a month. That's the benefit of an all turbo-prop fleet.
 
I'm not forgetting. I think flights to YOW and YUL can go at 30-45min headways and still maintain profitability. Especially at peak times where planes are full, it makes up for any shortcomings that tend to occur mid-day. The problem is that these full flights aren't just making up for the lighter loads that might occur over the course of a day, but also for the abysmal loads going to MDW and the slightly better ones to EWR. I hope the company thrives since i have a lot of friends there, but the plan was entirely dependent on quick access to the American markets, and that just isn't happening.
 
I am sure they need the US markets to expand. However, that does not mean that they won't survive till that happens. That's beauty about the operation they have. They own the airport an they are fielding the lowest cost aircraft against competitors who operate fleets of aircraft and compete at an airport further away from their passengers.

I think Porter will be fine. They'll survive till the US market picks up. And then they'll really soar ahead. Air Canada and Westjet have nothing to compete with a business model based on aircraft that needs only 40% of its seats filled to break even. Indeed, Air Canada has been trying for a while to buy up used Q400s for AC Jazz just to be able to set up a competitor to Porter (and any other similiar regional players that pop up).
 
I'm short on time to go through the entire 46 pages here. Are there plans for flights to Vancouver? I'm thinking of heading down there this summer. Would be nice to try Porter.
 
Porter to 'revitalize' Toronto Island airport

Porter to 'revitalize' Toronto Island airport

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...423.wtorontoairport0423/BNStory/National/home

The Canadian Press
April 23, 2009 at 3:36 PM EDT

TORONTO — Critics of Toronto's downtown Island airport who hoped it would fade away are en route to a disappointment: Porter Airlines has scheduled a ceremonial announcement, saying the facility “is being revitalized with additional jobs and flights.”

The event Monday morning at the Toronto City Centre Airport will feature federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Transport Minister John Baird, Ontario Economic Development Minister Michael Bryant, Toronto Port Authority chairman Mark McQueen and Porter founder and CEO Robert Deluce, the airline said Thursday. [EDIT: the rest of this paragraph was added later] It made no mention of Mayor David Miller.

“Details of an ongoing new terminal infrastructure project will be available as part of a ceremony at the airport,” Porter promised.

The airline, which began amid controversy in 2006, now flies to Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City, Halifax, New York and Chicago, and in the winter to Mont Tremblant in Quebec, with its fleet of Toronto-made Bombardier Q400 turboprop aircraft.

[EDIT: the article has been updated with the text below]
In 2002, the Port Authority — a federal commission that administers Toronto's waterfront — had announced a $35-million revitalization, including a bridge to replace the ferry across the 120-metre-wide channel separating the island from the city.

Expansion of the airport was opposed by neighbouring residents and became a hot issue in the 2003 Toronto municipal election, in which Mr. Miller became mayor on a promise to kill the bridge.

Mr. Deluce then launched a lawsuit seeking $505-million from the city and federal government, settled with an undisclosed payment from the port authority, which said in January it is buying a new 200-passenger ferry for the airport.

While larger airlines have been brought low by high fuel costs followed by a wrenching recession, Porter — privately held, with its finances confidential — appears to have thrived with its efficient fleet of new turboprops providing service from the downtown location.

It currently operates eight planes and will add four more 70-seat Q400s in May, aiming for a fleet of 18 by year-end.
Click to expand...

Sounds like we will soon have some details on when the new terminal will be open.
 
Last edited:
Hopefully they'll be adding a bridge.

Hmm, perhaps I should e-mail TTC and request they put an LRT spur off the Bathurst/Queens Quay to improve access to the airport. Probably cheaper and more environmentally friendly than building the LRT to Pearson.
 
nfitz said:
Hopefully they'll be adding a bridge.

Hmm, perhaps I should e-mail TTC and request they put an LRT spur off the Bathurst/Queens Quay to improve access to the airport. Probably cheaper and more environmentally friendly than building the LRT to Pearson.
Click to expand...

It is a bit funny that when Pearson was the only real airport we had....we had no direct rail links to the airport.....now that there is a bit (for some routes) of downtown competition for Pearson we are planning 3 tracks to Pearson.

I know there are differening reasons and all that....just seems funny.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top