TPA, the community and load figures
Comments about the manner in which the TPA interacts with the community
are very disturbing. The TPA should create a dedicated "community
relations / noise enforcement office" and provide meaningful and
constructive responses to the many legitimate concerns that have been
raised. Community members and city officials should be incorporated
into this department to ensure that it is run properly. I can't
understand why the TPA keeps missing opportunities to improve community
relations. They take a meeting that, on the surface, appears designed
to "mend fences" and it only serves to further alienate those with the
most concerns.
On another matter, Mr. Iler's commentary about the "devastating" Porter load figures and the chances of their new terminal becoming a white elephant need some perspective.
Load figures (how many people per flight) need an additional element to be of any value. That is - YIELD. You need to know how much each seat is selling for and use that WITH the load figures to calculate if the airline is breaking even, making a profit or losing money. Once you have BOTH figures (YIELD + LOAD) and some idea of the airline's cost structure, you can calculate a BREAK EVEN LOAD FIGURE.
For example, if an airline has a very high cost structure and is charging too many deep discounted fares to generate traffic, then you could have a scenario where a flight that is 100% full doesn't make money because of the Low YIELD of each seat.
Conversely, Porter, which is attractive to business travelers (full fare = HIGH YIELD), can operate a Chicago flight with an 18% load and make money because the fares cover their costs and the cost structure of the airline is also very good.
The fact is, Air Canada wants to return to serve the TCCA because Porter has taken a large percentage of HIGH YIELD customers from them. Those HIGH YIELD customers subsidize all of the discounted fares in the network.
Furthermore, to compare US-CANADA load figures between Porter and Air Canada is a tad misleading. Air Canada flies to over 30 destinations in the US while Porter only serves 3 (4 later in 2010). Secondly, Air Canada's Toronto HUB is a huge connection point for customers from all over CANADA which generates additional passengers. Porter does not have the network to support a large amount of connecting traffic for their US flights (yet) so virtually all of their passengers originate in Toronto.
Porter has also been adding aircraft and destinations through the last year which skews figures since there are MORE available seats in the system.
I know that airlines in Canada haven't fared well over the years but Porter has continued to grow through a "devastating" economic downturn which is quite an accomplishment.
There's more to an airlines health and profitability than just LOAD FIGURES. To suggest that this information is devastating is a "bit" of a stretch and should be considered in light of some of the factors I have outlined.
Take Care!
Joe
On another matter, Mr. Iler's commentary about the "devastating" Porter load figures and the chances of their new terminal becoming a white elephant need some perspective.
Load figures (how many people per flight) need an additional element to be of any value. That is - YIELD. You need to know how much each seat is selling for and use that WITH the load figures to calculate if the airline is breaking even, making a profit or losing money. Once you have BOTH figures (YIELD + LOAD) and some idea of the airline's cost structure, you can calculate a BREAK EVEN LOAD FIGURE.
For example, if an airline has a very high cost structure and is charging too many deep discounted fares to generate traffic, then you could have a scenario where a flight that is 100% full doesn't make money because of the Low YIELD of each seat.
Conversely, Porter, which is attractive to business travelers (full fare = HIGH YIELD), can operate a Chicago flight with an 18% load and make money because the fares cover their costs and the cost structure of the airline is also very good.
The fact is, Air Canada wants to return to serve the TCCA because Porter has taken a large percentage of HIGH YIELD customers from them. Those HIGH YIELD customers subsidize all of the discounted fares in the network.
Furthermore, to compare US-CANADA load figures between Porter and Air Canada is a tad misleading. Air Canada flies to over 30 destinations in the US while Porter only serves 3 (4 later in 2010). Secondly, Air Canada's Toronto HUB is a huge connection point for customers from all over CANADA which generates additional passengers. Porter does not have the network to support a large amount of connecting traffic for their US flights (yet) so virtually all of their passengers originate in Toronto.
Porter has also been adding aircraft and destinations through the last year which skews figures since there are MORE available seats in the system.
I know that airlines in Canada haven't fared well over the years but Porter has continued to grow through a "devastating" economic downturn which is quite an accomplishment.
There's more to an airlines health and profitability than just LOAD FIGURES. To suggest that this information is devastating is a "bit" of a stretch and should be considered in light of some of the factors I have outlined.
Take Care!
Joe
Comments