I fly quite a bit, and I actually prefer Air Canada to Westjet. Mainly because of the airmiles I accumulate, and the constant upgrades once you hit Elite/Super Elite. Westjet doesn't offer that, and I actually get a lower level of service from Westjet than AC when compared to my Star Alliance program.
I think I remember hearing once how a very small percentage of people account for a very large percentage of the overall revenue of most airlines, which would make sense as most people who fly a lot get treated like gold, and those that don't get treated like cattle. I might accumulate 60 000+miles in a year, and even then that's not much compared to a lot of their top level flyers.
No, I'm simply saying that all the Westjet lovers that deride Air Canada are not comparing two similar airlines. Your reply to me proves that. I am VERY aware how the two are different from an operational standpoint.
Well if we are talking about a companies that use planes to fly people from point a to point b, WestJet and Air Canada are very similar. And in operating their business, WestJet has a lower cost structure than Air Canada. That's indisputable; Air Canada will tell you the same thing!
Quote:
Plus Westjet has already strayed from the Southwest model in how they conduct business.
Who cares if they've strayed from the Southwest model. That doesn't necessarily mean anything good or bad. I don't know what your point is. The Canadian market is different from the American market so there are bound to be differences between the two airlines.
Quote:
Not too mention their upcoming experiment chartering 2 757's for flights to Hawaii this coming winter/spring. We'll see how their pilot group likes that.
If they're going to charter 757s to go to Hawaii it'll be because they can do it profitably. If it's not profitable, they'll discontinue the service. Again, no clue what your point is here.
There is no way their lower fares are lower than Air Canada's economy fares. I can't remember one instance in my lifetime where Westjet was $1 dollar cheaper than Air Canada for a similar flight.
And you are out to lunch on Vegas as well. I booked two months in advance, and the only time I could get a comparable rate on Westjet to United/Delta was if I left on a Sunday and came back prior to Friday. I went to the Mandalay (2 people) with hotel and flight included during the May long weekend last year for $1,100 (Thursday to Sunday). I couldn't even fly to Vegas for that on Westjet.
...
What dates did you go to Vegas though?
+/2 weeks from spring break, Christmas, superbowl etc etc? You can book 8 months in advance, its the time period you travel that matters the most. Especially with their seat sales its best not to book so far in advance IMO.
I am not defending Westjet, but you cant blame them for not wanting to compete with United Airlines connecting you through Chicago, Denver, or SanFran especially when Westjet cares about its bottom line. What was Air Canada's price to Vegas when you booked?
Like I said, Westjet loses money if it routes you to Vancouver to get to Vegas. Yes its no reason to take Westjet but its also not a reason to bash them either.
__________________
MYK - Supports Arizona to democtratically pass laws for the state of Arizona
Rudy was the only hope in 08
2011 Election: Cons 40% - Nanos 38% Ekos 34%
Well if we are talking about a companies that use planes to fly people from point a to point b, WestJet and Air Canada are very similar. And in operating their business, WestJet has a lower cost structure than Air Canada. That's indisputable; Air Canada will tell you the same thing!
I'm simply responding to your post implying that I had no idea that AC and WS operate two completely different fleet types. So why does your reply here go back to just comparing planes flying from A to B when you acknowledge the operational differences between the two?
Air Canada does have a higher cost structure (and Jazz has the highest in NA if I recall correctly), but they can help offset that with business class and the ability to carry cargo pallets on a lot of their narrowbody fleet (Airbus).
Quote:
Who cares if they've strayed from the Southwest model. That doesn't necessarily mean anything good or bad. I don't know what your point is. The Canadian market is different from the American market so there are bound to be differences between the two airlines.
There are many within the airline itself (and ex-employees) that believe straying too far from that model is a mistake for them. But that is just personal opinion from those people. Of course some of those ex-employees have tried their hand at the game (Morgan with Enerjet) and that isn't exactly working out for them.
Quote:
If they're going to charter 757s to go to Hawaii it'll be because they can do it profitably. If it's not profitable, they'll discontinue the service. Again, no clue what your point is here.
The chartering of the 757's proves that AC hurt them last season with their direct 767 service from YEG/YYC-Hawaii. Flying half empty 737-700's across the pacific must not have done the trick for them. There are already many upset grumblings from within their pilot ranks about this 757 planned charter.
Like I said before, I fly with both airlines. Sometimes I think the western press has too much of a love affair with them, and that they can do no wrong. Just as they think that AC is the devil and their number one mission is to make you unhappy.
If we can agree on one thing, it is that AC and WS are still miles ahead of most other NA carriers, and leaps and bounds ahead of an airline like Jetsgo was.
__________________
MYK - Supports Arizona to democtratically pass laws for the state of Arizona
Rudy was the only hope in 08
2011 Election: Cons 40% - Nanos 38% Ekos 34%
We are going to Maui this winter, the choice is still AC for the simple fact that a 2 aisle aircraft is much better for traveling with an infant/toddler that wants to move around.
I've done the "sardine can" economy flight from OGG-LAX on a UA 757, never again.
I'm simply responding to your post implying that I had no idea that AC and WS operate two completely different fleet types. So why does your reply here go back to just comparing planes flying from A to B when you acknowledge the operational differences between the two?
You keep saying you can't campare the two companies - my point was you can. In fact, it's because of the operational differences that makes for an interesting comparison.
Anyway, I'm sounding like the airline version of fanin80, when in fact I'm a cheapskate. If the price difference is within $20, I choose WestJet because I do like them better. If Air Canada (or anybody else) is more than $20 cheaper, I'd take them.
You keep saying you can't campare the two companies - my point was you can. In fact, it's because of the operational differences that makes for an interesting comparison.
Anyway, I'm sounding like the airline version of fanin80, when in fact I'm a cheapskate. If the price difference is within $20, I choose WestJet because I do like them better. If Air Canada (or anybody else) is more than $20 cheaper, I'd take them.
See this is what aviation does to people, it drives us crazy trying to compare two different business models.
Where I differ from you is I may pay more for a direct flight or to be on certain equipment that I find more comfortable than the other option. For example I will take a flight in an AC Embraer 190 over a Westjet 737 any day. But when I'm travelling with the wife and child it's back to the Westjet 737 because it is 3x3 seating versus the 2x2 in the AC E-190, and perhaps we could get the middle seat free for the kidlet (while she flies free).
See this is what aviation does to people, it drives us crazy trying to compare two different business models.
Where I differ from you is I may pay more for a direct flight or to be on certain equipment that I find more comfortable than the other option. For example I will take a flight in an AC Embraer 190 over a Westjet 737 any day. But when I'm travelling with the wife and child it's back to the Westjet 737 because it is 3x3 seating versus the 2x2 in the AC E-190, and perhaps we could get the middle seat free for the kidlet (while she flies free).
Yeah, good points. I'd pay more for comfort on long flights fo' sho'.
I just flew down on United on Thursday to New Orleans. I checked one small bag and it cost me $30, my jaw just about hit the floor. A second bag would have been an additional $50. That is just mental.
I guess $20 for a second bag is reasonable, I think I've only taken two bags once in my life and that was when I was moving across the country for uni.
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Westjet is cheaper if you don't care about flying on specific days; if I go to Vegas or Palm Springs, I'll be generous with the dates I'm willing to go and I can usually get a deeply discounted seat on at least one leg. I check with every airline (because it's easy to do online) and consistently Westjet will be the best value.
That isn't being brainwashed, that's a consistent pricing advantage. If another airline does give a better deal, I'll take it (for example I booked Air Canada to Palm Springs in February 2011), but 4/5 times it IS cheaper on Westjet. Especially if you only want to fly direct.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois
The carry on issue typically isn't two bags, but the fact people will use up the overhead bins before putting one at their feet, or have 3 or 4 or even 5 things (2 bags plus a purse plus a coat+ a duty free bag etc.)
And for fata sake keep your shoes on.
__________________
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dion For This Useful Post:
From WestJet's twitter feed, the charging of the 2nd bag is because only 27% of people check at least two bags. In theory this will allow them to lower their prices for all flights and charge the people with additional baggage the $20, instead of spreading it over all the seats in the plane. The extra baggage means more handlers are needed and more fuel is required to get between the destinations. It goes to more of a pay per use formula.
I agree with this in theory, and I seldom check any bags when I fly, unless they are golf clubs or I'm bringing wine back home. The problem I see is with the math. On a Boeing 737-800 to Maui there are 166 seats. By their stats, 45 of these people will check a second bag, for total revenue of $900. This allows them to decrease the base cost of a one way flight by $5.42 ($900/166). This hardly seems worth it, when you are paying $300 each way. The math will obviously change slightly based on the flight, with less people checking a bag from Calgary to Edmonton and more people checking bags from Vancouver to Maui.
As a flyer without a lot of checked second baggage I'd still rather it was included in the base fare. It's more convenient to me to pay for everything up front instead of paying for the baggage at the check in desk. This takes more time and means I have to get to the airport earlier. I remember the days when you had to have cash at each airport for the Airport Improvement Fee and it wasn't the same amount each place. Now it's collected for you when you pay the ticket.
If WestJet consistently has their prices $5 cheaper than Air Canada, I'll believe they have implemented the theory. If they are the same prices, than it becomes a cash grab for them. AC would be smart to change their policy to the same, as this would allow them to both act like they have lowered prices but really not change anything except grab the additional revenue. I have no idea what AC's policies on baggage are as I haven't checked anything in with them in years, so if it's already like this, my bad.
Maybe flights over a certain distance could have more baggage included, but that might be too tough for logistics. I do hate the people who bring the oversized everything on the planes and take up all the room. I'd make the overhead bins an inch bigger than the size restrictions and if it doesn't fit, you check it and pay for it. This would likely cause huge delays but hopefully people would get the message.
More on the topic of bags, West Jet has given people a lot of notice for this, its not like this is in effect NOW. January 19, 2011 is when this begins. If you booked a flight prior to November 3 2010 for travel after Jan 19 this still won't apply to you, you can stil bring 2 checked bags free of charge.
If you book a flight on or AFTER Nov. 3 for travel on or AFTER Jan 19 then this will apply.
I think it was smart they didn't try for a cash grab over the holiday season.
I think its also important to note that they lowered the fee for a 3rd bag to $50.00, and a LARGE number of people who bring 2 bags tend to bring a 3rd, this saves this group of people $5 (as their original fee for a 3rd bag was $75).
One idea that I would like to see WestJet take from Air Canada is the ability to leave your carry-on on the bridge and they'll stow it with the strollers and other top-load stuff. I forget what they call it. Then they've got it there for you after you step off of the plane.
I try and fly all carry-on when I'm going away for one night for business. Both of my items meet the size requirements. That being said, all of the stuff that I may want access to on the flight is in my computer bag. The traveller still gets the efficiency of not having to wait at the baggage carousel and can still head straight out the door, and the cabin is less crowded. Win-win.
My new girlfriend is a flight attendant for Westjet. KEEP FLYING WESTJET! WESTJET CAN DO NO WRONG! KEEP PAYING THE $20 ADDITIONAL BAG FEE. IT'S IN YOUR BEST INTEREST! /end subliminal message
My new girlfriend is a flight attendant for Westjet. KEEP FLYING WESTJET! WESTJET CAN DO NO WRONG! KEEP PAYING THE $20 ADDITIONAL BAG FEE. IT'S IN YOUR BEST INTEREST! /end subliminal message
New girlfriend eh? You know those pilots can't be trusted right? What else you gonna do on a Winnipeg layover?
