Porter and the CSeries

[ChallengerDan]

Details of what is involved available at porterplans.com

[gegu1]

How is Porter financing this expansion, $2.3 billion not including the airport expansion, who is lending this much money and taking on all the risks. Porter doesn't have much equity and is barely breaking even, you have to have a strong balance sheet and revenue to be able to take on this much debt. Porter is privately owned, I have no problem if some billionaire behind Porter is risking his money but I don't want the government to lend Porter $2billion because when things don't work out and the company goes bankrupt, the taxpayers wouldn't be getting all of their money back. This is going to be a political fight, there is some serious money involved here, the owners of Porter will have the backing of the Conservatives on all levels and in all departaments, I don't think they will win but anything is possible, the laywyers and corrupt politicians will try anything, the media machine will do their spin. How come Porter isn't interested competing out of other airports like Pearson, they seen to be tough because they have no competition on Billy Bishop, Porter has a 90% market share there, if the expansion is approved and the jets could land there that would be a totally different situation, in such case Porter should sell some slots to other airlines like Westjet.

[rudder]

How is Porter financing this expansion, $2.3 billion not including the airport expansion, who is lending this much money and taking on all the risks. Porter doesn't have much equity and is barely breaking even, you have to have a strong balance sheet and revenue to be able to take on this much debt. Porter is privately owned, I have no problem if some billionaire behind Porter is risking his money but I don't want the government to lend Porter $2billion because when things don't work out and the company goes bankrupt, the taxpayers wouldn't be getting all of their money back. This is going to be a political fight, there is some serious money involved here, the owners of Porter will have the backing of the Conservatives on all levels and in all departaments, I don't think they will win but anything is possible, the laywyers and corrupt politicians will try anything, the media machine will do their spin. How come Porter isn't interested competing out of other airports like Pearson, they seen to be tough because they have no competition on Billy Bishop, Porter has a 90% market share there, if the expansion is approved and the jets could land there that would be a totally different situation, in such case Porter should sell some slots to other airlines like Westjet.

I presume that aircraft financing will be 80% EDC and 10% gov't of Quebec.

[photofly]

How long does it take to get ETOPS certification on a new aircraft, sufficient to fly CYTZ-EGLC?

[mulligan]

Anybody have any insight into the performance of the C series? I fly the 319 which is a pretty good performer and I doubt if we could go out of a 5000' runway at YTZ and go to LA or Vancouver. I have done KSNA-YYZ but the winds are always on the tail coming east. KSNA is 5700' and it's a tight squeeze getting out. On a 30+ degree day at YTZ I would guess there would be a problem unless the new aircraft has huge engines. Maybe it does.

[Dirty A]

Looks like YTZ is becoming the new Pickering...it will be interesting to see how this pans out.

[Gino Under]

The range is 2950 nm.
It comes out of the box 120 minutes ETOPS.
MTOW requires (probably will require) just over 4000 ft on an ISA day.
YTZ - LAX well within its range.
YHZ - LCY well within its range.

Imminent death for the A318?

...this IS going to be interesting.

Gino

[photofly]

I thought ETOPS required airline certification too, after a certain number of operating hours, to verify maintenance procedures etc.

[ptc]

there is an "urban operations" variant of the CS100.

I am not sure how accurate this info is but here is the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardier_CSeries

[whodareswins]

How is Porter financing this expansion, $2.3 billion not including the airport expansion, who is lending this much money and taking on all the risks. Porter doesn't have much equity and is barely breaking even, you have to have a strong balance sheet and revenue to be able to take on this much debt. Porter is privately owned, I have no problem if some billionaire behind Porter is risking his money but I don't want the government to lend Porter $2billion because when things don't work out and the company goes bankrupt, the taxpayers wouldn't be getting all of their money back.

How do you know Porter doesn't have a strong balance sheet? Our last glimpse into their financials was several years ago now. It's a private business so like the rest of us you're just speculating. You don't have to turn a huge profit to have a strong balance sheet. Maybe instead of posting a significant profit they chose to pay down debt? That's what I would do if I had any surplus at the end of the year. Like you, this is just pure speculation on my part.

How come Porter isn't interested competing out of other airports like Pearson, they seen to be tough because they have no competition on Billy Bishop, Porter has a 90% market share there, if the expansion is approved and the jets could land there that would be a totally different situation, in such case Porter should sell some slots to other airlines like Westjet.

Huh?? Why on earth would Porter even consider competing out of YYZ or YUL? That would be financial suicide and completely against the entire reason the airline was founded in the first place! One minute you're questioning the company's viability, the next you're wondering why they aren't taking on unnecessary risks. And why on earth should they sell any slots to Westjet? (highly unlikely they'd want them in the first place). One of the reasons why Porter was given all of Continental's slots into YTZ was because they would explore new markets. If Air Canada was awarded any they would just be adding capacity on already saturated markets like YOW or YUL. Similarly if Westjet was given any slots.

[Gino Under]

photofly

You're right.
However, it's unlikely Porter would have to spend a lot of time and effort to be ETOPS approved for 120 minutes.
The aircraft is expected to be approved for steep approaches and with HGS, Cat IIIb auto land it should fit many operators wish list.

Politics will rule the day at YTZ and Toronto City Council is known for it's stupidity. With 3 years to wait and see who knows where this will go?

For today at least, I'd say it's all good.

Gino Under

[photofly]

I don't think there's any doubt that the plans will be approved, one way or another.

I'm seriously wondering if Porter can do flights to London. (No doubt they already know.) Imagine what that would do to their load levels if, for instance, you could fly London City -> Chicago via CYTZ.

[Mig29]

Good for them!!

As long as they don't offer left seat C-Series for 65k/year!!

[justwork]

Good for them!!

As long as they don't offer left seat C-Series for 65k/year!!

I'm positive it wont pay less than the Q! No one knows what the pay scale will be and no one will likely know until the final stages of the game. Announcing the order is the first move in a long road a head.

[mulligan]

Hmmm
The 319 needs a balanced field length of about 7000' to take off at max gross and go to LAX, say from YYZ. So if the C series can do that from 5000' or so feet then it must be some hot rod! Sounds a little optimistic.

[planeless]

Bombardier says it only needs 4800' at MTOW which would work, operations might stop when the runway gets wet though.

[wordstwice]

What about the Steep ILS, will that be part of the C series plan or will they use an RNP type approach to avoid the stack.........lots of interesting developments and challenges to overcome.

Also, I am always excited to hear about expansions and changes to the aviation industry but with Porter declining passenger loads it makes one wonder how viable a $2 billion order is for them. If I was a Porter employee I would have alot of anticipated excitement but also very concerned about the financial path my employer is taking.

In the end I do wish them the best of luck!

[Realitychex]

How is Porter financing this expansion, $2.3 billion not including the airport expansion, who is lending this much money and taking on all the risks. Porter doesn't have much equity and is barely breaking even, you have to have a strong balance sheet and revenue to be able to take on this much debt. Porter is privately owned, I have no problem if some billionaire behind Porter is risking his money but I don't want the government to lend Porter $2billion because when things don't work out and the company goes bankrupt, the taxpayers wouldn't be getting all of their money back.

How do you know Porter doesn't have a strong balance sheet? Our last glimpse into their financials was several years ago now. It's a private business so like the rest of us you're just speculating. You don't have to turn a huge profit to have a strong balance sheet. Maybe instead of posting a significant profit they chose to pay down debt? That's what I would do if I had any surplus at the end of the year. Like you, this is just pure speculation on my part.

How come Porter isn't interested competing out of other airports like Pearson, they seen to be tough because they have no competition on Billy Bishop, Porter has a 90% market share there, if the expansion is approved and the jets could land there that would be a totally different situation, in such case Porter should sell some slots to other airlines like Westjet.

Huh?? Why on earth would Porter even consider competing out of YYZ or YUL? That would be financial suicide and completely against the entire reason the airline was founded in the first place! One minute you're questioning the company's viability, the next you're wondering why they aren't taking on unnecessary risks. And why on earth should they sell any slots to Westjet? (highly unlikely they'd want them in the first place). One of the reasons why Porter was given all of Continental's slots into YTZ was because they would explore new markets. If Air Canada was awarded any they would just be adding capacity on already saturated markets like YOW or YUL. Similarly if Westjet was given any slots.

That's what they said when WJ launched. There's no room for them in the marketplace.

Had WJ launched with the same fares as AC and CP, I'd tend to agree that the skeptics would have been correct. However, with costs 40% lower than the incumbents, the fares could be dramatically dropped thus stimulating demand. Let's be clear. Both AC and Canadian flew significantly higher load factors on competing routes after WJ was launched. The difference was that WJ made money doing so and the incumbents couldn't.

So the point is really "saturated at what price"? I'd agree there's very little demand for Porter's service to Boston when the walk up fare is $771. But how does demand change when those fares are chopped in half, as they were were to EWR when WJ launched 8x daily to LGA in June 2012?

The larger question is why Porter needs to be protected from free competition after being in business for 7 years. WJ has managed to be an extremely profitable business without any of the help that Porter's been given. As I recall, the only protection WJ was given was a 2 year head start at YHM, which was given to them after they began service there in the first place.

Porter is the only commercial airline in Canada that is pretty much free to fly wherever and wherever they want. It's virtually open season for them. They love to spout off the importance of competition in Canada, except when it comes to competition out of YTZ.

For those of you who consider Air Canada a monopolist, I present to you Porter. They have 85% of the commercial aircraft movements at YTZ, the downtown airport of Canada's largest metropolitan area. I mean, seriously. I get it if they wanted to operate out of Dryden or Flin Flon or Red Deer where they might need some protection, but out of Toronto?

Give me a break.....

[justwork]

For those of you who consider Air Canada a monopolist, I present to you Porter. They have 85% of the commercial aircraft movements at YTZ, the downtown airport of Canada's largest metropolitan area. I mean, seriously. I get it if they wanted to operate out of Dryden or Flin Flon or Red Deer where they might need some protection, but out of Toronto?

Give me a break.....

Give me a break... if it wasn't for Porter Jazz would be flying 20K people out of there a year. As the slots open up airlines can bid on them. The last slots that opened were awarded to Porter because they wanted to diversify destinations while Air Canada chose to bid on already saturated routes. If a 737 can operate out of the island after the extension, and are physically capable with the 37, then why shouldn't they? My guess is that there pilots would see that airport once every month or so, and a 737 makes a big splash.

[pointyertoes]

Dear Realitychex/Bean,

I've sat back and listened to you blather on like a broken record for nearly 7 years now. You've made some cogent points over time that have given me pause. You've also repeated the same dire predictions time and time again and openly wished for Porter's demise. Aren't you getting tired? Or is someone paying you to attack Porter?
Your past ties to WJ are obvious (checkered past and all), and it makes sense that you would want to attack and discredit a competitor by any means necessary. But over the last 7 years, you've criticized Porter's choice of aircraft (then watched WJ buy a bunch of their own). You've waxed on about the folly of other airlines operating a mixed fleet (then watched WJ elect to operate a mixed fleet). You've questioned Porter's profitability without any backing information since 2008 (BTW, I've received healthy profit sharing checks for the last 2 years).
And repeatedly you have whined about Porter's "monopoly", even though slot allocation was and will continue to be a function of the decisions of an independent outside agency (not the TPA, which BTW is back in the black because of Porter). Porter was awarded the majority of the slots because of a commitment to both the infrastructure of the airport (which is massive) and a commitment to route/market expansion (which AC and Continental had no desire to pursue). By your own admission, WJ had no interest in operating from YTZ. So why all the whining? When the tunnel is complete next spring I'm sure WJ would be eligible for a fair share of slots (assuming they have the Q400s to allocate out east by that time...). Porter would love nothing more than another tenant to rent some pricey gate space, and sell fuel, wi-fi, cookies and coffee for a modest mark-up. I can tell you for certain that SR is regarded as a dream tenant. (It's quite satisfying seeing an increasing number of AC passengers connect to the Porter network from YUL)
As for the next step, just sit back and watch. I've witnessed RD pull off a lot of things since the beginning and he hasn't disappointed. Negotiating with city council is just a speed-bump, one of many that he's trundled over thanks to tenacity and good connections. Would you want to be the Councillor that single handedly scuttles $2.3 BILLION worth of investment and an additional 1000 or so jobs in Toronto in order to kowtow to a small percentage of voters? You think the Feds and the Quebec government and a couple of major corporations maybe have something to say about all this as well? (I wonder what kind of pull the tunnel developers have in the city?). Judging from the popularity of Porter in informal polls run by major news outlets over the last couple of days, I don't think this expansion plan will be a hard sell. Besides, Porter only wants to fit an aircraft in that works within NEF25 restrictions, kind of limits the fear-mongering once you realize that. And 1000' of runway within the existing airport boundary is a pebble in the harbour compared the the VAST piles of construction waste that is continually dumped into the lake at Leslie Spit. (I'm surprised Councillor Vaughn hasn't biked over there to check it out...)
So, in conclusion, play the game, not the player...keeping in mind the game can me modified by the savvy and that the arena may be bigger than what you perceive.

[Fanblade]

Bombardier says it only needs 4800' at MTOW which would work, operations might stop when the runway gets wet though.

Carefull.

Mulligan is referencing "Balanced" field TO distance. BBD is using the term TO distance. No mention of the word balanced. 55,000 kg is a lot of inertia to stop. Big engines help acceleration distance but stopping certification is all braking as it assumes engine out. Its not as simple as go bigger. Rubber can only take so much stopping force before skidding. In other words Braun doesn't help.

If 4800 is a balanced field then the wing must be phenomenal and able to lift 55,000 kg at very very low speeds. Like the CS100 must be able to pull 55,000kg off the ground in a 3000' roll. All aircraft out there at this time capable of that have high lift/high drag wings. Not capable of distance/speed or efficiency.

I'm skeptical 4800 is a balanced field number.

Anyone have proof this is a balanced number?

[pointyertoes]

Bombardier says it only needs 4800' at MTOW which would work, operations might stop when the runway gets wet though.

I'm skeptical 4800 is a balanced field number.

Anyone have proof this is a balanced number?

No proof till after certification. However, do you think BBD would market this major selling point if it wasn't plausible? And do you think that Porter would dare make this order without having a reasonable assurance of some of the the most basic performance criteria?

[Fanblade]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardi ... #section_4

This says 4800' TO roll. Yeah I know its Wikipedia but the refenence section looks well researched.

So 6200- 6500' feet roughly for a balanced field length at all up weight? That sounds more reasonable for 55,000kg. Still very good. That being an ISA number they will need at least 7000 feet to make this a year round feasible operation at MTOW.

So what I would like to know. BS aside? What is the actual end game here? A submerged scuba water park? Wreck diving in lake O.

Clever. They would never approve that.

Anyone have better info? I just can't see a 4800' balanced field.

[Fanblade]

However, do you think BBD would market this major selling point if it wasn't plausible?

Show me were BBD makes the claim that the 4800' is anything other than TO roll. I can't find it. I have found 4950 as well. Again nothing about balanced. The term being used is roll.

Again less than 7000' balanced at all up weight and the range the CS100 has is fantastic. 4800 balanced with that range and weight? I'm sceptical. More so since I can't find BBD making the claim.

Does anyone have a reference where BBD claims a 4800' balanced TO distance at all up weight?

[Fanblade]

And do you think that Porter would dare make this order without having a reasonable assurance of some of the the most basic performance criteria?

Well I think there is a lot at stake for both companies. Both BBD and Porter have much to gain over the publisity alone.