When everyone is else is going budget, Porter is going up-scale.

Harmony went up-scale and at the end of the day people wanted cheap tickets. You might carve out a niche serving YTZ without any competition, but once another airline steps in and serves it (although I don't see anyone forking over a lot of money to build a terminal.. ) with a much larger network and a FF program you can bet that'll eat into your profits and revenue.

..have you guys thought about about charging 10 cents a toilet paper square? Maybe you could drop the YYZ-YUL fare down to $5.

So who's getting you all riled up about the ticket prices being offered by AC and WS?

Thks invertedattitude, those pics will really help this discussion on the $48 fare within the triangle.

The niche market is there for Porter. If they can maintain good service with OTP instead of cxling flights because of low loads. Their yields will only increase.

sanjet wrote:The niche market is there for Porter. If they can maintain good service with OTP instead of cxling flights because of low loads...

You must know something we don't. The loads are great and we've never cancelled because of light loads.

I know a few people who have flown Porter and they love the service, lounge, convenience...... But, last winter those same people were diverted to YYZ when they couldn't get into YTZ because of Wx. Unfortunately, a few of them are reluctant to fly with Porter again when the Wx looks "iffy". What are the Minimums for the island 350'-400'?

windshear wrote:I know a few people who have flown Porter and they love the service, lounge, convenience...... But, last winter those same people were diverted to YYZ when they couldn't get into YTZ because of Wx. Unfortunately, a few of them are reluctant to fly with Porter again when the Wx looks "iffy". What are the Minimums for the island 350'-400'?

Tell your friends that if they end up at Pearson, the free Porter shuttle will be waiting next to the airplane to take them downtown. It doesn't happen often, but passengers are taken care of if it does. If they are reluctant to end up at Pearson, why then fly with another carrier that is guaranteed to end up at Pearson?

pointyertoes wrote: You must know something we don't. The loads are great and we've never cancelled because of light loads.

Well then, all is well. Perfect!

It doesn't happen often, but the main issue is the fear of the unknown. If I fly another carrier into YYZ, I plan on adding an hour for my commute back downtown from the time I land. If I'm expecting to land at the island and don't, I've just lost all the convenience I've paid for, plus I'm arriving back downtown at least 1-1.5 hours later than I expected. Don't get me wrong, Porter has a great product and I hope you guys are around for a long time. Cheers.

windshear. Did you ever experience a divert to YYZ when u flew with Porter. Do any of your collegues have same opinions of YTZ operations?

NC just installed a new ILS at the Island recently, surely that must help things a bit?

sanjet the pics are not meant as derogatory, although likely ill-placed.

I personally would love a chance to fly on the Q, but you don't fly here.

The Q400 has impressive climb performance. I took one last years from Vienna to Geneva. Very good vis from the passenger cabin and it really goes when you rotate.

It has impressive landing performance too!
http://www.break.com/index/plane-crash- ... unway.html

Edited - I should read the thread first!

Flightlevels wrote:It has impressive landing performance too!
http://www.break.com/index/plane-crash- ... unway.html

Date: 2005/12/30
Further Action Required: No
O.P.I.: Commercial & Business Aviation
Narrative: UPDATE TSB A05A0161: WJA798, a Westjet Boeing 737-700, was landing on Runway 14 at Halifax when the left wingtip, position light, outboard slat and flap canoe contacted the runway. The flight crew was unaware of the incident until the aircraft was parked at the terminal gate at which time ground personnel informed the crew of the damage. There were no injuries and the aircraft has been removed from service until repairs can be affected. The runway visibility at the time of the accident was 1/8 sm in fog, RVR 1200 feet.


Date: 2005/12/30
Further Action Required: No
O.P.I.: Commercial & Business Aviation
Narrative: UPDATE TSB: On 25 December 2005, an incident occurred at Halifax involving a Westjet Boeing 737. On landing, the left wing of the aircraft contacted the runway. The Transportation Safety Board (TSB) is conducting an investigation into the incident (TSB Occurrence Number A05A0161) with the type of occurrence initially classed as a "reportable aviation accident". After further investigation, the TSB has decided to change the occurrence type to a "reportable aviation incident" with a sub-type of "wingtip strike" (Ref: AIM, General Section, Part 3.2 (e) and TSB Regulations, Part 2). In addition, the aircraft damage has been downgraded from "substantial" to "minor".



...at least the SAS Q400 had a good excuse to drag a wingtip through the mud.

Flightlevels wrote:It has impressive landing performance too!
http://www.break.com/index/plane-crash- ... unway.html

Oooopppsss....Part #2
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/683805/cr ... h_landing/

Oooopppsss....Part #3
http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/b737.htm

I wonder how many posts we are away from "my dick is bigger than your dick"?

pointyertoes wrote:

Flightlevels wrote:It has impressive landing performance too!
http://www.break.com/index/plane-crash- ... unway.html

...at least the SAS Q400 had a good excuse to drag a wingtip through the mud.

Hahahaaaa! Nice response to a low blow. Keep up the good work at Porter.

lol, touchy...it wasn't even pointed at porter but at the Q400...insecure?..lol.

bmc wrote:I wonder how many posts we are away from "my dick is bigger than your dick"?

Far, far away...... Cheers my man!!! You too Flightlevels!!!

Flightlevels wrote:lol, touchy...it wasn't even pointed at porter but at the Q400...insecure?..lol.

Maybe not pointed, but definitely implied. Oh come on now.

p.s. I don't work for them.

never asked who you work for. I wasn't implying porter at all, merely looking at it as the Q400.

Flightlevels wrote:never asked who you work for. I wasn't implying porter at all, merely looking at it as the Q400.

Glad to hear! Thanks for the clarification. I got friends at both WestJet & Porter and want to see everyone do well. We are all united by virtue of our profession regardless of who we work for. What happens to one will most likely affect the other if not today then tomorrow.

pointyertoes wrote: For whatever reason more and more people are willing to pay more to fly with us...

I wish Porter all the best. But, I disagree. History has proven that the public always flock to the lowest fare. WestJet lowered fares, AC followed. My guess is it won't be long before Porter matches the fares. Once again, the industry gives passengers a fare level that is ridiculously low. Its a race to the bottom.

Once again, the industry gives passengers a fare level that is ridiculously low. Its a race to the bottom.

Race to the bottom for what? Pilots pay?