07-21-2015, 03:01 PM
(07-21-2015, 02:53 PM)BuildingScout Wrote:(07-21-2015, 02:19 PM)ookpik Wrote: One reason why expansion at YKF is impractical from a business standpoint is due the immense benefit and value of flying through a hub.
Sure, one will never fly YKF-Singapore direct, but why exactly we cannot have direct flights to Calgary, Vancouver, New York, Chicago, Dublin and San Francisco? I bet the demand is there.
If the demand is really there, why is no one doing point-to-point flights from YKF? The costs are low, there are plenty of landing slots, there is no competition. Are all the airline planners and strategists completely unaware that airports other than YYZ exist?
(07-21-2015, 02:49 PM)BuildingScout Wrote:(07-21-2015, 02:33 PM)tomh009 Wrote: And in addition to that, expansion at YKF (or YHM, or YXU) is no substitute for YYZ capacity.
I don't follow. Stanstead, Gatwick and Luton have expanded to relieve pressure from Heathrow. Why would the same effect not apply here for YYZ?
Stanstead, Gatwick and Luton are there only because Heathrow is so constrained (no landing slots available and no room for expansion). This is not the case at YYZ.