Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
User currently offlinePzurita1 From Greenland, joined Sep 2002, 1402 posts, RR: 13
Posted (11 years 7 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5161 times:

In our last Avioncitos meeting, Ghost told us about MX plans to start MX), Mexico">MEX-MTY-FRA...

Well, according to an article published in Reforma and El Norte, it seems Lufthansa is considering opening this route given high loads to Mexico's market.

I paste the article (spanish), since Reforma and El Norte requiere a password to be read:

"Vuelan hacia rumbos diferentes
Por Yaotzin Botello
Grupo Reforma

Ciudad de México (7 diciembre 2003).-
La aerolínea alemana Lufthansa eliminó sus comidas al interior de su país y están remodelando su clase de negocios para atraer a más viajeros de este tipo y basar sus ingresos en el alto costo de estos asientos.

Su director en México, Peter Vierrath, detalló que para operar un avión, refiriéndose sobre todo a los vuelos transcontinentales, se debe tener tanto a los pasajeros que paguen 600 dólares como a los que pagan 6 mil, aunque a estos últimos hay que ofrecerles valor por su dinero y, con ello, dejarlos enganchados a la empresa.

Lufthansa tiene una tasa de ocupación por encima del 80 por ciento y es con esta confianza con la que se pretende inaugurar un vuelo entre Monterrey y Frankfurt .

Next flight: IAH-DBX-MRU-ANT
35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
User currently offlineJOSEMEX From Mexico, joined Oct 1999, 1539 posts, RR: 23
Reply 1, posted (11 years 7 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5062 times:

So, given Ghost's amazing track record regarding his accurate predictions on mexican aviation, I guess we can safely sit around and wait for AM's 777 to arrive.

Mis respetos, Ricardo.  Big thumbs up

User currently offlineJopavon From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 304 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (11 years 7 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5010 times:

My vote goes to a CUN-FRA. Germans travel a lot for pleasure and are demand generators. CUN could be a nice destination. I don't see a MTY flight. I wish MX was the one doing that leg.

Come fly Mexicana, to Mexico!
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 69
Reply 3, posted (11 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 4994 times:

With Condor/Thomas Cook operating two weekly FRA-CUN flights and LTU one weekly, I don't see LH going into that market: too much leisure travel, not enough business (or am I misjudging the route?)...

Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineFraT From Germany, joined Sep 2003, 1107 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (11 years 7 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4947 times:

No, you aren't misjudging. As there is nearly no business travel and Condor (Thomas Cook), which is partly owned by LH, is flying this route already.
I don't think, LH will serve any other City in Mexico than MEX.

User currently offlineVectorVictor From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (11 years 7 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4909 times:

About three years ago, under a different user name at the time, I posted a comment that British Airways should select Monterrey as a new North American station. My comment was not taken seriously.

Well, if the above rumor is true, I will be slightly vindicated about my ability to predict markets that are developing.  Smile

Mexico is not all about sitting on the beach getting a tan or going to Mexico City. Monterrey is huge (3.1 mil), with ample industrial output and heavy manufacturing along with its neighbor to the west Satillo. Plus its a very cosmopolitan city.

If not LH, than some other airline from outside North America will realize the potential that exists in Monterrey, N.L..

User currently offlineLatinAviation From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1279 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (11 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 4844 times:

Today's front page of Aviation Daily says that LH will continue to add flights to Mexico, though it doesn't mention MTY specifically. It says Jaan Albrecht, himself an MX alum, CEO of Star Alliance, has entered into discussions with several Latin American carriers to try to fill the gap. One question: who is available? Almost everyone with a decent network is already affiliated or are we going to see further alliance defections?

User currently offlinePzurita1 From Greenland, joined Sep 2002, 1402 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (11 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 4795 times:

I did not see any direct link between MTY and Europe. However, in the last Avioncitos meeting, Ghost77 told us MX was to start flights to Europe and given the restrictions of their equipment departing MX), Mexico">MEX (high altitude airport), they were considering doing a stopover in either MTY, CUN or Canada. However, according to his sources within MX, MTY looked as the favourable choice.

Given Ghost77 current streak of rumors becoming REALITIES, I had change my opinion about airlinks between MTY and Europe... And then, an article in Reforma appears in which LH President for Mexico acknowledges they are willing to open this route... With all this info, I guess this is much more than a mere rumor.

I do not know if MX and LH were thinking of doing this route together through code sharing before MX quit Star Alliance... But, given Ghost77 reliable sources and the article I posted, I believe will soon see this route.


Next flight: IAH-DBX-MRU-ANT
User currently offlineNotdownnlocked From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 957 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4703 times:

LH flew to MTY before so why not again. They flew FRA-NAS-MTY-MEX and possibly other routes from there a long time ago>

User currently offlineBritmex From Mexico, joined Nov 2000, 207 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4642 times:

Aeromexico was going to introduce a MTY-CDG flight before september11. However, the plans are being resurrected and this should be done by the first months of 2004. It is part of the plans to decentralize MEX, before a new airport should be considered. Actually it makes sense.

sehr gut!!! super!!!


Aeromexico, la linea aerea que va para arriba
User currently offlineSOUTHAMERICA From Colombia, joined Dec 2003, 2498 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4617 times:

I definitely see this route happening. Monterrey obviously has the potential to make this leg work, being practically the most important commercial, industrial and financial pole of northern Mexico. Although it is a shame that no Mexican carrier beat Lufthansa to the goal line.

Anyway for starters, I'd see it in a medium-sized long haul aircraft such as the A330-200, and operating in a compound segment like MEX-MTY-FRA, or stopping in some US/Canadian city in 3xweek frecuency.

P.D: As a side note, I thought I'd post this strange coincidence. My mom's best friend works on a company here in Colombia that has the main headquarters in Frankfurt. She said that there where people travelling constantly to Monterrey and to other northern mexican cities from Germany, but that the going down to MEX and then going back up was pretty annoying.


User currently offlineLatinPlane From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2753 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4608 times:

LH flew to MTY before so why not again. They flew FRA-NAS-MTY-MEX and possibly other routes from there a long time ago"

They did? That's odd. Monterrey wasn't really what it is now, till maybe the 90s. A lot of its economic success has to do with NAFTA because of its geographic position to the north.

I don't think we should discard out MTY as a destination not to be served by a European carrier. The country is really underserved by European airlines and there is a lot of potential that needs to be exploited.

I always thought that IB would be the first one to fly to MTY via their MIA hub, but I guess that things would have been much different if it weren't for 9/11. Maybe one day directly.

 Smile LatinPlane

User currently offlineFraT From Germany, joined Sep 2003, 1107 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4581 times:

OK, there is some business travel to MTY. But in my opinion not enough for LH's A330 (daily or not). But there wouldn't be any leisure travel at all. MTY is 150 miles away from the closest beach. So again, no chance to fill this bird regularly, unless they make a circle trip with another destination.

User currently offlineJopavon From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 304 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4524 times:

MX could add some domestic legs from MTY to connect with an international leg MTY-FRA...the B763 with 186 pax origination in MX), Mexico">MEX...could be a nice option...codeshare with LH (even if MX is not in *A)...connections to BJX (ORD-MTY-BJX), and maybe MX could add a MTY-GDL so pax could avoid MX), Mexico">MEX.

And "regios" would love to have a nonstop to Europe operating 3x weekly...I bet on that, I lived there and that would make them really proud...

MTY is indeed a good option, although CUN has good chances since MX could connect to MCO, CZM, MX), Mexico">MEX, MIA, GDL, AUS.

Come fly Mexicana, to Mexico!
User currently offlineGhost77 From Mexico, joined Mar 2000, 5251 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4513 times:

Well, nothing else to add from myself. This is something not new nor I got surprised when I read the news. As always European carriers going stronger in the Mexican market and always looking for new markets and going a step forward against Mexican airlines and always leaving them waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay behind.

I didn't knew about LH's interests in MTY, but I did knew about MX plans., basically they were studying this new route., given the fact the B767-383ER was going to be restricted going out from MEx., they were studying the possibility of running MEx-MTY-FRA or MEx-CUN-FRA.., but as always looks like the will be beaten... It's amaaaaazing how Europeans got control of our market., in case they reallly open this new destination it will be the third Mexican destination flown by LH and Condor. (MEx, CUN, MTY). And also we have to take into consideration LTU's strong prescense in CUN.

LH has also been succesful because of its code-share agreement they got with Mexicana. I have some privilege information and numbers about the load factos in LH498 (7x) and LH496 (3x). 3 and a half +-, 747s out from the 10 weekly LH flights to MX), Mexico">MEX, tickets are reserved and bought directly with MX.

Maybe, with this new flight to MTY, LH wants to get a peace from the cake before MX does., also they might be preventing a termination of their code-share agreement that they currently have MX and LH. Despite, I've been told that for now code share with AC and LH will remain.... its also uncertain for how long MX will keep this code share with LH.

I just ask something to myself...... What if MX enteres OneWorld?!!!! For sure, AA, BA, IB and LA, will force MX to quit code shares with AC and LH. Or, is LH starting a code share relation with 6A?

Apart from the bad news (as I would consider bad news LH flying into MTY for OBVIOUS REASONS), yesterday, I was told that AM got big intentions to bring 3 777s into the fleet! I'm guess they will be ex. AF's. So maybe, it's just only about months for this to take place. I also think that as soon as AF take their first 777-300000s from Boeing., AF will be able to lease 777's to their partner AM OR AM will go with a lessor OR the least thing I expect from AM is a direct oder for new planes (It would take a lot of time to receive new aircraft/and AM has to rush with their plans!). The most appropiate thing to do is lease them via AF or lessor.

AM will also launch a European route from MTY! Routing will be MEx-MTY-XXX (won't tell you, thx to the person who put a nickname on me last Avioncitos meeting). Maybe, I guess they will start it by Februrary, when they received the 6th B767, or in case SCL route is given to MX by February, they might use the 767 from SLC for this new route.

Back to the topic, its insane what CINTRA leaders are doing by letting European carriers take almost a 90% of the Mexico - Europe traffic. It really piss me off to see all this expansions programs., soon ASTAR from France wil also launch flights to MID from CDG and Air Pullmantur from Spain with their 3rd B747 soon to be delivered from LH will increase frequencies to CUN, ACA and maybe they will also start flights to PVR.

Amaaaazing.......!!!!! I just don't understand all the lack of vision from CINTRA. Anyway, one last........... FAA (Fu*k Again and Again) for CINTRA. Wonder when all this bull.*.*.t will change??? Wonder when privaztion will be done to CINTRA??? Wonder when they will split????? Wonder when monopoly will stop????

One thing I'm sure is that 6A and ZE are doing pretty well their job, day by day they are becomming more mature and more expirienced airlines. And everyday a lot of more poeple are considering as an option to fly! Watch out MX / AM..... would love to see 6A in two or three years launching flights to Europe with B767-200! Or hope to see one of these days 6A or ZE flying B757-200s to the south and not only going North!!!

Our aviation is in big crisis! I just land on earth... our airlines are waaay behind! And not always on time! Hope I can see MX going first this time than LH!

Finally, MTY CAN SUPPORT A 5X a week with A343! IT'S not a DREAM., only a reality. MTY needs a route with direct entrance to Europe!

Ricardo Morales - APM  Smile

Ricardo Morales - flyAPM - ¡No es que maneje rapido, solo estoy volando lento!
User currently offlinePzurita1 From Greenland, joined Sep 2002, 1402 posts, RR: 13
Reply 15, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4484 times:

Just for the record: it was not me who named you with that nickname!  Smile But, yes, I did use it a lot!!!!  Smile

Thanks again for your deep analysis.


Next flight: IAH-DBX-MRU-ANT
User currently offlineSR117 From Mexico, joined Jun 2000, 799 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4444 times:

Now now Ghost, let's not get too negative about CINTRA, they're planning the biggest expansion plan in ages so that must count for something.

Let's remember that all of these things cost -money- and airlines are basically out to make money too. In recent years our airlines were not exactly in a position to splurge too much.

I would think that MTY could maybe support transatlantic service (I'm sure both AM, MX and LH would not consider it if market studies proved otherwise) But I think that it's success would depend on who has a better sturture to feed the flights, and in this aspect, I think AM would have the upper hand... they have enough flights to feed into MTY, and at CDG they could connect with AF's extensive network.

I doubt there's enough O/D traffic between MTY and one specific european city so the flight would be more or less a more effective connection between MTY/Northestern Mexico and Europe, could definitley work !

But I think that these decisions have to be thought of and planned, not taken as impulse measures cause we think foreign airlines are beating us or because of prestige, look where prestige has taken VARIG : ) Not much prestige in having your planes impounded !! Running an airline is about making money and not a game of who has bigger planes at the most ammount of airports. While I certainly agree that an airline contributes in a great way to a local economy, but unless all of those benefitted give a slice of the pie to the airline, the airline could care less about all these benefits if they're flying a plane full of 400$ seats.

Lufthansa may have big pockets, but if they don't have a proper feeding structure in Mexico, our airlines have the upper hand in this case (I think).

So let's see what happens, next year promises to be very exiting, the loads on those new planes will tell us if the gamble was worth it !


User currently offlinePzurita1 From Greenland, joined Sep 2002, 1402 posts, RR: 13
Reply 17, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4430 times:

It seems you consider only leisure traffic as the main attractive for carriers to fly to cities in developing countries...

Why then BA and VS fly to KAN (almost 1,000 km away from beaches), or why KL flies to GYE... or TP to FOR???? It is not always leisure travel.

I have never doubt about market existing in MTY to fly to Europe or Europeans willing to fly to north Mexico (Europeans will fly mainly for business, but Mexicans will fly business and leisure --- believe me, there are some Mexicans traveling abroad).

The problem has been, and also origin for me being skeptical about European services from MTY or GDL, closeness to US. Connections through American gateways have absorbed all traffic between Mexico (and especially MTY) and the rest of the world.

However, here some facts about Monterrey... It is not only 3.2 million people and a big industrial and financial centre... According to a report prepared by America Economía, MTY is the 5th largest economy among Latin American cities, even larger than SCL, LIM, BOG, CCS which receive not one, but plenty of international air services.... MTY output is U$23.4 billion, compared with MIA which is U$37.2 billion. SCL's is U$23.3 billion and Buenos Aires is U$29.8 billion.

MTY is even larger to the total output of Ecuador (which, incedentely, has IB and KL services to both UIO and GYE).

Let's say MTY as an economy is not enough.... Well, let's think then in Northern Mexico (MTY could easily serve as a transcon hub for this region)... Northern Mexico's output is larger than Chile's.

My point is... you cannnot say a service is not possible because there is no beach near... May be, it is because IAH, DFW and ATL are too close!!!!


Next flight: IAH-DBX-MRU-ANT
User currently offlineFly727 From Mexico, joined Jul 2003, 1790 posts, RR: 17
Reply 18, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4411 times:

Pzurita1: Thanks for that impressive piece of information. I certainly knew that the MTY area was very productive but never thought its output could be larger than some countries total. Again thanks for that.

Despite acknowledging that SR117 is right in many of his statements, I think Ghost77's opinion is valid. We have seen for many years other carriers stealing a huge part of the cake that by law must be shared by two nations. It is true that our airlines have not had it easy, struggling to survive in a very competitive environment and that they were wounded with sky-rocketing fuel costs, but remember that ALL AIRLINES HAVE, and despite that, they keep having a very aggressive route expansion that for our matters it so important as it help us measure how we do in the international scenario.

Seems to me that Mexico is a very attractive market for foreign airlines (and will be more right after AM and MX warm up those new routes/frequencies for them). Another player in the field, in this case AM and MX will not be fatal for the foreign carriers and will certainly bring a lot of benefits to the market. I have a question here related to the partners every foreign player will tie up with in order to feed their huge planes out of MX), Mexico">MEX, CUN, MTY or MID (that by now or in the near future will be the cities with direct scheduled service). AM working with their buddies at Skyteam, MX out of SA and on its way to join another. Anyone wants to bet on Aviacsa as a tiny but yet powerful local working with lets say LH? With competition coming from their once affiliated, I'm sure LH will need some sort of arrangement to fill those seats from every possible corner of the country.

Richard: Indeed, 2004 will be a VERY interesting year.

RM  Smile

There are no stupid questions... just stupid people!
User currently offlineGhost77 From Mexico, joined Mar 2000, 5251 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4413 times:


I'm not being negative., just realistic. You can read my previous posts in the last months, I'm always positive! Also, Pzurita1 used to critize me a lot because I was very positive on this issues., ie. having a larger fleet and more destinations.

I know they are planning the biggest expansions ever! And I could say that It was just about time!

I also don't want to see Mexicana or AeroMexico having trouble with their fleet just liked you point out Varig's problem, but I just can't believe what our two carriers are compared to some flag carriers... ....... NOTHING. I don't want to make less Avianca, don't take it personal colombian friends, but how come AV is possible to have 6 B767s while AM just got 5! 5 767 is our sole fleet for such a big country like us.... no lo entiendo!!! Don't understand!!! I don't think it would AeroMexico a better airline having in their fleet 10 B777s and another 20 B767s... etc etc!

What I would love to see in Aeromexico? I don't request impossible things! I would just like to see AM serving CDG and MAD with 2x a day with B777. Same thing for GRU and SCL 1 flight a day well served with B777 or B767-300..... a new route to Italy 1x a day with B777 also either MXP or FCO, same thing for AM), Netherlands">AMS with one daily flight with B767.... enough, that's all I want for now! Someone here disagrees?

What I would love to see in Mexicana? As for now 1x a day with B767 to LHR, FRA, maybe ZRH... and getting back some routes flown in the past by MX..... some examples, pacific flights from Mexico to the US.... Puerto Rico back, Panama back, Santiago back, and some other routes that where thrown away for unknown reasons after YEARS of flying into certain destinations....enough!

I think Mexicana and AeroMexico are doing their job well in Mexico, US and Canada. But it's not enough! They should make more! Lower their fares! And get to more agreements with Mexican airports, request lower landing fees and promising more operations in the day into the airports by the airlines!

I think we all here could solve a lot of problems......, this discussions take place in a lot of cockpits from Mexicana and AeroMexico., also I think MX Ceo Fernando Flores and AM CEO Arturo Barahona make movements that come from CINTRA leaders. And unfortunately, not all decisions are made by the airlines Chief's....... big problem here is CINTRA.

Hope the best for Mexicana and AeroMexico in 2004!


Mexican Pacific..... TOO CLOSE TO SAN, LAX, SFO, YVR.

Mexico's NortWest...... PHX, LAS, SLC.

Mexico's NortEast....... IAH, DFW, ATL, SAN.

That's it....... a lot of traffic lost in those airport! We are just tooooooooooo close to the States and with those leaders.........: 5 B767s in AeroMexico. That's it!

Ricardo Morales - APM  Smile

Ricardo Morales - flyAPM - ¡No es que maneje rapido, solo estoy volando lento!
User currently offlineSR117 From Mexico, joined Jun 2000, 799 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4367 times:

Yep, you're right about that Ricardo, ya know when you put it in those terms, compairing with other latin airlines, I can't help but see your point : ) Our long haul fleets really are pitiful !

However here is something that I have wondered about, what about Mexicana/Aeromexico when they are sold? I think they shall need to form a sort of Oligopoly in order to make sure not to step on their toes. Mexico, while a big country doesn't have the same proportion of population flying as other smaller countries like Germany, France or such, our flying market is much smaller, so is it really viable to have such a fragmented market? Wouldn't it better to have just one large flag carrier and various low cost competitors to serve as an alternative?

I'm not too sure on the issue myself, but I think that a very careful co-existence between a post privatization MX and AM is the only way that both could expand and maintain a strong market prescence, without having to spend lots of resources on fare wars and such.

Ricardo T.

User currently offlinePzurita1 From Greenland, joined Sep 2002, 1402 posts, RR: 13
Reply 21, posted (11 years 7 months 1 day ago) and read 4341 times:

Ricardo T:

I firmly agree with you. There is no point in selling AM and MX as different and weaker firms. They need to trully consolidate operations in order to be competitive worldwide. I know oligopoly is a terrible word, but it happens it is the most viable industrial structure for a medium size market such as Mexico.

Of course, an excelent regulation is a must. A regulation that encourages firms to invest and grow keeping their prices within market targets... We cannot expect to have ridiculous low fares in Mexico... I wish they would exist... But the size of our market demands other fare structure. And those low fares would not even exist if AM and MX are sold separately, as they do not happen now that they operate "together". Lower fares will come slowly as market grows and demand forces prices down. But, in order to grow, there must be a trully national airline forced to increase its network and equipments, and niche airlines looking to profit through investment and not by means of taking only services where the big one those not fly.

A national flag carrier is needed with a regulation that enables niche airlines to grow with profitability as well.


Next flight: IAH-DBX-MRU-ANT
User currently offlineMarcus From Mexico, joined Apr 2001, 1823 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (11 years 7 months 23 hours ago) and read 4295 times:

I couldn't agree more with you guys.....I guess within Mexico the US and Canada AM and MX have a very respectable position due to the market size in Mexico, and the strength of the US and CAN based competitors.

But outside of this area is a whole different ball game, after seing how foreign airlines have virtually dominated the MX), Mexico">MEX-Europe market, and the lack of better (or more for that matter) equipment from AM and MX to cope with the current size of this market, one ponders the reasons or the thinking (or lack of) of Mexican airlines response to European airlines.

We all know airlines are out to make money from their operations, and I know there is no glamour in flying to far away places with half empty planes.........but I guess the general sentiment is that we would like to see our carriers with a more agressive and long term market strategy.

Just my "dos centavos de peso"

Kids!....we are going to the happiest place on earth...TIJUANA! signed: Krusty the Clown
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 18394 posts, RR: 46
Reply 23, posted (11 years 7 months 22 hours ago) and read 4242 times:

Why MTY? GDL is considerably bigger than MTY and has better access to the Pacific coastal resorts as well as the business centers in and around GDL. CUN is out of the question and I can't imagine what other city anyone would serve nonstop from Europe. In any case, LH service to PDX was less surprising than LH service to anywhere else in Mexico besides MEX.

E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineFly727 From Mexico, joined Jul 2003, 1790 posts, RR: 17
Reply 24, posted (11 years 7 months 22 hours ago) and read 4225 times:

Maverick: Read reply #17. MTY economical output is greater than many cities in Latin America.

RM  Smile

There are no stupid questions... just stupid people!
25 Rojo : Noooooo, I don't want MX and AM as a duopoly!!!!!!!!!! I want my Ryanair fares in Mexico!! Or at least some EasyJet fares... jejeje. I don't agree. An
26 Jopavon : I'm with Rojo, no oligopoly, free competition is the answer, but always fair and equal to all, not like the 90s in Mexico where airlines where flying
27 MAH4546 : Before September 2001 there were strong rumours that Iberia was going to launch Monterrey service with a daily A319 to Miami (also rumours they were g
28 Marcus : Interesting points Rojo...................I wonder what would happen if AM and MX were to be sold to private investors as separate airlines, the inter
29 MaverickM11 : "Maverick: Read reply #17. MTY economical output is greater than many cities in Latin America." The daily capacity for December in MTY is just under 1
30 FraT : "It seems you consider only leisure traffic as the main attractive for carriers to fly to cities in developing countries... Why then BA and VS fly to
31 LatinAviation : MAH4546: AA also used to serve MIA-MTY back in 1998/1999. It started twice-daily with 727-200s, then once daily and then... well the rest is history.
32 Motorhussy : Remember, if you're flying LH Economy, take a good book! MH
33 SR117 : I think it's impossible for AM or MX to compete with their bloated cost structures on the same level as smaller airlines with much smaller cost struct
34 MAH4546 : MAH4546: AA also used to serve MIA-MTY back in 1998/1999. It started twice-daily with 727-200s, then once daily and then... well the rest is history.
35 Post contains images Ghost77 : Ric, I entirely agree with you, Mexicana and AeroMexico can't be sold with a weak route system/fleet. You have to make them more attractive!! But geee
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
YVR To FRA With LH Question posted Sat Apr 22 2006 21:08:44 by Milan320
AMS-FRA-JNB With LH J/cl - Awful posted Thu Sep 28 2006 14:47:00 by QM001
Marrow Transplant Success With LH/FRA Help posted Tue Mar 7 2006 15:34:36 by Ariis
Flying With LH Lax - Fra - Thr! posted Tue Mar 18 2003 03:26:23 by Komran110
ANZ Launch HKG-MUC/FRA Codeshare With LH posted Wed Jun 19 2002 20:51:15 by Jiml1126
FRA-BOS With LH Question (Amir?) posted Mon Jul 24 2000 19:15:51 by Cricri
After Berlin, A380 Spotted At TLS With LH Markings posted Mon May 22 2006 14:32:12 by Leelaw
MTY-GDL With Magnicharters posted Mon Jan 2 2006 17:00:08 by Pzurita1
New A380 Hanger At FRA For LH posted Fri Sep 9 2005 01:19:57 by Squirrel83
What To Do In Frankfurt? (FRA) With 5 Hours posted Sun Aug 21 2005 13:47:22 by UN_B732