Dellatorre From Brazil, joined May 2000, 1084 posts, RR: 2 Posted (9 years 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2693 times:
I was wondering if any of them ever considered flying to South America or Latin America, besides Caribbean! Us Airways has a strong position in the Caribbean market from CLT, PHL, BOS and even PIT! They fly to San Jose CR which is more like a leisure destination, along with Cancun and Cozumel. Now with US in Star Alliance, wouldn't be reasonable getting in some hot leisure destinations down under! Could PHL-GRU or even CLT-GRU, with code-share with RG of course, work out or that's just a little too off! Would RG benefit from a most wanted BOS-GRU with US presence in Logan?
What about Northwest from DTW? Expansion to Latin America is under consideration?
What do you guys think about that? AA), Japan">NRT is served by AA, UA, CO, NW, and DL! London follows, as Paris, Frankfurt and Amsterdam.
My point is, a key city in a continent like Tokyo is served by AA from a couple of US cities, though AA's weak presence in Asia, not to mention DL and CO! I know about CO Micronesia, OK!!!!!
The big question is: Would NW or US make any profit flying to Sao Paulo from their hubs?
Tomorrow May 9th is mother's day here in Brazil,
so best wishes to all members mothers!!!
N670UW From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1595 posts, RR: 8 Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2655 times:
I think a PHL-GRU route (especially with a Varig codeshare) would be successful. CLT-GRU may even be successful, but that would rely very heavily on connecting traffic.
The problem is, US Airways doesn't have any widebody aircraft to open such a route. The 10 767's and 9 A330's are already assigned to the European routes, and until the 332's start coming in (which is questionable that they ever will), South American routes will have to be put on hold.
NWA Man From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1828 posts, RR: 13 Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2620 times:
If NW wasn't aligned with DL, or more importantly, CO, they would probably start GIG, EZE, and maybe GRU. As is, the alliance provides adequate service to Latin America, and NW doesn't have the planes to commit to this new service.
M404 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2213 posts, RR: 5 Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2516 times:
I seem to remember about 10 years ago NW was asked this question. That was right when AA was making noises going that way and management pretty much dismissed the notion but not really giving a reason why. As has been said earlier, with CO and DL and NW in alliance now, it doesn't seem prudent to be redundent.
Less sarcasm and more thought equal better understanding
Dellatorre From Brazil, joined May 2000, 1084 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2489 times:
So the are fleet and alliance issues! Even though, why DL keeps flying to JApan, if NW and CO can offer easy connections to Asia through MSP, DTW, IAH and EWR? DL and CO seem to be competing on their L American routes! I don't think that alliance is a fair excuse! DTW may demand some non-stop conection to S. America! Aren't they getting a few 332?
In US Airways case, I imagine that UA could handle a couple of parked 767 to US!
M404 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2213 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2440 times:
OK Then, if you won't buy the alliance excuse then you will have to accept an economic one. IF the market was there and the political means available to make the service work and IF we have a capitalistic company trying to make a profit in a market we have never been in, in an era where we can't make a profit in our home markets I would assume we would be trying to start service to SA. Absent that effort, hence your question, then I would have to return to the first as a flawed assumption - the market ISNT there.
Remember, strong markets can be shared among alliances. Weak ones cannot.
Less sarcasm and more thought equal better understanding
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 58 Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2279 times:
As mentioned, its very unlikely that NW or US will open routes to South America in the near-term future for several reasons.
1. Neither has a well placed hub to launch South American services - CLT for US and MEM for NW, their southern most hubs, would have a hard time supporting South American services - neither could generate O&D traffic. For a route to make a good profit, a reasonable mix of O&D and connecting traffic is required, which explains why so much of the service between the US and Latin America is routed via MIA.
2. Much of the airservice between the US and SouthAmerican nations is controlled by treaty - for the most part, its not an open-skies situation and it would take lots of time and negotiation for either carrier to open the routes. For example, CO for years wanted to fly EWR-Buenos Aires; after years of waiting, authority was finally granted but this came after 9/11 when the airlines were in their worst trouble and the Argentinian economy had hit bottom - CO elected not to fly the route and the authority was resassigned to DL for ATL-EZE.....CO is out of luck.
3. Neither has the aircraft - NW needs all of its A333s to replace DC10s on European services and all of the A332s for fleet replacement on pacific services and the SEA-AMS route......nothing is left over; its still not clear what NW is going to use on DTW/MSP-HNL routes after the DC10, never mind an expansion into south america that would required many aircraft. US uses its long-haul craft to europe and some high density routes, it has nothing left over and very few seriously think that US will be able to accept delivery on the A332s due to finances.
4. Alliance partners can handle these routes - NW can route pax on CO via IAH and EWR, and US can route pax on UA via IAD or MIA (UA has cut most south american routes) or on RG via MIA.
Klwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 1786 posts, RR: 3 Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2205 times:
Dutchjet, DL's ATL-EZE and CO's EWR-EZE authorities were assigned at the same time. DL did not seize CO's unused authority for the route. DL also eventually dropped EZE as well. AA took CO's unused EZE authority and I think used it for DFW-EZE..
Usatoeze From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 358 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2152 times:
1. Neither has a well placed hub to launch South American services - CLT for US and MEM for NW, their southern most hubs, would have a hard time supporting South American services - neither could generate O&D traffic. For a route to make a good profit, a reasonable mix of O&D and connecting traffic is required, which explains why so much of the service between the US and Latin America is routed via MIA.
Dutchjet makes some great points, but none greater than this one. Look at where US and NW are strong...are there any large O&D markets to/from South America? Not really, or at least not ones which aren't already served. US owns market share in PHL, PIT, CLT and a few other cities in the northeast. NW is strong throughout the upper midwest...where are the ties with South America?
Neo From Brazil, joined Jan 2001, 671 posts, RR: 7 Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1928 times:
It's very unlikely that either NW or US will start service to S.America....
There are just so many reasons, that have already been pointed out here why this is just not gonna happen in the near future...
However, I do think that there are still room for growth in this market. There are several routes to be resumed or started that could really work.
some of them are:
MIA-MAO
MIA-SSA-REC or MIA-REC-SSA
MIA-BSB
MIA-COR
MIA-MVD ?? i don't know if MVD could sustain a non-stop service to MIA??
JFK-GIG
JFK-SSA or REC (seasonal)
JFK-SCL
JFK-VVI-LPB
BOS-GRU
EWR-GIG
EWR-EZE
IAH-SCL
LAX-EZE
SFO-GRU
..... I'm sure there is probably a few more.. but anyway..
All of this would of course depend of how the airline industry will do in the next year... i'm sure some of the routes listed above are more unlikely to happen then others... but at least should be considered...
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31106 posts, RR: 74 Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1915 times:
MIA-MAO
MIA-SSA-REC or MIA-REC-SSA
MIA-BSB
MIA-COR
MIA-MVD ?? i don't know if MVD could sustain a non-stop service to MIA??
Lloyd Aero Boliviano flies non-stop between Miami and Manaus every Wednesday and Saturday.
TAM flies non-stop between Miami and Salvador every Sunday.
American Airlines flies direct between Miami and Montevideo daily with a stop in Buenos Aires.
Varig has served Recife, Salvador da Bahia, Manaus, Belem, and Fortaleza from Miami in the past, but dropped them because they went to concetrating all long-haul out of GRU. They are now re-opening those discontinued long-hauls, and some of the older Miami service may resume.
Cordoba has had non-stop service to Miami in the past on Aerolineas Argentinas. Demand exists for 2-3 weekly flights. Southern Winds Lineas Areas holds the route authority and was planning on starting the route, but when the Argentine economy collpased, they decided better safe than sorry, and went with MIA-EZE instead.
TAM operated a daily A320 service between Brasilia and Miami with a stop in Manaus for a short time between July 2001 and December 2001. It did decently, but it was launched during too difficult a time.
NWA Man From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1828 posts, RR: 13 Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1898 times:
There are several routes to be resumed or started that could really work.
some of them are:
MIA-MAO
MIA-SSA-REC or MIA-REC-SSA
MIA-BSB
MIA-COR
MIA-MVD ?? i don't know if MVD could sustain a non-stop service to MIA??
JFK-GIG
JFK-SSA or REC (seasonal)
JFK-SCL
JFK-VVI-LPB
BOS-GRU
EWR-GIG
EWR-EZE
IAH-SCL
LAX-EZE
SFO-GRU
True, all good route possibilities... but in regards to the main topic, none of these would be feasible for US or NW, as both airlines would need substantial feed in addition to strong O&D to open a South American gateway.
Neo From Brazil, joined Jan 2001, 671 posts, RR: 7 Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1791 times:
True, all good route possibilities... but in regards to the main topic, none of these would be feasible for US or NW, as both airlines would need substantial feed in addition to strong O&D to open a South American gateway
That reinforces the idea that neither US or NW will likely start service into South America!!!
Pluna757 From Uruguay, joined Mar 2004, 18 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1654 times:
MVD could have a MVD-MIA non-stop without problem, not daily but at least three times weekly would be ok, and IB will be flyin MVD-MAD a 12:30 hrs flight non stop, so I dont see the problem.............you said MIA-COR , well Cordoba is just a "little town" compared to Montevideo and what Montevideo means to South America, not sure how many residents COR have, but this is not about residents at all, just the meaning of a town in the middle of argentina and the capital of Uruguay.
Sponsor Message: 
From Brazil, joined May 2000, 1084 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1595 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, 
From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 1786 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Dec 2003, 51 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31106 posts, 
From Uruguay, joined Mar 2004, 18 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
