Upsmd11 From United States of America, joined May 2003, 799 posts, RR: 4 Posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2812 times:
If US Airways is to survive (and I hope they do) would they be profitable with routes to GRU, GIG, EZE, etc.? Many of the US carriers have flights there and seem to do well from what I read here and hear other places.
Please don't turn this into a US won't make it thread as I have heard enough of that. I think the A332 would be a nice fit for flights PHL - GRU, CLT - GRU, PHL - EZE, FLL - GRU, etc. These would be a nice complement to the Latin America and Caribbean flights already on the schedule.
Again, I'm being an armchair analyst here and just wanting the opinions on this hypothetical situation.
TBCITDG From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 921 posts, RR: 3 Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2789 times:
I do not see a future for US Airways in Latin America.
Routes that do make money like MIA-EZE are covered nicely by both AR and AA. Even UA had to pull out of that particular route and now serves EZE via Washington.
Chile's market is limited to growth and LAN can more than accommodate the market to the states. I would say that the same thing goes for LAN in Peru.
These are my personal opinions of the Argentina/Chile flights. US Airways would have a tough time competing against these carriers that are well established in the US-Argentina/Chile market.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31118 posts, RR: 73 Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2770 times:
Most likely, not at all.
Firstly, getting into most Latin American markets is hard because of strict air treaties and lack of open skies, that right there would require a lot of work.
Neither Philadelphia or Charlotte would work well to feed flights to Sao Paulo or Buenos Aires, even with all that feed. Neither is a superhub like Dallas or Atlanta, and neither can make it up for it with the O&D like Miami, New York City, or Washington, D.C.
Fort Lauderdale does have the O&D to support destinations like Sao Paulo and Buenos Aires, but that is still a market dominated by American Airlines and the national carriers of South America, that it would be very difficult for US Airways to break into it successfully.
A330323X From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 3039 posts, RR: 47 Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2762 times:
I think US could pull off CLT-GRU. In addition to the feed at CLT, they also would have RG feed at GRU. PHL-GRU could also possibly work. (Not both, though.) I don't think US could successfully operate FLL-GRU at this point, and I don't think US could successfully operate to any other markets in deep South America.
I wouldn't be surprised, however, if CCS were one of the next few markets added, with service from CLT and FLL.
I'm the expert on here on two things, neither of which I care about much anymore.
Mia From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 862 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2718 times:
FLL-Brazil would not work for any airline because MIA-Brazil covers the market sufficiently. The Brazilian community in Broward just drives to Miami to take their flights, it is not enough to support its own flights like say the FLL-CCS flights. I dont think USAirways could make it in South America but who knows- how well do they do in MEX? They would have to offer really competitive pricing for customers to want to fly them. Besides- PHL is close to IAD (UA) and JFK (RG). I do not think it would work...
"Like all great travelers, I have seen more than I remember, and remember more than I have seen."
JoFMO From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 2211 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2694 times:
I could see US jump in the short haul South American market from FLL. So I see it possible that they later in 2005 might add CCS and BOG from FLL. Maybe Guayaquil and Quito are also possible as an triangle flight.
SOUTHAMERICA From Colombia, joined Dec 2003, 2496 posts, RR: 15 Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2677 times:
So I see it possible that they later in 2005 might add CCS and BOG from FLL.
I also thought in CCS when I saw the thread. Now if the Colombian government were to allow more flights to/from the United States, I think that we would see AA applying for FLL-BOG once more instead of US. Remember that this route is already covered by Avianca (to whom the Colombian authorities granted permission over AA) on a daily basis with a 757. Could it support a second carrier?.
Planeloco From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 99 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2646 times:
I am based in FLL and travel 10 days a month to South America for work, and I enjoy my AAdvantage miles and status. However, my friends and colleagues who do Latin America would absolutely support US Airways or any airline (other than Avianca!) if they would start FLL-EZE, FLL-GRU, FLL-BOG or SCL - or San Salvador (could hook up with TACA) - anything to avoid driving to MIA!
"Mia" is correct - we have a large Colombian, Argentine, and Brazilian community here in Broward County, and if marketed properly the service would do well.
If they could not dedicate the fleet and crew, no problem. Aerolineas Argentinas does not appear partnered and it would be great to see them up here partnered with US Airways and maybe even codesharing. Argentines are loyal to AR - and they would drop MIA in a heartbeat.
If US Airways makes it - please send me a consulting fee!
A330323X From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 3039 posts, RR: 47 Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2642 times:
However, my friends and colleagues who do Latin America would absolutely support US Airways or any airline (other than Avianca!) if they would start FLL-EZE, FLL-GRU, FLL-BOG or SCL - or San Salvador (could hook up with TACA) - anything to avoid driving to MIA!
Daily Fort Lauderdale-San Salvador service begins February 13, along with most of the rest of the US Airways buildup at FLL.
I'm the expert on here on two things, neither of which I care about much anymore.
EddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7177 posts, RR: 45 Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2627 times:
I doubt it. South American carriers and AA seem to have firm control of the market, with some routes also served by DL, CO and UA. In addition, you have CM as a good alternative for connections (and perhaps MX too, thanks to its partnership with AA) so I don't think there is room for another carrier. Besides, there is the issue of the hubs. I don't think PHL and CLT have a lot of O&D traffic to/from South America. US would have to market CLT as a good connection point and would have to offer aggressive fares (and this could be bad for its yields).
Question: I would like to know how CLT-MEX is working for US. The flight is going to be one year old next month and I am curious if loads and yields are good. On a related subject, US was scheduled to begin flying PHL-MEX non-stop in January but its difficult financial position prevented it from starting the route. I still believe PHL-MEX could work but I don't see them rushing to do it any time soon. Do you think that if US makes it through bankruptcy we will see this route?
A300AA From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 388 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2450 times:
I think theres no more room , simply all routes are covered.
Also if US applies, for more south American routes, AA will apply also to cover them, via Fll.
They will have grants to cover those routes as a co-terminal.
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2404 times:
I am not writing to rain on your parade here but I am curious about your interest here.
The likelihood of USAirways operating flights between Philly and Latin America in the foreseeable future is, as you surely know, is the functional equivalent of zero. Given this reality what exactly is the basis of your interest in this question?
Tavong From Colombia, joined Jul 2001, 833 posts, RR: 5 Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2408 times:
The market is already covered, in BOG and CCS case the ammount of people thy could feed at CLT ort PIT is too small compared with the ammouns of people that flies MIA, FLL, JFK so i don't thik that there is enougth market from the US hubs.
Colombian coffee, the best...take a cup and you will see how delicious it is.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31118 posts, RR: 73 Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2336 times:
If there is a competitive application for a new U.S.-Colombia route authority, US would be the favorite over AA/CO/DL. The DOT has a clear and stated preference for new entrants.
The DOT does, but the CAA doesn't. The CAA doesn't like compietition, and is more likely to give favour to airlines that have established history in Colombia - American and Continental. When the next round of US-Colombia flights is offered up, look for AA to try to get MIA-BAQ back or FLL-BOG, and CO will probably go for IAH-MDE and/or EWR-CLO. Other airlines will probably apply to, but the CAA will give preference to AA and CO.
And with regards to Brazil, even if US Airways wanted to, they couldn't. There are only two unused US-Brazil frequencies for US carriers, and they likely won't be around for long. Plus, they don't have enough equipment to dedicated two A330s to what would likely be a poor performing route for them.
Chiguire From Venezuela, joined Sep 2004, 2003 posts, RR: 19 Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2227 times:
In the actual financial situation it would be crazy to start such an adventure. Opening routes to completely new destinations. On top of that this airline is unknown in these markets. AA, UA, CO - these are the US airlines Southamericans know. CLT and PHL have a bad geographical location to be feeded. This would just cover the northeast of the US. The mayor cities in that region have nonstop services. So this market is covered.
Maybe some destinations out of southern USA, yes. So FLL could be an option. But then just CCS or BOG. Even though they are very good covered out of MIA (CCS also from FLL with AA). So I think they should focus in what they were strong in the past.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31118 posts, RR: 73 Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2205 times:
Maybe some destinations out of southern USA, yes. So FLL could be an option. But then just CCS or BOG. Even though they are very good covered out of MIA (CCS also from FLL with AA).
FLL has BOG service too, with Avianca.
I do think that there is potential to enter FLL-South America for US Airways, but it is not in BOG or CCS. It is in FLL-LIM, with a daily A319. Lima is a very dense destination with limited capacity. It could work very well.
SESGDL From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3385 posts, RR: 11 Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2160 times:
"On top of that this airline is unknown in these markets. AA, UA, CO - these are the US airlines Southamericans know"
Wrong. UA has lost a TON of ground recently in South America. They have been overtaken by DL as the 3rd largest carrier to Latin and South America. DL has been gaining ground recently, they're adding a 2nd daily ATL-GRU, and are reinstating ATL-GIG.