Ghost77 From Mexico, joined Mar 2000, 5251 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (10 years 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3668 times:
Good news for Mexico! Perhaps more of this from MX and AM will be seen shortly! I think this movements are because they finally getting more B737s which increase the daily hours utility per aircraft in fleet compared to MD80s.
Ricardo Morales - flyAPM - ¡No es que maneje rapido, solo estoy volando lento!
AirportPlan From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 469 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (10 years 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3553 times:
For those of you who don't know, many Chicagoans of Mexican decent come from the region around Durango, MX. Many of these people make regular trips back to Mexico. Aeromexico may be trying to take advantage this traffic.
BGOODAM From Mexico, joined Apr 2005, 152 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3498 times:
Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 1): With all the tax-free money they've been getting from the Mexican Government shuttling illegal aliens, why wouldn't they be looking to expand to more American destinations???
Please elaborate, what "tax-free money"? Correct me if i'm wrong, U.S. airlines are still flying while on Chp 11, U.S. airlines get billions of dollars on loans to survive to keep coming down south, to our beaches, tourist destinations and what not to survive because thats where the money is at.
So, who is getting what from who?
NoMoreRJs From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 612 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3488 times:
As Cubsrules points out, there are many residents in Chicago from Durango. MX dropped this route when the pulled out of DGO, but there is demand for service. Good move on AMs part. This route should do very well, especially during the holidays.
Mexicana757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3054 posts, RR: 25
Reply 8, posted (10 years 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3451 times:
Glad to see DGO being operated by AM. Well MX reason for leaving the route was because of poor loads. Thats what MX told the local media (Univision station) here in Chicago. That flight will do good during the summer months too.
Latinplane From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2753 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (10 years 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3363 times:
If AM wants to establish a presence in ORD, they need to add more interior Mexican destinations like DGO, GDL, ZCT, MLM, and such because MEX - ORD itself is is not strong. Anyone could have figured that one out! I don't know why they make such planning mistakes with their route planning (Or, should I say "I do know why...).
And they should really establish a presence in ORD, with the Mexican presence in the city, it is ludicrous for them not to be able to establish themselves in the market and make it work. Instead of just playing around helping fellow CINTRA MX keep their market from Aviacsa, they could very easily make it a very lucrative one for them. These people... (por eso estamos como estamos!)
EddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7715 posts, RR: 42
Reply 10, posted (10 years 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3358 times:
Well, I don't know LatinPlane. I recall that, when I lived in Hyde Park in Chicago for a year, I flew 5 or 6 times between ORD and MEX and AM always had very attractive fares. However, I believe that MX, AA and UA have much more recognition in the market and, if AM had priced its flights higher, it would not have been able to sell so many seats. At the end, despite good loads, margins were non-existent so AM had to pull the plug. On the other hand, it was possible to find lower fares with 6A via MTY and with CO via MTY. In other words, those whose number one concern was not low fares and had loyalty to oneworld or Star Alliance, never chose AM, and those who wanted rock-bottom fares and did not care about connecting did not go for AM either.
Next flights: MEX-JFK-FCO AM 788/AZ 77E | DBV-BEG-BUD JU AT7/733 | BUD-AMS 738 | AMS-MEX 74M