Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Am CLE-MEX Service?  
User currently offlineGreenair727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 568 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2026 times:

In early 2006, USDOT approved AM's application to fly CLE-MEX, but service never happened. Does anyone know is it still on the drawing board or did AM change their plans?

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineKLM685 From Mexico, joined May 2005, 1577 posts, RR: 18
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1970 times:

Probably not enough planes have arrived so they can start the route and maybe some market changes that are preventing AM to actually getting in.


KLM- The Best Airline in the World!
User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5438 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1926 times:

AM applied for, and received, only one year's authority for CLE-MEX, effective from 2/10/2006-2/10/2007. If they wish to fly the route they will need to reapply for the authority soon.

I suspect they have lost interest in CLE-MEX. I also suspect their Skyteam partner CO failed to offer any support for the route; direct CLE-MEX service would undercut their IAH connection.



I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7582 posts, RR: 42
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1849 times:

I may be wrong but I think that AM was interested in having the authority to fly MEX-CLE-MEX in order for them to be able to position aircraft that would fly as charters from CLE to CUN and back for a vacations company, sort of like what goes on at BOS. Hence, the flight would not be daily. I am not sure whether there is sufficient demand for a non-stop flight.

Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 2):
Skyteam partner CO failed to offer any support for the route; direct CLE-MEX service would undercut their IAH connection.

AM and CO do not codeshare at all and one could say that CO is one of AM's main headaches in cross-border flights. Soon after CO entered SkyTeam, AM, DL and CO launched a campaign in Mexico (basically ads in the press) touting the benefits to their frequent flyers of their imminent 3-way alliance, but this never came to be and it sure does not look like it will ever happen. I have read here repeatedly that AM negotiated a very unfavorable codeshare agreement with CO, and therefore it decided not to proceed with it. If AM goes ahead with MEX-CLE, I am sure CO will be quite unhappy and will retaliate somehow.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineGreenair727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 568 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1831 times:

CO would have no right to retaliate, as they could have offered such service themselves, but chose not to. Who likes changing planes at IAH?

User currently offlineMbm3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 841 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1824 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 2):
I suspect they have lost interest in CLE-MEX. I also suspect their Skyteam partner CO failed to offer any support for the route; direct CLE-MEX service would undercut their IAH connection.

IIRC this route was going to support CLE-CUN charter service that never happened, with a routing of MEX-CLE-CUN-CLE-MEX. I suppose the charter contract was dropped or AM lost interest.



Let Me Tell You, Landing A 772ER Is Harder Than It Looks!
User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7582 posts, RR: 42
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1824 times:

Quoting Greenair727 (Reply 4):
CO would have no right to retaliate

I mean they'd do something like add a third daily EWR-MEX, a gazillionth daily IAH-MEX or something like that to show who's the boss.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineMbm3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 841 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1811 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 6):
I mean they'd do something like add a third daily EWR-MEX, a gazillionth daily IAH-MEX or something like that to show who's the boss.

IMHO a CLE-MEX flight would do well with business and leisure travelers, even more so if there was a codeshare agreement.



Let Me Tell You, Landing A 772ER Is Harder Than It Looks!
User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7582 posts, RR: 42
Reply 8, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1800 times:

Quoting Mbm3 (Reply 7):
IMHO a CLE-MEX flight would do well with business and leisure travelers

From the leisure standpoint, I am not sure. Americans seem to prefer flying a U.S. carrier to a foreign destination rather than the airline of the corresponding country. And while some Ohioans may vacation in Mexico City, there is way more demand to Cancún/Riviera Maya, Cabo, etc., so CO is in a better position to serve those travelers either non-stop or via a CO hub in the U.S. Moreover, leisure passengers do not help airlines make a profit.

From the business perspective, maybe AM could do something, but it would have to secure contracts with companies like Procter & Gamble to ensure a certain degree of success. In addition, the argument of Americans preferring their country's airlines also applies to business travelers.

Quoting Mbm3 (Reply 7):
even more so if there was a codeshare

Honestly I don't see CO and AM codesharing any time soon.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineMbm3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 841 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1786 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 8):
From the leisure standpoint, I am not sure. Americans seem to prefer flying a U.S. carrier to a foreign destination rather than the airline of the corresponding country. And while some Ohioans may vacation in Mexico City, there is way more demand to Cancún/Riviera Maya, Cabo, etc., so CO is in a better position to serve those travelers either non-stop or via a CO hub in the U.S. Moreover, leisure passengers do not help airlines make a profit.

From the business perspective, maybe AM could do something, but it would have to secure contracts with companies like Procter & Gamble to ensure a certain degree of success. In addition, the argument of Americans preferring their country's airlines also applies to business travelers.

Northeast Ohio has a fairly sizable Latino community, so there is a great opportunity for VFR travel. For pure vacation travel, I do agree that most Americans would rather fly a US carrier. On the business side, there are a lot of companies in NE Ohio with facilities and/or partners in Mexico City (and other cities throughout the region). While business travel may prefer US carrier, I believe they prefer direct flight more than carrier.

In any event, it is a mute point at the moment...

 Smile



Let Me Tell You, Landing A 772ER Is Harder Than It Looks!
User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7582 posts, RR: 42
Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1774 times:

Quoting Mbm3 (Reply 9):
Northeast Ohio has a fairly sizable Latino community, so there is a great opportunity for VFR travel

Most of those persons do not come from Mexico City and its metro area, but rather from San Luis Potosí, Zacatecas, Michoacán, Puebla, Oaxaca, Jalisco, Guanajuato, etc. CO does a good job flying them to the closest airport to their towns via IAH. Few would benefit from AM service because they'd have to connect at MEX and the fare would be much higher, or would have to take a bus from and to MEX adding many hours to their journey.

Quoting Mbm3 (Reply 9):
While business travel may prefer US carrier, I believe they prefer direct flight more than carri

While the Mexican headquarters of the Ohio-based corporations may be in Mexico City, many of those travelers will need to go to the production facilities, which could be anywhere from the Tijuana-Mexicali-Ciudad Juárez strip to anywhere in the Bajío. Again, CO is in a better position to serve them.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineWA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2226 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1725 times:

I think it's more likely AM would resume DTW before they added CLE. DTW is a much larger market, and I think NW would be more likely to cooperate with AM than CO would be.


Seaholm Maples are #1!
User currently offlinePlaneGuy27 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 314 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1606 times:

As an FYI, Aeromexico today notified the U.S. DOT that is will not seek to renew its operating route authority on the Cleveland-Mexico City route.

http://dms.dot.gov/search/document.c...m?documentid=435343&docketid=23510


User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5438 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1587 times:

And that's all she wrote.


I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlineGortsilo From Canada, joined Jul 2006, 27 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1567 times:

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 11):
I think it's more likely AM would resume DTW before they added CLE. DTW is a much larger market, and I think NW would be more likely to cooperate with AM than CO would be.

I completely agree with you.


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...
MX To Double MIA-MEX Service posted Fri Jan 13 2006 04:54:04 by MAH4546
AeroMexico Applies For CLE-MEX posted Tue Jan 3 2006 23:58:18 by MAH4546
Am Plans MEX-GIG Flight posted Mon Oct 17 2005 17:27:14 by Hardiwv
LAB Changes MEX Service! posted Sat Jun 18 2005 15:23:36 by LeoDF
New Pan Am Clipper Connection Service posted Fri Apr 22 2005 22:49:15 by PieTpaFlSun
CO Upgrades CLE-SEA Service posted Mon Apr 11 2005 19:21:12 by CXA340
Aeromexico's New BOS-MEX Service. posted Fri Feb 13 2004 06:21:23 by Ny-jfk-lga
Pan Am To Begin Service To Cumberland, MD posted Wed May 9 2001 19:56:39 by Cody
Pan Am's Starts New Service To Gary. posted Tue Nov 16 1999 02:57:50 by Stlbham
Am Receives Approval For MEX-CLE posted Sun Mar 5 2006 23:06:40 by Mbm3