According to the story, the route is pending final governmental approval. It looks like a November start, 1X Daily A330. I really hope that the route will work this time.
Rookinla From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 305 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3807 times:
According to the story, the route is awaiting final governmental approval. They are aiming for a November start, 1X Daily A330. I really hope that the route works this time around. MCO won't get too many second chances...
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31116 posts, RR: 74 Reply 2, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3777 times:
Quoting Rookinla (Reply 1): According to the story, the route is awaiting final governmental approval. They are aiming for a November start, 1X Daily A330. I really hope that the route works this time around. MCO won't get too many second chances...
The story is not correct.
TAM will tentatively launch with 4x weekly 763, eventually going to daily 763. They might go daily from the start, but it would put a significant stress on aircraft utilization.
I think it will work. TAM has 2 767s - and two more on the way this year - configured in a high-density configuration for low-yielding tourist markets that finally make MCO-GRU a possibility for TAM. The A330s are in too low density a configuration to make any money flying tourists to Disney World. The 763s are also being used on three other primarily lower yielding tourist routes: MIA-GIG, MIA-MAO, and JFK-GIG. JFK-GIG should become an A330 in 2009, freeing up 763s to launch MIA-FOR and MIA-BSB.
Rookinla From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 305 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3769 times:
Behramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4439 posts, RR: 43 Reply 4, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3753 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 2): I think it will work. TAM has 2 767s - and two more on the way this year - configured in a high-density configuration for low-yielding tourist markets that finally make MCO-GRU a possibility for TAM.
Is there that much O&D demand between Brazil and MCO to make the route break even at least?
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31116 posts, RR: 74 Reply 5, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3750 times:
Quoting Behramjee (Reply 4): Is there that much O&D demand between Brazil and MCO to make the route break even at least?
O&D to GRU is around 300 people a day and to GIG is around 125. Walt Disney World is extremely popular with Brazilians. 85% of the traffic is Brazil-originating.
Rookinla From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 305 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3744 times:
Quoting Behramjee (Reply 4): Is there that much O&D demand between Brazil and MCO to make the route break even at least?
I think it will work as well. The flight will also be good for connections within much of South America...this should make it work. I'm pretty sure that CM is a bit unhappy about this though.
TAM will launch with 4x weekly 763, eventually going to daily 763.
Rookinla, it is expected that JJ's 767 fleet will be flying like this by the end of 2008:
2 for GIG-MIA-MAO-MIA-GIG
1 for BSB-MIA
1 for GRU-MCO
Both the 332s they are receiving this year will probably replace the ones that are going through the retrofit (today, only 3 had been through it) and operates MAD, MIA, JFK, etc...
SalMonela From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 64 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3733 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 5): O&D to GRU is around 300 people a day and to GIG is around 125. Walt Disney World is extremely popular with Brazilians. 85% of the traffic is Brazil-originating.
True, but this is primarily leisure, VERY low yield traffic. Unless they supplement with a lot of cargo (not unreasonable) it's going to be difficult to make MCO profitable given the lack of connections to points beyond.
LH506 From Ecuador, joined May 2007, 448 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3717 times:
Quoting JJ8080 (Reply 7): Rookinla, it is expected that JJ's 767 fleet will be flying like this by the end of 2008:
2 for GIG-MIA-MAO-MIA-GIG
1 for BSB-MIA
1 for GRU-MCO
Both the 332s they are receiving this year will probably replace the ones that are going through the retrofit (today, only 3 had been through it) and operates MAD, MIA, JFK, etc...
JJ8080 From Brazil, joined Aug 2008, 932 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3701 times:
Quoting SalMonela (Reply 8): True, but this is primarily leisure, VERY low yield traffic. Unless they supplement with a lot of cargo (not unreasonable) it's going to be difficult to make MCO profitable given the lack of connections to points beyond.
Agree... If they didn't have such a strong presence in MIA I'd say MCO could be a Florida option from GRU, but they already operates 3 MIA-GRU, 1 GIG-MIA-MAO-MIA, and 1 BSB-MIA (upcoming one)...
Quoting LH506 (Reply 9): Which a/c will be used on GIG-JFK-GIG??
Sorry, I got confused:
2 for GIG-MIA-MAO-MIA
1 for GIG-JFK
1 for BSB-MIA
Then we are out of 767s to GRU-MCO.... To be honest I'm not sure about how it's gonna work then, surely they will need to put at least one of the upcoming 330s to fly, probably on GIG-JFK...
Incitatus From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 3777 posts, RR: 14 Reply 11, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3626 times:
Quoting SalMonela (Reply 8): True, but this is primarily leisure, VERY low yield traffic.
I don't know if I would call it "VERY low yield". The lower fares seen Brazil-Orlando are much higher than the lower fares seen in US-Europe outside of summer.
Quoting SalMonela (Reply 8): it's going to be difficult to make MCO profitable given the lack of connections to points beyond.
The lack of beyond connections should not matter. TAM is after GRU-MCO, GIG-MCO, CWB-MCO, CNF-MCO, POA-MCO, EZE-MCO, BSB-MCO, SSA-MCO, VIX-MCO, GYN-MCO, etc. For some of these routes, TAM is the only game in town with a single-connection, same-airline service. They have demand to make money on that route for at least 6 months of the year.
JJ8080 From Brazil, joined Aug 2008, 932 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3459 times:
[/quote]
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 12): BSB-MIA isn't planned to be daily. TAM will split the service between MIA-BSB and MIA-FOR. I believe MIA-BSB will be 4w and MIA-FOR will be 3w.
Didn't said it would be daily, but would have a dedicated 767 maybe for 4x weekly redeye, but not sure.. I your scenario, we would have to see a akward 1x weekly BSB-FOR with 763. Would be Interesting. Were did you found info about they planning FOR-MIA service? Think that a 32A would better fit it, at least to begin.
Teneriffe77 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 423 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3409 times:
The MCO-brazil route has been flown in the past by both Varig and Transbrasil with 767's and I even saw a Varig 743 there once.
Lambert747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3371 times:
Quoting Behramjee (Reply 4): Is there that much O&D demand between Brazil and MCO to make the route break even at least?
It may work well for two reasons. The route will start at less than daily to test the waters. If the route is proven to do well both from a capacity and yield base it will go to daily. The inaugural period is to see what the route can obtain. I have a serious belief the route will work if the leisure packages that are supporting the route will be used to a profitable margin for TAM.
The other key factor in all of this is that with JJ coming into Star within the next few months or so the B6 buildup at MCO will be of great use to the routes. Less we not forget the LH and B6 partnership. Call it what one may, there is a reason that JJ is serving MCO and there is a reason that B6 is using MCO as a South American gateway.
Quoting SalMonela (Reply 8): True, but this is primarily leisure, VERY low yield traffic.
Adding to it, I have a very serious doubt that this route is supported with business traffic. This route will be supported by leisure passengers and travel agency block space geared at the Disney and Florida leisure crowds.
Quoting LH506 (Reply 9): Which a/c will be used on GIG-JFK-GIG??
Unfortunately the 767-300. I think many including myself will stick with the incumbent AA 777-200 via GRU. There is to much of an advantage to a 777 vs a 767-300.
Quoting Teneriffe77 (Reply 14): The MCO-brazil route has been flown in the past by both Varig and Transbrasil with 767's and I even saw a Varig 743 there once.
American Airlines flew the route as well with the 767-300 for a short period.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31116 posts, RR: 74 Reply 17, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3337 times:
Quoting JJ8080 (Reply 13):
Didn't said it would be daily, but would have a dedicated 767 maybe for 4x weekly redeye, but not sure.. I your scenario, we would have to see a akward 1x weekly BSB-FOR with 763. Would be Interesting. Were did you found info about they planning FOR-MIA service? Think that a 32A would better fit it, at least to begin.
MIA-FOR has already been talked about in Brazilian press starting in the first half of 2009. I've posted the news article in the past here.
The plan is MIA-BSB 4w/MIA-FOR 3w, with a redeye/daylight mix.
Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 16): The other key factor in all of this is that with JJ coming into Star within the next few months or so the B6 buildup at MCO will be of great use to the routes. Less we not forget the LH and B6 partnership. Call it what one may, there is a reason that JJ is serving MCO and there is a reason that B6 is using MCO as a South American gateway.
LOL. That's just laughable. The number of inferences and relations you are drawing there is idiotic. JetBlue has absolutely nothing to do with TAM starting MCO.
Lambert747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3329 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 17): LOL. That's just laughable. The number of inferences and relations you are drawing there is idiotic. JetBlue has absolutely nothing to do with TAM starting MCO
Iditotic?
Not really. LH buys into B6. JJ posturing to enter Star Alliance headed by LH. B6 opens MCO as gateway to South America. JJ serves GRU-MCO. Nothing idiotic about any of that. A year ago people laughed when B6/LH were talking. Now that it is a deal, those same people are using terms such as "idiotic".
Not really. LH buys into B6. JJ posturing to enter Star Alliance headed by LH. B6 opens MCO as gateway to South America. JJ serves GRU-MCO. Nothing idiotic about any of that. A year ago people laughed when B6/LH were talking. Now that it is a deal, those same people are using terms such as "idiotic".
Interesting, not idiotic..
We'll agree to disagree here. I'll stick with idiotic.
JetBlue has absolutely nothing to do with TAM flying to Orlando.
Lambert747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3306 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 19): We'll agree to disagree here. I'll stick with idiotic
Thanks, lets agree to disagree..
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 19): JetBlue has absolutely nothing to do with TAM flying to Orlando.
Well, we will have to wait and see as there is a rumor, yes a rumor that B6 and JJ will codeshare at MCO, and JFK. It has yet to be proven false or real. So I will leave the rumor in place until proven false.
C010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3513 posts, RR: 21 Reply 21, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3299 times:
Quoting Lambert747 (Reply 16):
Unfortunately the 767-300. I think many including myself will stick with the incumbent AA 777-200 via GRU. There is to much of an advantage to a 777 vs a 767-300.
AA's service is a shame with that stop, but de facto connection. Unless you're flying C or F, AA offers nothing.
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 17):
MIA-FOR has already been talked about in Brazilian press starting in the first half of 2009. I've posted the news article in the past here.
When it comes to aviation, the Brazilian press is only reliable when the article is based on a press release. I believe it is being studied, but I wouldn't be confident.
MCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8552 posts, RR: 14 Reply 22, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3251 times:
Quoting Incitatus (Reply 11):
The lack of beyond connections should not matter. TAM is after GRU-MCO, GIG-MCO, CWB-MCO, CNF-MCO, POA-MCO, EZE-MCO, BSB-MCO, SSA-MCO, VIX-MCO, GYN-MCO, etc. For some of these routes, TAM is the only game in town with a single-connection, same-airline service. They have demand to make money on that route for at least 6 months of the year.
I want a source please. If this true, I'll be darned. Welcome to MCO TAM. Hopefully your pilots and f/a's will enjoy their layovers in our wonderful city of Orlando.
Lambert747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3246 times:
Quoting C010T3 (Reply 21): Unless you're flying C or F, AA offers nothing.
P and J is what counts. The money goes where the comfort and quality is. AA has a direct advantage with the 777 on JFK-GRU-GIG. The 767-300 on JFK-GIG is of no advantage, however knowing JJ the flight will be sold in great numbers to consolidators.
25 C010T3: I'm talking about the passenger's perspective here... Even on C, the advantage is not that great when you consider the extra 3 hours in order to reac
26 Dazed767: Or a sub? DC-10's used to be common from Varig here.
27 JJ8080: Lambert747 is right, although, with GRU-MCO and GRU-BSB on sight, when the next 2 332s arrives, at least one will probably go for GIG-JFK freeing up
28 Hardiwv: This route has the chance to show it also can generate very good yieldings. Agreed. In fact, look at the success of LH and VS in MCO where the market
29 TN757Flyer: Someone beat me to it. More like if TAM doesn't make it work, three strikes and MCO is out? Granted those before it had problems, but those flights n
30 Teneriffe77: Well there is a difference in that one of the carriers operating MCO-Brazil, Transbrasil doesn't exist anymore and if they did still exist they might
31 Hardiwv: The situation now is very, very different from the past, starting with the Brazilian economy and currency. I am sure it will work and there is a subs
32 2travel2know: CM will still have 5 weekly CNF-PTY-MCO, daily GIG-PTY-MCO, thrice weekly MAO-PTY-MCO (!)and twice daily GRU-PTY-MCO for those who choose not to fly
33 C010T3: We can only tell that once we now the schedule. JJ flies internationalised GRU-GIG and GRU-CNF tags and it's possible to connect to them.
34 Tonytifao: Any chances of AA trying to lower fares on MCO-MIA-GRU to compete with JJ non stop? I would love that
35 MAH4546: Not at all. Virgin and, soon, Lufthansa both send high-density, low-premium configuration airplanes to Orlando. Lufthansa will be removing first clas
36 MIAMIx707: There's a very large Brazilian population in the Orlando area, besides the leisure draw. Don't forget at a certain point, Brazil had 3 airlines flyin
37 MAH4546: It is switching to an A340-600, but that's because the route's yields have been anything but good. The switch to the A340-600 is for two reasons. Yes
38 TN757Flyer: Thanks for the FYI. I was not aware they flew there for that length of time. Continuous service? I have some timetables and OAG's from 80's and 90's
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 305 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31116 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4439 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Aug 2008, 932 posts, 
From Ecuador, joined May 2007, 448 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
