Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
OAG: AM Drops ATL-MEX  
User currently offlineEnilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7210 posts, RR: 13
Posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4488 times:

Flights cease in January. CUN-ATL service begins in January 3/week as previously scheduled and appears unaffected.

OAG changes usually appear in GDS by Monday.

66 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7587 posts, RR: 43
Reply 1, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4440 times:

Weird. One would think that a route designed to feed partner DL's superhub would be a profitable one for AM. When I have flown in the past DL or AM between MEX and ATL, flights have always been full.


Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineSflaflight From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1183 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4313 times:

Well more of AM trimming the fat. I guess the new board feels it's easier and more cost savings to just code share with DL to their ''fortress''

User currently offlineEnilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7210 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4274 times:



Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 2):
Well more of AM trimming the fat. I guess the new board feels it's easier and more cost savings to just code share with DL to their ''fortress''

I think it probably means the relationship between AM and DL isn't that great. AM is probably feeling shortchanged. They would be better off with a JV. So AM is adding a bunch of non-SkyTeam hubs like DEN and YYZ with probably no code share at all versus SkyTeam hubs with a second code. Sounds fishy to me...or at least questionable as a strategy.


User currently offlineSflaflight From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1183 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4261 times:



Quoting Enilria (Reply 3):
They would be better off with a JV

I definitely agree with that.

Quoting Enilria (Reply 3):
So AM is adding a bunch of non-SkyTeam hubs like DEN and YYZ with probably no code share at all versus SkyTeam hubs with a second code.

The problem is that who knows how long they'll last. AM is notorious for add/delete, add/delete, add/delete. But I see your point, and it is definitely valid as well.

I think it's tough being a Mexican carrier under (meaning south if the border) powerful US carriers due to the proximity of MX to the US.


User currently offlineEnilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7210 posts, RR: 13
Reply 5, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4246 times:



Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 4):
The problem is that who knows how long they'll last.

We both know.  pessimist 

Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 4):
I think it's tough being a Mexican carrier under (meaning south if the border) powerful US carriers due to the proximity of MX to the US.

I'll take that a step further and say it's tough because most of the passengers are Americans and they don't want to fly on Mexican carriers --- bottom line. That's why code share is so important because then they can fool Americans into thinking they are on Delta. Trouble is that Delta knows all of this and treats AM about the same way UA used to treat MX.

My personal opinion is that AM/MX should fly strong ethnic markets and also beach routes in cooperation with tour companies like Apple/Funjet because it's like a code share in terms of who sells the tickets and the Mexican carriers should be the lowest cost providers of seats to tour operators.


User currently offlineJuventus From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 2835 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4191 times:



Quoting EddieDude (Reply 1):
Weird. One would think that a route designed to feed partner DL's superhub would be a profitable one for AM. When I have flown in the past DL or AM between MEX and ATL, flights have always been full.

Agree Eddie, did not expect this. I figure AM brings Europe and East Coast bound passengers from Mexico into ATL, and DL does the rest.


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32867 posts, RR: 71
Reply 7, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4067 times:

Just about the only certainty there will ever be in AeroMexico's U.S. network is Los Angeles, Miami and New York.

AM isn't even consistent with Chicago - a very large market from Mexico.



a.
User currently offlineThomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3960 posts, RR: 22
Reply 8, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4049 times:

Anyone want to take a guess if any other US gateways are on the chopping block? Let's see PHX is history along with the short lived DTW service. I am praying the IAH is not next.

Thomas



"Show me the Braniffs"
User currently offlineLexy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2515 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4002 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 7):
Just about the only certainty there will ever be in AeroMexico's U.S. network is Los Angeles, Miami and New York.

I would agree with this. Those are for sure markets where AM will be regardless.

It's a shame to see them move back out of ATL for a second time, but they will still be there with the CUN flights I assume. It is interesting that they can't make it work.



Nashville, Tennessee KBNA
User currently offlineNAVEGA From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 741 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3992 times:

Enilria,

I have flown both Aeromexico and Mexicana from New York to Mexico City and both airlines
carry a large percentage of Americans on thier flights. Sure during the Christmas holidays
you see more ethnic passengers but I think Americans know they get better service on
a foreight carrier to Mexico than a peanut flight on an US Carrier. I have flown on almost
all airlines to Mexico and my choice would be

1. Mexicana - Bright cabin - comfortable seats - free meal and licor - professional friendly crews
2. Aeromexico - new B737s- free meal and licor- professional crews
3. United - friendly crews - bright comfortable A319/320s

The other airlines are fine and I would fly them if I had no other choice but I like the exotic feel
of a foreign crew when traveling to another country.


User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5440 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3993 times:



Quoting Thomasphoto60 (Reply 8):
Anyone want to take a guess if any other US gateways are on the chopping block?

In addition to PHX cuts (although not a total shutdown), ATL and DTW, TUS was just recently shut down; SEA service has been altered so who knows how long that will be on the route map; and SLC (2x wkly to MEX) is another DL hub so might they repeat ATL there?

Quite a reorganization going on at AM, particularly -- but not limited to -- their US service. Is it just the economy or is it deeper?

bb


User currently offlineLexy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2515 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3988 times:



Quoting SANFan (Reply 11):
Is it just the economy or is it deeper?

If I had to guess, a little of both. The economy stinks and they are making cuts.



Nashville, Tennessee KBNA
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25503 posts, RR: 50
Reply 13, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3954 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 7):
AeroMexico's U.S. network is Los Angeles

And even here they are a shadow of what they use to be.

At one time thru all of the 1980s into ealrly 90s AM was the largest foreign carrier at LAX while today they are down to 6 dailies having exited many historic markets while MX run circles around them with 18 or so flights!



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineBA744PHX From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 337 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3941 times:

only PHX-MEX is being dropped. PHX-HMO-PHX will still operate via AM B737

User currently offlineSwissair4ever From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3902 times:

what will the schedule for the ATL-CUN-ATL service be?

User currently offlineGhost77 From Mexico, joined Mar 2000, 5222 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3865 times:



Quoting Enilria (Thread starter):
OAG changes usually appear in GDS by Monday.

Are you saying THIS next Monday AM636 will be dropped?????

OAG shows the next thing:

MEX-ATL:
AM636 09:25 13:45 0 737 1234567 D MAR07
AM636 09:25 14:45 0 737 12345 .7 E MAR08
AM634 09:30 16:10 1 737 1234567 E JAN12 THROUGH FEB08

ATL-MEX:
AM637 15:00 16:55 0 737 12345 .7 E MAR08
AM637 15:00 17:55 0 737 1234567 D JAN11
AM637 15:00 17:55 0 737 1234567 E FEB09 THROUGH MAR07
AM635 15:20 20:30 1 737 1234567 E JAN12 THROUGH FEB08
AM637 17:30 20:25 0 737 1234567 E JAN12 THROUGH FEB08

Translation:

AM636/637 is staying.

Eff Jan 12th till Feb 8th 2009 AM will fly an additional flight to ATL, AM634/635 MEX-CUN-ATL-CUN-MEX. ONLY.

AM636/637 is going from 7X to 6X eff March 08, 2009.

Unless you know something else we don't know or own a magic ball.

Quoting Sflaflight (Reply 4):
The problem is that who knows how long they'll last. AM is notorious for add/delete, add/delete, add/delete. But I see your point, and it is definitely valid as well.

I foresee hard times for DEN, as for YYZ, it will sure be a total success, there's market there for a 3rd competitor.

Quoting Enilria (Reply 5):
and also beach routes in cooperation with tour companies like Apple/Funjet because it's like a code share in terms of who sells the tickets and the Mexican carriers should be the lowest cost providers of seats to tour operators.

What makes you think that? FYI, MX since they went to private hands, all they've done is CUT their HIGH operating costs... and AM is far worse since in Oct 07 went to private hands... being Mexican carriers doesn't mean they're cheap in wages, service, etc and have lower operations costs. FYI, MX and AM have brand new Airbuses and Boeing's, newer fleet compared to MANY US carriers, some owned some leased, so they have to get a lot of cash and pay it in USD or Euros!!!

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 7):
AM isn't even consistent with Chicago - a very large market from Mexico.

I got one for this one... Mexicana...!

Quoting Thomasphoto60 (Reply 8):
Anyone want to take a guess if any other US gateways are on the chopping block? Let's see PHX is history along with the short lived DTW service.

No more stations...

Quoting Thomasphoto60 (Reply 8):
I am praying the IAH is not next.

IAH is good whereas... ATL... flights are still are loaded, but perhaps next monday might go? ATL was the other station having problems.

Quoting SANFan (Reply 11):
Quite a reorganization going on at AM, particularly -- but not limited to -- their US service. Is it just the economy or is it deeper?

It's limited to US stations. And their STUPID venture to Central American. It's stupid to go against, MX, TA, CM and fly to MGA...!!!

Cause, AM has gotten its 11th widebody, a B767-300ER, today a Boeing 767-300ER arrived too, it is believed its the 12th B767-300ER for the fleet.

In the next days:

MEX-MTY-MAD will be slashed but FCO will go from 2X to 4X. (A MX consequence of the new MEX-MAD)
MEX-EZE is going from 3X to 5X. (Until no Argentine carrier shows up, AM will be able to do up to 7X)
MEX-GRU is back from 7X to 9X. (2X via CUN)
MEX-SCL is back from 4X to 5X.
MEX-BCN is going from 3X to 5X (and remember it started with 2X).
MEX-TIJ-PVG is doing AWESOME for the short period of time compared to a slow start of MEX-TIJ-NRT which is now also good and staying.

And on the pipeline, a new long haul destination.

Quoting Lexy (Reply 12):
If I had to guess, a little of both. The economy stinks and they are making cuts.

Making wise cuts only...

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 13):
At one time thru all of the 1980s into ealrly 90s AM was the largest foreign carrier at LAX while today they are down to 6 dailies having exited many historic markets while MX run circles around them with 18 or so flights!

LAX, you have stats for this when exactly AM was 1 in LAX? AFAIK, MX has always been number 1 at LAX.

g77



Ricardo Morales - flyAPM - ¡No es que maneje rapido, solo estoy volando lento!
User currently offlineNAVEGA From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 741 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3824 times:

Ghost you beat me to this one but all my experience and research confirms that Mexicana has always been the leader to Mexico from LAX. They have been for over 70 Years the top
carrier to Mexico.

Aeromexico has never even come close to the number of passengers carried or number of flights operated from LAX but they do have a good number of flights. Mexicana can go
from 19 a day to 28 during high season a day to various cities in Mexico.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25503 posts, RR: 50
Reply 18, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3815 times:

Yes, AM was the #1 carrier at LAX for at least 10 years. Around 86-88'ish they were actually commended by the Los Angeles City Council for this record and service to LAX. Additionaly when TBIT opended in 1984 they were also know as the #1 foreign operator at LAX.

One needs to remember if anyone can dig up old scheduled that AM had 10+ daily DC-9 with occasional DC-10 at at LAX when MX was only 4-5 727s and maybe a single or so DC-10s for much of the early 80s.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineGhost77 From Mexico, joined Mar 2000, 5222 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3792 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 18):

Ok, I'll do some homework of the 80s to see when was this exactly.

g77



Ricardo Morales - flyAPM - ¡No es que maneje rapido, solo estoy volando lento!
User currently offlineJkudall From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 615 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3775 times:



Quoting Enilria (Reply 3):
I think it probably means the relationship between AM and DL isn't that great. AM is probably feeling shortchanged.

I disagree. In fact, I think it is more the opposite. By having the code-share, it isn't really ncecessary to have both carriers flying the same route when there is already more than enough capacity. By having the more dominant carrier on the route (in this case, Delta) maintain it, the other airline can reallocate planes on other routes and still have the ability to sell seats on the other carrier. This is what happened with JFK-CDG for example, where Delta dropped the route entirely and uses AF flights to sell seats on.

We'll probably see more of this to come.


User currently offlineJkudall From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 615 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3759 times:



Quoting SANFan (Reply 11):
In addition to PHX cuts (although not a total shutdown), ATL and DTW, TUS was just recently shut down; SEA service has been altered so who knows how long that will be on the route map; and SLC (2x wkly to MEX) is another DL hub so might they repeat ATL there?

I'm pretty sure AM's SLC-MEX is seasonal for winter only (November thru March).


User currently offlineBobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6483 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3716 times:



Quoting Jkudall (Reply 20):
By having the code-share, it isn't really ncecessary to have both carriers flying the same route when there is already more than enough capacity.



Quoting Jkudall (Reply 20):
This is what happened with JFK-CDG for example, where Delta dropped the route entirely and uses AF flights to sell seats on.

Quite a difference between these two examples. One is a joint venture(CDG-JFK), the other MEX-ATL is not.


User currently offlineJkudall From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 615 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3703 times:

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 22):
Quite a difference between these two examples. One is a joint venture(CDG-JFK), the other MEX-ATL is not.

Yes, but as part of the code-share they are still able to sell seats on the other carrier, just not as many as is the case with JFK-CDG.

[Edited 2008-12-19 21:52:06]

User currently offlineEnilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7210 posts, RR: 13
Reply 24, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3657 times:



Quoting NAVEGA (Reply 10):
I have flown both Aeromexico and Mexicana from New York to Mexico City and both airlines
carry a large percentage of Americans on thier flights. Sure during the Christmas holidays
you see more ethnic passengers but I think Americans know they get better service on
a foreight carrier to Mexico than a peanut flight on an US Carrier. I have flown on almost
all airlines to Mexico and my choice would be

No statement is an absolute. The INS data shows passport country by carrier registration country. Mexican carriers carry a fraction of the U.S. passport ratio of the U.S. carriers. The Mexican carriers also have much lower load factors than American carriers according to T100. The Mexican carriers do carry more Mexican passport passengers, but the market is roughly 70% U.S. passports.

Quoting NAVEGA (Reply 10):
The other airlines are fine and I would fly them if I had no other choice but I like the exotic feel
of a foreign crew when traveling to another country.

You are open minded and are a seasoned traveler. That is not typical.

Quoting Ghost77 (Reply 16):
Are you saying THIS next Monday AM636 will be dropped?????

OAG shows the next thing:

Checking aeromexico.com, the flight is already deleted. The only flights listed for February are Delta flights or a direct flight stopping in CUN. Not sure what you are talking about. What is your source and why is it more accurate than www.aeromexico.com???

Quoting Ghost77 (Reply 16):
being Mexican carriers doesn't mean they're cheap in wages, service, etc and have lower operations costs. FYI, MX and AM have brand new Airbuses and Boeing's, newer fleet compared to MANY US carriers, some owned some leased, so they have to get a lot of cash and pay it in USD or Euros!!!



It should mean they are cheap in wages. If it doesn't then they are letting the U.S. carriers get an unnecessary advantage. Mexican wages for comparable jobs are about 70% less in Mexico across the board. It's possible AM/MZ don't follow that paradigm, but they should.


25 NASCARAirforce : We just added an AMX flight at MCO. We have 2 flights a day to MEX from MCO. I think we will have 14 flights a week soon. In the past we would usually
26 LIPZ : The best thing would be to u/g FCO to 777 (3xw) in order to make MEX-FCO non-stop possible (bypassing MTY).[Edited 2008-12-20 01:19:48]
27 EXAAUADL : IR use to be that AM was focused on business and MX on leisure and ethinic. Obviously that isnt true today
28 Post contains links Ghost77 : LAX, I did my research, never ever AM has been over MX at LAX, with flights nor seats. Flights for 1987: AM: AM467, LAX-LAP-PVR-GDL-MEX ........M80 1
29 RafflesKing : Well that's a bugger. I fly to Mexico monthly, and swap between Mexicana and Aeromexico as much as possible - much better service. I tend to see a mix
30 NAVEGA : Ghost, They are also largest foreign carrier in ORD.
31 Juventus : Just to clarify, MEX-ATL is staying, it is NOT disapperaing, correct?? I don't understand why AM would ever drop ATL.....
32 Tango-Bravo : Only possible "thanks" to the legalized collusion that is codeshare...to say nothing of legalized fraud.. At least to me, I have always understood th
33 Globalflyer : I am confused too...is ATL staying or going? Honestly I would love to see MX come into ATL. I have always enjoyed their service!
34 LJ : I was looking at schedules for November 09 and saw that the B777 was loaded for MEX-MAD. However does AM have enough 777s? I thought MEX-MAD was down
35 Ghost77 : They have 4 B777s. Enough metal to do: MEX-TIJ-NRT 2X MEX-TIJ-PVG 2X MEX-MAD 7X MEX-GRU 7X MEX-CDG 2X All other routes are flown with B767. g77
36 EddieDude : I am glad that AM got an exception to add more flights to EZE. Unless LA decides to have its Argentine subsidiary launch MEX non-stop from EZE, I rea
37 LAXintl : Try earlier into the 1980s -- like 82/83 AM was definately the #1 airline when TBIT opended and was commended for 10 years of being #1 foreign carrier
38 SANFan : My understanding of all said here and elsewhere is that AM is shutting down ATL. AM is on a major-league reorganization of (at least) their US operat
39 Globalflyer : That is a shame...there is hardly anything in ATL except DL...not bashing them. I love DL and am a Platinum for years...but I would love to see some o
40 MayaviaERJ190 : I can now imagine AeroMexico's executives saying "we will end operations at any US airport not starting with an S, as in SAN, SEA and SLC, we will sta
41 Juventus : It is actually worrying and alarming that Aeromexico has been dropping a BUNCH of U.S destinations lately, while Mexicana hasn't drop a single one in
42 Ghost77 : I'm really sorry I cannot disclose more, but hopefully, AM gets this other long haul destination. But with certainty, it's not London. Plans in the s
43 Enilria : AM is only offering ATL-CUN-MEX as of January with their own planes. AM will continue to offer ATL-MEX, but the flight will be operated by Delta. A b
44 EddieDude : No worries man. I understand. I have a couple of suspected cities on my mind, and I definitely hope they launch a new long haul service. Any idea of
45 Hondah35 : I don't think Conesa has a clue. You can't look at AM's route changes over the last 3-4 years and glean any cohesive strategy, save starting NRT and
46 Post contains links Latinplane : Just say it: It's Frankfurt or another big city in Germany. If that turns out correct AM will re-establish its European route map to what it looked l
47 EddieDude : Well, if it were a destination in Germany, it would be either FRA or MUC. I don't think the other large German metro areas would make much sense. The
48 Ghost77 : Trying earlier... AM: AM497 LAX-MTY-CUN .................. . . . . . 6. ...DC8 ..153 seats/weekly AM495 LAX-MTY-CUN-MID ........... 1234567 ...D9S ..
49 EddieDude : Ghost, very interesting figures. Thanks so much for your research. I have a question however in connection with the two tables. There is no sign, in a
50 LAXintl : I dont know what to say, but AeroMexico was clearly awared by the Los Angeles City Council in the mid 80s for being the #1 foreign carrier at LAX for
51 Pecevanne : iiLAX INTL, sorry but the market figures you talk are totally wrong, never, i say never, AM had been number one in LAX. I have been using LAX arprt fo
52 Swissair4ever : So it seems ATL is NOT CLOSING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ATL-CUN-MEX on AM metal still remains!!
53 Enilria : Your startling observation seems little more than a nearly verbatim repetition of this thread's first post...by me, ATL-MEX is being dropped. ATL-CUN
54 Post contains links Ghost77 : Yes Eddie, no MEX-LAX non-stop, till the early 90s, I believe. It wasn't smart to fly the DC10 non-stop on MX side and AM never sent their Dc10s to L
55 Post contains links Ghost77 : Hi Eddiedude, For 1982: For 1987: This is really been an interesting discussion in respect to Mexican Carrier @ LAX. History and memory betrays me as
56 LAXintl : That was for 2006. Indeed, Qantas was the #1 Foreign Carrier tenant at LAX during 2007.
57 EddieDude : Thanks Richard, it is very interesting. I am sure I am not the only who would have thought that AM had non-stop service to LAX from MEX since God know
58 SANFan : It will be interesting to see what happens to AM in ATL in the summer; I would be very surprised to see them flying to CUN then! And if there's no AT
59 DTWAGENT : Rumor has it in the Travel Agent area. That AM is going to change to Star Allence and get out of the Skyteam. That is what some of our trade papers ar
60 Swissair4ever : I was merely attempting to clarify what I picked up on after 40+ posts of speculation, but thanks for the for the pleasant response.
61 EddieDude : Ah, so that is the rumor following the launch of YYZ, DEN, SFO... hmmm. This is quite interesting. I really don't see it, though. AM is a founder of
62 Humberside : Nothing UA and NH couldn't replace though
63 EddieDude : That is absolutely true, but if I am not mistaken, the reason why MX left Star Alliance was because it was frustrated with UA (UA got more from MX th
64 Post contains links EddieDude : Speaking of AM, our fellow a.netter BN747 has put together this very cool video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ603pEp_1k I suggest you click on it
65 Post contains links Ghost77 : Your welcome! Indeed, interesting stuff! I've done a table of recent numbers, they show very interesting things, you can check it on here: http://www
66 Enilria : I'm sorry it's just a pet peeve when people don't read the first post, but maybe you were being sarcastic?
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...
OAG: DL Drops CVG To AVP/AZO/MHT/PWM posted Fri Nov 21 2008 06:23:42 by Enilria
AA Drops ATL-LGA, Trims STL posted Fri Aug 1 2008 07:12:50 by Enilria
Am Drops GDL-PHX posted Sun Feb 24 2008 08:16:27 by BA744PHX
Delta Announcement 11:00 Am Today @ ATL posted Thu Oct 12 2006 09:14:29 by GFA330
Op Days For The AM's T7 On MEX-CDG-MEX posted Wed Feb 22 2006 16:14:32 by Orbis
Pan Am: SFB-ATL... Will It Fly? posted Tue Jan 3 2006 18:53:41 by Dlx737200
AM Now Seeks MEX-SCK MLM-OAK GDL/MLM/BJX/MEX-BFL posted Fri Nov 4 2005 20:54:05 by FATFlyer
What Happened To AM's 14x Weekly MEX-ORD Flights? posted Sun Sep 12 2004 00:43:51 by EddieDude
Am 767 On MEX-MTY-MEX posted Fri Aug 27 2004 03:18:33 by AR385
OAG: DL/DLC Drops SLC-RDU/CLE/CMH posted Thu Nov 27 2008 20:55:23 by Enilria