MSYtristar From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 6570 posts, RR: 50 Posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3073 times:
It looks like MSY-MEX on AM will be discontinued as of February 27, 2010. I no longer see it listed in the OAG after that date. I'm eating my words big time right now as I thought this route had a chance to do well. I was really hoping that this could work out for the city, since it has been pushing hard for new international service. Also to be honest, I took pride is the fact that the airport once again could be called "international", since AC and TA bailed after Katrina and have yet to return. I figured that the large increase in the Hispanic population in the New Orleans area would have really helped this out; however, maybe MEX just isn't the best choice in international destinations from MSY. I know AM was promoting the connecting service to SAP considerably but the flight timings weren't the best and on the return it required a 4-hour connection in MEX. CO has a daily one-stop, same plane service via IAH which has to be easier. It's also too bad that AM couldn't shuffle the flight times around, adjust the frequency, or even implement the code-share with DL, which they had received approval for, to perhaps see if this could work a little more. But I don't think that's AM's style.This sucks to be sure...but, as recent personal events in my life have proven to me yet again, there are more important things to worry about in the grand scheme of things.
It is not only that MEX is not the best choice from MSY, but AM is not the best airline to fly MSY-MEX using an ERJ. AM has a very high cost structure and the ERJ is very expensive to operate in a route like this which needs a lot of premium traffic to keep the flight in the black marker. Therefore, I don't understand why AM bothers to try so many Mexico - US routes with those "mosquitos" and then discontinue service!! Ohh well, it is AeroMexico, so nothing new I guess!!!
Laxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25422 posts, RR: 49
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2945 times:
Are you surprised? Just par for the course based on AM scheduling practices.
The entry to MSY was as timid as it could be utilizing the smallest capacity available with the baby ERJ. From the git-go I don't think AM had high hopes for the route.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Apjung From United States of America, joined Aug 2002, 116 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2696 times:
It's a shame that MSY has slipped and allowed other airports to eclipse MSY in the past 3 decades. It would probably take 3 decades to catch up if it is remotely possible. We seriously have a chicken and egg problem. What would it take for airlines to add more nonstop destinations but businesses aren't flocking down here due to the lack of convenient nonstops.
EddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7583 posts, RR: 42
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2688 times:
This is very bad news. As MSYtristar and ConcordeBoy say, I wonder if different schedules would have helped this flight. It is ridiculous that people have to check-in at 4:30 a.m. at MSY. It is also my understanding that AM did very little to advertise this flight... if people both in New Orleans and Mexico City had been more aware of the route's existence, maybe it would have fared better. And finally, yes, I wonder why the DL codeshare was not implemented; that could have only helped, even if marginally.
AM used to do MEX-CUN-MSY in the past. I wonder if we will see AM trying this approach further down the road.
ERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6771 posts, RR: 17
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2646 times:
Quoting Apjung (Reply 7): What would it take for airlines to add more nonstop destinations but businesses aren't flocking down here due to the lack of convenient nonstops.
That can go for most large and medium tier markets without a hub airline. Unfortunately, the mighty overtaking the small has caused this problem to occur. I think, for the most part, everyone is screaming for consolidation. But it is having a detrimental effect on many airports out there. Consolidation is helping hubs and SOME spokes. But it's not helping the general populous.
In my opinion, what the US needs is more independent small airlines and less megalithic, carnivorous airlines. But its not happening. And airlines will cry out left and right that what is needed is consolidation. Less is better. Bigger is better. We can get you everywhere. But can they get you where you want to be? Does everybody who fly need access to Tel Aviv or Calcutta? No. However, they are more likely to want to get around the US. More nonstops would definitely help most cities grab more international and domestic jobs/headquarters.. but there just is no option.
Unlike a lot of the rest of the world, the US does not have new airlines popping up all the time. The last true airlines of the decade was Skybus, Independence Air, and Virgin America. If you look other places, there have been many more added. Granted, some have failed, but it hasn't stopped others from coming in.
Justlump From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 156 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2369 times:
Quoting Enilria (Reply 11): Average shelf life of a new AM route? 100 days?
I realize that in this economy that no airline can sustain prolonged financial losses into any market. However, AM seems to drop routes before they have a chance to develop. Just a few months is not enough time to build any kind of market share or to develop loyal customers. Also, you would expect them to tweak the existing service first (fewer frequencies, timing, etc.) before just abandoning the route.
MSYPI7185 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 710 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2329 times:
Quoting AR385 (Reply 12): BA used to fly LGW (or was it LHR)? MSY-MEX in the 80´s with an L-1011
They flew MEX-MSY-LGW.
Also EA flew MEX-MSY-ATL-IAD-JFK back in the 60's.
EA 304 that crashed into Lake Pontchartrain in 1963 Originated in MEX. It was a DC-8 aircraft.
MSY used to have quite a few flights to Mexico, the Carribean and Europe from the 50's thru the early 80's. Service to Canada was off and on up until Katrina when that service ended, and most of it was direct service, except for AC.
BNAFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2303 times:
Quoting OP3000 (Reply 16): I agree. This could eventually be a good route for Volaris or one of the Mexican LCCs.
Agreed. Volaris seems the logical choice given it's pending hookup with WN (assuming that's still on?) While WN has retrenched at MSY, they might actually get some feed to flights to the southeast and midwest from Volaris.
AznMadSci From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 3670 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (4 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1977 times:
Quoting Hondah35 (Reply 20): CO did all of their LatAm route planning with zero attention to AM.
I remember at one time CO and AM were planning on doing codeshare agreements with each other, yet there was some sort of disagreement. Can anyone refresh my memory if it was either CO or AM that were later not interested in playing fair in said agreement.
Also, does AM still maintain their main US offices just outside of IAH?
The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
MSYtristar From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 6570 posts, RR: 50
Reply 22, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1711 times:
Hot off the presses...this route is NOT being canned....frequency will be reduced in March to twice weekly for the off peak season...with Monday and Friday departures it looks like. This is a lot better than just canceling it altogether. I found this information on Aeromexico.com while looking up availability.
Wasn't it MEX-MSY-STL on a TW MD-80. Since the aircraft did not make it non-stop to STL, it made a stop in MSY. The flight did good thanks to TW's STL hub.
TWA had two MEX routings: STL-MEX-STL, and JFK-MSY-MEX-MSY-JFK. The JFK route was for TATL connections. TWA had no nonstop authority NYC-MEX because DL and CO did, and the route was limited to 2 American carriers. Thus the stop in MSY. They eventually dropped MEX completely awhile before the AA deal.