Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DL To Latin America  
User currently offlineAmfleet82 From United States of America, joined Sep 2012, 9 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 10 months 15 hours ago) and read 1612 times:

I have been fascinated by the various posts concerning Delta's inability to be competitive in the Latin market with their Atlanta focused flights. I have used DL for GRU and EZE flights and it always cracks me up that people will fly to ATL and then backtrack to Miami!

What has kept DL from growing JFK (likely there only real O&D hub with significant Latin traffic) into a stronger Latin Gateway? Would the NWA ordered 787's have helped them? Right now I believe only GRU and BOG are flown from JFK. It seems JFK could support LIM, GIG and UIO flights.

Adam

68 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25198 posts, RR: 48
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 15 hours ago) and read 1654 times:

As discussed prior Latin America is the most profitable segment for US carriers, but Delta indeed struggles.

Latin America: Most Profitable For US Airlines (by LAXintl Jul 18 2012 in Civil Aviation)

Trying to make Atlanta a Miami North has surely been a challenge even by DL's own admission.

For NYC, yes it has a much larger local market, but the stage length are longer being so far north, and its not much very convenient as connection point for most of the US either.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinedavescj From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 2306 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 15 hours ago) and read 1649 times:

How much of this is a question (currently) of getting the rights to routes in Brazil?

Another question: for Mexico (which I understand does not speak for all Latin America), could a JV with Aeromexico increase flight to Mexico while leaving metal free for other routes?

Dave



Can I have a mojito on this flight?
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25198 posts, RR: 48
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 15 hours ago) and read 1647 times:

Quoting davescj (Reply 2):
How much of this is a question (currently) of getting the rights to routes in Brazil?

Delta has received authority to only pull out from one Brazil market after another -- Fortaleza, Manaus and Recife have been discontinued. Plus some specific markets like LAX-GRU also have been tried and dropped.

Quoting davescj (Reply 2):
Another question: for Mexico (which I understand does not speak for all Latin America), could a JV with Aeromexico increase flight to Mexico while leaving metal free for other routes?

Yes much could be done with AM, however it seems neither is extremely interested in tying their networks in tightly.

DL prefers to run its global network with connections in mind, while AM is more focused on its home market needs including offering more focused ethnic O&D routes. Their respective models dont quite mix.

To me the Mexicana - United relationship was the same while in Star. Both carriers had divergent needs and interest.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineEIRules From Ireland, joined Aug 2007, 775 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 15 hours ago) and read 1646 times:

From a European connections point of view, DL's timings through ATL dont help either. 8 hours plus of a layover to places like EZE or SCL are less than ideal and considering the relative lack of competition from Europe to deep South America (compared to for example Europe to Asia), its not to be taken lightly


Next Flights: EI DUB-LHR A320, BA LHR-SFO B744, UA SFO-LAS A320, BA LAS-LHR B744, EI LHR-DUB A320
User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3699 posts, RR: 19
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 15 hours ago) and read 1651 times:

Well, it's funny that you shall mention that today. DL is announcing the relocation of its Commercial HQ for Latin America and Caribbean to Brazil:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...dquarters-to-brazil-177276261.html


User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6129 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 15 hours ago) and read 1642 times:

Quoting Amfleet82 (Thread starter):
I have used DL for GRU and EZE flights and it always cracks me up that people will fly to ATL and then backtrack to Miami!

Well I know people that do BZE-ATL-FLL/MIA

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
Trying to make Atlanta a Miami North has surely been a challenge even by DL's own admission.

Hence maybe why there has been rampant speculation that DL will make some kind of strategic move for AA's MIA ops.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineIrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2183 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 14 hours ago) and read 1649 times:

Quoting EIRules (Reply 4):

From a European connections point of view, DL's timings through ATL dont help either. 8 hours plus of a layover to places like EZE or SCL are less than ideal and considering the relative lack of competition from Europe to deep South America (compared to for example Europe to Asia), its not to be taken lightly

Yah, but there's really not a major need for ATL to provide this function as most markets like EZE, GRU, GIG, and to a lesser degree, LIM and SCL are already connected by nonstop service to major European hubs. No real need to connect over the US or Canada.



next flights: jfk-icn, icn-hkg-bkk-cdg, cdg-phl-msp
User currently offlineBDL757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 13 hours ago) and read 1642 times:

Quoting C010T3 (Reply 5):
Well, it's funny that you shall mention that today. DL is announcing the relocation of its Commercial HQ for Latin America and Caribbean to Brazil:

We have been told a few times in memo's from HQ that Latin America is one of the fastest growing regions and that it is a place that we will continue to focus on. However it does not seem that Latin America performs very well for us. I'm wondering what is going to be done to address that? Perhaps this move is a start.


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8344 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 13 hours ago) and read 1649 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Amfleet82 (Thread starter):
I have been fascinated by the various posts concerning Delta's inability to be competitive in the Latin market with their Atlanta focused flights. I have used DL for GRU and EZE flights and it always cracks me up that people will fly to ATL and then backtrack to Miami!

Lots of people in Florida like Delta especially if they don't live in Miami, I flew to EZE on DL from my local airport PBI. Dealing with that Planet called MIA is a pain. Most of Florida is NOT what Miami is, Its Not the Capital of Latin America. Its the sixth borough or a sunny place for people from up north. IF you define Florida by what Miami is eveything outside Dade County will seem wrong.


User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6129 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 13 hours ago) and read 1647 times:

Quoting BDL757 (Reply 8):
However it does not seem that Latin America performs very well for us.

Could be how it is accounted for too.....For example a MSP-ATL-EZE ticket may have more revenue assigned to the MSP-ATL segment than the EZE segment. Could also mean that they are pouring resources back into LatAm for longer term gain...sorta like how they poured resources in LGA that are now paying dividends. Could also mean that AA and UA are just kicking their butts yield wise.

Remember DL is relatively late to the LatAM game....AA and UA(CO) have had many years to learn how to do business there and get maximum return on investment there. These carriers also have very very loyal FF bases, that will fly those carriers even when fares are substantially higher. (I see it all the time here in BZE). DL is converting some of these FFs over....but it is goign to take time and money.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 9):
Dealing with that Planet called MIA is a pain.

Yes, it is a zoo....but it has gotten a bit better since the new facility there has opened. Customs is still horrid though.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 12 hours ago) and read 1644 times:

Quoting C010T3 (Reply 5):
Well, it's funny that you shall mention that today. DL is announcing the relocation of its Commercial HQ for Latin America and Caribbean to Brazil:

I like how Delta's PR says that, "Ferri's relocation to Brazil makes Delta Air Lines the only U.S. carrier to have a vice president residing in Latin America." I suspect anyone who's ever spent much time in Miami might argue a bit with that assessment!

 
Quoting BDL757 (Reply 8):
We have been told a few times in memo's from HQ that Latin America is one of the fastest growing regions and that it is a place that we will continue to focus on. However it does not seem that Latin America performs very well for us. I'm wondering what is going to be done to address that? Perhaps this move is a start.
Quoting yellowtail (Reply 10):
Remember DL is relatively late to the LatAM game....AA and UA(CO) have had many years to learn how to do business there and get maximum return on investment there. These carriers also have very very loyal FF bases, that will fly those carriers even when fares are substantially higher.

I think it's largely a function of Delta's structurally disadvantaged network relative to AA. Not to sound like a broken record, but MIA is so dominant as a U.S. gateway for many markets in Central and South America that whoever holds MIA ultimately holds the keys to the Latin America kingdom. The market is just so much larger.

Plus, AA has such an entrenched sales force and corporate/FF presence in so many of the region's markets - which is itself largely a function of the shear breadth of AA's penetration into so many markets - that it puts AA at a huge competitive advantage. AA has sales and ticketing offices - often several of them - in just about every major city in the region, along with tons of local contracts, etc.

Delta has done an incredibly impressive job in the last 20 years of turning ATL in the nation's second-largest gateway to non-Mexico Latin America, but alas it is still tiny compared to AA at MIA - many markets that Delta cannot support with more than 1 daily flight, or in some cases hasn't been able to make work at all, easily support multiple frequencies to MIA on AA and often foreign carriers as well.


User currently offline2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2610 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 11 hours ago) and read 1654 times:

There are several reasons why DL isn't doing that well in Latin America.
Yes there's the "MIA is where the demand is" syndrome but other than that obvious one:
1) Distance-wise ATL location doesn't help DL be able to use smaller jets to cover much of Latin America / Caribbean without the need to take a bigger jet out of a profitable domestic route, And since ATL is an inferior product than MIA for lots of Latin American markets its imperative that DL flies overnight both ways between ATL and deep South America thus needing 2 aircraft is the route is going to be flown daily.
2) ATL out-bound departures mornings and late afternoon ATL arrivals often are not attractive for those markets DL should be looking after in the region; yes R.O.N. a DL aircraft may be a hassle when compared to a quick turn-around but if that's what the market likes, it's the way to go.
3) DL is so ATL-centric that it isn't willing to develop routes out of its focus and minor-hubs to Latin America which may work. DL stubborness for ATL-FOR instead of a FLL-FOR route is such an example (IMHO, South Florida - FOR O/D could had alone supported that route). And I dare to say that several of DL current destinations may be able to support some kind of ATL complementary service from other DL focus/hub airports (MEM, DTW, MSP, FLL).
4) DL @ NYC faces stiff competition directly from AA @ JFK and indirectly from UA @ EWR. The only NYC - Americas non-stop market where DL is alone as a U.S. carrier is GEO and that is a mostly O/D route which AA would immediately take from DL if given a chance.
5) Looking at DL ATL lack of DL late night arrivals (2330-0030h) or early morning departures (0530-0630) makes me believe that the chances of offering some kind of LCC-style fare red-eyes flights to a few of its current destinations don't look good. It could have save DL keeping aircraft at some Latin tarmac overnight.
IMHO, There's hope but DL has still a long way to go in Latin America..



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlineBDL757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 10 hours ago) and read 1649 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 11):
Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 12):



Yeah, it is quite clear that ATL cannot act as a primary gateway to Latin America/South America. DL will have to develop a different gateway...the question is where though (especially given the hubs they have)?


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25198 posts, RR: 48
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 10 hours ago) and read 1653 times:

Ideally it needs to be someplace that has decent existing O&D demand already to complement whatever transfer traffic they generate.

While both NYC and LA have underlying markets neither one is ideal for nationwide connections, nor can they support a very wide set of destinations due to stage lengths involved.

To me geographically Florida is the place. Maybe bring the MCO hub back?   



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6129 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 10 hours ago) and read 1652 times:

Quoting BDL757 (Reply 13):
Yeah, it is quite clear that ATL cannot act as a primary gateway to Latin America/South America. DL will have to develop a different gateway...the question is where though (especially given the hubs they have)?
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 14):
Ideally it needs to be someplace that has decent existing O&D demand already to complement whatever transfer traffic they generate.

MIA, MIA, MIA



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineAmfleet82 From United States of America, joined Sep 2012, 9 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 9 hours ago) and read 1649 times:

I also don't really see the need for Latin America-Europe connectivity. Most Argentinians/Brazilians would prefer avoiding the US and its ridiculous Transit Visas and instead take direct flights.

There was much gained by the DL/NW merger. NWA was unaware of the world south of the equator and DL couldn't figure out how to connect to Asia as its economies exploded. However the combined carrier's network is just geographically inferior to UA or AA when it comes to the Latin world.

I don't know the local market well, but i wonder of FLL or MCO could be grown into mini-Latin gateways?

DL has done a few smart things when it comes to Latin America. One was scheduling the ATL-BSB flight to continue on to DCA, thus creating a DCA-ATL-BSB one stop flight on the same metal. The DTW-GRU flight also appears to be doing well. The new interiors on DL are some of the best on US metal heading south. There will be failures though, like MSP-MEX or Fortaleza and Salvador.


User currently offlinequestions From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 774 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 8 hours ago) and read 1660 times:

1. What exactly defines "Latin America"? Is it Central and South America plus Mexico?

2.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 9):
that Planet called MIA is a pain

Why do you consider Miami another planet? Isn't California and New Orleans a different planet to some?

3. Could DL make FLL work? Is it set up for significant international flights from the DL terminal or is there a separate international departures/arrivals terminal?

4. Does DL need more bilingual cabin crew onboard to serve the market?


User currently offlineRCS763AV From Colombia, joined Jun 2004, 4395 posts, RR: 12
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 8 hours ago) and read 1663 times:

Quoting Amfleet82 (Reply 16):
I also don't really see the need for Latin America-Europe connectivity. Most Argentinians/Brazilians would prefer avoiding the US and its ridiculous Transit Visas and instead take direct flights.

There is the visa issue, but in reality a lot of the flying public to europe normally holds a US visa. The real deal here is the horrible treatment that latin americans receive by US customs officers, which adds to the hassle of already having to deal with TSA and carrying your bags from belt to belt, something that isn't done anywhere else in the world.

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 7):
Yah, but there's really not a major need for ATL to provide this function as most markets like EZE, GRU, GIG, and to a lesser degree, LIM and SCL are already connected by nonstop service to major European hubs.

All latin american capitals enjoy multiple connections to Europe, BOG has much more capacity to Europe than SCL and CCS probably has more capacity than SCL and BOG combined. Ecuador and Panama have IB and KL, and the other small markets have IB to MAD (SJO, GUA, MVD, SAL) there really isn't much demand for Latin America-Europe connections via the US. But there are exceptions when DL offers competitive fares. From BOG there is the possibility of connecting to most of their european network in ATL. Some belgian friends of mine who came last year flew BRU-ATL-BOG because DL was the cheapest.

The thing with ATL is that it will never have the business or ethnic ties that south Florida has with South America, so demand will always be limited to connections and a very small O/D component.



Les escribo desde el frío de mi verde altiplano.
User currently offlineneveragain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 6 hours ago) and read 1653 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
As discussed prior Latin America is the most profitable segment for US carriers, but Delta indeed struggles.

DL may indeed struggle in Latin America, but I wouldn't point to those figures as proof. As presented, there's the illusion that the figures can be compared among airlines, but all the figures are good for is comparing year-over-year performance for the same airline. The fact that DL reports domestic sector profit in these (Form 41) reports while implying the exact opposite on investor calls should make everyone realize that what is really driving these numbers are internal airline accounting decisions.

Quoting EIRules (Reply 4):
From a European connections point of view, DL's timings through ATL dont help either. 8 hours plus of a layover to places like EZE or SCL are less than ideal and considering the relative lack of competition from Europe to deep South America (compared to for example Europe to Asia), its not to be taken lightly

If you're connecting from Europe to EZE or SCL via ATL, then you're fare-sensitive and the 8-hour connection is the "hidden" price. I can't imagine the options via MIA being appreciably different.

Quoting commavia (Reply 11):
I like how Delta's PR says that, "Ferri's relocation to Brazil makes Delta Air Lines the only U.S. carrier to have a vice president residing in Latin America." I suspect anyone who's ever spent much time in Miami might argue a bit with that assessment!

Hahahahaha!!! Wait, no, that wasn't funny.

Quoting commavia (Reply 11):
Delta has done an incredibly impressive job in the last 20 years of turning ATL in the nation's second-largest gateway to non-Mexico Latin America,

I don't have the energy to check this assertion, but I doubt it's right. To South America, probably. To South and Central America, I would be surprised if IAH didn't come out on top. Are you including the Caribbean?

Quoting commavia (Reply 11):
but alas it is still tiny compared to AA at MIA

There you go again. DL's Latin America operation at ATL isn't "tiny" compared with AA at MIA. It's certainly smaller, but it's not "tiny."


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25198 posts, RR: 48
Reply 20, posted (1 year 10 months 5 hours ago) and read 1650 times:

Quoting neveragain (Reply 19):
DL may indeed struggle in Latin America, but I wouldn't point to those figures as proof.

The proof is Delta managing director of market development himself admitting the carrier lags peers in the region as it struggles with a lacks markets that can support high frequency service and also suffers from lack of brand awareness in the region.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 21, posted (1 year 10 months 5 hours ago) and read 1656 times:

Quoting neveragain (Reply 19):
To South and Central America, I would be surprised if IAH didn't come out on top. Are you including the Caribbean?

I am using the DOT definition of Latin America, which includes the Caribbean, and adding in SJU and STT (domestic). I pulled using the airlines' published timetables, although I may well have missed things or miscalculated - please correct me if I did.

But by my numbers, using Christmas week (typically a peak travel period both for VFR-heavy and leisure-heavy Latin America markets), Delta is operating over 30% more weekly departures out of ATL to non-Mexico Latin America than United is out of IAH (296 vs 225).

For comparison purposes, AA out of MIA is at well over 800.

Quoting neveragain (Reply 19):
There you go again. DL's Latin America operation at ATL isn't "tiny" compared with AA at MIA. It's certainly smaller, but it's not "tiny."

"There I go again?"   

"Tiny" is a subjective word, but I think it's appropriate for 800+ vs 296. Let me use an alternative that may be less controversial for you: "dramatically smaller" - Delta's Latin operation out of ATL is "dramatically smaller" than AA's out of MIA.

This winter, AA will be operating nonstop from MIA to 27 Caribbean islands/markets vs Delta's 18, and with nearly four times the frequency (464 weekly flights vs 161). AA will be operating nearly double the flights (140 vs 72) to Central America as Delta will out of ATL. AA will be operating more weekly flights from MIA to Brazil alone than Delta will from ATL to the entire continent of South America.

Need I go on? I think the numbers speak for themselves.


User currently offlineogre727 From Spain, joined Feb 2005, 719 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (1 year 10 months 5 hours ago) and read 1656 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 21):

You are right. Tiny is subjective. However i didnt know the figures and from your comment I thought the ratio woud be much smaller than 800+ vs. 296.

Also, do your math. It is actually less than 3 times the frequency (160x3=480).

I dont care about delta or aa, but your post does come across as tinily biased...



Sigh
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8344 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (1 year 10 months ago) and read 1656 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting commavia (Reply 21):

"Tiny" is a subjective word, but I think it's appropriate for 800+ vs 296. Let me use an alternative that may be less controversial for you: "dramatically smaller" - Delta's Latin operation out of ATL is "dramatically smaller" than AA's out of MIA.

This winter, AA will be operating nonstop from MIA to 27 Caribbean islands/markets vs Delta's 18, and with nearly four times the frequency (464 weekly flights vs 161). AA will be operating nearly double the flights (140 vs 72) to Central America as Delta will out of ATL. AA will be operating more weekly flights from MIA to Brazil alone than Delta will from ATL to the entire continent of South America.

Delta doesn't capture the Miami traffic which is obviously the first choice destination fron Latin America. The market is still large enough for DL to have a decent operation from Atlanta to the region. Delta even has a Detroit to Sao Paulo flight, Latin America has gradudated from only Miami & JFK. UA has a decent Houston and Newark( ORD to GRU is flown daily) operation to the region as does AA from DFW & JFK.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 24, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1650 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 23):
The market is still large enough for DL to have a decent operation from Atlanta to the region.

I'd say it's more than decent. Again - it's the second largest U.S. gateway to non-Mexico Latin America. And I think Delta definitely still has more room to grow ATL. I'm not sure how much more organic growth they can support to South America ex-Brazil, but Brazil definitely holds more opportunity for Delta (and all airlines) as it continues to grow and develop as the undisputed economic and geopolitical force in South America. Right now I don't think Delta could realistically make anything else work to Brazil besides perhaps CNF, and a second daily GRU/GIG, but in time they probably will be able to profitably fly to smaller secondary markets again.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 23):
Delta even has a Detroit to Sao Paulo flight, Latin America has gradudated from only Miami & JFK. UA has a decent Houston and Newark( ORD to GRU is flown daily) operation to the region as does AA from DFW & JFK.

  

There are plenty of other non-MIA/JFK hubs in the U.S. that have been turned into viable gateways to Latin America (Mexico and non-Mexico). You listed the main ones there - ATL, IAH, DFW, EWR and even to a lesser extent IAD and ORD. None of those will ever be able to support the same breadth and depth of service MIA does (multiple daily flights to just about every single major market in the region), but they are all viable and can continue to grow.


User currently offline2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2610 posts, RR: 1
Reply 25, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1845 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 14):
To me geographically Florida is the place. Maybe bring the MCO hub back?
Quoting Amfleet82 (Reply 16):
I don't know the local market well, but i wonder of FLL or MCO could be grown into mini-Latin gateways?

If DL wants to grab a piece of the MIA-Latin America market without going head to head with AA, FLL might be the choice; however NK already flies out of FLL to some important Latin American / Caribbean destinations. Yes NK is a different product but it'd be seen as an alternative to possible DL routes out of FLL:
A (long) walkway from a couple of FLL DL terminal gates to the FIS may be what DL needs to handle international arrivals @ FLL.
If DL wants to cover both MIA and MCO, PBI DL focus airport for Latin America may be a good compromise.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlinecatiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 3029 posts, RR: 4
Reply 26, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1815 times:

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 12):
, And since ATL is an inferior product than MIA for lots of Latin American markets

What exactly does this mean?


User currently offline2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2610 posts, RR: 1
Reply 27, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1976 times:

Quoting catiii (Reply 26):
What exactly does this mean?
Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 12):
the "MIA is where the demand is" syndrome

The major Latin American / Caribbean O/D P2P demand is in MIA (geographic region + airport)..
For all other connecting traffic, sure IAH and ATL (perhaps even CLT) may offer a top-notch connecting experience than MIA.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlinecatiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 3029 posts, RR: 4
Reply 28, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1982 times:

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 27):

The major Latin American / Caribbean O/D P2P demand is in MIA (geographic region + airport)..
For all other connecting traffic, sure IAH and ATL (perhaps even CLT) may offer a top-notch connecting experience than MIA.

Ok, but you said ATL is an "inferior product." They have a brand new int'l terminal that far exceeds anything MIA has. SO in what way is ATL's product inferior?


User currently offlineIrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2183 posts, RR: 15
Reply 29, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1980 times:

quote=commavia,reply=24]You listed the main ones there - ATL, IAH, DFW, EWR and even to a lesser extent IAD and ORD.[/quote]

Also CLT. I believe they are planning on adding CLTGRU eventually.

Quoting questions (Reply 17):
Could DL make FLL work? Is it set up for significant international flights from the DL terminal or is there a separate international departures/arrivals terminal?
Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 25):
If DL wants to grab a piece of the MIA-Latin America market without going head to head with AA, FLL might be the choice; however NK already flies out of FLL to some important Latin American / Caribbean destinations. Yes NK is a different product but it'd be seen as an alternative to possible DL routes out of FLL:
A (long) walkway from a couple of FLL DL terminal gates to the FIS may be what DL needs to handle international arrivals @ FLL.
If DL wants to cover both MIA and MCO, PBI DL focus airport for Latin America may be a good compromise.

I don't think this is a wise strategy. US tried to set-up a Latin American/Caribbean gateway hub at FLL a few years ago and it largely failed. NK wasn't as formidable at the time, either. The concept didn't make much strategic sense given that CLT was already serving this function just a couple hundred miles away up north, with a much larger feed of connecting traffic from the hub. I'm sure that US was hoping to slice away from of the South Florida O&D market, but just couldn't siphon it away from AA at MIA.

Delta would be in a much similar situation if they made an effort at FLL, personally speaking. Why erode some of the functionality of the ATL hub?

Similar situation



next flights: jfk-icn, icn-hkg-bkk-cdg, cdg-phl-msp
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7893 posts, RR: 52
Reply 30, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1973 times:

Quoting catiii (Reply 28):
Ok, but you said ATL is an "inferior product." They have a brand new int'l terminal that far exceeds anything MIA has. SO in what way is ATL's product inferior?

I don't think he's talking about airports, just geography. That's how I read it



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineLDVAviation From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 1061 posts, RR: 5
Reply 31, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1993 times:

Quoting catiii (Reply 28):
Ok, but you said ATL is an "inferior product." They have a brand new int'l terminal that far exceeds anything MIA has. SO in what way is ATL's product inferior?

Hyperbole? The new Concourse D at Miami is quite nice on the inside, better design in my opinion than the new international terminal at Atlanta.


User currently offlineRAGAZZO777 From Uruguay, joined Jul 2010, 585 posts, RR: 1
Reply 32, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2008 times:

For what it's worth, DL is now deploying the A330 to Lima and Buenos Aires, and the 764 to Rio de Janeiro. This smart move will last during the entire southern summer season.


.

Quoting Amfleet82 (Thread starter):
What has kept DL from growing JFK (likely there only real O&D hub with significant Latin traffic) into a stronger Latin Gateway? Would the NWA ordered 787's have helped them? Right now I believe only GRU and BOG are flown from JFK. It seems JFK could support LIM, GIG and UIO flights.

LP just launched LIM-JFK-LIM flights (which complements LA's daily service on the route), so clearly there's demand for more flights and DL would be a welcome addition.



JESÚS, TE AMO !!
User currently offlineeastern023 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 871 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1991 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 11):
Not to sound like a broken record, but MIA is so dominant as a U.S. gateway for many markets in Central and South America that whoever holds MIA ultimately holds the keys to the Latin America kingdom. The market is just so much larger.

Hard to believe that UA just walked away...could have made sense back in 2002, but now it would have been nice to have...IAH and EWR are not a leg to stand on when you consider...

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 12):
4) DL @ NYC faces stiff competition directly from AA @ JFK and indirectly from UA

And LA at JFK.

Quoting Amfleet82 (Reply 16):
I also don't really see the need for Latin America-Europe connectivity. Most Argentinians/Brazilians would prefer avoiding the US and its ridiculous Transit Visas and instead take direct flights.

Agreed, between the visa requirements (with all its aggravations) and the CBP/TSA bad reputation transit pax avoid US airports like the plague...can't blame them.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 20):
The proof is Delta managing director of market development himself admitting the carrier lags peers in the region

True.

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 25):
If DL wants to grab a piece of the MIA-Latin America market without going head to head with AA, FLL might be the choice; however NK already flies out of FLL to some important Latin American / Caribbean destinations.

If there was ever a time to go head to head with AA at MIA that time is now.... AA has been asleep in their laurels for too long. They were able to get away with being sloppy.



AA will Rise Again!
User currently offline2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2610 posts, RR: 1
Reply 34, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1974 times:

Quoting catiii (Reply 28):
Ok, but you said ATL is an "inferior product." They have a brand new int'l terminal that far exceeds anything MIA has. SO in what way is ATL's product inferior?

It's definitely not in its infrastructure.
It's on its mainstream perception in Latin America when compared to MIA.

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 29):
I don't think this is a wise strategy. US tried to set-up a Latin American/Caribbean gateway hub at FLL a few years ago and it largely failed.

I never got to fly US between PTY and FLL, the flight was so short-lived but relatives did and their morning FLL departure, late afternoon FLL arrival wasn't attractive for PTY market.
IMHO, Had US R:O:N its aircraft in several of its FLL experiment destinations, other would have been the performance.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlineIrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2183 posts, RR: 15
Reply 35, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1907 times:

Quoting eastern023 (Reply 33):
Hard to believe that UA just walked away...could have made sense back in 2002, but now it would have been nice to have...IAH and EWR are not a leg to stand on when you consider...

This is always an ANET hot topic: the fateful UA hub at MIA.

It's a tale of two airlines. UA acquired the MIA ops from PanAm, AA from Eastern. Both took radically different approaches to building up their MIA hubs when the lending carriers went under. AA invested big time into developing Miami as their primary Latin American/Caribbean gateway (at the expense of SJU, arguably) whereas UA just kind of floated along, not really planning out any long-term strategic focus or determining which role MIA would play out into their network. This turned out to be very costly for them.

They continued to play second fiddle to AA through the late 90s, but 9/11 and the dot com bubble burst drove UA into bankruptcy. MIA became the lowest-hanging fruit for targeted cuts when UA was forced to trim fat. As UA parred its schedules, it lost corporate contracts and consequently revenue streams needed to keep the MIA crew base opening, resulting into a total shutdown in March '04.

It came back to haunt them through the late 2000's when it became apparent that Latin America continued to be a lucrative bright spot for US carriers despite the global economic downturn. Projected potential in China and India turned out to be lukewarm, now there's the whole Eurozone crisis.

Acquiring the IAH hub was beyond key for UA moving forward. Still, they really paid a huge price for letting go of MIA, but what could they really have done in the early 2000s to reverse the situation?



next flights: jfk-icn, icn-hkg-bkk-cdg, cdg-phl-msp
User currently offlineSCL767 From Chile, joined Feb 2006, 8808 posts, RR: 5
Reply 36, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1909 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting eastern023 (Reply 33):

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 12):
4) DL @ NYC faces stiff competition directly from AA @ JFK and indirectly from UA

And LA at JFK.

That is correct. LATAM will soon operate 49 weekly flights into JFK from GIG, GRU, GYE, LIM, and SCL. Also, DL will soon be competing directly with LA on the BOG-JFK route...


User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7575 posts, RR: 43
Reply 37, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1865 times:

Quoting davescj (Reply 2):
nother question: for Mexico (which I understand does not speak for all Latin America), could a JV with Aeromexico increase flight to Mexico while leaving metal free for other routes?

Mexico and the U.S. do not have open-skies. Without open-skies, airlines from the two countries would not be allowed by U.S. antitrust authorities to implement a joint operation like AF-KL-AZ-DL across the Atlantic, or UA-AC in the U.S.-Canada market.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 3):
Yes much could be done with AM, however it seems neither is extremely interested in tying their networks in tightly.

DL prefers to run its global network with connections in mind, while AM is more focused on its home market needs including offering more focused ethnic O&D routes. Their respective models dont quite mix.

AM and DL are relaunching their "partnership". The number of codeshared flights on each other's network has been increased, and now AM and DL will offer to each other's elite passengers upgrades as if they were flying on their respective carrier. I think we can expect to see AM and DL working more closely that in the past.

Quoting RCS763AV (Reply 18):
There is the visa issue, but in reality a lot of the flying public to europe normally holds a US visa. The real deal here is the horrible treatment that latin americans receive by US customs officers, which adds to the hassle of already having to deal with TSA and carrying your bags from belt to belt, something that isn't done anywhere else in the world.

And yet, many will still fly via the U.S. when the fares are cheaper. It might not be as common in South America, but many, many Mexican fliers fly to Europe via U.S. hubs because it is cheaper.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17450 posts, RR: 46
Reply 38, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1878 times:

Quoting eastern023 (Reply 33):
If there was ever a time to go head to head with AA at MIA that time is now.... AA has been asleep in their laurels for too long. They were able to get away with being sloppy.
Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 35):

This is always an ANET hot topic: the fateful UA hub at MIA.

I think MIA has gotten this mythical status on a.net as some sort of money printing machine, when I am confident it is firmly behind DFW in terms of profitability. It can't match the domestic breadth and depth of schedule that IAH/ATL/DFW can, it has loads more competition by far more competent and dodgy carriers, and while it is by far the #1 ethnic destination for Latin America, the business component is not as strong, never mind FL's economy which suffered a major fall recently. NK has even reigned in its international network out of FLL recently. I don't think the MIA hub is nearly as profitable as a.net seems to think it is.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 39, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1856 times:

Quoting questions (Reply 17):
3. Could DL make FLL work? Is it set up for significant international flights from the DL terminal or is there a separate international departures/arrivals terminal?

It is an extremely saturated market down there. Even with the extra O/D gained from the area, the flights will still have to rely on connections to make them work. Why put yourself out there when you're already doing the same thing in Atlanta' but to only skim off more local passengers?

Just to note as well, FLL is a shell of it's former self for Delta. They would have to really beef it back up and I don't see them pumping money into the market to be number 3 at best.

Quoting questions (Reply 17):
4. Does DL need more bilingual cabin crew onboard to serve the market?

There is no shortage of LOD F/As. And if they needed more they need not do anything more than post the job on delta.com for a couple days. The last big hiring they did in 2010, the job site shut itself down for almost 2 days because of the flood of applications they received.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineneveragain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 40, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1848 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 20):
Quoting neveragain (Reply 19):
DL may indeed struggle in Latin America, but I wouldn't point to those figures as proof.

The proof is Delta managing director of market development himself admitting the carrier lags peers in the region as it struggles with a lacks markets that can support high frequency service and also suffers from lack of brand awareness in the region.

We're saying the same thing. I'm saying don't look at Form 41; you're saying the proof isn't in Form 41.

Quoting commavia (Reply 21):
"Tiny" is a subjective word,

As you use it, it would appear so. I may agree with such usage if you said the service from Raleigh-Durham to Latin America is "tiny." You're the one who in a prior post said ATL was the "nation's second-largest gateway to non-Mexico Latin America." How you can then call it "tiny" is difficult for me to reconcile. The only way for me to explain it is that it is that it is indicative of some bias.

Then again, I have my own biases, which I don't need to explain to you. Like the use of words like "tiny." Since it's the day after Election Day, let me provide an example why I think being careful with language matters.

If you think I have a strong response to the use of the word "massive," I have a strong physical response when I hear talk about "increasing taxes on small businesses," as such talk implies that there is a separate tax on small businesses. If one took a poll, I'm sure the results would show that a good amount of Americans think there is such a separate tax, when in actuality (assuming the existing federal tax system), there isn't. What is really being talked about is an increase in the tax rate for ordinary income, which affects not only small businesses but also every wage earner. For some reason, there's a deliberate decision that it's better to create a false impression by confusing a large portion of the population on the assumption that the average American's association hears "small business" and has an association that "small business" is "good."

Obviously apples and kumquats. But my point is, the only reason I can explain that an educated person would choose (consciously or subconsciously) such a word is to transmit a bias (MIA/AA great!! Good luck DL with ATL--because, BTW, it's tiny!!). And I can't help but read every one of your posts and through the lens of the bias I perceive (that bias being you're an AA partisan, which I think you'd acknowledge).

So I read a post from you on a very complex situation--that being the AA pilot union negotiations--and you use the word "fascinating" twice in as many sentences. Such usage is not normal. So I ask myself, why would a smart person use the word "fascinating" as such? And the only explanation I could come up with is that what was posted in the Dallas Morning News blog confirmed your view of the world. You acknowledged some disappointments (CRJ vs Embraer), but what I think you were really communicating/arguing was that what you read was an acceptable outcome to you, and therefore it was "fascinating" for you. I challenge you to just be direct and communicate the former.

I know I'm in a minority on this view, and that 999 people out of 1000 (if not 9,999 out of 10,000) would say I'm wasting everyone's time by worrying about such word usage, but I think such word choices are at the heart of most disagreements on this forum because they lead to very binary arguments ("my airline"-"your airline"/"my airport"-"your airport"/"my hometown"-"your hometown"). God forbid I ever decide to participate in a sports forum.

Quoting commavia (Reply 21):
Need I go on? I think the numbers speak for themselves.

No, I agree with you, they do. ATL is still a very busy airport to Latin America and certainly not "tiny."

Quoting commavia (Reply 21):
But by my numbers, using Christmas week (typically a peak travel period both for VFR-heavy and leisure-heavy Latin America markets), Delta is operating over 30% more weekly departures out of ATL to non-Mexico Latin America than United is out of IAH (296 vs 225).

How about we use the whole year?

How about we measure seats instead of frequencies?

How about we exclude DoT "domestic" destinations? (I think your approach to use the DoT definition is definitely the right one. I don't understand why you would make life difficult for yourself and choose to include PR and USVI.)

Without regard to airline, all of Latin America, including Mexico, thousands of seats

MIA: 96.3

JFK: 46.7

IAH: 35.7

ATL: 30.3

Without regard to airline, excluding Mexico

MIA: 88.3

JFK: 41.2

ATL: 22.3

IAH: 16.9

Without regard to airline, excluding Mexico and Caribbean

MIA: 55.9

JFK: 15.8

IAH: 15.4

ATL: 12.3

QED--I was wrong, and you were right (by plenty of electoral votes!). That said, ATL is only the second-busiest (single airline) hub to Latin America excluding Mexico because of the Caribbean. So I'm not sure why you would choose to exclude Mexico from the calculation and consider the result meaningful. All you're confirming is (1) MIA is in a class of its own; (2) IAH and ATL are much less busy but the service patterns are naturally different due to geography.


User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9353 posts, RR: 14
Reply 41, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1864 times:

Quoting RAGAZZO777 (Reply 32):

For what it's worth, DL is now deploying the A330 to Lima and Buenos Aires, and the 764 to Rio de Janeiro. This smart move will last during the entire southern summer season.

just a note, GIG has been a 400ER for years in the winter(ATL winter, GRU summer).
Also EZE/LIM use to see the 400ER.

Believe ATL-SCL has also been 764 before. (but a 300ER this winter)



yep.
User currently offlineSCL767 From Chile, joined Feb 2006, 8808 posts, RR: 5
Reply 42, posted (1 year 9 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1854 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 41):
Believe ATL-SCL has also been 764 before. (but a 300ER this winter)

That is correct. During the NW2011 season, DL operated the ATL-SCL route daily with the B764. This year, it's back to the B763. LAN and AA are the only other carriers that operate non-stop and direct flights between SCL and the U.S. and both carriers will increase frequencies between SCL and the U.S. for the high season.


User currently offlineklwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2030 posts, RR: 3
Reply 43, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1836 times:

Quoting Amfleet82 (Thread starter):
What has kept DL from growing JFK (likely there only real O&D hub with significant Latin traffic) into a stronger Latin Gateway? Would the NWA ordered 787's have helped them? Right now I believe only GRU and BOG are flown from JFK. It seems JFK could support LIM, GIG and UIO flights.

Maybe. But a long time ago CO did EWR-BOG-UIO. Eventually CO dropped the UIO tag. Also CO downgraded EWR-BOG to the smallest aircraft that could fly the route. It started as a 757, it's now a 737-700. I recall at one time DL wanted to transfer JFK-BOG to create a 2nd flight on ATL-BOG. The DOT told them no.

I have wondered why UA has not been in eager to reinstate EWR-GIG. In the 90's CO did EWR-GIG with the DC10. But I did not last.

So not all NYC to Latin America markets are viable all the time.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 62
Reply 44, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1850 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 38):
I think MIA has gotten this mythical status on a.net as some sort of money printing machine, when I am confident it is firmly behind DFW in terms of profitability. It can't match the domestic breadth and depth of schedule that IAH/ATL/DFW can, it has loads more competition by far more competent and dodgy carriers, and while it is by far the #1 ethnic destination for Latin America, the business component is not as strong, never mind FL's economy which suffered a major fall recently.

I agree that it isn't "mythical." I think it is very-much fact-based, at least regarding the sheer size of MIA's local market to the Caribbean, Central and South America, and even Mexico - particularly in comparison with other U.S. markets. I think the breadth of Miami's cultural, political and commercial connections to the region are also demonstrably self-evident, and I personally disagree that there isn't a strong business component to these connections. I think there is an enormous business component, since Miami is in many ways directly plugged into the Latin American economic pipeline in across multiple large industries.

Now - in terms of profitability, as opposed to size? My guess is that you are right - DFW is probably, in aggregate, a more profitable hub based on the massive scale of the market and hub, and the relative lack of competition (excluding Southwest, of course). But, I also suspect that MIA is more profitable than DFW on a unit basis (per-flight, per-seat, per-trip). Just my guess.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 38):
NK has even reigned in its international network out of FLL recently.

True, but look at the divergent fortunes of NK's FLL "hub" vs AA's 30 miles south. While NK has paired back many of its FLL-Latin America routes in the last few years, including dropping several and substantially reducing frequency on others, AA has been on a near-continual path of expansion, including frequency and capacity increases in many existing markets and the introduction of multiple new markets.


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8344 posts, RR: 7
Reply 45, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1864 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting eastern023 (Reply 33):
Hard to believe that UA just walked away...could have made sense back in 2002, but now it would have been nice to have...IAH and EWR are not a leg to stand on when you consider...

United and AA took two different approaches to Miami, AA was all thing to all people, short and long haul. UA flew a Central America schedule with 737's for a year or two when they started but concentrated on a long haul operation in Miami to GIG, GRU, EZE and SCL, CCS was flown too. UA flew to the long haul cities until 2004 when they were only flying GRU and EZE with 763ER. IN its tenure in Miami UA used everyting from 747SP to 747-100, 767-300ER and 777. Eventually UA moved its GRU and EZE flights to Dulles Airport flying to the Latin Capitals from Wahington DC.


User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3699 posts, RR: 19
Reply 46, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1857 times:

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 43):
I have wondered why UA has not been in eager to reinstate EWR-GIG. In the 90's CO did EWR-GIG with the DC10. But I did not last.

I did not survive 9/11, but the problem nowadays is actually at GRU. UA's IAD-GRU has a tag-on to GIG, but if UA decided to end that tag today, it would not be allowed to do so. GRU has no long-stay parking position available. Launching EWR-GIG and keeping the tag is incompatible.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22932 posts, RR: 20
Reply 47, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1843 times:

Quoting neveragain (Reply 40):
So I'm not sure why you would choose to exclude Mexico from the calculation and consider the result meaningful.

Perhaps we need to talk about two Latin American route networks distinctly: the network that connects to IAH, DFW and, to some degree, LAX, and the network that connects to the east coast hubs. There's surely some overlap, but ATL isn't ever going to support QRO or ZCL, while IAH isn't ever going to support BSB or MVD.

YMMV, of course, but I think it's appropriate to compare hubs in NYC, IAD, CLT, ATL and MIA in terms of service to South America and the Caribbean without reference to Mexico and hubs in DFW, IAH and LAX in terms of service to Mexico and Central America without reference to the Caribbean.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineklwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2030 posts, RR: 3
Reply 48, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1821 times:

Quoting C010T3 (Reply 46):
I did not survive 9/11, but the problem nowadays is actually at GRU. UA's IAD-GRU has a tag-on to GIG, but if UA decided to end that tag today, it would not be allowed to do so. GRU has no long-stay parking position available. Launching EWR-GIG and keeping the tag is incompatible.

So IAD-GRU-GIG and EWR-GIG nonstop both would not be allowed?


User currently offlinebogota From Colombia, joined Sep 2004, 819 posts, RR: 1
Reply 49, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1829 times:

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 43):
Maybe. But a long time ago CO did EWR-BOG-UIO. Eventually CO dropped the UIO tag. Also CO downgraded EWR-BOG to the smallest aircraft that could fly the route. It started as a 757, it's now a 737-700. I recall at one time DL wanted to transfer JFK-BOG to create a 2nd flight on ATL-BOG. The DOT told them no.


That is true CO operated a 757 when the UIO tag was still operating, they then decided to operate BOG without the tag on on the B737-700 which is the only type of 737 that can operate out of BOG into JFK. DL had a slow start of its JFK-BOG route hence the interest of operating a second ATL-BOG which has performed much better. Now that open skies USA-Colombia starts in 2013 DL has said they will begin to operate a 2nd ATL-BOG with no effect on the JFK-BOG. AV has been able to consolidate its second daily JFK-BOG quite well, not sure why DL can not continue to grow on the route as well.


User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3699 posts, RR: 19
Reply 50, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1837 times:

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 48):
So IAD-GRU-GIG and EWR-GIG nonstop both would not be allowed?

EWR-GIG is allowed at any time. Dropping the tag of the IAD-GRU-GIG would be the problem. The aircraft has to leave GRU, since the aircraft would have no position to be parked on.


User currently offlinenickofatlanta From Australia, joined May 2000, 1487 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1799 times:

Interestingly, DL has just announced that it is moving its commercial HQs for Latin America and the Caribbean from ATL to Sao Paulo - the first time a US carrier has based a senior executive in the region.
http://atwonline.com/airline-finance...erican-headquarters-s-o-paulo-1108


User currently offlineAA767LOVER From Hong Kong, joined Aug 2007, 609 posts, RR: 0
Reply 52, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1779 times:

Quoting questions (Reply 17):

Several experiences at MIA make me fully concur!
MIA is a pain in the rump.



J.I. Tsui, American Advantage Member, United Mileage Plus (Premier)
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6129 posts, RR: 2
Reply 53, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1757 times:

Quoting AA767LOVER (Reply 52):
Several experiences at MIA make me fully concur!
MIA is a pain in the rump.

While I avoid MIA at all costs, I would say that it is no more chaotic and crowded than LAX or JFK from an arrivals perspective.

And one has to remember that these "Latins" are coming from congested cities (GUR, EZE, GUA, BOG) where they are used to chaos.....so MIA seems like easy to them.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineRCS763AV From Colombia, joined Jun 2004, 4395 posts, RR: 12
Reply 54, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1748 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 44):
I think it is very-much fact-based, at least regarding the sheer size of MIA's local market to the Caribbean, Central and South America, and even Mexico - particularly in comparison with other U.S. markets. I think the breadth of Miami's cultural, political and commercial connections to the region are also demonstrably self-evident, and I personally disagree that there isn't a strong business component to these connections.

Completely agree. It's like trying to replace London as the primary gateway to Europe from the US. There's nothing mythical about the MIA hub, it's there because of very strong cultural, migrational and business ties with latin america.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 53):
And one has to remember that these "Latins" are coming from congested cities (GUR, EZE, GUA, BOG) where they are used to chaos.....so MIA seems like easy to them.

What does that have to do with having a horrible airport experience? Even if these cities are chaotic, it doesn't mean people find it easy to be stuck in small hallways, waiting in line and having to endure very rude customs officers and borderline illiterate security personnel. People endure it because it's what's available, but I bet you if there was a better airport in south florida no one would prefer MIA.

The fact that MIA is a major hub for latin america owes to the fact that it has deep ties to the continent, and the usual transfer point for passengers has also been MIA for decades, as it also happens to be the airport with the most offer to the region. Not because people are used to enduring the terrible experience transiting through Miami is (although I must say that it has gotten a bit less annoying over the last few years).



Les escribo desde el frío de mi verde altiplano.
User currently offlineSJOtoLIR From Costa Rica, joined Jul 2007, 4488 posts, RR: 4
Reply 55, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1737 times:

Quoting questions (Reply 17):
What exactly defines "Latin America"? Is it Central and South America plus Mexico?

Latin America is strictly defined as those countries and regions placed in the continent where languages derived from Latin are primarily spoken.
Some countries belonging from the Caribbean are of course integrated in Latin America: Cuba, Dominican Republic, Haiti and so on.
In terms of aviation-wise, all the countries and overseas territories places south-bound from the United States are usually considered part of Latin America: Belize, Guyana, Trinidad & Tobago, St. Maarten and so forth...

Regards.



"Goin' up to the spirit in the sky"
User currently offlineArcano From Chile, joined Mar 2004, 2407 posts, RR: 24
Reply 56, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1725 times:

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 42):
DL operated the ATL-SCL route daily with the B764. T

I don't think daily, I took that flight in Jan that year and 763 both ways...

Regards



in order: 721,146,732,763,722,343,733,320,772,319,752,321,88,83,744,332,100,738, 333, 318, 77W, 78, 773 and 380
User currently offlineTR1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 269 posts, RR: 1
Reply 57, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1716 times:

Would there be any opportunities for additional JFK-Latin America flying?
With Aerolineas Argentinas' problems could JFK-EZE be a viable route?


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8344 posts, RR: 7
Reply 58, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1705 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Flights from non Miami USA cities have more to do with the destination in Latin America then the city North America. That is why Sao Paulo is the king of Latin destinations from the USA, Europe and now The Middle East. Emirates and Qatar discovered something at GRU, so did AA 20 years ago.

User currently offlineLDVAviation From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 1061 posts, RR: 5
Reply 59, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1720 times:

Quoting RCS763AV (Reply 54):
Completely agree. It's like trying to replace London as the primary gateway to Europe from the US. There's nothing mythical about the MIA hub, it's there because of very strong cultural, migrational and business ties with latin america.

When Delta first started flying from Atlanta to Santiago, the CEO of LanChile (now LAN/LaTam) was asked by AviationWeek if he considered that a competitive threat. He said from his experience of the market and the marketing research no one (from Santiago) wanted to fly to Atlanta directly. (He was also quoted as saying that no one in Chile knew were Atlanta was, but he might just have been overstating his case.)

About Miami, he said that it was the "London" of LatinAmerica, with all the Import/Export banks there.


User currently offlineOB1504 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 3332 posts, RR: 9
Reply 60, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1692 times:

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 10):
Yes, it is a zoo....but it has gotten a bit better since the new facility there has opened. Customs is still horrid though.

Even Customs has improved, as the new D FIS opened just a few months ago, replacing the outdated and overcapacity E FIS.

Quoting commavia (Reply 11):
Plus, AA has such an entrenched sales force and corporate/FF presence in so many of the region's markets - which is itself largely a function of the shear breadth of AA's penetration into so many markets - that it puts AA at a huge competitive advantage. AA has sales and ticketing offices - often several of them - in just about every major city in the region, along with tons of local contracts, etc.
Quoting yellowtail (Reply 15):
MIA, MIA, MIA

DL tried an MIA focus city of sorts just recently, with the MIA-LHR flight (which, admittedly, DL only planned on flying until they could transfer the slot to ATL or JFK) and some intra-Florida flying on RJ's. I'm surprised they never tried going south where the money is, considering that they have a good customer base in MIA.

Quoting questions (Reply 17):
Why do you consider Miami another planet? Isn't California and New Orleans a different planet to some?

I took it to mean the airport rather than the city, but jfk777 is clearly stuck in the mindset of MIA as it was in the early 2000s. It's barely the same airport nowadays.

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 25):
If DL wants to grab a piece of the MIA-Latin America market without going head to head with AA, FLL might be the choice; however NK already flies out of FLL to some important Latin American / Caribbean destinations. Yes NK is a different product but it'd be seen as an alternative to possible DL routes out of FLL:
A (long) walkway from a couple of FLL DL terminal gates to the FIS may be what DL needs to handle international arrivals @ FLL.
If DL wants to cover both MIA and MCO, PBI DL focus airport for Latin America may be a good compromise.

I doubt we'll ever see a "long walkway"; what's more likely is that DL would have to use Terminal 4 at FLL for their international arrivals just like every other airline does, then tow over to Terminal 2 for departures. Even then, Terminal 4 is maxed out and won't be capable of handling any meaningful increase in international traffic until the runway/terminal expansion is completed in a few years.

Quoting catiii (Reply 28):
Ok, but you said ATL is an "inferior product." They have a brand new int'l terminal that far exceeds anything MIA has. SO in what way is ATL's product inferior?

When was the last time you visited MIA? Again, it's virtually an entirely different airport.

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 29):
I don't think this is a wise strategy. US tried to set-up a Latin American/Caribbean gateway hub at FLL a few years ago and it largely failed. NK wasn't as formidable at the time, either. The concept didn't make much strategic sense given that CLT was already serving this function just a couple hundred miles away up north, with a much larger feed of connecting traffic from the hub. I'm sure that US was hoping to slice away from of the South Florida O&D market, but just couldn't siphon it away from AA at MIA.

Delta would be in a much similar situation if they made an effort at FLL, personally speaking. Why erode some of the functionality of the ATL hub?

US started to pull back at FLL because they went bankrupt (again). Ben Baldanza was a US executive at the time and the FLL focus city was his idea. When he became CEO of NK, he again built a Latin American hub at FLL and it appears to be working for him.

Quoting eastern023 (Reply 33):
If there was ever a time to go head to head with AA at MIA that time is now.... AA has been asleep in their laurels for too long. They were able to get away with being sloppy.

AA will do everything they can to destroy any airline that threatens their dominance at MIA or DFW. With the bankruptcy making the writing on the wall very clear, they're on the defensive. DL may have missed its chance.

Quoting commavia (Reply 44):
True, but look at the divergent fortunes of NK's FLL "hub" vs AA's 30 miles south. While NK has paired back many of its FLL-Latin America routes in the last few years, including dropping several and substantially reducing frequency on others, AA has been on a near-continual path of expansion, including frequency and capacity increases in many existing markets and the introduction of multiple new markets.

Part of this is because the Latin American market's response to NK's business model has been lukewarm. Domestically, it's working well for them because the market is more used to the a-la-carte model, considering that most major airlines have already adopted it in some shape or form.

Quoting AA767LOVER (Reply 52):
Several experiences at MIA make me fully concur!
MIA is a pain in the rump.

Again, when was the last time you used MIA?

Quoting SJOtoLIR (Reply 55):
In terms of aviation-wise, all the countries and overseas territories places south-bound from the United States are usually considered part of Latin America: Belize, Guyana, Trinidad & Tobago, St. Maarten and so forth...

According to who, though? I've never considered Trinidad and Tobago or St. Maarten to be part of Latin America. To me, they're the Caribbean.


User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17450 posts, RR: 46
Reply 61, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1684 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 44):
But, I also suspect that MIA is more profitable than DFW on a unit basis (per-flight, per-seat, per-trip). Just my guess.

I think DFW is the higher margin of the two. AA owns DFW, has a much richer business mix, and much less competition, whether it's competent airlines like CM/AV/JJ/LA or fly by night operators



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineneveragain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 62, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1686 times:

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 59):
When Delta first started flying from Atlanta to Santiago, the CEO of LanChile (now LAN/LaTam) was asked by AviationWeek if he considered that a competitive threat. He said from his experience of the market and the marketing research no one (from Santiago) wanted to fly to Atlanta directly. (He was also quoted as saying that no one in Chile knew were Atlanta was, but he might just have been overstating his case.)

There is no substance in this thread, other than if "Latinos had a choice they would go to Miami before they would go to Atlanta."

I'm not sure why that's a surprise.


User currently offlineSJOtoLIR From Costa Rica, joined Jul 2007, 4488 posts, RR: 4
Reply 63, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1668 times:

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 60):
I've never considered Trinidad and Tobago or St. Maarten to be part of Latin America. To me, they're the Caribbean.

Dominican Republic belongs to the Caribbean and Latin America.
Technically, St. Maarten and Trinidad & Tobago of course are not forming part of Latin America, based on the definition edited on reply 55: "Latin America is strictly defined as those countries and regions placed in the continent where languages derived from Latin are primarily spoken."
What I tried to explain before consisted in how the definition of Latin America is usually extended to the regions located south-bound from the US. Related to aviation, I've seen before some route maps featuring its Latin America network where stations such as Barbados, Aruba, Belize, Jamaica are wrongly listed in Latin America.

Regards.



"Goin' up to the spirit in the sky"
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8344 posts, RR: 7
Reply 64, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1654 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 60):
I took it to mean the airport rather than the city, but jfk777 is clearly stuck in the mindset of MIA as it was in the early 2000s. It's barely the same airport nowadays.

MIA has evolved like many other airporrts, at MIA the AA terminal is FINALLY finished as is j concourse. But Miami is still in its own "mind set". AA in Miami is NOT the AA I got to know when I lived in Dallas in the late 1980's, its a worse version. People forget what Miami was like when Eastern and Pan Am ran the show, nothing was ever improved so when AA got to town they had 30 years worth of projects to finance. AA is the best thing to happen to Miami since the Nina, the Pinta and Saint Mary arrived in 1492.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22932 posts, RR: 20
Reply 65, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1651 times:

Quoting SJOtoLIR (Reply 63):
Related to aviation, I've seen before some route maps featuring its Latin America network where stations such as Barbados, Aruba, Belize, Jamaica are wrongly listed in Latin America.

Sort of a silly statement, don't you think? I don't expect US or AA to have one route map that shows me " true Latin America" and another that shows me anglophone and francophone places south of here. It might be more correct to call the "Latin America" map "Western Hemisphere," but as far as the destinations on it it's the most sensible way to display a route map.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3699 posts, RR: 19
Reply 66, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1639 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 65):
Sort of a silly statement, don't you think? I don't expect US or AA to have one route map that shows me " true Latin America" and another that shows me anglophone and francophone places south of here. It might be more correct to call the "Latin America" map "Western Hemisphere," but as far as the destinations on it it's the most sensible way to display a route map.

It's only a problem for those who want separate the US and Canada from the rest of the continent. When an European airline, for example, shows European routes without domestic ones, they name the map Europe. US airlines could easily name theirs Americas.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22932 posts, RR: 20
Reply 67, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1642 times:

Quoting C010T3 (Reply 66):
When an European airline, for example, shows European routes without domestic ones, they name the map Europe. US airlines could easily name theirs Americas.

. . . and I'm in favor of that, though I called it "Western Hemisphere" rather than "Americas." "Americas" is probably actually a better name but alas, I cannot take credit for it.

As a practical matter, the trouble becomes how to split a couple of maps of the Americas. We all agree that it is appropriate for US carriers - like carriers in every other country - to show domestic and international routes separately. I think we can all also agree that it's sensible for US carriers to show the US and Canada and then the rest of the Americas separately since most Canadian destinations are near the border and flights to Alaska fly over (or at least past) Canada. The difficulty is what to call that "rest of the Americas" map.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3699 posts, RR: 19
Reply 68, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1639 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 67):
The difficulty is what to call that "rest of the Americas" map.

It's not difficult at all. SAS has 3 home markets and still calls their European routes European routes, not "rest of Europe".


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...
UA/CO To Latin America posted Wed Jan 4 2012 10:25:36 by klwright69
American Airlines 757 Usage to Latin America posted Thu Feb 14 2013 05:10:17 by pierrelav
Czech Airlines New Charters To Latin America posted Wed Apr 1 2009 08:35:50 by Juventus
UA/CO To Latin America posted Wed Jan 4 2012 10:25:36 by klwright69
Singapore Airlines Cargo Flights To Latin America posted Sun Jan 18 2009 11:07:52 by 777way
US Airlines 2008 Traffic To Latin America posted Wed Jan 7 2009 14:06:12 by Incitatus
Czech Airlines New Charters To Latin America posted Wed Apr 1 2009 08:35:50 by Juventus
RSW Looks For Service To Latin America posted Tue Jun 26 2007 20:13:20 by RSWA330
Singapore Airlines Cargo Flights To Latin America posted Sun Jan 18 2009 11:07:52 by 777way
US Airlines 2008 Traffic To Latin America posted Wed Jan 7 2009 14:06:12 by Incitatus
RSW Looks For Service To Latin America posted Tue Jun 26 2007 20:13:20 by RSWA330
United To Latin America, Expanding? posted Thu Jul 20 2006 14:57:51 by Eastern023
Delta Flights From Orlando To Latin America posted Thu Mar 30 2006 08:01:53 by Kkfla737
United To Latin America, Expanding? posted Thu Jul 20 2006 14:57:51 by Eastern023
767-300 Overkill To Latin America? posted Tue Mar 28 2006 11:30:22 by FLY777UAL
Delta Flights From Orlando To Latin America posted Thu Mar 30 2006 08:01:53 by Kkfla737
American's Comitment To Latin America & Mexico posted Thu Aug 4 2005 22:48:18 by Juventus
767-300 Overkill To Latin America? posted Tue Mar 28 2006 11:30:22 by FLY777UAL
American's Comitment To Latin America & Mexico posted Thu Aug 4 2005 22:48:18 by Juventus