Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AS Ends Another Mexico Flight; Whats Latin Future?  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 11117 times:

I noticed in DOT filings that Alaska seeming has dropped another Mexico service.

They filed to inform the DOT that Horizon Air service between LAX and La Paz would be ending on April 6th freeing up the designation for other airlines potentially.

By my estimates this makes over 10 routes which have been dropped over the years.

While we certainly know Hawaii now plays a major part of AS operations, their Mexico flying at one time represented nearly 20% of ASM (peaked in mid 2000's) while in 2012 it down to 7%.

So where does Mexico sit in the AS network future? They entered into a codeshare with AeroMexico in recent times, will they use this as quasi presence instead?


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
96 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3258 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 10915 times:

That's a bit of an overreaction. It was posted months ago in an OAG thread that AS/QX is pulling out of LAP (unfortunately, because I far prefer LAP to SJD as a place to be and hoped they'd keep LAP).

Apparently, AS is electing to focus on SJD and there is a new fast freeway between LAP and SJD.

AS has adjusted frequencies to Mexico in recent years as the tourist trade slowed down, and discontinued CUN and a few SFO flights, but it's not like AS is engaging in a massive Mexico pulldown. They still even maintain service to secondary destinations such as LTO, ZLO and ZIH and have added SJC-SJD, SJC-GDL and SAN-PVR in the past few years.

Actually AS has been in and out of LAP several times over the past 15 years, so maybe it will come back.

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
By my estimates this makes over 10 routes which have been dropped over the years.

Let's see if I can do this....

SJC-PVR
LAX-LAP
LAX-CUN
SFO-CUN
SEA-CUN
SFO-MZT
SFO-ZIH
ONT-MEX
SMF-GDL (which didn't last long)
PHX-SJD
ACA service (not sure of the routing)
PDX-SJD (didn't last long)
PDX-PVR (didn't last long)
SEA-MZT (not sure if this one is coming back)

So I get more like 15.

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
their Mexico flying at one time represented nearly 20% of ASM (peaked in mid 2000's) while in 2012 it down to 7%.

That's partially just due to AS's ASM being much greater now than in the mid-2000s also. AS still has a healthy Mexico route network.

[Edited 2013-02-28 15:42:02]

[Edited 2013-02-28 15:42:59]

[Edited 2013-02-28 15:43:31]

User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13523 posts, RR: 100
Reply 2, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 10764 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I see the LAX-PVR flight still exists (with steep fares a month out). So that is the one I care about.  
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 1):
Apparently, AS is electing to focus on SJD and there is a new fast freeway between LAP and SJD.

Interesting!

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5595 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 10642 times:

I would hope to see possibly a bit of growth from SAN to Mexico as part of the (apparently continuing) growth by AS in our fair city. SAN-SJD is going daily double starting in a couple of weeks and SAN-PVR seems to have found a viable year-round niche at 3x weekly.

I'd love to see AS try SAN-GDL. Y4 seems to be having issues from here (and other places to be honest) and to the best of my recollection, we have never had an American carrier try to serve the SAN-GDL market. (DL has had the authority in that market for many years -- I don't think they have retained it recently -- but it was never served.) There have been a few attempts at SAN-GDL by Mexican cx but the competition of lots of cheaper (domestic) service from nearby TIJ airport has undermined the service from Lindbergh. I think AS would stand the best possible chance to do well with local (American) traffic from SAN, as well as some connecting traffic from some of the other new routes in and out of SAN.

SAN-MEX has had successful US-carrier service in the past (mainly from WA for years plus a couple of short-lived attempts by CO.) I think DL could have continued the route but like many of their inherited WA routes, didn't. There is obviously competition from TIJ in this market as well but again, I think AS could make this route work from SAN as well.

AS has obviously done well with the leisure resort traffic from SAN and I don't see why they couldn't get a solid hold on the more business-oriented markets from here as well. I'm sure there is lots of daily traffic between SAN and MEX and a reliable, popular American carrier such as AS should certainly be able to capture enough of the north-of-the-border travelers to operate a daily round trip out of Lindbergh Field.

I could also see SAN-MZT and maybe even a couple of sub-daily QX routes as well on the AS route map. It seems that the issues with Mexican travel are starting to quiet down a bit (as far as news headlines anyway) so I'm hopeful that there may be a slow appearance of new service in some of these SAN-Mexico routes over the next year or two.

bb


User currently offlineTomassjc From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 903 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 10371 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A few of the weekly frequencies dropped by LAX-LAP will be added to LTO in April.

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
They entered into a codeshare with AeroMexico in recent times, will they use this as quasi presence instead?

AM will add their flight number to AS metal only....Not the other way around.

Tomas SJC



When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward -Leonardo DaVinci
User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 10297 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

To the O.P. - you have to keep in mind that the drug violence is Mexico has devastated their tourism industry. Tourism from the U.S. is way down from times past. The AS service pull-down could be another casualty of the drug war.

You can see a parallel in the cruise industry. Not too long ago, there were several cruise lines serving Mexico from California which included San Pedro, Long Beach and San Diego as home ports. In this coming year, there will be months when San Diego doesn't see a single cruise ship. This is after money was invested in improved facilities for cruise ships and despite the fact the ships dock next door to the airport and several major tourist destinations.

Mazatlan for example won't see a cruise ship according to cruisett.com until November 2013. Even Cabo is only getting a handful of ships per month in the peak periods.

If and when the violence subsides and Mexico can demonstrate its safe to go back, hordes of tourists will return. I'd love to spend time in places like Acapulco and the areas inland but I'd be insane to take my family there given its on a drug trade corridor.


User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9700 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 10256 times:

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 1):
SJC-PVR
LAX-LAP
LAX-CUN
SFO-CUN
SEA-CUN
SFO-MZT
SFO-ZIH
ONT-MEX
SMF-GDL (which didn't last long)
PHX-SJD
ACA service (not sure of the routing)
PDX-SJD (didn't last long)
PDX-PVR (didn't last long)
SEA-MZT (not sure if this one is coming back)

did they fly SEA-MEX at one point?



yep.
User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6194 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 10225 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 6):

Nope

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 1):
ACA service (not sure of the routing)

How many years you covering? I started with AS in '98 and ACA had been dropped already



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlinejonathanxxxx From United States of America, joined Feb 2011, 673 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 10127 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 5):

It's interesting to note though that this is mainly the Pacific coast as CZM and CUN are still doing great as cruise ports.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 9, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 9944 times:

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 1):
That's partially just due to AS's ASM being much greater now than in the mid-2000s also.

True AS has grown, however it certainly has not maintained the same presence to Latin markets as it has in other regions. For example California/West Coast has historically been in the 30% range of ASMs for a long time. Alaska service about 20%. They are about the same today.

Mexico has shrunk, as aptly displayed by your long list of markets which they have exited.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 2):
I see the LAX-PVR flight still exists (with steep fares a month out). So that is the one I care about.

I hear the CalJet shutdown left people high and dry so there is a rush to get seats to the Pacific Coast.

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 5):
To the O.P. - you have to keep in mind that the drug violence is Mexico has devastated their tourism industry.

Actually big misnomer

Tourism figures have never been higher.

Mexico sets tourism record despite drug violence
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/worl.../mexico-tourism-drug-violence.html

Travel from US has only seen a 3% decline through the years of violence.

Same thing with capacity to Mexico. Outside the big hit following the Mexicana shutdown, capacity has also bounced back and even grown as others grew their Mexico presence. Alaska on the other hand has shrunk.

On a macro scale, Latin America is the hottest and most profitable region for US airlines. Even Southwest is coming out of its shell with new services to Mexico.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineadamh8297 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 1046 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 9911 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 9):
Same thing with capacity to Mexico. Outside the big hit following the Mexicana shutdown, capacity has also bounced back and even grown as others grew their Mexico presence. Alaska on the other hand has shrunk.

Except for MZT and ACA


User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6194 posts, RR: 24
Reply 11, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 9890 times:

One of the things that led to some withdraw by AS before I left was the taxes. I don't have any figures, but one number I remember was a $200 charge just for the fuelers to hook up. We were tankering on SFO-SJD-SFO flights if the passenger load was light enough.


"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 9859 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 9):
Actually big misnomer

Tell that to the Pacific resorts cities outside of Cabo. When our cruise ship stopped in PVD for eight hours, every vendor and service provider asked us to tell folks in the U.S. that the Pacific Coast is safe. Mexican Marines screened off the cruise terminal area and a tour from the same cruise ship was robbed at gun point outside of PVD a couple of weeks earlier. Check out what's been going down in Acapulco.

Mexico is doing well in Cancun and Cozemel. It's doing fine in Baja but the rest of the Pacific Coast is struggling big time. The airlines may be insulated somewhat but the cruise industry certainly isn't.


User currently offlineTomassjc From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 903 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 9831 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 5):
The AS service pull-down could be another casualty of the drug war


C'mon....we are talking Baja California Sur here. Not Ciudad Juarez or Culiacan.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 9):
Travel from US has only seen a 3% decline through the years of violence.

I believe Cabo and Loreto saw even a smaller decline, even in the worst of times. Baja Sur is considered by some as a safe little bubble, being away from the main arteries to the north. Same can be said for the CUN and CZM.

Tomas SJC



When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward -Leonardo DaVinci
User currently offlineTomassjc From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 903 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 9796 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting as739x (Reply 11):
We were tankering on SFO-SJD-SFO flights if the passenger load was light enough.

We still do. Given it's location, fuel is expensive in SJD.



When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward -Leonardo DaVinci
User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6194 posts, RR: 24
Reply 15, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 9760 times:

Quoting Tomassjc (Reply 14):

I bet. Let's hope the loads stay heavy enough that AS's isn't doing it much.



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 16, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 9732 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 12):
Mexico is doing well in Cancun and Cozemel. It's doing fine in Baja but the rest of the Pacific Coast is struggling big time. The airlines may be insulated somewhat but the cruise industry certainly isn't.

Bottom line is tourism numbers are setting records in Mexico still, and air travel remains strong between the US and Mexico.
According to the DOT for the 12-months ending June 2012 air traffic enplanements were up 4.6% between the nations.

Many airlines are taking advantage of this, while Alaska has let its presence shrink. Point of my thread.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17823 posts, RR: 46
Reply 17, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 9654 times:

West CoastMexico can be brutally cheap, and AS' network outside of SEA/PDX is surprisingly limited--for instance SFO/LAX have very little AS service that is worth connecting to Mexico. If they can't make money on the local, they're out of the market, which is what I think happened in LAXLAP

Quoting SANFan (Reply 3):
I'd love to see AS try SAN-GDL.

SAN-ethnic Mexico is just not going to happen. There's just no reason when TIJ is $100 roundtrip cheaper and right next door.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13748 posts, RR: 61
Reply 18, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 9312 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
I noticed in DOT filings that Alaska seeming has dropped another Mexico service.

They filed to inform the DOT that Horizon Air service between LAX and La Paz would be ending on April 6th freeing up the designation for other airlines potentially.

By my estimates this makes over 10 routes which have been dropped over the years.

While we certainly know Hawaii now plays a major part of AS operations, their Mexico flying at one time represented nearly 20% of ASM (peaked in mid 2000's) while in 2012 it down to 7%.

Keep in mind that Mexico service was used primarily to offset the seasonality of the flying to/from the state of Alaska; Hawaii doesn't suffer from such seasonality so extra capacity in wintertime is easily deployed there. Also, U.S. touists are still wary of Mexico following the outbreak of H1N1 there in 2009 coupled with the news stories of violence toward tourists on the rise.

Quoting as739x (Reply 7):
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 1):ACA service (not sure of the routing)
How many years you covering? I started with AS in '98 and ACA had been dropped already

I've been with AS since 1992, and ACA wasn't served then either.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlinelaca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4064 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 8969 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SANFan (Reply 3):

I'd love to see AS try SAN-GDL. Y4 seems to be having issues from here (and other places to be honest) and to the best of my recollection, we have never had an American carrier try to serve the SAN-GDL market. (DL has had the authority in that market for many years -- I don't think they have retained it recently -- but it was never served.) There have been a few attempts at SAN-GDL by Mexican cx but the competition of lots of cheaper (domestic) service from nearby TIJ airport has undermined the service from Lindbergh. I think AS would stand the best possible chance to do well with local (American) traffic from SAN, as well as some connecting traffic from some of the other new routes in and out of SAN.

Actually AS has been smart to stay out of SAN-GDL/MEX. It's not worth the effort. I feel Y4 will not last in SAN forever. As you mention, they seem to be having issues with their service. I don't see why they offer flghts from SAN when they are a low cost carrier and have a sizable operation @ TIJ. The costs of operating @ SAN are definitely markedly higher than TIJ. Perhaps they are still there for incentives given to them by SAN airport authority? Further, Y4 has yet to build a remarkable presence @ LAX. Four flights a day on the average is nothing when many thought they would add additonal service since MX's demise.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 6):

did they fly SEA-MEX at one point?

No,. AM did.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 17):
SAN-ethnic Mexico is just not going to happen. There's just no reason when TIJ is $100 roundtrip cheaper and right next door.

  


User currently offlineTomassjc From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 903 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8219 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 18):
I've been with AS since 1992, and ACA wasn't served then either.

If my fuzzy memory serves, AS's first two routes to Mexico were in the mid 80s between SFO-GDL and SFO-ACA with MD80s. I was working for the competition at SFO at the time. As I recall we carried all the leftover bags from the AS GDL flight on our DC-10s. I also remember when AS started SFO-MZT/PVR, they literally stole the market from MX.

I'll have to do a little research when I have time.....

Tomas SJC



When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward -Leonardo DaVinci
User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13523 posts, RR: 100
Reply 21, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8185 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 9):
I hear the CalJet shutdown left people high and dry so there is a rush to get seats to the Pacific Coast.

Thank you. I hadn't paid attention to CalJet. (oops, I should have...)

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 16):
According to the DOT for the 12-months ending June 2012 air traffic enplanements were up 4.6% between the nations.

That is very interesting. Do you know how they are relative to the peak?


Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineDesertAir From Mexico, joined Jan 2006, 1480 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8102 times:

La Paz is servied by Volaris daily from Tijuana and Aerocalifia has twice weekly service. The economic situations has lowered traffic into Baja. AS once had mainline to Loreto then changed to Horizon.

SAN-ethnic Mexico is just not going to happen. There's just no reason when TIJ is $100 roundtrip cheaper and right next door.

When a flight crosses an international boarder, the taxes are higher. SAN are international flights for Volaris while TIJ flights are domestic. Volaris runs a lot of TIJ-ethnic Mexico flights.


User currently offline737-990 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 375 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 7811 times:

Horizon only serves LAX-LAP 3x weekly, I think that capacity goes to LAX-LTO which goes daily (currently 5x weekly) so really it's a transfer of capacity to another Mexican route.

I think the late 90s/early 200s was the real hayday of AS Mexico service. I remember back in 1997 LAX-SJD was 4x daily and PVR was 2x every day. Now SJD is 2x and PVR just once daily with a second flight on Saturday. Back then the only competition, if there was any was from Mexicana. Slowly U.S. airlines started flying to Mexico and AS Market share began to shrink.



Happiest is a man who has his vocation as a hobby
User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3258 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 7781 times:

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 1):
So I get more like 15.

I forgot PHX-PVR too. AS did both SJD and PVR from PHX at time.

AS did ACA according to an older timetable. I don't have it handy, but according to the route map it stopped somewhere else in Mexico - something like LAX-PVR-ACA or something like that.

Wasn't AS planning to serve Oaxaca a few years ago before the drug violence hit?


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 25, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 6936 times:

So now that we all agree AS has reduced its Mexico presence and dropped maybe 20 odd routes over the years what is the reason for all this?

1) Did AS who held a strong franchise with big market share find the competition too hard as ever more US airlines added Mexico capacity and growth of Mexican LCC's?
2) Is the north-south network lacking strength/feed it needs from its Mexico gateways like LA and SF Bay area?
3) AS simply found other opportunities (eg Hawaii, more transcons) and needed the frames ?
4) Horizon shake up made using them to Mexico less viable strategy?

Also any clue why AS has not attempted to try other markets - Central America - eg Costa Rica? Even trouble Frontier seems to have done OK with SJO for many years now.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 21):
Do you know how they are relative to the peak?

I looked back until 2000, and the peak year for air travel between the US and Mexico was 2007-2008 with about 20mil passengers.
2012 should end with about 19.3-19.5mil, and as alluded to prior the market the last 2-years has grown at rather strong rate.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7633 posts, RR: 42
Reply 26, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 6758 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 5):

To the O.P. - you have to keep in mind that the drug violence is Mexico has devastated their tourism industry.

That is frankly a huge load of bull. Drug violence on the one hand is localized in very specific areas near the border and in certain other regions. It is not a widespread situation afflicting the entire country, Mexico City or most of the major resort destinations. 2011 is the year when Mexico has seen more domestic and international tourists ever (2012 numbers are expected to be higher, but are still not published). We had 22.67 million international visitors during 2011, which is a historic high. It is 2% higher than 2010 and 5.7% higher than 2009. Mexico is a major touristic powerhouse despite what you choose to believe.

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 5):
Mazatlan for example won't see a cruise ship according to cruisett.com

That is true. Mazatlan is one of the places that has suffered badly because of violence. The whole state of Sinaloa is a major drug violence area.

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 5):
I'd love to spend time in places like Acapulco and the areas inland but I'd be insane to take my family there given its on a drug trade corridor.

No, you don't want to visit Acapulco. Unless you go to a secluded place in the "new" Acapulco like the Banyan Tree in Puerto Marqués, the Las Brisas resort, etc., Acapulco has lost its charm. The main Acapulco bay area is a shadow of its former self and I wouldn't want to go there at all. Playa del Carmen or Nuevo Vallarta are much, much better propositions.

Regarding inland places, you could visit the beautiful colonial towns in the Bajío region, like Guanajuato and San Miguel de Allende. There is also Oaxaca southeast of Mexico City, which is my favorite city in the entire country. These places are not only incredibly beautiful, but also significantly safe. I'd feel safer in Guanajuato than in DC, Philly or New Orleans. I know what I am talking about. I have lived in the U.S., and there are many places in the U.S. that are far scarier than Mexico City or some other major towns or tourist destinations in Mexico.

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 12):
Mexico is doing well in Cancun and Cozemel. It's doing fine in Baja but the rest of the Pacific Coast is struggling big time. The airlines may be insulated somewhat but the cruise industry certainly isn't.

A bit of a stretch too. Nuevo Vallarta is quite alright. Same with the Huatulco- Puerto Escondido corridor. Ixtapa is also very safe if you don't venture far afield by car. I understand Rocky Point is very peaceful too. Never heard bad stories about Manzanillo. It is just Mazatlán and Acapulco. Even the coast of Baja is safe. I imagine by your username that you live in Sonoma, CA, near many wineries. Maybe you should take a chance and visit the Mexican wine region south of Tijuana, near Ensenada. There are several boutique hotels in the area within the properties of some of the wineries which, btw, are producing fantastic wines these days (google Vino de Piedra).



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offline28L28L From Australia, joined Nov 2005, 459 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 6718 times:

Looks like the AS operation at ACA was brief. SFO-GDL-ACA began April, 1989 and ceased October, 1990.
Cheers.


User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 6311 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 26):

I appreciate the insight Eddie. I shouldn't have implied the entire country is unsafe. There are certainly areas which are fine and largely untouched by the drug violence. However, many areas which in the past saw large number of visitors/cruise ships etc have been badly affected by the troubles. Sinaloa as you cited is an example along with Vera Cruz, the border areas opposite Texas, inland from Ixtapa and many parts of Acapulco. Even parts of Jalisco are not safe given the violence.

Much of this is also a perception problem. Tourists can go to many different places on vacation and are very risk adverse as a rule. This has benefited Cancun and Cozemel along with Baja and some parts of the interior but badly hurt the other Pacific Coast areas.

I hope things return to the way it was pre-drug wars. I love spending time down there and I very much want my family to learn to love Mexico as I do.


User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13748 posts, RR: 61
Reply 29, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 6316 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 25):
So now that we all agree AS has reduced its Mexico presence and dropped maybe 20 odd routes over the years what is the reason for all this?

The reduction of ASMs to Mexico is twofold:

1. Demand to Mexico began falling like a rock in 2009
2. At the same time, demand - and yields - to Hawaii were far, FAR better
3. There hasn't yet been a compelling enough financial reason to pull those ASMs from Hawaii and other markets

AS hasn't given up on Mexico and will not, however they're in the business of making the most profitable use of their aircraft possible, and deploying those assets to other markets have proven to be a far better use of those ASMs.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently onlineWingtips56 From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 443 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 5746 times:

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 26):
That is frankly a huge load of bull. Drug violence on the one hand is localized in very specific areas near the border and in certain other regions.

But the problem, Eddie, is that at least here on the West Coast, the only news we've been getting is all bad. Average people aren't necessarily distinguishing good areas from bad areas .... in the news it's just: Mexico. So yes, there is a fear factor that can only be harming the entire country's image and keeping some people away. With the cruise lines dropping West Coast ports (which AS does/did focus on) because of the reported troubles, the perception is that it is a place to avoid, right or wrong.

I'm just speculating, but with AS continuing to expand in more drama-free Hawai'i, it make sense to redistribute the fleet to maximize markets. For QX, obviously that's not behind the draw-back, but if they aren't making money in a market, pull out. I suspect there may also be an economic downturn affecting the "ethnic" Mexico market, which could explain AS/QX contraction along with the ever-shifting AM and Volaris frequencies in the non-touristic markets. And too, the expansion of Volaris and other low-cost models is probably putting a pinch on what had been higher-fare marketing by higher cost AS and other U.S. carriers. The FL/WN expansion is going to further erode pricing, so it may be time for others to pick up their toys and go play in another sand box.



Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 31, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 5691 times:

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 29):
1. Demand to Mexico began falling like a rock in 2009

Well you are right H1N1 pandemic certainly scared people away, and traffic did fall in 2009 by 12%, but this quickly rebounded in 2010 and 2011.
Also the Mexicana shutdown in 2010 provided a big boost for competing airlines as they looked to back fill the capacity.

So instead of riding out the turbulence for '09 and then coming back strong the year after as most, Alaska seems to have bid adieu to good portion of its Mexico franchise not to return.

Sure the opportunity of Hawaii came along, but it still seems interesting to me AS has folded much of its cards to a region which has produced the strongest profitability for the industry as a whole and has the strongest forecast traffic growth opportunity rivaling the Asia-Pacific region for US airlines.

Certainly no airline needs to be everywhere all the time, just interesting observation imo that Alaska virtually a US leader in many markets, now plays such a diminished role down South.

[Edited 2013-03-01 14:47:08]


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 5645 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 31):
Alaska seems to have bid adieu to good portion of its Mexico franchise not to return.

I wouldn't go that far. They made a calculation to put their 738s into ETOP status and fly them to Hawai'i and have made out very well in the process. I think they will come back more to Mexico (which for AS mostly means the Pacific Coast) once things calm down.

I hope that if the violence recedes, either AS or a competitor jumps back into the market from the Bay Area. Places like Acapulco can certainly help themselves out with a bit of revitalization to bring folks back as well.


User currently offlineboeing773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 441 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 5599 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 5):

I've certainly noticed a slow down of cruise ships in Cabo, I stay at a resort where the ships are only a couple hundred meters away.

I was there for the past two years and this year there was a significantly less amount of ships there.

It is truly ashame of all these drug wars really slowing down Mexico's tourism sector.



Work Hard, Fly Right.
User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13748 posts, RR: 61
Reply 34, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5245 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 31):
the Mexicana shutdown in 2010 provided a big boost for competing airlines as they looked to back fill the capacity.

AS has instead tried making some headway in the non-beach Mexico markets since the yields are better than the resorts, but Mexico is still a dream come true for wholesalers selling bulk fares at junk yields, and pressuring AS to open up even more low-bucket inventory to attract the VFR crowd.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineTomassjc From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 903 posts, RR: 2
Reply 35, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5134 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 30):
I suspect there may also be an economic downturn affecting the "ethnic" Mexico market, which could explain AS/QX contraction

Actually Wingtips, the ethnic market on AS is going just fine. Besides the obvious GDL and MEX routes, I've seen quite a bit of VFR traffic through resort cities, especially during the holidays, to places like PVR (for western Jalisco and Nayarit) ZLO (for Colima and Michoacan) and ZIH (Guerrero). Back when things were at the lowest, it was the Mexican national market that kept these routes alive. As previously mentioned, the contraction of AS/QX service is simply to put aircraft where they will make the most money.

Tomas SJC



When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward -Leonardo DaVinci
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17823 posts, RR: 46
Reply 36, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5094 times:

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 34):
AS has instead tried making some headway in the non-beach Mexico markets since the yields are better than the resorts, but Mexico is still a dream come true for wholesalers selling bulk fares at junk yields, and pressuring AS to open up even more low-bucket inventory to attract the VFR crowd.

It's surprisingly the other way around; by all accounts--other than internal data obviously--GDL/MEX fares are far worse from LAX than SJD for example, and much farther.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 37, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4945 times:

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 34):
AS has instead tried making some headway in the non-beach Mexico markets since the yields are better than the resorts, but Mexico is still a dream come true for wholesalers selling bulk fares at junk yields, and pressuring AS to open up even more low-bucket inventory to attract the VFR crowd.

The ethnic market as you mention is often not direct sale - its controlled by consolidators.

To succeed in the long run one needs to get into bed with them. However its not as bad as it sounds. Selling to these groups is often easier then regular individual sales as once you are set as they do most of your work and you are not out there beating the drums to generate thousands of individual sales.

However doing things like advertising in Spanish language media, billboards, and Spanish version of websites are all very helpful in building affinity with such communities.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineHiFlyerAS From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 1016 posts, RR: 2
Reply 38, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4941 times:

MEX and GDL are doing just fine...flights are always near capacity. I wouldn't be surprised to see AS someday start service via RJ or mainline to cities such as Leon, Puebla and/or Toluca out of LAX.


Next trip...DL RJ SEA-LAX/AM LAX-MEX Dec 23
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17823 posts, RR: 46
Reply 39, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4833 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 37):
The ethnic market as you mention is often not direct sale - its controlled by consolidators.

I'm not sure that's true anymore for the major LAX trunk routes like GDL or MEX. They are so hypercompetive on both sides of the border, and the fares so low, that consolidators would no longer provide any edge or discount. You can regularly find LAXGDL for as low as $350 roundtrip all in, or about $115 ow that the airline sees. That's less than carriers are getting for Northeast-Florida.

Quoting HiFlyerAS (Reply 38):
MEX and GDL are doing just fine...flights are always near capacity. I wouldn't be surprised to see AS someday start service via RJ or mainline to cities such as Leon, Puebla and/or Toluca out of LAX.

Of course they're full--that's probably because the break even load factor is 110%.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 40, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4697 times:

Actually the ethnic agents have never been more important. Now with ever more people travelling their business is booming.

Amadeus put out an interesting research presentation (you can download from below link) explaining their important niche. It highlights that booking volume are up significantly in the last decade, especially in the big metro areas like LA, NYC and Miami.
http://www.travelagentcentral.com/tr...itable-niche-travel-agencies-29127


To understand them, one needs to understand the communities they serve. Its things like internet use, language, and most particularly credit card usage which are low in many of these communities. As a result its often a cash business, and your local corner travel agent becomes the nexus and most convenient avenue for travel planning.

To show how important such agencies are even Volaris and Interjet which by their LCC nature should have nothing to do with such accommodations, are willing to modify their practices by offering things like holding reservations for payment later by agents or 3rd party stores like Sears, installment pay programs, ability to use Mexican bank vouchers or money grams, and even allowing generic no name reservations which agents can assign names later for a small fee.

So go to many of these communities and the travel agent business is still big, and airlines must be willing to work with them or risk losing a huge category of travelers.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17823 posts, RR: 46
Reply 41, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 4651 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 40):
Actually the ethnic agents have never been more important. Now with ever more people travelling their business is booming.

They are in other areas, but in the LA area to GDL/MEX the fares are so low and the populace is cotinuously conditioned to book more and more travel online and directly. There is no data to suggest any carrier is getting much of any premium out of LAX or an advantage from going through consolidators in these two specific markets, and in general a whole bunch of tools are used by carriers to ferret out any special fares that airlines may be offering to consolidators, travel agents, web only, etc.. There's just not much room for a consolidator to take a slice of such a hypercompetitive market. In something like CHIMLM there's more room to drive the market, but even then I think the long term trend is going to marginalize consolidators.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 40):
So go to many of these communities and the travel agent business is still big, and airlines must be willing to work with them or risk losing a huge category of travelers.

There's no question it's one of the last bastions of the travel agent business, but they need to make money too, and there's more money to be made selling a bunch of LAXEVN tickets, for example, than taking a cut of a zillion LAXGDL tickets at $115ow, when every airline is matching or undercutting the consolidator.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 42, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4598 times:

I am confused. Who do you say is not making money on a $350 GDL ticket?

If its the airline, the revenue per mile is over $0.10. That's higher then someone like JetBlue or Delta earn on average to JFK from LAX. Also don't forget the very nice excess baggage fees airlines earn beyond the headline ticket price.
Plus remember tickets are not always el-cheapo $350's. Try flying for the holidays or upcoming Easter period. Volaris is charging $600 from LAX to GDL for that weekend.

If its the travel agent, well they also do quite well from the ones I know. You have airlines like TACA paying upwards of $80 per ticket, Volaris in the $30 range. That's much better the $20 service charge they are lucky to tack on to domestic tickets these days. Then you also have all the incentive and override payments for the top producers.

And no ethnic consumers are not conditioned to use online bookings especially when they don't have bank accounts let alone credit cards. One airline that found this out the hardway was Spirit and its venture into Central America from LAX. Its refusal to work with agencies on either end, or come up with creative payment methods had its planes come and go with mere 30-40 people onboard.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13748 posts, RR: 61
Reply 43, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4562 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 42):
I am confused. Who do you say is not making money on a $350 GDL ticket?

$110.00 of which are taxes.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 44, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4541 times:

$240 for the airline is almost $0.10/mile on LAX-GDL.

Like I said better then what JetBlue or Delta garner on LAX-JFK.

Total PRASM in Latin markets - those ethnic ones is much higher then simply ticket revenues.

TACA does not have an armored car show up nightly at LAX to collect the excess baggage cash for no reason.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17823 posts, RR: 46
Reply 45, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4435 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 44):
$240 for the airline is almost $0.10/mile on LAX-GDL.

A 350 all in roundtrip ticket ends up being about 8.5 cents/mile...the airline needs every last cent they can get from that.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 44):
Like I said better then what JetBlue or Delta garner on LAX-JFK.

Well, DL/B6 transcon fares are dreadful

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 44):
Total PRASM in Latin markets - those ethnic ones is much higher then simply ticket revenues.

Depends on the carrier, but with the foreign carriers, they're less stringent on the bag requirements, and don't bother with buy on board, so I don't think there's a big wedge between ticketed revenue and total passenger revenue.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 43):
$110.00 of which are taxes.

$125 according to AS.com for LAXGDL Wow!
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 42):
And no ethnic consumers are not conditioned to use online bookings especially when they don't have bank accounts let alone credit cards

Sure they are--airlines and travel agents still accept cash. Abuelas just get their grandkids to search the internet and then bring the fare they want to their favorite travel agent or airline.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 44):
TACA does not have an armored car show up nightly at LAX to collect the excess baggage cash for no reason.

Consolidators are more meaningful for Central America than Mexico, but again as competition increases and fares go down, they serve a quickly decreasing purpose. Anyone who is going through a consolidator for LAXGDL/MEX is probably getting rooked; I just don't see why anyone would bother--it's like going to a consolidator for NYCFLL.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 46, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4342 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 45):
A 350 all in roundtrip ticket ends up being about 8.5 cents/mile...the airline needs every last cent they can get from that.

Sure airlines would like every penny/peso they can get, but even the discount Mexico ticket is not as bad as some of the domestic yields in the US.

I have had plenty of people I know pay $600-800 for advance purchase trips to Mexico City for example. The average revenues airlines garner are not solely reliant on that $350 ticket.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 45):
Depends on the carrier, but with the foreign carriers, they're less stringent on the bag requirements, and don't bother with buy on board, so I don't think there's a big wedge between ticketed revenue and total passenger revenue.

Yes depends on the carrier.

LCC like Volaris is a Nazi when it comes to bags. They charge $5+/kilo in excess. You can save a bit (down to $4/kilo) by prebooking the additional weight.
While Volaris does not do food onboard sales but they peddle other services like ground transportation, baggage delivery, hotels, etc. Plus like Spirit they also ding you for some extra charges here and there.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 45):
Sure they are--airlines and travel agents still accept cash. Abuelas just get their grandkids to search the internet and then bring the fare they want to their favorite travel agent or airline.

Again the transaction is via a travel agent.

Here is a tidbit: Per IATA in 2010 - 68.5 of US domestic tickets were purchase online either directly with airline or travel sites, and 62.3% without any subsequent airline or travel agent interruption. Same year Mexico - only 11% of tickets were purchased online. Two very different worlds.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 45):
I just don't see why anyone would bother--it's like going to a consolidator for NYCFLL

But they do. I can point you to several LA based agencies that sell AeroMexico and Volaris tickets like candy.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinesxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 47, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4160 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 46):
Here is a tidbit: Per IATA in 2010 - 68.5 of US domestic tickets were purchase online either directly with airline or travel sites, and 62.3% without any subsequent airline or travel agent interruption. Same year Mexico - only 11% of tickets were purchased online. Two very different worlds.

In 2010, the Mexican market had no major LCCs. It is a completely irrelevant data point compared to today.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 48, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4130 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 47):
In 2010, the Mexican market had no major LCCs. It is a completely irrelevant data point compared to today.

Both Volaris and Interjet have been around since 2005. Plus there has always been a string of other LCCs over the years in Mexico.

But still does not change the fact that internet bookings are a rather small thing still due to lack of computer access and limited credit card use.

Its simply the nature of the beast, the culture it totally different for travel booking both sides of the border.
Many are more likely to buy a ticket in a bank lobby then sitting in their living room online.

Here is a 2012 article if it makes you feel better:
For most Mexicans, the digital age is still out of reach
http://phys.org/news/2012-01-mexicans-digital-age.html


But I am not sure why the argument here - we are speaking about Alaska Airlines in this thread.

Alaska and others serving Mexico and other Latin markets must make the appropriate accommodations to serve the different conditions present which includes heavy reliance on brick and mortar sales methods to connect to their customers.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineDL747400 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 332 posts, RR: 0
Reply 49, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4130 times:

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 26):
That is frankly a huge load of bull. Drug violence on the one hand is localized in very specific areas near the border and in certain other regions. It is not a widespread situation afflicting the entire country, Mexico City or most of the major resort destinations. 2011 is the year when Mexico has seen more domestic and international tourists ever (2012 numbers are expected to be higher, but are still not published). We had 22.67 million international visitors during 2011, which is a historic high. It is 2% higher than 2010 and 5.7% higher than 2009. Mexico is a major touristic powerhouse despite what you choose to believe.

That may or may not be true, but this American will not cross the border into your country, nor will I spend my $ there until there is clear reason to believe that the safety of myself and my family is not at risk. And despite what you believe, there are many Americans who feel this way. Not trying to bask Mexico, but perception is often reality when people are making decisions on where to spend their travel $$$. The government of Mexico has only themselves to blame for this current mess.


User currently offlinesxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 50, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4014 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 48):
Both Volaris and Interjet have been around since 2005. Plus there has always been a string of other LCCs over the years in Mexico.

What was Volaris and Interjet's share of US-Mexico traffic in 2010? Both airlines have grown exponentially since Mexicana shut down, making comparisons between today and 2010 logically flawed.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 48):
But still does not change the fact that internet bookings are a rather small thing still due to lack of computer access and limited credit card use.

Internet bookings at Volaris and Interjet have grown along with the airlines' US networks. Regardless, the argument that AS has chosen not to grow its Mexico network because it has not aggressively used consolidators is stupid because you're ignoring the difference between beach and ethnic markets and US-focused point of sale and VFR traffic.

Isn't it better if you can fill your planes without consolidators and operate a consistently profitable airline?


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 51, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3932 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 51):
Isn't it better if you can fill your planes without consolidators and operate a consistently profitable airline?

Who says consolidators are not profitable avenue for airlines serving the region?

Having almost 30-years experience (going back to early 1980s) with business to Mexico and Central America, consolidators are a great way to reach customers and market your airline.

Its much harder to generate individual sales in the region unless if you want to open a million ticket offices.

These companies do your work for you, they become your storefront at a much lower cost then you could do it yourself.
Its simply the appropriate local distribution means.

So even with what you perceive is a negative distribution method has allowed airlines to make the region the most profitable for US carriers across any region.
Latin America: Most Profitable For US Airlines (by LAXintl Jul 18 2012 in Civil Aviation)

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 51):
Internet bookings at Volaris and Interjet have grown along with the airlines' US networks

And such individual internet booking volumes are no where near what typical LCCs in developed nations like US or EU generate.

There is a reason why you can buy a Volaris ticket at Sears, Banamex, or 7-11 like chains.

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 51):
What was Volaris and Interjet's share of US-Mexico traffic in 2010? Both airlines have grown exponentially since Mexicana shut down, making comparisons between today and 2010 logically flawed.

If you really want to know I can look it up for you, but online bookings were always available on folks like Mexicana as well. Its not like Volaris or Interjet invented internet online booking.

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 51):
Regardless, the argument that AS has chosen not to grow its Mexico network because it has not aggressively used consolidators is stupid because you're ignoring the difference between beach and ethnic markets and US-focused point of sale and VFR traffic.

Some posters here employed by AS seem to say the company is trying to shift into more ethnic traffic.

See Reply 34 and 35.


But bottom line is regardless, Alaska has clearly shrunk in Mexico, while other carriers have managed to grow their pie.

Repeated excuses such as narco-violence don't go far when Mexico is still setting new tourism arrival records.
If anything, AS has either has failed to pivot and capitalize on shifting opportunities in Mexico, or its simply made the strategic decision to look to other markets to grow in at the expense of its once quite strong Mexican franchise.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinesxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 52, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3874 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 52):
Who says consolidators are not profitable avenue for airlines serving the region?

Having almost 30-years experience (going back to early 1980s) with business to Mexico and Central America, consolidators are a great way to reach customers and market your airline.

Its much harder to generate individual sales in the region unless if you want to open a million ticket offices.

No one has said consolidators are necessarily unprofitable; however, direct bookings - especially through the airline's website - are more profitable than consolidators. It is impossible to argue that AS is doing something wrong focusing on distribution through alaskaair.com...

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 52):
If you really want to know I can look it up for you, but online bookings were always available on folks like Mexicana as well. Its not like Volaris or Interjet invented internet online booking.

Volaris and Interjet have helped "democratize" air travel within, to, and from Mexico with lower fares and better service. Online bookings in Mexico continue to grow, driven by the success of the low cost/higher service business models.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 52):
But bottom line is regardless, Alaska has clearly shrunk in Mexico, while other carriers have managed to grow their pie.

It seems like you're trying to argue that it is AS' own fault that its shrunk in Mexico. While the decision to pursue growth in other, more lucrative, markets is certainly part of the equation, there are too many variables to legitimately argue AS should be able to profitably grow at the same rate as Mexican LCCs or the US-Mexico market as a whole.


User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17823 posts, RR: 46
Reply 53, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3762 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 46):
I have had plenty of people I know pay $600-800 for advance purchase trips to Mexico City for example. The average revenues airlines garner are not solely reliant on that $350 ticket

From LAX? Then either they were traveling at Christmas, in first, or they got scammed. Look at the average fares for US carriers between LAX and GDL and MEX--they're rough, and yet they are bursting at the seams at around 90% for US carriers. Mexican carriers are likely lower on both fare and LF.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 46):

But they do. I can point you to several LA based agencies that sell AeroMexico and Volaris tickets like candy.

I'm sure there are travel agents still selling NYCFLL tickets--even 1% of the market would be hundreds of tickets. But US carriers in LAXGDL have no problem filling the plane, and to turn a cheap direct booking away to get a cheap consolidator booking *and* pay them a cut quickly marginalizes the consolidators.

Quoting DL747400 (Reply 50):
And despite what you believe, there are many Americans who feel this way. Not trying to bask Mexico, but perception is often reality when people are making decisions on where to spend their travel $$$. The government of Mexico has only themselves to blame for this current mess.

Many Americans think the earth was created a few thousand years ago too, so reason is clearly not involved here. The drug trade is almost entirely geared towards Americans sucking stuff up their nose or shooting it in their veins, so for the drug dealers to endanger their clients is bad for business. Unfortunately perception rules, but the reality is leaving somewhere like Chicago to go to Cancun probably reduces your risk of violece ten fold. 
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 52):
There is a reason why you can buy a Volaris ticket at Sears, Banamex, or 7-11 like chains.

Yes, and that was the initial push by Mexican LCCs to be as ubiquitous as possible to avoid having to go through third parties. It didn't entirely work, and airlines like Volaris, for example, realized they had to partner with agencies and consolidators.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 52):
Some posters here employed by AS seem to say the company is trying to shift into more ethnic traffic.

Bottom line, I think AS breaks even at best in LAXMEX/GDL, on screaming LFs and low fares, and consolidators aren't going to move the dial much for AS on either route.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 54, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3469 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 53):
direct bookings - especially through the airline's website - are more profitable than consolidators.

Sure, but when direct bookings only make up a sliver of the market, unless if you want to ignore a huge chunk of potential passengers you opt to go with the most broadly accepted forms of booking which still happens to be the traditional travel agency and consolidators.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 54):
From LAX?

Yes LAX. $600 is quite common for Mexico City. Matter of fact I have a receipt sitting from someone here - $713 on United for later in March. For fun I just plugged in the same dates today, and got $904 as the price. (and yes its economy class)

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 54):
Yes, and that was the initial push by Mexican LCCs to be as ubiquitous as possible to avoid having to go through third parties. It didn't entirely work, and airlines like Volaris, for example, realized they had to partner with agencies and consolidators.

Indeed the LCCs also learned they also had to use consolidators if they wanted bodies on their flights.

Also all the other distribution partners like Sears, the banks, phone company etc, just like a travel agency had to be given a commission cut to assist in sales, but such alternate distribution methods still were valuable as the airlines needed ways to access folks that simply could not directly book with the airline.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinesxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 55, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3384 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 55):
Sure, but when direct bookings only make up a sliver of the market, unless if you want to ignore a huge chunk of potential passengers you opt to go with the most broadly accepted forms of booking which still happens to be the traditional travel agency and consolidators.

Are you advocating AS chase a huge chunk of less profitable passengers in order to maintain its historic Mexican network? I guess most people would argue AS move its planes to the routes were they can be filled most profitably, franchise be damned.


User currently onlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1724 posts, RR: 2
Reply 56, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3367 times:

Yes Mexico is like many other place in Latin America or developing world where travel agents are still very much key link to reach consumers.

Certainly economics and lack of access to technology or financial tools like credit card are a big issue for large portion of population, but in my experience its also a matter of respect and trust people have to go see a travel agent versus doing it themselves. I know many respectable good off people in the region, but no matter what they still opt to contact and use assistance of travel agent automatically if they ever are considering a trip.

Maybe to show how these traditional sales methods are still very important we can look to American Airlines.
Its interesting that AA still maintains ticket office. In the US for example they have 4 left - 1 in NYC Manhattan, but 3 also in Miami area. And overseas in Latin America AA still have many dozen offices. For example was in Lima not long ago, I saw 2 AA ticket offices. Same in Mexico, Brazil, etc..

Why ? because people like to, and need to come to office, check on flights and fares, and pay for tickets. Internet access, let alone online commerce is a limited thing in region.

I don't think airline can do business well in Latin America unless it accepts that travel agent and things like ticket offices are the proper means to reach your customers.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 57, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3276 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 56):
Are you advocating AS chase a huge chunk of less profitable passengers in order to maintain its historic Mexican network? I guess most people would argue AS move its planes to the routes were they can be filled most profitably, franchise be damned.

At one time AS was the 2nd largest US airline to Mexico and clearly had a good game going.

In the years since the market has not shrunk, its actually grown, and there has been tremendous opportunities created such as the loss of Mexicana which other US airlines were able to take advantage of.
AS instead started to fold its cards on many routes, and has seen its overall activity to the region decline by a large chunk.

Sure as a business, you use your assets to the maximum benefit, however I find it a little puzzling that AS has let shrink what was a huge historic strength and large portion of the enterprise (almost 1/5 of all flying). Also in aggregate, the region produces the best margins for US carries - certainly better then domestic flying. Why could AS not replicate this level of success, especially when it was coming from a place of strength?

I guess a parallel we can draw is Delta with loss of the Western Airlines Mexico network. We might be able to chalk that down to simply its lack of awareness of what was happening, but in Alaska case its the same airline still and much of the same management team that was there 10-years ago.
I guess its one of those mysteries in the industry.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1724 posts, RR: 2
Reply 58, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3185 times:

Sounds like Alaska was not ready to service the market when competition got high.

Maybe it was easy for them to be big when there was more a duopoly, but when Mexican low cost, and more American airlines arrive, Alaska not able to defend its turf?

I recall seeing on monitors that they had something like 5-6 Mexico departures back to back within 1-hour at LAX a few years ago. They seemed to be a power to Mexico and doing well. Maybe not.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25989 posts, RR: 22
Reply 59, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3187 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 58):
Also in aggregate, the region produces the best margins for US carries - certainly better then domestic flying. Why could AS not replicate this level of success, especially when it was coming from a place of strength?

Hasn't the US-Mexico tourist market suffered significantly due to the high crime rate in Mexico and several incidents of murders and other major crime involving tourists at major Mexican resorts? I expect that must be a factor. AS rarely makes bad decisions so I think they know better than A.net members how to use their assets most profitably.


User currently offlinedoug_Or From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3441 posts, RR: 3
Reply 60, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3163 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 58):

In the years since the market has not shrunk, its actually grown, and there has been tremendous opportunities created such as the loss of Mexicana which other US airlines were able to take advantage of.
AS instead started to fold its cards on many routes, and has seen its overall activity to the region decline by a large chunk.

The total market for passengers between the US and Mexico may have grown, but Alaska's Mexican network was very narrowly focused on on taking US citizens to Mexican resort cities. Has this market grown or shrunk (not a rheotircal question, I honestly don't know)?



When in doubt, one B pump off
User currently offlinehatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1500 posts, RR: 14
Reply 61, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 58):
Also in aggregate, the region produces the best margins for US carries - certainly better then domestic flying.

Forgive me if you posted above, but where is this information that you're referring to? I can tell you that the Mexico flying is nowhere near AS's most profitable flying. It's profitable, but it's not a cash cow like as it feels like you are implying.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 58):
At one time AS was the 2nd largest US airline to Mexico and clearly had a good game going.

I feel like this ignores a lot of potential factors. What makes it a good game? Number of frequencies? Number of actual unique route pairings? DL had a good game going in MEM at one point if that is the determining factor. But I think profits are what should really qualify as a good game. If anyone has show financial discipline it's been AS and if the Mexico market was ripe for the picking I think you'd see us all over it just like we are in Hawaii.

At one point in Mexico there was less competition, so it probably was a good game until others entered the fray. Mexicana did shut down and that helped, and AS actually added frequencies after that on the overlap routes. LAX-GDL was always 1x daily going as far back as 1998. As soon as Mexicana shut down it bumped to 2x daily and has been there ever since. The same thing happened on LAX-MEX.

In the last 15 years, AS's total ASMs to Mexico in one year was as low as 709m and as high as 1.297m. It steadily grew between 1999 and 2007. It peaked in 2007 and 2008 at that 1.297m number. Then it suddenly dropped to almost 911m over the next 2 years. What happened during that time? Well we had the fuel crisis in 2008 and the H1N1 epidemic in 2009. Since it hit 911m in 2010, it has climbed back to 1.024m. If you compare 2012 to 1998 AS has increased Mexico capacity by 44%. I just don't see how that is such a huge cut back of Mexico like you are making it out to be over that long time period. Sure, we don't have as many unique city pairings or as many destinations in Mexico, but the capacity certainly hasn't been cut down to size like it seems you are saying.

Let's just take since 2008. Here are the capacity changes in Mexico for the legacy US airlines:

UA/CO +7.4%
US +5%
AA +0.1%
AS -13.7%
DL -30%

Yes, since the fuel crisis AS has cut more than others, but maybe now we should start a thread about DL's Mexico cuts?   Plus 13.7% of AS's ASMs are considerably less overall than 5% of UA's.

AS also isn't interested in serving markets with junk yields, hence why we dropped LAX-CUN a while back. That route never made a profit for the airline as the yields were too low. That market alone added a ton of ASMs (30m) to our overall network, so removing it from the schedule would drop ASMs a bit. In the last year DOT O&D data show yields on LAX-CUN at between 10.75 and 11.97 cents. However on LAX-SJD for example, the yields are between 19.74 and 21.80 cents. And LAX-SJD is more than half the distance of LAX-CUN. That one seems like a no brainer. And AS has 5-6 flights a day to SJD which makes complete sense.

So I would venture to say that when AS peaked on capacity in 2008, the region was much less profitable for the airline than it is today as we have exited markets that just weren't working. LAP is just the latest casualty. Nobody else serves LAX-LAP and probably for good reason.

I always respect your opinions LAXintl and I enjoy the debate. But it just seems to me the numbers here don't add up to AS cutting as much over the last 10-15 years as you make it out to be. I'd just argue that 2008 was probably too much capacity, and now we have right sized it. But you can't argue that Mexico capacity for AS was larger 10 years ago than it is today. You are correct though in saying that it makes up a much less share of total ASMs for the airline, a lot of that probably just due to the explosive Hawaii growth. I would just venture to say that the capacity that we had in there at one time was in markets that didn't make sense within our route network (PHX-SJD as an example), or markets that had junk yields like LAX-CUN. But markets where yields are strong we have a good number of frequencies from the west coast, in the markets where it makes sense for us (LAX, SAN, SJC, SFO, etc).


User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3258 posts, RR: 7
Reply 62, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3057 times:

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 62):
LAP is just the latest casualty. Nobody else serves LAX-LAP and probably for good reason.

Great insightful post. I think I read that AM is going to start LAX-LAP.

How come AS dropped SEA-CUN too? At first when they announced discontinuing LAX-CUN, AS said they were planning to keep SEA-CUN seasonally.

SMF-GDL must not have done well since AS dropped it quickly. Seems like SJC-GDL does well, and they are keeping SJC-SJD so far.


User currently offlinesxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 63, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3037 times:

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 62):
Forgive me if you posted above, but where is this information that you're referring to? I can tell you that the Mexico flying is nowhere near AS's most profitable flying. It's profitable, but it's not a cash cow like as it feels like you are implying.

I think LAXintil is - illogically - applying the Latin American yields for U.S. carriers to AS' LAX-Mexico network. The problem is that Latin America generally encompasses everything south of the United States from all US points. Yields are distorted by routes to/from Brazil and other restricted markets that have strong premium demand.


User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17823 posts, RR: 46
Reply 64, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3044 times:

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 63):
How come AS dropped SEA-CUN too? At first when they announced discontinuing LAX-CUN, AS said they were planning to keep SEA-CUN seasonally.

SEACUN fares are worse than LAXCUN, and SEA is about 25% farther.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 63):
Seems like SJC-GDL does well, and they are keeping SJC-SJD so far.

GDL to anywhere on the West Coast is pretty challenging, but SJD seems to be working from just about anywhere on any carrier lately.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 65, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3032 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 60):
Hasn't the US-Mexico tourist market suffered significantly due to the high crime rate in Mexico and several incidents of murders and other major crime involving tourists at major Mexican resorts?

Unfortunately the media portrays a story that is not always what the end result is.

In reality US - Mexico traffic continues to grow, while Mexico is setting tourism arrival records for 2-years running now.

The biggest hit was in 2009 with H1N1 flu that caused a 12% decline, but traffic recovered very fast since and has been growing last 3-years.

See Reply 9, 25 and 31 along with comments of our Mexican contributors.

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 61):
The total market for passengers between the US and Mexico may have grown, but Alaska's Mexican network was very narrowly focused on on taking US citizens to Mexican resort cities. Has this market grown or shrunk (not a rheotircal question, I honestly don't know)?

Looks like the full 2012 numbers are not out yet, but atleast through September 2012 US tourist arrivals were up 3% while total tourism was up 8%. Even cruise ship arrivals were up 11% through October.
http://www.journeymexico.com/blog/tag/mexican-tourism-statistics/

As we have mentioned in this thread AS also serves some ethnic markets, but maybe AS has the wrong mix of markets if its seeing such counter trend.

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 62):
Forgive me if you posted above, but where is this information that you're referring to?

See Reply 52 article.

Latin America produced the highest margins for US airlines, and has been a safe heaven to absorb capacity during these times global uncertainty.

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 62):
DL's Mexico cuts?

We have had those discussions to - some quite interesting ones by Delta fan boys getting all excited how DL squandered what Western Airlines had built.

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 62):
But you can't argue that Mexico capacity for AS was larger 10 years ago than it is today. You are correct though in saying that it makes up a much less share of total ASMs for the airline,

I referred to ASMs in my opening thread.

Outside of new Hawaii markets, Alaska has kept its ASMs rather steady across its geographic entities except for the huge Latin drop. Mexico has gone from 20% of all flying down to 7%. Things like intra Alaska, West Coast, have only shifted a few percentage points all these years. They have kept pace with overall airline growth.

So in essence while the Latin pie has grown, AS has not increased its portion of this pie, instead it has shrunk.

As other posters have listed something like 20 routes that have been exited over the years.

Certainly an airline is free to use its assets to maximum value and there will always be a few turkey routes, its just very interesting to me how Alaska has seen its Mexico flying shrink in stature while the underlying market has grown with others clamoring to get in on the action. Basically why could Alaska not reap the same opportunities especially when it was so well established already in the market?



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13748 posts, RR: 61
Reply 66, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2908 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 65):
Outside of new Hawaii markets, Alaska has kept its ASMs rather steady across its geographic entities except for the huge Latin drop. Mexico has gone from 20% of all flying down to 7%.

Hold on a second; your thread title implies that Mexico flying is reduced overall by AS and when compared to 2008 levels you'd be correct, but this "huge Latin drop" you keep referencing appears to be in terms of the ratio of Mexico AS flown ASMs vs. total AS flown ASMs If so, it's intellectually dishonest to frame this as a "huge drop" when the ASMs have been growing since the drop-off and it's really only Mexico's importance to the AS network that has diminished somewhat. If I didn't know any better it almost seems like you're trying to stir the pot.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 67, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2700 times:

AS has dropped what 20 - odd city-pairs ? (BoeingGuy put a list together)

That's pretty significant pull back both on ASM basis and actual activity basis no matter how you slice or dice it.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinesxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 68, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2682 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 67):
AS has dropped what 20 - odd city-pairs ? (BoeingGuy put a list together)

That's pretty significant pull back both on ASM basis and actual activity basis no matter how you slice or dice it.

Why do people portray this as a bad thing? Are you saying AS should keep flying unprofitable routes for the sake of maintaining a certain network?


User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13748 posts, RR: 61
Reply 69, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2670 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 67):
AS has dropped what 20 - odd city-pairs ? (BoeingGuy put a list together)

That's pretty significant pull back both on ASM basis and actual activity basis no matter how you slice or dice it.

Read this again. And then before you reply, read it again. And again once more. I'm hoping the numbers sink in and you'll realize how silly it is to frame this as a "Huge Latin Drop" :

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 61):
In the last 15 years, AS's total ASMs to Mexico in one year was as low as 709m and as high as 1.297m. It steadily grew between 1999 and 2007. It peaked in 2007 and 2008 at that 1.297m number. Then it suddenly dropped to almost 911m over the next 2 years. What happened during that time? Well we had the fuel crisis in 2008 and the H1N1 epidemic in 2009. Since it hit 911m in 2010, it has climbed back to 1.024m.

Also, keep in mind a huge chunk of those ASMs lost were due to long stage length routes to/from CUN.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently onlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1724 posts, RR: 2
Reply 70, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2654 times:

Interesting discussion to see how carrier that is once near top of market fall and become smaller presence.

So what make so many routes Mexico "unprofitable" for Alaska Airlines enterprise compared to other airlines which it appear to like Mexico and increasing activity as market is growing size ?

Has Alaska poor marketing for Mexico, poor network, poor hub city, poor mix of aircraft, bad cost ?

What is cause of failure and force to reduce so many Mexico routes ?


User currently offlinehatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1500 posts, RR: 14
Reply 71, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2588 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 65):
See Reply 52 article.

Latin America produced the highest margins for US airlines, and has been a safe heaven to absorb capacity during these times global uncertainty.

Ahh thanks. I couldn't find it. So I read the article and it doesn't tell me much about Mexico. Latin America yes. B6 for instance is mentioned in the article and claims a margin of 27% for Latin America and the Caribbean. Well B6 only flies to CUN but they are all over the rest of Central America and the Caribbean. So I can't easily tie these incredible margins to Mexico only because B6 doesn't really fly to Mexico. UA is probably doing pretty well from their IAH hub but the west coast is pretty well covered to Mexico, and that's where AS competes.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 67):
AS has dropped what 20 - odd city-pairs ? (BoeingGuy put a list together)

That's pretty significant pull back both on ASM basis and actual activity basis no matter how you slice or dice it.

I know what you're saying, but it's not in terms of ASMs. You kept referencing the last 10-15 years and in reality the last 10-15 years AS has grown 44% in terms of ASMs. Yes, the number of unique routes has dropped by 20 or so, but the total capacity has actually climbed. It's not back to where it was pre fuel crisis in 2008 or H1N1 in 2009, but it's climbing again. The only time in the last 10-15 years AS pulled any ASMs overall out of Mexico was in 2008 and 2009. So I just don't think you can claim there has been a severe pull down.

Let's go back to the list that BoeingGuy put together and think about this logically:

SJC-PVR - Not served by anyone else, can now feed SJC pax through LAX to PVR
LAX-LAP - Not served by anyone else for good reason
LAX-CUN - Served by DL, UA and VX...junk yields
SFO-CUN - Served by UA and VX...junk yields
SEA-CUN - Not served by anyone else, big money loser when it was served
SFO-MZT - Not served by anyone else
SFO-ZIH - Not served by anyone else
ONT-MEX - Not served by anyone else
SMF-GDL - Not served by anyone else
PHX-SJD - Served by US...makes sense cause it's their hub and they have feed. AS doesn't.
PDX-SJD - Not served by anyone else, can feed pax through SAN, SEA, SFO, SJC or LAX. Why keep PDX nonstop?
PDX-PVR - Not served by anyone else, can feed pax through SAN, SEA, SFO or LAX. Why keep PDX nonstop?
SEA-MZT - Not served by anyone else, can feed pax through LAX

So looking at this list I don't see why it's so hard to understand why AS would have tried and then dropped these routes. Half of them nobody else has come into pick up the slack, which leads me to believe they aren't moneymakers in anyone's eyes. The other ones that were dropped now have a considerable amount of connecting opportunities within AS's own network to feed pax which makes the nonstop flights worthless and would just dilute overall margins. So why again was it a bad idea to drop the above routes? AS clearly should have never started them in the first place, which means this thread would never have even existed because we'd have no dropped routes to discuss.


User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3258 posts, RR: 7
Reply 72, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2570 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 68):
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 67):
AS has dropped what 20 - odd city-pairs ? (BoeingGuy put a list together)

That's pretty significant pull back both on ASM basis and actual activity basis no matter how you slice or dice it.

Why do people portray this as a bad thing? Are you saying AS should keep flying unprofitable routes for the sake of maintaining a certain network?

Thanks. Those were pairs I could think of off the top of my AS-fanboy A.net nerd head.

Put it in perspective. During the time that AS dropped those 20 Mexico routes, they've added countless other routes. Here's a start.

SEA-HNL
SEA-LIH
SEA-OGG
SEA-KOA
ANC-KOA
ANC-OGG
ANC-HNL
BLI-HNL
BLI-OGG
BLI-LAS
PDX-FAI
PDX-BOS
PDX-ORD
SEA-MCI
SEA-AUS
SEA-PHL
SEA-SLC
SEA-SAT
SEA-ATL
SEA-IAH

That's more than 20 and we haven't even gotten to all the PDX and California to Hawaii routes or the new SAN routes.

So, AS has pulled back some (but certainly still has a healthy network) Mexico routes and has been in a major expansion mode overall.


User currently offlineTomassjc From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 903 posts, RR: 2
Reply 73, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2540 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 71):
SMF-GDL - Not served by anyone else

Small correction, both AeroMexico and Volaris fly SMF-GDL



When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward -Leonardo DaVinci
User currently offlinehatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1500 posts, RR: 14
Reply 74, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2526 times:

Quoting Tomassjc (Reply 73):
Small correction, both AeroMexico and Volaris fly SMF-GDL

My bad. You are right. I got keystroke happy  


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25989 posts, RR: 22
Reply 75, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2470 times:

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 70):
What is cause of failure and force to reduce so many Mexico routes ?

It's hard for legacy carriers to make money on routes with very little premium business traffic and almost all traffic price-sensitive leisure and VFR.


User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 76, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2393 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Many of the city pairs dropped were leisure focused destinations from the U.S. west coast to the Mexican west coast. I accept that some in this thread are proclaiming record tourism in Mexico but its not on the Pacific Coast (with Cabo being a possible exception). Cancun and Cozemel are a long way from ASs hubs and focus cities and are also leisure destinations.

AS went to Hawai'i instead of maintaining focus on Mexico. Until the perception of the violence goes away, the tourists will stay away from the Pacific coast.


User currently onlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1724 posts, RR: 2
Reply 77, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2233 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 75):
It's hard for legacy carriers to make money on routes with very little premium business traffic and almost all traffic price-sensitive leisure and VFR.

Thank you.

Interesting how things shift and how once powerful player loses its edge in market.

It seems Alaska to be worse off abandoning so many Mexico routes while competitors grow.


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5792 posts, RR: 28
Reply 78, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2199 times:

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 58):
Sounds like Alaska was not ready to service the market when competition got high.

Maybe it was easy for them to be big when there was more a duopoly, but when Mexican low cost, and more American airlines arrive, Alaska not able to defend its turf?

and...

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 77):
Thank you.

Interesting how things shift and how once powerful player loses its edge in market.

It seems Alaska to be worse off abandoning so many Mexico routes while competitors grow.

...display a general lack of understanding of Alaska and their success. Much of these losses happened due to the economy, gang violence, and H1N1. I live in Seattle and I remember very well when these reductions started really taking place. It was around the same time that our options to cruise to Mexico out of Los Angeles really started to decline, and they haven't come back in any meaningful way either.

Alaska continues to be extremely profitable, and that comes from making tough choices. They chose to move some of their fleet away from Mexico and now have a large Hawaiian network. Hawaii isn't exactly a "duopoly" marketplace, particularly when you consider that there are quite a few options in the Bay Area to Hawaii and yet they've continued to grow there.

Frankly, I'm at a loss to figure out how you can say "It seems Alaska to be worse off..."? I think a number of airlines would love to be as worse off as they are.  

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 79, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2175 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 68):
Are you saying AS should keep flying unprofitable routes for the sake of maintaining a certain network?

I've said companies are free to utilize their assets as they see fit, but I certainly interesting for me to a company that had such long and well developed presence to all of a sudden find so much to be unprofitable (if that is really the case), and then drop so many routes while others are increasing their presence in the market.

Maybe AS network is run more along short term reactionary planning versus longer strategic outlook. Mexico might have its ups and downs, but overall its certainly headed upwards, and industry peers seem to agree that looking South is a smart way to go.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 78):
Hawaii isn't exactly a "duopoly" marketplace, particularly when you consider that there are quite a few options in the Bay Area to Hawaii and yet they've continued to grow there.

I think we will very shortly see Hawaii is not a panacea AS might think it is.

We already had commentary from folks like Hawaiian Air in their earning calls that the market to the West Coast has excess capacity and revenues are weakening.

If I can find it, an analyst in last couple of weeks put a paper out on it as well.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinesxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 80, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2142 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 79):
Maybe AS network is run more along short term reactionary planning versus longer strategic outlook. Mexico might have its ups and downs, but overall its certainly headed upwards, and industry peers seem to agree that looking South is a smart way to go.

Running a network with a longer term perspective is generally a recipe for disaster. I know it is sexy and fun to discuss strategic network decisions on A.net, but that's not how bills generally get paid.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 79):
I think we will very shortly see Hawaii is not a panacea AS might think it is.

We already had commentary from folks like Hawaiian Air in their earning calls that the market to the West Coast has excess capacity and revenues are weakening.

If I can find it, an analyst in last couple of weeks put a paper out on it as well.

AS has been very clear that they will trim Hawaii growth and have some seasonal reductions. However, anyone could see that AS and HA are taking very different approaches to their West Coast-Hawaii networks. Based on AS' financial success and HA's decision to purchase smaller aircraft, it is clear that one approach is more successful than the other.


User currently offlinehatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1500 posts, RR: 14
Reply 81, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2128 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 79):
Mexico might have its ups and downs, but overall its certainly headed upwards, and industry peers seem to agree that looking South is a smart way to go.

I want to put this thread to rest so here is the cold hard truth in numbers. You keep saying demand to Mexico is growing rapidly. However, the numbers don’t tell that story:

AS growth vs the entire industry to Mexico from the US

2005-2012
Industry: ASMs -11.9%, Pax -2.1%
AS: ASMs -6.1%, Pax +4.3%

2010-2012
Industry: ASMs -6.8%, Pax -3.1%
AS: ASMs +12.4%, Pax +19.4%

AS growth vs the entire industry to Mexico from California only

2005-2012
Industry: ASMs -23.6%, Pax -17.9%
AS: ASMs -7.2%, Pax +4.2%

2010-2012
Industry: ASMs -5.9%, Pax +0.5%
AS: ASMs +19.5%, Pax +23.6%

According to the real numbers not only has AS been outperforming the industry in terms of passenger and capacity growth to all of Mexico from the US, it has been outperforming them hands down from the state of California to Mexico. I seriously don't understand how you are concluding that AS is not taking advantage of Mexico growth but other airlines are, or anyone else on this thread for that matter. Even if you just look at the last 2 years with the fuel crisis and H1N1 being over with, AS has blown everyone out of the water. Even from 2005-2012 AS shrunk capacity but had an increase in pax. So you have excellent capacity discipline the rest of the industry didn't have.

Also the claim about this really fast growing Mexico demand appears to be false. Since 2010 US to Mexico passenger numbers are down 3.1%. This is all from publicly available DOT T100 data.


User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13748 posts, RR: 61
Reply 82, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2103 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 79):
Maybe AS network is run more along short term reactionary planning versus longer strategic outlook. Mexico might have its ups and downs, but overall its certainly headed upwards, and industry peers

Paraphrasing a quote from former CEO Bill Ayer, AS used to do silly things like staying in wildly unprofitable markets and calling them "strategic". AS doesn't chase market share like other carriers do; a market's financial performance now has to justify its presence in the AS network.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26145 posts, RR: 50
Reply 83, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2054 times:

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 81):
Since 2010 US to Mexico passenger numbers are down 3.1%. This is all from publicly available DOT T100 data.

Yes a number I mentioned in a previously - that's off a record high and because H1N1 caused a 13.2% hit in 2009/2010.

However if you look at the last 2-years from the same DOT numbers - Mexico is experiencing strong growth.

2011 + 6.0%
6mos 2012 + 4.9%

So not only is Mexico growing faster then any other DOT reporting entity, faster then domestic, atlantic, pacific or even rest of latin america.

Now if Alaska Airlines wants to sit out this growth and exit route after route is it obviously free to do so.

As far as the competitors here is the increase in seats to Mexico:

2011 - +3.8
6 mos 2012 - +4.0%

Add in that Mexico government has also been setting record tourism arrival statistics.

I think there is ample numbers to show the market is on the upswing, certainly well above expected standard baseline GDP growth rates.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 82):
Paraphrasing a quote from former CEO Bill Ayer, AS used to do silly things like staying in wildly unprofitable markets and calling them "strategic". AS doesn't chase market share like other carriers do; a market's financial performance now has to justify its presence in the AS network.

A philosophical difference.

Personally I dont believe one should be jumping from short opportunity to short opportunity because at some point you will run out of these opportunties and not have a strong foundation to fall back on.
A business imo needs long term strategic goals and consistency. I have been associated with one airline where we almost 2-decades ago decided we needed to get into China. Initially it was very costly and loss making, but everyone agreed China was the future. Today thankfully China helps pay the bill for much of the rest of the enterprise when its down. Similarly I had the opportunity to work with a former CEO of Lufthansa who regularly commented that if you wanted to build customer loyalty and garner the higher share of business revenues, you need to operate a consistent network. The business man expects his 7am flight. Don't be changing that to 8am one season, or 6am another. Keep it a 7am and he will be coming back year after year.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinehatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1500 posts, RR: 14
Reply 84, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2035 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 83):
A business imo needs long term strategic goals and consistency.

I just don't see how AS is not doing this? It would appear to me putting all their eggs in the Mexico basket is thinking short term strategy no? Nobody knows if Mexico demand will stick around. It surely dropped after the H1N1 crisis. So why wouldn't it drop soon again? If anything AS is taking a long term outlook on the region and not over committing. If AS was so short term focused then why after 81 years is it still one of the smaller players? B6 passed us in less than 10 years in terms of growth and they are running out of places to put those planes. AS has always thought long term which is why we've grown so slowly and made sure markets were sustainable before putting all of our resources into them. Hawaii is about the fastest short term growth you'll ever see at this company. AS is doing what you proclaim, not getting all excited about this great Mexico demand you say there is and making so many short term decisions.

Besides, how can any of us claim anyone is taking a short or long term strategy in this industry? This industry is so cyclical that none of us know when the next big hit is coming. Therefore you can't really plan on anything being a certainty long term.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 83):
2011 + 6.0%
6mos 2012 + 4.9%

And in 2011 AS pax to Mexico grew 21.9% and in 2012 it was -2%. But over the two years AS growth in pax has outpaced the industry. So I still don't see your argument? AS is beating the industry in pax growth to Mexico since 2010. Or as you put it, taking advantage of the growth better than competitors.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 83):
2011 - +3.8
6 mos 2012 - +4.0%

Again, in 2011 AS's seat growth was 17% and in 2012 it was -3.9% but cumulatively outpaced all other capacity over those 2 years. Even with a dip in 2012, AS is still beating the rest of the airlines over those 2 years total.

Your numbers didn't refute mine. AS is still overall over the last 2 years growing their own network more than the other carriers are. You can only grow so fast at a time when you don't have a ton of new airplanes and we have been grown Mexico capacity and are reevaluating what to do next.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 83):
Add in that Mexico government has also been setting record tourism arrival statistics.

And if you start looking at where in the US they've seen the biggest increase to Mexico, it isn't happening on the west coast, where AS is located. So it's not totally fair to say AS isn't taking advantage of what the Mexican market is doing when most of those new influx of pax are coming from the East Coast. West Coasters are opting to visit Hawaii more often than Mexico now and AS has filled that void. Now if AS opens up an East Coast hub and doesn't add Mexico then I could see the claim. But there aren't that many opportunities left for the picking from the West Coast. As I've shown in an earlier post, California is the strongest market to Mexico from the West Coast and they've seen pax numbers dip big time.


User currently offlinehatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1500 posts, RR: 14
Reply 85, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2012 times:

I'll throw in some more numbers. Where would AS be most likely to add service to Mexico? From the West Coast. So here's the numbers for WA, OR, CA, NV and AZ to Mexico over the last two years for the whole industry.

2011 Pax -3.3%
2012 Pax 5.4%
Since 2010 +1.9%

2011 ASMs -7.2%
2012 ASMs +4.7%
Since 2010 -2.8%

Here they are for AS in the same states to Mexico:

2011 Pax +44.3%
2012 Pax -4.9%
Since 2010 +37.1%

2011 ASMs +51.5%
2012 ASMs -8.3%
Since 2010 +38.9%

How are you not buying those stats? AS would only ever expand to Mexico from the West Coast where they have their operation and from West Coast states they have absolutely expanded their operation at a pace well beyond anyone else. AS did take advantage of Mexicana going bust. Some of that growth was overdoing it though as you can see in 2012 we pulled back a bit. But cumulatively still over the last two years our growth overall has still outpaced the industry. Which parts are you still not buying?


User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3258 posts, RR: 7
Reply 86, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2004 times:

Let's not forget that AS still operates a lot of Mexico flights and routes. While they've right-sized some capacity, it certainly doesn't seem like AS is abandoning the Mexico market. In fact, they've added (or resumed) a number of Mexico routes the last few years: SJC-GDL, SJC-SJD, SAN-PVR.

This still a healthy amount of routes to Mexico so it doesn't tell me they are abandoning the market.

SEA-PVR (seasonal)
SEA-SJD (seasonal)
SFO-SJD
SFO-PVR
SJC-GDL
SJC-SJD (seasonal)
LAX-LTO
LAX-SJD
LAX-GDL
LAX-MEX
LAX-MZT
LAX-PVR
LAX-ZLO
LAX-ZIH
SAN-SJD
SAN-PVR


Yeah, I was hoping LAP would stay, and would like to see SJC-PVR again, but I'm not seeing any question about Latin America having a future in AS's network.


User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 87, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1999 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 81):
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 79):
Mexico might have its ups and downs, but overall its certainly headed upwards, and industry peers seem to agree that looking South is a smart way to go.

I want to put this thread to rest so here is the cold hard truth in numbers. You keep saying demand to Mexico is growing rapidly. However, the numbers don’t tell that story:

AS growth vs the entire industry to Mexico from the US

2005-2012
Industry: ASMs -11.9%, Pax -2.1%
AS: ASMs -6.1%, Pax +4.3%

2010-2012
Industry: ASMs -6.8%, Pax -3.1%
AS: ASMs +12.4%, Pax +19.4%

AS growth vs the entire industry to Mexico from California only

2005-2012
Industry: ASMs -23.6%, Pax -17.9%
AS: ASMs -7.2%, Pax +4.2%

2010-2012
Industry: ASMs -5.9%, Pax +0.5%
AS: ASMs +19.5%, Pax +23.6%

According to the real numbers not only has AS been outperforming the industry in terms of passenger and capacity growth to all of Mexico from the US, it has been outperforming them hands down from the state of California to Mexico. I seriously don't understand how you are concluding that AS is not taking advantage of Mexico growth but other airlines are, or anyone else on this thread for that matter. Even if you just look at the last 2 years with the fuel crisis and H1N1 being over with, AS has blown everyone out of the water. Even from 2005-2012 AS shrunk capacity but had an increase in pax. So you have excellent capacity discipline the rest of the industry didn't have.

Also the claim about this really fast growing Mexico demand appears to be false. Since 2010 US to Mexico passenger numbers are down 3.1%. This is all from publicly available DOT T100 data.

Thanks for taking the time to dig up these numbers. I just didn't have the time to track them down and folks on these boards boil at anecdotal evidence such as the disappearance of cruise ships going from the west coast to Mexico and the fact places like Puerto Vallarta aren't nearly as busy as they were prior to the drug violence.

I think AS will selectively return or ramp up certain markets from the west coast. However, I wouldn't necessarily expect them to lead the pack in doing so. UA is the 800 lb gorilla on the west coast (among airlines flying to Mexico) and they don't have a ton of capacity going to the Mexican riviera either.

[Edited 2013-03-06 14:15:56]

[Edited 2013-03-06 14:17:34]

User currently offlinehatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1500 posts, RR: 14
Reply 88, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1983 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 87):
However, I wouldn't necessarily expect them to lead the pack in doing so. UA is the 800 lb gorilla on the west coast (among airlines flying to Mexico) and they don't have a ton of capacity going to the Mexican riviera either.

I agree. I don't think AS will lead the pack either. But they certainly won't let themselves be left in the dust. Regarding UA, they already compete with AS on SFO/LAX-PVR/SJD and isn't there a rule about only 3 carries on any one route to Mexico? All 4 of those markets are already at the max 3 carriers. So to some extent the biggest West Coast markets AS is in are a little protected in that sense.


User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 89, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1972 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I don't know if there is a three airline limit on service to Mexico destinations. Something tells me the NAFTA agreement made this more of an open skies arrangement but I could be wrong.

User currently onlineaaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 90, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1942 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 89):
I don't know if there is a three airline limit on service to Mexico destinations. Something tells me the NAFTA agreement made this more of an open skies arrangement but I could be wrong.

No, scheduled and charter air services between the U.S. and Mexico are still governed by bilateral. Off the top of my head, routes involving MEX are still limited to two carriers from each side, CUN, GDL, SJD three carriers from each side, Final tier is unlimited rights to/from the smaller ciudades (LAP, HMO, CUU, etc)



With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25989 posts, RR: 22
Reply 91, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1936 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 89):
I don't know if there is a three airline limit on service to Mexico destinations. Something tells me the NAFTA agreement made this more of an open skies arrangement but I could be wrong.

Air transportation was specifically excluded from NAFTA as far as I recall. I find it ironic that U.S.-Mexico, two immediate neighbors that otherwise have long had a free trade agreement, still have such a restrictive air services bilateral, when Canada-U.S. has been open skies since 1995 with major benefits to airlines, passengers and the economies of both countries. In the first year alone after the Canada-U.S. open skies agreement was signed, air travel between the two countries increased 25% and after the first 5 years was up 41%.


User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 92, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1931 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting aaway (Reply 90):
No, scheduled and charter air services between the U.S. and Mexico are still governed by bilateral. Off the top of my head, routes involving MEX are still limited to two carriers from each side, CUN, GDL, SJD three carriers from each side, Final tier is unlimited rights to/from the smaller ciudades (LAP, HMO, CUU, etc)

That seems odd given existing services. So from the U.S. to SJD for example we have UA, VX, AS, AA, DL, Frontier, Spirit and US all serving sunny Cabo. It may be that the Mexican govt may be relaxing that rule to help boost tourism.


User currently onlineaaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 93, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1917 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 92):
That seems odd given existing services. So from the U.S. to SJD for example we have UA, VX, AS, AA, DL, Frontier, Spirit and US all serving sunny Cabo. It may be that the Mexican govt may be relaxing that rule to help boost tourism.

Perhaps I've mislead you here. SJD is limited to 3 carriers (both sides) for a single route (i.e., LAX - SJD (U.S. designations AA, AS and UA, or LAX - GDL (U.S. designations are AS, DL, UA(from CO))



With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5792 posts, RR: 28
Reply 94, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1812 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 79):
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 78):Hawaii isn't exactly a "duopoly" marketplace, particularly when you consider that there are quite a few options in the Bay Area to Hawaii and yet they've continued to grow there.
I think we will very shortly see Hawaii is not a panacea AS might think it is.

We already had commentary from folks like Hawaiian Air in their earning calls that the market to the West Coast has excess capacity and revenues are weakening.

If I can find it, an analyst in last couple of weeks put a paper out on it as well.

I have no affiliation with AS (or any airline) but in my opinion I seriously doubt that Alaska thinks that the Hawaii bubble cannot burst. This happened with intra-California flying way back in the day. It's happened to Mexico to a degree. And it will happen to Hawaii at some point also. They will ultimately "right size" their presence on their island routes as G4, WN, B6, NK, F9, etc add service (should they choose to do so).

With the new NEO order, they are positioning themselves with a lot of flexibility. The thread about ANC-Asia (which I haven't read) might give a glimpse into what they "could" do with the extra capacity. They could also build up LAX more. Or whatever. Who knows?

Anyhow, I just don't think that they are under any notion that they are immune to competitive factors in Hawaii.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13748 posts, RR: 61
Reply 95, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1783 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 94):
I just don't think that they are under any notion that they are immune to competitive factors in Hawaii.

Certainly not, and that's why AS is doing their level best to build their franchise in Hawaii while the opportunity still exists to have limited LCC competition, and particularly before HA's narrowbody Airbus deliveries begin in 2017.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 96, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1712 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting aaway (Reply 93):
Perhaps I've mislead you here. SJD is limited to 3 carriers (both sides) for a single route (i.e., LAX - SJD (U.S. designations AA, AS and UA, or LAX - GDL (U.S. designations are AS, DL, UA(from CO))

Ok that makes sense, thanks for clearing up my confusion!


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...
Tiger Australia : Whats Its Future Direction? posted Sat Apr 21 2012 17:29:56 by IndianicWorld
AS Files Another Motion To Review VX posted Fri Aug 21 2009 10:57:06 by Aviators99
Need AS Tail # For May Flight posted Mon Aug 10 2009 00:38:48 by AA737-823
Whats The Future Of Virgin's 747 400s posted Sun May 31 2009 17:33:28 by GVROY
Air Canada Denies Mexico Flight Refund posted Sat May 23 2009 00:27:51 by YWG737LVR
Whats The Future Hold For Emirates A340-500's? posted Thu Oct 25 2007 15:37:29 by Gilesdavies
Whats The Future Hold For 4 Engines? posted Sun Sep 2 2007 16:58:11 by Aircanada014
Curious As To This B6 Flight posted Thu Jun 28 2007 21:43:14 by B6ramprat
Whats's The Future Of Corsair? posted Mon May 14 2007 21:46:49 by Beaucaire
AS Ends Partnership With Hawaiian... posted Tue Mar 6 2007 22:00:49 by ASMVPGOLD