NYCAAer
Topic Author
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:22 pm

Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:40 pm

I haven't heard much about this, but a flight attendant colleague of mine who had a senior VP on a recent flight from FCO to JFK told me that AA is looking at a 2nd daily flight to EZE from JFK.

I know the flight does well, but nowhere near as well as JFK-GRU, so I was surprised to hear this. With the recent upgrading of JFK-EZE with a 772 for the coming winter season, I don't know what equipment would be used, most likely a 763. And when the 2nd flight would start up, I have no idea. I know AA would like another frequency on MIA-EZE. Any other AAers out there hear about this? I'd be thrilled if it were true. The average seniority of the F/As on this trip is around 30 years, and it would be nice if us "younger" folks (18 years' seniority) would be able to fly the trip.
 
nuggetsyl
Posts: 155
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 11:46 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:43 pm

they would need to get the rights first.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13200
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:44 pm

They must be looking at going after UAL's ORD-EZE route authority which UAL is suspending (again), if so I think AA has an up hill battle to convice the DOT that launching a second daily JFK-EZE is more beneficial to the flying public than awarding the authority to CO (EWR-EZE) or DL (JFK-EZE).
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
MD11junkie
Posts: 2499
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 4:59 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:49 pm

Quoting NYCAAer (Thread starter):
I know the flight does well, but nowhere near as well as JFK-GRU, so I was surprised to hear this. With the recent upgrading of JFK-EZE with a 772 for the coming winter season, I don't know what equipment would be used, most likely a 763. And when the 2nd flight would start up, I have no idea. I know AA would like another frequency on MIA-EZE. Any other AAers out there hear about this? I'd be thrilled if it were true. The average seniority of the F/As on this trip is around 30 years, and it would be nice if us "younger" folks (18 years' seniority) would be able to fly the trip.

I think DL stands more of a chance to start JFK-EZE rather than DOT letting AA start the 2nd daily JFK-EZE. What frequencies would AA use? ORD-EZE is seasonal but DOT, IIRC, has denied several times AA's, DL's requests to have the frequencies removed from UA. Now that CO is at stake, maybe there could be more pressure, but still, I highly doubt it will get anywhere.

Cheers! wave 
Gastón - The MD11junkie
There is no such thing as Boeing vs Airbus as the queen of the skies has three engines, winglets and the sweetest nose!
 
BigGSFO
Posts: 2214
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 5:27 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:53 pm

Quoting STT757 (Reply 2):
They must be looking at going after UAL's ORD-EZE route authority which UAL is suspending (again), if so I think AA has an up hill battle to convice the DOT that launching a second daily JFK-EZE is more beneficial to the flying public than awarding the authority to CO (EWR-EZE) or DL (JFK-EZE).

Perhaps. But it's been rumored on A.net (so you know it must be true  Smile ) that if AA is able to wrangle another frequency to Argentina, they would launch MIA-COR....
 
NYCAAer
Topic Author
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:22 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:00 pm

I was shocked to hear a 2nd JFK-EZE was even being considered, because MIA is higher priority right now. Maybe the VP is mixed up- he is getting close to retirement  Wink
 
CHIFLYGUY
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 10:14 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Fri Sep 15, 2006 12:18 am

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 4):

Perhaps. But it's been rumored on A.net (so you know it must be true Smile ) that if AA is able to wrangle another frequency to Argentina, they would launch MIA-COR....

There are probably two considerations:

1. Which application would be most likely to be successful for them? MIA-COR, opening a new city, might be a better shot but ....

2. It needs to be balanced against speed to market. It would take a while to open a new station. This means they'd miss the peak travel season, and by next summer UA will probably try to show the flight as back on again for the coming winter, to keep the frequencies for themselves.

Argentine frequencies are very precious, the DOT shouldn't let UA squat on them IMO.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Fri Sep 15, 2006 5:03 am

AFAIK, there are zero plans for this. If they do it, AA would need to apply for UA's ORD-EZE frequency. Delta will, without a doubt, apply for JFK-EZE, and win over any AA proposal. AA's only shot at adding a fifth flight to Argentina is proposing a Miami-Cordoba flight, an idea that has been floated around lately.

AA would love to be able to add a third daily MIA-EZE much more than a second daily JFK-EZE, but, of course, they can't. They've been wanting to do so for a few years now, having the flight operate as a daylight and not use any additional equipment.
a.
 
LVTMB
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:18 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Fri Sep 15, 2006 5:31 am

Quoting NYCAAer (Reply 5):
I was shocked to hear a 2nd JFK-EZE was even being considered, because MIA is higher priority right now.

AA currently has two daily 777 frequencies on the MIA-EZE-MIA run and, if I recall correctly, they were planning a third one -- maybe a day time flight. Regardless, AA's consideration of JFK-EZE-JFK might have been driven by the fact that AR is abandoning that route.

MB
 
AJMIA
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 11:29 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:32 am

IMHO before anything new to Argentina I bet we will see another MIA-GRU flight. EZE just got a big upgrade with JFK and MIA #1 going to 777.

With the daylight MIA-GRU flight changing to a eve departure and RG off the MIA radar for now, I bet AA is going to want to add back in another daylight flight at least for the high season... if the can get the authorization.

AJMIA
Lady it's a jet... not a kite.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Fri Sep 15, 2006 7:17 am

Quoting AJMIA (Reply 9):
IMHO before anything new to Argentina I bet we will see another MIA-GRU flight. EZE just got a big upgrade with JFK and MIA #1 going to 777.

With the daylight MIA-GRU flight changing to a eve departure and RG off the MIA radar for now, I bet AA is going to want to add back in another daylight flight at least for the high season... if the can get the authorization.

Agreed.
a.
 
jfk777
Posts: 5841
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:37 am

In the name of protecting AR the whole Argentine economy pays.
 
MD11junkie
Posts: 2499
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 4:59 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:51 am

Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 11):
In the name of protecting AR the whole Argentine economy pays.

WTF has that got to do with anything in this thread? And, what the f*ck are you saying?
There is no such thing as Boeing vs Airbus as the queen of the skies has three engines, winglets and the sweetest nose!
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Fri Sep 15, 2006 9:41 am

Quoting MD11junkie (Reply 12):
Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 11):
In the name of protecting AR the whole Argentine economy pays.

WTF has that got to do with anything in this thread? And, what the f*ck are you saying?

Very simple. The Argentine government has a very restrictive air treaty with the United States. Now, I don't see how it helps AR. It could, but AR obviously doesn't take advantage of it with just one daily flight to Miami.

The US would be more than willing to have Open Skies with Argentina, which be of great benefit to all travelers.
a.
 
flyguy1
Posts: 1660
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 1999 9:45 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:12 am

Anyone know of whether or not AA was approved for the extra JFK/MIA-GRU services they applied for?
727, L1011, MD80, A300, 777-200, 737-300, 737-700, 747-400, 757-200, 737-800, A320. E190, E135, 767-200, CRJ9
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:39 am

Quoting Flyguy1 (Reply 14):
Anyone know of whether or not AA was approved for the extra JFK/MIA-GRU services they applied for?

No idea, but what they want is 7 more MIA-GRU frequencies (to make MIA-GRU 4x daily), from what I have been told.
a.
 
Argentina
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 12:05 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sat Sep 16, 2006 3:22 am

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 13):
Very simple. The Argentine government has a very restrictive air treaty with the United States. Now, I don't see how it helps AR. It could, but AR obviously doesn't take advantage of it with just one daily flight to Miami.

54 weekly frequencies for each country (Argentina-USA) are more than enough. Getting more would imply almost an open skies agreement.

AR flies 6 weekly frequencies nowadays, and LAN Argentina will be flying 7 weekly to MIA from October. That means 13 weekly for Argentina flag. Argentina (with the actual fleet size of its carriers) cannot cover more than that by now, and fares are really very competitive, so why should the Argentine Government be more flexible? No need to destroy our country anymore.
 
AA767400
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2001 2:04 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sat Sep 16, 2006 3:30 am

Mark, do you know what is going on with MIA-Periera?

I know that was something AA has been looking at....
"The low fares airline."
 
panamair
Posts: 3761
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sat Sep 16, 2006 3:47 am

Quoting Argentina (Reply 16):
Getting more would imply almost an open skies agreement.

And what is wrong with that?

Quoting Argentina (Reply 16):
so why should the Argentine Government be more flexible? No need to destroy our country anymore.

Destroy our country? Or destroy AR? What about the Argentinean PEOPLE and Businesses that would benefit from more choices, lower fares, etc.?
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sat Sep 16, 2006 8:41 am

Quoting Argentina (Reply 16):
54 weekly frequencies for each country (Argentina-USA) are more than enough. Getting more would imply almost an open skies agreement.

If it was more than enough, AA and DL would not be wanting for frequencies.

Quoting Argentina (Reply 16):

AR flies 6 weekly frequencies nowadays, and LAN Argentina will be flying 7 weekly to MIA from October. That means 13 weekly for Argentina flag. Argentina (with the actual fleet size of its carriers) cannot cover more than that by now, and fares are really very competitive, so why should the Argentine Government be more flexible? No need to destroy our country anymore.

That is pretty sad that you think that way. Open Skies means more flights and lower fares. It makes it more affordable for Argentines to travel, its makes it more affordable for cargo to get to Argentina, and it makes it more affordable for business to be done with Argentina. Many Argentines cannot afford to travel because of the ridiculous and restrictive air treaty set between Argentina and the USA that creates extremely high airfares because the 68 weekly US-Argentina flights do nothing to meet demand.
a.
 
BigGSFO
Posts: 2214
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 5:27 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sat Sep 16, 2006 11:50 am

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 19):
Many Argentines cannot afford to travel because of the ridiculous and restrictive air treaty set between Argentina and the USA that creates extremely high airfares because the 68 weekly US-Argentina flights do nothing to meet demand.

Well according to Wikpedia (so it's is suspect), Argentina is South America's strongest economy. So yes, 68 weekly flights is not enough to meet passenger and cargo demands of the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_South_America

Argentina's economy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Argentina
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sat Sep 16, 2006 11:55 am

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 20):
Well according to Wikpedia (so it's is suspect), Argentina is South America's strongest economy.

Most would probably argue that Chile and Uruaguay are the strongest economies, but Argentina has the highest per capita GDP. None the less, doesn't change the fact that, as you said, 68 weekly flights isn't enough.
a.
 
CHIFLYGUY
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 10:14 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 12:10 am

SFO, Argentina is prone to periodic financial crises, like most Latin American economies. That's really one of the big problems down there. Economies are "strong" for a while, but corruption, lack of effective property rights and the rule of law, ethnic tensions (not really in Argentina, but elsewhere), international trading flows, and poor government policy bring about a crisis.

Chile is a notable exception. It is by far the best Latin American economy, but is much smaller than places like Brazil and Argentina.
 
Argentina
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 12:05 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 12:32 am

Quoting Panamair (Reply 18):
Destroy our country? Or destroy AR? What about the Argentinean PEOPLE and Businesses that would benefit from more choices, lower fares, etc.?



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 19):
Open Skies means more flights and lower fares. It makes it more affordable for Argentines to travel, its makes it more affordable for cargo to get to Argentina, and it makes it more affordable for business to be done with Argentina. Many Argentines cannot afford to travel because of the ridiculous and restrictive air treaty set between Argentina and the USA that creates extremely high airfares because the 68 weekly US-Argentina flights do nothing to meet demand.



Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 20):
Well according to Wikpedia (so it's is suspect), Argentina is South America's strongest economy. So yes, 68 weekly flights is not enough to meet passenger and cargo demands of the future.

According to the US Dept of State website, there are many countries that could be of great interest for the US to have an Open Skies Agreement with and they do not.

Think of Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Australia, South Africa, Spain, UK, Russia, Japan, China and Argentina. There are no open skies agreements (OSA) between US and these countries. Check the list here:

http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/2006/22281.htm

In Latin America, the only countries that signed an OSA with US are:

Chile, Peru, Paraguay and Uruguay, plus all central american countries from Panama to Guatemala. The rest, protect, like Australia and many others in the world do. So, should we give what US CARRIERS (not passengers) want that easy? Fares are pretty competitive in this market, compared to many others. OSA's are very good for countries with similar economies, but not for the developed-undeveloped pairs. Before opening the skies, the undeveloped countries must have an airline structure to afford that. Argentina and many others in the region, do not have it now. And you have to be careful and pay attention to what ALL your main neighbours do. Argentina is not "ridiculous and restrictive", think of it.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:06 am

Quoting Argentina (Reply 23):
Chile, Peru, Paraguay and Uruguay, plus all central american countries from Panama to Guatemala. The rest, protect, like Australia and many others in the world do. So, should we give what US CARRIERS (not passengers) want that easy? Fares are pretty competitive in this market, compared to many others. OSA's are very good for countries with similar economies, but not for the developed-undeveloped pairs. Before opening the skies, the undeveloped countries must have an airline structure to afford that. Argentina and many others in the region, do not have it now. And you have to be careful and pay attention to what ALL your main neighbours do. Argentina is not "ridiculous and restrictive", think of it.

You are very wrongly assuming that just because it would not benefit Aerolineas Argentinas it would not benefit Argentina. So, maybe it wouldn't benefit AR. Who cares? Is it Argentina's fault AR is poorly ran? No. Increased service by US airlines means more tourism, more trade, more travel, and a boost to the overall economy. Argentines shouldn't suffer to protect an airline that can't get its act together. And to say that $800-$900 round-trip airfare during the low season is "competitive" is ridiculous.

Quoting Argentina (Reply 23):
Think of Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Australia, South Africa, Spain, UK, Russia, Japan, China and Argentina. There are no open skies agreements (OSA) between US and these countries. Check the list here:

Nobody ever argued that only Argentina should have Open Skies. Open Skies with those countries would be very much welcomed. Still, however, Argentina's restrictions are much worse than most others.

Brazil - Similar situation to Argentina. The allowed 104 frequencies per country is too little. However, the Brazilian government has become lineant lately, and has allowed both AA and DL to go over their alloted frequencies to benefit the traveling public.

Mexico - Mexico's air treaty with the US is very, very lose, and only limits the number of airlines on city pairs (2 US/2 Mexico for business centres, 3 US/3 Mexico for beach destinations). It has zero limits on frequencies and is extremely lax.

Australia - The air treaty heavily protects Qantas, however there it has almost no limits on frequenices or city pairs and there is very sufficient US-Australia service.

Colombia - What was once a very restrictive air treaty become much less restrictive this past January.

South Africa - Air treaty restricts flights to 21 from each side, but who cares? Only half those frequencies are used and it covers demand.

Spain - Very lax air treaty. Not Open Skies, but there are little limits and it allows the USA-Spain market to be very well served.

UK - Open Skies outside of Gatwick and Heathrow.

Japan - Not heavily restrictive and allows the market to be well served.

Russia - The market is well served as is.

China - Similar to Argentina. Very restrictive, hurts the consumer.

Does Argentina "need" Open Skies with the US? No, they don't. They need a less restrictive air treaty. The US-Spain air treaty is not Open Skies, but it allows the market to be well served. Same with US-South Africa, US-Mexico, US-Japan, etc., etc. US-Argentina does not.
a.
 
LVTMB
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:18 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 4:30 am

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 24):
You are very wrongly assuming that just because it would not benefit Aerolineas Argentinas it would not benefit Argentina. So, maybe it wouldn't benefit AR. Who cares? Is it Argentina's fault AR is poorly ran? No. Increased service by US airlines means more tourism, more trade, more travel, and a boost to the overall economy. Argentines shouldn't suffer to protect an airline that can't get its act together. And to say that $800-$900 round-trip airfare during the low season is "competitive" is ridiculous.

Very well put. 100% agree.

LVTMB
 
Marambio
Posts: 1145
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:41 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 4:39 am

A new agreement with the USA would hurt both Aerolíneas in particular and Argentina as a whole. Aerolíneas employes thousands of Argentine people accross the nation, pays its taxes to the Argentine Government and flies to a plethora of destinations inside Argentina, most of which are economically backed by profits earned on international routes.

US airlines, on the other hand, employ just a couple of hundred Argentines mainly in Buenos Aires, pay their taxes to the US Government and, out of all the airports in the country, they only fly to Ezeiza. Yes, their crews go to hotels in Buenos Aires, but that still does not put them on the same level. It is obvious that our economy makes much more money with Aerolíneas than with any international airline.

Indeed Argentina is per capita the biggest economy in South America, but Brazil is way bigger than us and Sao Paulo has become the region's economical capital. Besides, the prices on the Argentina-USA market are already pretty reasonable.

I completely understand US airlines' will of getting a new bilateral agreement, but on our part it would not mean anything significant for the economy. It would not make any sense for us to get a new bilateral agreement, let alone an OSA with the United States.

As for the routes, I highly doubt American will get a second JFK-EZE. Since Aerolíneas cancelled their flight, American plays a monopoly, which (I hope) it is a big con while assigning routes. Delta already applied to the FAA for JFK-EZE and got it denied in favour of Continental, which proposed EWR-IAH-EZE, the only flight from Argentina to any US city west of the Mississippi. So this would be DL's chance to get the route. However, I am still reluctant to believe United will simply give up their frequencies, focusing on their 1x daily IAD-EZE.

Saludos,
Marambio

[Edited 2006-09-16 21:41:54]
Aerolíneas Argentinas - La Argentina que levanta vuelo
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:07 am

Quoting Marambio (Reply 26):
A new agreement with the USA would hurt both Aerolíneas in particular and Argentina as a whole. Aerolíneas employes thousands of Argentine people accross the nation, pays its taxes to the Argentine Government and flies to a plethora of destinations inside Argentina, most of which are economically backed by profits earned on international routes.

AR flies one measly daily flight to the United States that relies almost entirely on O&D from Miami. How on earth does more services hurt them? It won't.

Quoting Marambio (Reply 26):
As for the routes, I highly doubt American will get a second JFK-EZE. Since Aerolíneas cancelled their flight, American plays a monopoly, which (I hope) it is a big con while assigning routes. Delta already applied to the FAA for JFK-EZE and got it denied in favour of Continental, which proposed EWR-IAH-EZE, the only flight from Argentina to any US city west of the Mississippi. So this would be DL's chance to get the route.

So here you are boasting about how great it is that there is a limit in frequencies, yet you talk about how it is a negative that AA is the only airline on JFK-EZE. News flash: That's because of the restrictive US-Argentina air treaty.

Also, AA flies DFW-EZE, also west of the Mississippi.
a.
 
Marambio
Posts: 1145
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:41 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:48 am

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 27):
AR flies one measly daily flight to the United States that relies almost entirely on O&D from Miami. How on earth does more services hurt them? It won't.

It will. American is the strongest player on the Argentina-USA market and it has huge hubs at MIA, DFW and JFK - it is able to get people from anywhere in Asia and North America to Buenos Aires. American can dump prices on the route because then it has all the connecting pax to other destinations. Aerolíneas will never be able to win a price war against American.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 27):
So here you are boasting about how great it is that there is a limit in frequencies, yet you talk about how it is a negative that AA is the only airline on JFK-EZE. News flash: That's because of the restrictive US-Argentina air treaty

Really? Then why did UA and AR cancel EZE-JFK? They had the frequencies and the planes. Actually, I still don't understand why UA left - Argentina was under CAT2 (thanks to AA's lobby in Washington) at that time and thus AR had its frequencies blocked. A perfect scenery for any US airline.

And what do we win having AA twice daily to New York? Prices would be the same, maybe higher. It is not that AA would start a price war with itself, would it?

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 27):
Also, AA flies DFW-EZE, also west of the Mississippi.

Forgot Dallas is west of the Mississippi. Thanks for the correction.

Saludos,
Marambio

[Edited 2006-09-16 22:49:37]
Aerolíneas Argentinas - La Argentina que levanta vuelo
 
CHIFLYGUY
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 10:14 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:44 am

Quoting Marambio (Reply 26):
A new agreement with the USA would hurt both Aerolíneas in particular and Argentina as a whole. Aerolíneas employes thousands of Argentine people accross the nation, pays its taxes to the Argentine Government and flies to a plethora of destinations inside Argentina, most of which are economically backed by profits earned on international routes.

US airlines, on the other hand, employ just a couple of hundred Argentines mainly in Buenos Aires, pay their taxes to the US Government and, out of all the airports in the country, they only fly to Ezeiza. Yes, their crews go to hotels in Buenos Aires, but that still does not put them on the same level. It is obvious that our economy makes much more money with Aerolíneas than with any international airline.

This is faulty economic thinking. It does not account for comparative advantage, the benefits to the consumer vs. the benefits to the employess of AR (who aren't that dependent on the US routes anyway), and the fact that jobs are in fact a cost (i.e., labor cost). This sort of logic would suggest that any country should be 100% self-sufficient since that would maximize the number local jobs. However, reality doesn't work that way. Thinking like this is, alas, with strong local lobbies to back it up politically, one reason Latin America so trails the developed world economically.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:14 am

Quoting Marambio (Reply 28):

It will. American is the strongest player on the Argentina-USA market and it has huge hubs at MIA, DFW and JFK - it is able to get people from anywhere in Asia and North America to Buenos Aires. American can dump prices on the route because then it has all the connecting pax to other destinations. Aerolíneas will never be able to win a price war against American.

AA adding a third daily MIA-EZE flight will do little to hurt AR. LAN Argentina is a bigger threat than Aerolineas Argentinas.

Quoting Marambio (Reply 28):
Really? Then why did UA and AR cancel EZE-JFK?

UA moved it to IAD because they ended their JFK and MIA focus cities. AR
simply didn't have the planes, and still doesn't, to fly non-stop to JFK.

Quoting Marambio (Reply 28):

And what do we win having AA twice daily to New York? Prices would be the same, maybe higher. It is not that AA would start a price war with itself, would it?

More schedule choices, more capacity, and lower fares. I would love for you to exaplin to me how, if an airline doubles capacity on a route, fares will go up.

Your line of thinking doesn't surprise me. It is why countries like Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela are not stronger today. A bunch of nationalist that are doing nothing but hurting themselves by making the markets so closed.
a.
 
Marambio
Posts: 1145
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:41 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:36 am

Good evening CHYFLYGUY,

Quoting CHIFLYGUY (Reply 29):
This is faulty economic thinking.

There's no such thing as a "correct" or "faulty" economic thiking, sir. My economic thinking might be "faulty" from your point of view, but that doesn't make it "faulty economic thinking". Don't try to monopolize economic thiking with your personal views of how an economy should be or work.

Quoting CHIFLYGUY (Reply 29):
It does not account for comparative advantage, the benefits to the consumer vs. the benefits to the employess of AR

Why not? If Aerolíneas does well, the employee of AR gets his salary. He will spend a big part of his salary in goods, etc. Then the economy will work better. If I had to choose between paying less for an airplane ticket to the USA and my country's economy working better, I'd go with the latter. With all due respect, yours is a pretty selfish way of thinking.

Quoting CHIFLYGUY (Reply 29):
(who aren't that dependent on the US routes anyway)

Domestic routes in Argentina have their fares regulated by the Government on a scheme called bandas tarifarias (BDs). Although there was a 20% rise on the BDs less than a month ago, they are still not enough to cover all the costs. Aerolíneas is currently flying to most domestic destinations without making any single cent out them - for instance, AEP-RGA has a break-even of 107%. Aerolíneas needs its international network's foreign currency influx to maintain most of its domestic network.

EZE-MIA is one of AR's very few international routes that is currently making money, together with the flights to Australia/NZ and some regional routes. The European network is not performing well, for its yields are really low.

Should we have more airlines linking Argentina and the USA, it would not hurt only Aerolíneas, but also all the other competitors, both from Argentina and from the USA. US airlines are currently making lots of money with their EZE flights, contrary to most other international routes, where there is a huge overcapacity, which has meant thousands of employees loosing their jobs and even more employees seeing large parts of their income or even their pensions vanish.

Quoting CHIFLYGUY (Reply 29):
and the fact that jobs are in fact a cost (i.e., labor cost).

Again, I beg to differ. According to my perception, jobs are not a cost but something positive. The more people have jobs, the more people have money to insert into the economy, with production growing and so on. The cost of Aerolíneas paying salaries will then be reverted because there will be more people buying tickets to any destination.

Quoting CHIFLYGUY (Reply 29):
This sort of logic would suggest that any country should be 100% self-sufficient since that would maximize the number local jobs.

We have had a very long story of both self-sufficiency and wild-liberal-open-market in Argentina and none of them ever worked. It is obvious a country must not be self-sufficient, but the market -in my opinion- must not be open to anything at any cost - it ends up hurting the economy even more than monopolizing it.

Quoting CHIFLYGUY (Reply 29):
However, reality doesn't work that way.

I am afraid "reality" is a terribly subjective word, and your reality in the USA is certainly not the same than our reality in Argentina. In order to experience our definition of reality, you should live here. Reading The Economist every week will not help you.

Quoting CHIFLYGUY (Reply 29):
Thinking like this is, alas, with strong local lobbies to back it up politically, one reason Latin America so trails the developed world economically.

Despite what some people up there say, I don't think countries such as Argentina, Uruguay or Chile "so trail the developed world economically." Of course we have had our problems, but we are all doing better now that they let us do things our own way. What works in the USA and in Europe does not necessarily work in Latin America.

Saludos,
Marambio

[Edited 2006-09-17 01:37:16]
Aerolíneas Argentinas - La Argentina que levanta vuelo
 
Marambio
Posts: 1145
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:41 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:01 am

Good evening Mark,

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 30):

AA adding a third daily MIA-EZE flight will do little to hurt AR. LAN Argentina is a bigger threat than Aerolineas Argentinas.

It will hurt Aerolíneas because, as I explained on my previous post, the domestic network heavily relies on the international one. Miami is one of the very few international destinations that is currently making money, together with Australia/NZ and some regionals, such as Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. If a price war begins, Aerolíneas will be forced to stop flying to Miami and, without the money made out from that route, some domestic routes may be halted. This may not be important on a country the size of Germany or France, but Argentina is 2.700.000 sq km big and some areas depend on air links to survive.

Lan Argentina is not a bigger threat since it is indirectly a Oneworld member, and it would be unwise for American to hurt one of its partners. With AA having a third frequency to Miami and its partner Lan Argentina also operating the route, it is almost impossible that the only outsider, Aerolíneas, finds a niche on the market.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 30):

UA moved it to IAD because they ended their JFK and MIA focus cities.

Now it makes sense. I did not know that.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 30):

AR simply didn't have the planes, and still doesn't, to fly non-stop to JFK.

I am certain that should JFK have had good results, Aerolíneas would have found an airplane to keep on flying there. The fact of having American as the only other airline on the route, which has a strong hub and a huge amount of connections from New York, meant it was impossible for them to continue.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 30):

More schedule choices, more capacity, and lower fares. I would love for you to exaplin to me how, if an airline doubles capacity on a route, fares will go up.

Sure, let me explain you. If American doubles capacity on the JFK-EZE route and faces absolutely no competition from anyone, why would they lower their fares? After all, if you want to get from EZE to JFK you must fly them!

Instead of having American with two daily flights, it would make more sense to give those frequencies to another airline, be it Continental from Newark, Delta from JFK or anyone. I just don't see how two flights operated by one airline are better than two flights operated by two different airlines.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 30):
Your line of thinking doesn't surprise me. It is why countries like Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela are not stronger today. A bunch of nationalist that are doing nothing but hurting themselves by making the markets so closed.

Thanks for the compliment. As I told CHYFLYGUY, I am here to discuss my opinions with other people. It is nice to have such a well-spirited discussion with you.

Have a nice weekend, Mark.

Saludos,
Marambio
Aerolíneas Argentinas - La Argentina que levanta vuelo
 
CHIFLYGUY
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 10:14 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 10:17 am

Marambio,

When thinking about the economic impact, it helps to take a smaller example of, say, the household, and use that to think about the issues. It's not 100% analogous to a country, but it is close.

Consider the amount of labor it takes to wash the dishes, prepare dinner, do laundry, clean, maintain the structure, the yard, the car, etc. and assume you are doing this yourself. Unless you happen to enjoy one of these activities, you're likely to view them as a cost to you. Time spent mowing the grass or repairing the roof could be used playing with your children, reading a book, browsing a.net or any number of enjoyable activities. You could be using the time to add an addition to your home instead of repairing the existing structure, for example. Hence, you are likely to avail yourself of any labor savings you can. Clearly, the work spent on non-leisure activities in the home is not a "benefit", but rather a cost. If you didn't have to pay it, you could spend that time elsewhere. This is also true if you are paying money - of course you are going to pick the lower cost service provider, other things being equal.

Consider also what life was like when people were more or less self-sufficient with household production. This was a terrible, hardscrabble existence. I've seen photographs of the settlers who moved to the American midwest when it was new. The women look like they are in their 60's when they were in their 30's. Surival dependend on hours of back breaking labor every day. Bringing in more settlers brought the opportunity for a division of labor, specialization, trade, etc. raising standards of living.

The same things are true of countries, generally. The less labor that we have to spend on something (i.e., the greater our productivity), the more labor we can spend on other things. The prices of TV's, etc. fall on a real basis as they get steadily cheaper to produce. This makes the average person richer. Even in the last 10 years in the US, outsourcing has had enormous consumer benefits, leading to large improvements in standards of living. Comparing the average home, car, etc. today with even 1990 is a stark difference. We spend less time making things that other people can make more cheaply (because of labor costs and friendly regulatory regimes) and focus on higher value added activities.

Now clearly there is a down side to this. Everyone benefits a little from trading and productivity gains such as factory production. But the people who previously did that work are very hard hit. Consider the 45,000 Ford employess who are about to lose their jobs. Or the tens of thousands of airline jobs lost recently. These people did nothing wrong per se. (Though one can argue that employee unions in both of these cases contributed to current woes). But now they are unemployed and suffering. Particularly the auto workers are facing significant cuts in living standards. It's true they made a lot of money for largely unskilled labor in many cases, but these were not people living like millionaires, but rather average, ordinary citizens and members of our community who are now suffering. As a society we need to be there for them to help mitigate the pain. But we shouldn't lock ourselves into a current mode of production as a cure. Rather, this tends only to make companies more sickly and lock us into a standard of living that will seem crude later. After all, what would have happened if we'd kept the buggy manufacturers in business? (It's worth noting that the vast bulk of manufacturing job losses came from productivity increases, however, not import substitution. In 2002, the US still accounted for 25% of total global value added in manufacturing, vs. only 8% for China - manufacturing is hardly dying in the US).

And of course, you can't import everything. And it is probably worth being self-sufficient to some degree in critical commodities vital to national security. But that is actually of more relevance to a country like the US than Argentina.

The best defense of free trade principles I've seen is Henry George's "Protection or Free Trade", an old tract, but one still in print. I highly recommend it. (His argument for free trade stands alone even if you reject his land tax proposals).

I firmly believe Argentina - and the United States - would benefit with great flight access. I work for a company that recently relocated some operations to Buenos Aires. There is great opportunity to expansion, but every decision is going to likely be a toss up between Argentina and Brazil, where we also have substantial operations. And flight availability - and cost of course - is a key factor in the decision. Open skies might be bad for AR (and for AA and other American carriers who make great profits on these routes), but could be very good for attracting business.
 
Marambio
Posts: 1145
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:41 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 12:30 pm

CHYFLYGUY,

Your nice post would fit perfectly on an ideal world, where jobs are taken for granted for everyone. However, things are pretty different and those people, especially the ones that are +50 years old, have very few chances of getting a new job.

We, in Argentina, had both self-suffiency and open-market periods. None of them worked. During the self-sufficiency era, products were terribly bad, for there were just a couple of local manufacturers who knew they had no one to fight against. This meant we had very few brands to choose, and all of them offered badly-made, utterly-expensive products.

During the Carlos Menem administration (1989-1999), an IMF-backed open market policy was applied. Argentina was said to be "the IMF's best pupil" on the subject, and our case was studied pretty much everywhere in the developing world. With the peso tied on a 1-to-1 basis to the US dollar, we had all our goods imported from Europe, the USA, China and Brazil (which devaluated the real in 1999, 3 years before us). The Government gave up all state-owned companies to anyone who offered the best price (who cares about the holding's actual possibility of managing and modernizing a former state-run company?), Argentine industries all closed down, unemployment grew from around 5% in 1985 to 15% in 1999, and in order to pay foreign loans we had to borrow money - from abroad! The majority of that foreign debt came from the need to keep the peso tied to the US dollar (the Central Bank could not issue pesos if its reserves didn't have that exact amount of dollars), not helped at all with our exports becoming weaker and weaker everyday and imports playing a growing major role in our economy. Except for some basic stuff, pretty much everything, varying from cars to chewing gums, was made abroad.

The situation became unsustainable, we all knew it, but nobody did anything to avoid it. Fernando De la Rúa's administration (1999-2001) was decided to keep the peso-dollar convertibility, even if it meant borrowing more money from abroad and having all our industries bankrupt. Indeed did the middle and upper classes' living standars improve, as we could travel freely to everywhere in the world with our over-valued pesos and buy cheap, foreign-made stuff. We all had big TVs, drove cool cars, drunk foreign beers and wines, and ate French cheese. But at what expense? People who lost their jobs when most industries closed down were not able to find a new job, and for the first time ever, Argentines started to leave the country not because of political prosecution, like in the past, but because they couldn't find any job to feed their families. Hundreds of thousands left to the USA, to Europe, some even went to Israel, which at that time was experiencing the worst part of the 2nd Intifada. "I'd rather die because of a suicide bomber than of hunger", I recall an Argentine who moved to Tel-Aviv said on TV. Meanwhile, due to lack of ressources, provinces started to pay salaries in bonds, which were to be converted into pesos some years later. The National Government copied that policy and issued the LECOP (Provincial Debt Cancellation Bonds), with which it paid the provinces the debt it had with them. So, in Argentina there were about 15 different currencies circulating - Peso, LECOP, Patacón (Buenos Aires), BOFE (Entre Ríos), Quebracho (Chaco), LECOR (Córdoba), etc.

For instance, this is what a Patacón looked like:


Then the 2001 hecatombe (roughly translated as "huge catastrophe") came. The De la Rúa Administration, which at that time was actually run by the Minister of Economics, Domingo Cavallo, imposed a blockade on bank acounts, allowing people to withdraw only 250 pesos per month from their accounts, popularly known as corralito (something like a child's playpen). The middle class, which was already fighting to survive because of the lack of jobs, exploded. Millions of people countrywide went to the streets and made Cavallo and then De la Rúa step down.

We are now recovering from the 2001 hecatombe, but it is stuck in our memories. Our economic growth is due to industries re-opening after the 300% peso devaluation. This has created jobs, since the big TVs, the foreign wines and beers and the French cheese, we are not able to afford anymore. We now buy local stuff, which is actually pretty good - costumers improved their taste during the 1990s.

What we all want now is to find a middle term between self-sufficiency and an open market. As I said, we tried both and none was successful, for different reasons. We understand globalization is at its height and it would be stupid and unfeasable to remain outside, but we also firmly believe what happened during the 1990s and the early 2000s must not happen again.

That's why most Argentine members who have contributed to this thread believe the bilateral agreement with the USA must not be renegociated. We learned the hard way that cheap prices are not necessarily better. LAPA and Southern Winds also took advantage of the current bilateral agreement, with flights to Atlanta and Miami respectively. Southern Winds was forced to stop flying to Miami and Aerolíneas saw its frequencies freezed due to a unilateral decision taken by the USA, namely downgrading Argentina to CAT2. This created a harder scenery for Argentine companies, which had to lease foreign-registered airplanes to fly to your country. Meanwhile, American became the strong player on the market, as it was one of the very few lucky airlines to fly between your country and mine. Aerolíneas, just like Lan Argentina and any other national airline, contributes to the national economy with salaries, taxes and other things. It would be shooting ourselves in our own foot to give up the Argentina-USA airline market to the best tender, as we did with everything else during the 1990s.

Saludos,
Marambio
Aerolíneas Argentinas - La Argentina que levanta vuelo
 
CHIFLYGUY
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 10:14 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 12:42 pm

Marambio,

For what its worth, I would agree with you that small countries like Argentina are very vulnerable to being whipsawed by international capital flows. I'm not sure anyone has figured out a way to eliminate this, except to be too big to avoid it (e.g., the United States). Even economically larger countries like the UK have had bitter experiences with currency speculators. Come to think of it, even the USA couldn't sustain Bretton Woods.

At the end of the day, Argentines such as yourself can elect to do anything you want. In this case of the air treaty, I'd argue that it benefits the USA carriers on the route far more than it does Argentina. But that's your country's decision. Seek out your middle way. But I suspect that, given how things normally go in Latin America, another hecatombe is only a matter of time. I hope not, however.

I'm curious to know what you think of the example of Chile, which seems to have been the most stable economy in South America. It is a rather free market place. There's a somewhat lower GDP per capital than Argentina (higher than Brazil though), but it has been much more stable as far as I know and hasn't experienced things like people having their savings wiped out in a forced currency conversion.

Interestingly, Uruguay's GDP per capita is even higher than Argentina, though I'm not familiar at all with that country's economics.
 
Marambio
Posts: 1145
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:41 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:01 pm

CHIFLYGUY,

Quoting CHIFLYGUY (Reply 35):

At the end of the day, Argentines such as yourself can elect to do anything you want. In this case of the air treaty, I'd argue that it benefits the USA carriers on the route far more than it does Argentina.

It will certainly benefit the USA carriers more than the Argentine ones, and that's why I don't see the point of signing it - a bilateral agreement is supposed to benefit both countries, not just one.

As for your questions about Chile and Uruguay, I'll send you a private message.

Saludos,
Marambio
Aerolíneas Argentinas - La Argentina que levanta vuelo
 
Neo
Posts: 730
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2001 8:21 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:02 am

Quoting Marambio (Reply 36):
It will certainly benefit the USA carriers more than the Argentine ones, and that's why I don't see the point of signing it - a bilateral agreement is supposed to benefit both countries, not just one.

Marambio, I totally agree with the points made on your previous e-mails. Argentina should not sign OS agreement with USA now, and in my opinion neither Brazil.

Rgs,

Neo
 
incitatus
Posts: 2700
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:04 pm

Quoting Neo (Reply 37):
Marambio, I totally agree with the points made on your previous e-mails. Argentina should not sign OS agreement with USA now, and in my opinion neither Brazil.

I disagree with that. For the lack of flying rights there are very few flights between Northeast Brazil and the US. That, coupled with the visa requirement for American tourists, saps the development of strong tourist flows from the US. Hundreds of thousands of jobs that should exist don't. The result is that many young people that could have a future working in the tourism industry are growing up to be criminals.
Stop pop up ads
 
Argentina
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 12:05 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:09 pm

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 30):
Your line of thinking doesn't surprise me. It is why countries like Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela are not stronger today. A bunch of nationalist that are doing nothing but hurting themselves by making the markets so closed.

So you mean that if we open our market completely, we will be stronger? Yeah, in poverty, for sure... Anyway, it's nice thinking different. I love diversity.
 
incitatus
Posts: 2700
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:45 pm

Quoting Argentina (Reply 39):
So you mean that if we open our market completely, we will be stronger? Yeah, in poverty, for sure...

Argentina is at the tail end of a 60-year economic decline. Argentina lacks a strong political class (Brazil lacks that too). Argentina also lacks strong corporate leadership. Open or closed markets won't change that overnight. But with closed markets, there is certainty that Argentina residents will be fed products that resemble those offered in East Germany in the 80s.
Stop pop up ads
 
Box37
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 4:59 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:14 am

Quoting CHIFLYGUY (Reply 35):
Interestingly, Uruguay's GDP per capita is even higher than Argentina, though I'm not familiar at all with that country's economics.

Simple answer to this question and also applies to Chile.
I am going to put it in a politically correct way by stating that the "quality" of their politicians and respect for the institutions and the law is superior than in Argentina.

As far as Open Skies, that is a troubled question. In large economies free competition is the best cure for all problems, but when you have disparities between competitors, the one with the healthy balance sheet can artificially deflate prices with the sole purpose of putting the other out of business. AA is known to be very good at this game.
Box
 
LVICS
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 10:45 pm

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:31 am

Quoting Box37 (Reply 41):
the "quality" of their politicians and respect for the institutions and the law is superior than in Argentina.

I don't know enough about what happens in our neighbour countries, but for sure our politicians are not very prone to respect the law or any other rules (except for those they like, of course). I'd even go one step further and say that, as a general rule, Argentinians are not prone to respect the law and even that respecting the rules is not seen as a value in itself. Opposite to that, breaking the rules and getting away with it is regarded as a smart behaviour among us.
 
MD11junkie
Posts: 2499
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 4:59 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:52 am

Quoting Box37 (Reply 41):
As far as Open Skies, that is a troubled question. In large economies free competition is the best cure for all problems, but when you have disparities between competitors, the one with the healthy balance sheet can artificially deflate prices with the sole purpose of putting the other out of business.

Does Chapter 11 ring a bell to you?

Cheers! wave 
Gastón - The MD11junkie
There is no such thing as Boeing vs Airbus as the queen of the skies has three engines, winglets and the sweetest nose!
 
argiepilot
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:38 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Tue Sep 19, 2006 6:00 am

I have read this thread with interest. Both sides have valid arguments. Based on the fact that I live in Argentina, I tend to believe that I understand where Marambio and others with similar views are coming from. I respect their opinions but I don't fully agree with them. At least for now . . .

When you think of the issue from a consumers' stand point few would argue that further deregulation (including Open Skies Agreements) of international air transportation wouldn't be to their benefit. It will translate into more (i) routes/destinations, (ii) frequencies/lower fares, (iii) more competition/better service, (iv) tourism/business travel, etc. Regulation means reduced competition and higher fares.

I would even go a step further and suggest that domestic routes in Argentina should be fully deregulated. Anyone who has lived in Argentina for the past decades knows how costly, crappy, and inefficient domestic flights are over here. The only restriction that I would impose to a foreign carrier to fly domestic routes in Argentina would be that it had to employ Argentine workers to conduct their operations in Argentina. Would that be feasible?

Still, from a consumer stand point, where has protectionism taken us? To a monopolistic carrier that delivers crappy expensive service with an obsolete fleet. Shouldn't the flying public deserve better?

Finally, many in Argentina (myself included) have strong positive feelings towards AR that cannot be rationally explained. I even have friends working there that will surely loose their jobs a while after open skies for it would be impossible to AR to subsist in such a competitive scenario. The question then is how do we resolve this conflict of interests?
 
TBCITDG
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2004 5:17 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:30 pm

Since when has AR been an absolute monopoly?
I will not go through the list of all the carriers that came and went but some that do come to mind are Southern Winds, Dinar and so forth. Why is AR to blame for their failed attempts to serve the Argentine consumer?
I disagree as well with your comments about the state of service that AR offers. Especially in flight. Ever flown domestic on a US carrier?
Sure they have a some way to go but all in all AR offers an efficient service on board.

Should K allow foreign airlines to fly domestically in Argentina?
I would say NO. Look at what took place as far as LA is concerned.

Are they operating non profitable routes as promised? NO
Did they take on all the ex LAFSA employees? NO
Did they try to use CC registered aircraft? YES

This is a clear sign of what 'could' happen should the door be opened to foreign carriers. Having said that, there is always a way to get in. So, opening up the market or the skies to foreign entities should be very well thought out. Something that both the IMF and the previous Argentine governments failed to do!

Do we really think that AA will play fair should an open sky agreement be in place. Of course not. And as far as competition is concerned, ever thought of what a simple thing like a AA/4M code share to MIA could do to that route?
Or even a 4M/IB code share to MAD?
where is the competition then?
Look at what QF/LA charge on a SYD-EZE ticket compared to AR?
 
aacun
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 2:47 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Tue Sep 19, 2006 9:52 pm

The US is meeting with the Argentinian government this week to try to hammer something out as to an agreement over new flights... The thing is that the US is actually trying to get twice the allowed frequencies for US carriers so US airlines may expand there........ AA is ready to start a third flight to Miami which is their priority.... Then the next would be a ORD-EZE flight. However, this could also mean that CO and DL get awarded NYC flights and that would probably bring the yields on that route down..... Other options being studied.....MIA-MVD-COR-MIA...... so the MVD tag would be added to a new COR flight..... And its being looked at on the 767-300... Not the 757. This is all I could get yesturday while I was down there.
 
argiepilot
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:38 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Wed Sep 20, 2006 12:41 am

Great to read your opinion.

Quoting TBCITDG (Reply 45):
Since when has AR been an absolute monopoly?

Since it has a 90% market share.

Quoting TBCITDG (Reply 45):
I will not go through the list of all the carriers that came and went but some that do come to mind are Southern Winds, Dinar and so forth. Why is AR to blame for their failed attempts to serve the Argentine consumer?

I am not blaming AR. I am just saying that competition generally means lower fares and more options for the consumers.

Quoting TBCITDG (Reply 45):
I disagree as well with your comments about the state of service that AR offers. Especially in flight. Ever flown domestic on a US carrier?
Sure they have a some way to go but all in all AR offers an efficient service on board

You have a right to believe that flying pretty old 732s, paying the high fares that AR basically control at will, in aircraft flown by underpaid pilots that (rightfully) often go on strike, is acceptable service just because they offer you a sandwich instead of peanuts. Yes, I have flown in the US quite a bit. I would choose Southwest any time, or JetBlue, or UAL, or AA. You see, at least I would have a choice.

Quoting TBCITDG (Reply 45):
Should K allow foreign airlines to fly domestically in Argentina?
I would say NO. Look at what took place as far as LA is concerned.

Are they operating non profitable routes as promised? NO
Did they take on all the ex LAFSA employees? NO
Did they try to use CC registered aircraft? YES

OK with your opinion. I am still not sure if deregulating domestic routes would work. I am trying to think what would be best to the consumer. As for LAN, I really hope their fate will only be determined by the kind of service they provide. Since they are a private (for profit) company I would not blame them for not be willing to operate unprofitable routes nor for not employing more people than needed. If the government considers that those are social needs and has an interest in serving those needs then the state should take care of that and not a private company.

Quoting TBCITDG (Reply 45):
This is a clear sign of what 'could' happen should the door be opened to foreign carriers. Having said that, there is always a way to get in. So, opening up the market or the skies to foreign entities should be very well thought out. Something that both the IMF and the previous Argentine governments failed to do!

You seem to be forgetting that it was during the nineties where competition grew. We not only had AR, but LAPA, Southern Winds, Dinar, and others. Traffic grew, the industry grew, ticket prices were dramatically lowered and flying was suddenly an option for many. We could fly not only old 732s but CRJs and 377s. Please, I won't engage into a discussion about the IMF and all that environment. Mostly, we all sadly know what happened. I am just saying that competition is good.

As to the last part of your post. I really don't know. Thanks for sharing.
 
MD11junkie
Posts: 2499
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 4:59 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Wed Sep 20, 2006 2:31 am

OMG, this has gone too far and I didn't chime in with a full answer.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 30):
AA adding a third daily MIA-EZE flight will do little to hurt AR. LAN Argentina is a bigger threat than Aerolineas Argentinas.

So their own sister company is a bigger threat than a competitor?

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 38):
I disagree with that. For the lack of flying rights there are very few flights between Northeast Brazil and the US. That, coupled with the visa requirement for American tourists, saps the development of strong tourist flows from the US. Hundreds of thousands of jobs that should exist don't. The result is that many young people that could have a future working in the tourism industry are growing up to be criminals.

That is totally extremist. An agreement being or liberal or more conservative, will certainly not cause people to grow up and be criminals.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 30):
More schedule choices, more capacity, and lower fares. I would love for you to exaplin to me how, if an airline doubles capacity on a route, fares will go up.

I'd love for you to explain to me how, if an airline quadruples its capacity on a route, fares didn't go down - with even more competitors than there are today. Example, American Airlines on EZE-USA.

Quoting Box37 (Reply 41):
Simple answer to this question and also applies to Chile.
I am going to put it in a politically correct way by stating that the "quality" of their politicians and respect for the institutions and the law is superior than in Argentina.

I'd really love to see where you get this 'insight'.  Yeah sure

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 24):
Increased service by US airlines means more tourism, more trade, more travel, and a boost to the overall economy.

Oh, please. Don't tell me you believe this. This is just plain theoric thinking, and as you might know, there's one factor in those results. A big variable, that changes everything. It's Human Nature. The nature of having a better profit. This is what AA did. Increased the service to the US, PAX numbers increased - YET, the fares were at an all time high. And no, fuel was not the issue, since at that time a barrel was at 15 dollars a barrel. So... would a more lenient US-Arg bilateral treaty benefit us consumers? Definitely not. It's been seen and proven that this is not the case.

Quoting ARGIEPILOT (Reply 47):
in aircraft flown by underpaid pilots that (rightfully) often go on strike

Rightfully go on strike? Please. There are other ways to protest rather than smash the only means of reasonable transport that the country has, and thus, crashing AR's image with some unreasonable request.

Quoting ARGIEPILOT (Reply 47):
You seem to be forgetting that it was during the nineties where competition grew. We not only had AR, but LAPA, Southern Winds, Dinar, and others. Traffic grew, the industry grew, ticket prices were dramatically lowered and flying was suddenly an option for many. We could fly not only old 732s but CRJs and 377s.

And you seem to be forgetting that those carriers were NOT foreign owned. Point mute. Nothing to do with what TBCITDG is saying.

Quoting ARGIEPILOT (Reply 47):
Since it has a 90% market share.

That is not absolute. Most of that 95% includes the routes that 4M doesn't fly. In the routes that they fly, AR has a 92% market share. Absolute would be 100%. There's room for competition, but competition doesn't know how to make the turn around the corner when battling against AR.

This country has seen several flops, A4, MJ, D7. And others that are not even worth to mention.

Quoting Panamair (Reply 18):
Destroy our country? Or destroy AR? What about the Argentinean PEOPLE and Businesses that would benefit from more choices, lower fares, etc.?

If you knew what you were talking about, you'd realize that destroying AR would be destroying the transportation of this country. Flying to 33 destinations in the country - the domestic network, as Marambio said, heavily relies on the profits made on the international routes.

Marambio, nothing but a green  checkmark  for you. I agree with all your posts.

TBCITDG, well put!

Cheers! wave 
Gastón - The MD11junkie
There is no such thing as Boeing vs Airbus as the queen of the skies has three engines, winglets and the sweetest nose!
 
Box37
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 4:59 am

RE: Rumor:AA To Start 2nd Daily JFK-EZE

Wed Sep 20, 2006 3:37 am

Quoting MD11junkie (Reply 48):
I'd really love to see where you get this 'insight'.

Having been on this earth 3 times more than you (according with your profile)
and having worked in multiple countries is enough for me, and by the way I was very polite and avoid words that can be insulting and without sarcasm.
Read reply 42, written by a compatriot of yours and you will get the idea in case you do not know by now.
Box