Gonzalo
Topic Author
Posts: 1526
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:43 am

IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 11:36 am

Another hit for the connectivity of Uruguay. After PU closure, now the Spanish airline IB announced a reduction from 6 to 4 weekly flights, and a total elimination of the route from April. According to the source, the average LF in this flight is 86%, so this measure seems a little weird.

http://www.elpais.com.uy/121126/ultm...vuelos-madrid-montevideo-en-abril/

In the future, to travel from Uruguay to Europe, the options will be flights with stopovers in Brazil ( TAM ), Argentina ( AR ), or Chile ( LAN ).

Rgds.
G.
Gear Up!!: DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20-21 / B732 / B763 / B789
 
anstar
Posts: 2864
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:49 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 11:50 am

Full flights don't necessarily equal profitable flights though....
 
BlueShamu330s
Posts: 2565
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 3:11 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 11:56 am

Clearly, IB had three options:

1. Offer cheap fares, fill the aircraft, run it at a loss

2. Raise fares, achieve a much lower load factor, run it a loss

3. Cut their losses and axe the route.

Seems like option 3, in this case, was the best one, though I am sure SEPA will accuse IAG of stealing the route and giving it to BA.  Yeah sure

Rgds

[Edited 2012-11-26 04:02:15]
So I drive a 4x4. So what?! Tax the a$$ off me for it...oh, you already have... :-(
 
Gonzalo
Topic Author
Posts: 1526
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:43 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 12:20 pm

Quoting blueshamu330s (Reply 2):
2. Raise fares, achieve a much lower load factor, run it a loss

I guess you are right, although I would think that, being THE carrier with direct flights to Europe, the LF shouldn't be affected too hard. OTOH, I was in MVD this Saturday morning when the A343 of IB arrived at the gate... the LF for that particular flight was horrible...

Rgds.
G.
Gear Up!!: DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20-21 / B732 / B763 / B789
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 12:23 pm

I think all the cuts are technically suspensions. Once IB has their house in order and IAG are satisfied, I think we will see routes returning with more added.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
SCL767
Posts: 2812
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 12:24 pm

Quoting Gonzalo (Thread starter):
In the future, to travel from Uruguay to Europe, the options will be flights with stopovers in Brazil ( TAM ), Argentina ( AR ), or Chile ( LAN ).

Not good news for MVD. However ample connections between MAD and MVD are available via GRU:


IB6825 MAD 00:40 GRU 06:30
JJ8046 GRU 09:25 MVD 12:00

JJ8031 MVD 11:45 GRU 14:10
IB6824 GRU 15:35 MAD 06:45+1


JJ8065 MAD 23:00 GRU 04:45+1
JJ8046 GRU 09:25 MVD 12:00

JJ8047 MVD 13:15 GRU 15:50
JJ8064 GRU 20:55 MAD 12:15+1
 
delta2ual
Posts: 558
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:18 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:13 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 4):
I think all the cuts are technically suspensions. Once IB has their house in order and IAG are satisfied, I think we will see routes returning with more added.

I was thinking the same thing. Maybe this has to do with the downsizing of the fleet? Once IB is on more solid footing, this route may reappear. I would think the airline of Spain would do well in all of South America (except maybe Brazil).
From the world's largest airline-to the world's largest airline. Delta2ual
 
Clydenairways
Posts: 1099
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:27 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:26 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 4):
I think all the cuts are technically suspensions. Once IB has their house in order and IAG are satisfied, I think we will see routes returning with more added.

Agree with this view. Once the goal of reducing the cost base is implemented all of these routes will be back again.

The old A340 aircraft type argument is irrelevant IMO, it's the core cost base that is uncompetitive.
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 2:18 pm

Quoting delta2ual (Reply 6):
Maybe this has to do with the downsizing of the fleet? Once IB is on more solid footing, this route may reappear.

Yes that is the plan, cut routes and downsize.

Quoting clydenairways (Reply 7):
Agree with this view. Once the goal of reducing the cost base is implemented all of these routes will be back again.

IAG have essentially stated this. To re-quote myself from another thread:

"In the short term the transformation will focus on stemming the losses and creating a profitable route network. This will include suspending loss making routes and frequencies"

Often 'suspend', 'cancel' and 'end' are used interchangeably, so we can't be 100% sure, but here logic points to it indeed being just a suspension.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
KFlyer
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:05 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 2:50 pm

A sensible move IMHO. Full loads are hardly profitable. In fact nowadays, I'm more skeptical about a full service carrier running at 85%+ cabin factor as opposed to one running at 75%. CX too seem to be going through a similar situation right now.
The opinions above are solely my own and do not express those of my employers or clients.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:29 pm

Quoting clydenairways (Reply 7):
The old A340 aircraft type argument is irrelevant IMO, it's the core cost base that is uncompetitive.

The A340s are absolutely part of the problem.

From the November 9 IAG presentation about IB restructuring under challenges they state:

"A340 fleet cost"

And later on they add a key restructuring component will need to be:

"close the gap in cost, fleet and product in the long haul network".

=
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
Clydenairways
Posts: 1099
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:27 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:57 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 10):
The A340s are absolutely part of the problem.

I don't agree. The way some people talk about A340's on here you would swear they had the economics of a DC8.
Iberia's real financial problem is it's labour costs and productivity.

The A330 is no doubt more efficient that the A340, but the fleet of A340's is not the main reason why Iberia are losing money.
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:04 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 10):
From the November 9 IAG presentation about IB restructuring under challenges they state:

"A340 fleet cost"

It's a problem on the routes where a twin can now operate more efficiently, granted. But in general if you have a problem flying an A340 on routes which ideally need a quad to operate, then it's not the aircraft which is a problem.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
Gonzalo
Topic Author
Posts: 1526
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:43 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:07 pm

Quoting delta2ual (Reply 6):
was thinking the same thing. Maybe this has to do with the downsizing of the fleet? Once IB is on more solid footing, this route may reappear.

Although I basically agree with that view, I think there is a high risk of the route(s) being completely eliminated, if the day IB wants to return "discover" that the public is already doing fine in other airlines and doesn't have the intention to step back and fly IB again.
If LAN and TAM do a good job serving the requirements of this public, and do it with a good product ( as usual ) I doubt a significant number of this people would even think in flying IB again, specially considering that they are not precisely famous for having good in flight service.

Rgds.
G.
Gear Up!!: DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20-21 / B732 / B763 / B789
 
airbazar
Posts: 6807
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:11 pm

Quoting Gonzalo (Thread starter):

In the future, to travel from Uruguay to Europe, the options will be flights with stopovers in Brazil ( TAM ), Argentina ( AR ), or Chile ( LAN ).

A while ago there was a lot of talk about who the winners and losers would be from the LAN/TAM merger. It's starting to look like IB will be the biggest loser, ironically enough.
 
SCQ83
Posts: 2659
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:32 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:57 pm

According to Ch-aviation.ch http://www.ch-aviation.ch/portal/airline.php?cha=IB, they are also valuating whether to cut PTY, GUA, SAL and GYE.

Quote:
26NOV2012: Iberia expected to drop some Caribbean routes

Iberia (IB, Madrid Barajas (MAD)) is widely expected by Spanish media outlets to cancel its routes from Madrid Barajas (MAD) to Havana José Marti International (HAV), San Juan Luis Muñoz Marin International (SJU) and Santo Domingo Las Américas (SDQ) from its network as part of its restructuring plan. It is reportedly also currently evaluating whether to cancel its routes to Guatemala City La Aurora International (GUA), Guayaquil José Joaquín de Olmdeo International (GYE), Panamá City Tocumen International (PTY) and San Salvador Cuscatlán International (SAL).

So, if I am not missing anything, they have cut in LATAM:

COR
FOR
MVD
REC

They might cut:

HAV
SDQ
SJU

They are valuating to cut:

GUA
GYE
PTY
SAL

Only 9 "safe" remaining destinations in LATAM:

BOG
CCS
EZE
GIG
GRU
MEX
SCL
SJO
UIO
 
flyguy89
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:15 pm

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 15):
Only 9 "safe" remaining destinations in LATAM:

This is pretty sad IMO, these Central and South American routes should be IB's bread and butter routes being the geographically, culturally and economically (in the context of Spain's economic ties to the region) ideal carrier to serve that part of the world. TAP has been successfully able to grow it's network to Brazil, one would think IB would be able to do the same to LATAM, hope they get their house in order soon!
 
SCL767
Posts: 2812
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:32 pm

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 15):
GYE

If IB dropped GYE they will have to drop UIO as well since the flight is routed as MAD-UIO-GYE-MAD. Quito's high altitude does not allow carriers to operate mid-haul and long-haul flights non-stop from UIO for obvious reasons.
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:33 pm

Quoting delta2ual (Reply 6):
I would think the airline of Spain would do well in all of South America (except maybe Brazil).

Only If they are the only nonstop option. The elephant in the room not being mentioned is that IB has a so-so hard product and terrible service. People fly IB because they have no choice or because they don´t know better. High yielding traffic does not fly IB and unless they better their service, that traffic will still elude them. Thus, I don´t think they´ll be able to improve their finances, if they don´t improve radically in that area. It doesn´t matter wether they get A330s, 787s or free fuel (joking there)

Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 13):
If LAN and TAM do a good job serving the requirements of this public, and do it with a good product ( as usual ) I doubt a significant number of this people would even think in flying IB again, specially considering that they are not precisely famous for having good in flight service.

I´m not so sure. Of course LAN´s and TAM´s product is years ahead of IB´s but connections at GRU with the provided schedule up-thread are terribly inconvenient and tiring. Going to SCL is almost a 2 1/2 detour to the WEST. And really, who would choose AR through EZE? (another reasonble option) they are worse than IB. If IB comes back it´ll have a nice captive market. Low yield, perhaps, but still. It´s sad and telling that now, being the sole carrier non-stop to Europe thay can´t make a buck on the route. However, If somebody else starts a nonstop MVD-Europe, then IB probably wouldn´t stand a chance.
 
RAGAZZO777
Posts: 378
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 6:33 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:48 pm

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 15):
Only 9 "safe" remaining destinations in LATAM:

BOG
CCS
EZE
GIG
GRU
MEX
SCL
SJO
UIO

Add LIM to that list. LIM is, alongside BOG, EZE, GRU and MEX, one of the very few long-haul Latin American destinations that IB has been flying more than once daily to.


.

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 17):
Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 15):
GYE

If IB dropped GYE they will have to drop UIO as well since the flight is routed as MAD-UIO-GYE-MAD.

I guess IB must be evaluating to operate out of Quito's brand new airport.
JESÚS, TE AMO !!
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:50 pm

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 17):
If IB dropped GYE they will have to drop UIO as well since the flight is routed as MAD-UIO-GYE-MAD. Quito's high altitude does not allow carriers to operate mid-haul and long-haul flights non-stop from UIO for obvious reasons.

Won´t that change with the new airport? Legitimate question. I would think one of the reasons for the new infrastructure was to decouple UIO from GYE.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24522
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:53 pm

Quoting airbazar (Reply 14):
Quoting Gonzalo (Thread starter):

In the future, to travel from Uruguay to Europe, the options will be flights with stopovers in Brazil ( TAM ), Argentina ( AR ), or Chile ( LAN ).

A while ago there was a lot of talk about who the winners and losers would be from the LAN/TAM merger. It's starting to look like IB will be the biggest loser, ironically enough.

There is another point to this: ATI and a JV with AA. Iberia no longer needs to serve the smaller secondary markets non-stop now that it has ATI with AA. Three daily Miami-Madrid and daily Miami-Barcelona service feed the smaller destinations via Miami.
a.
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:09 pm

Quoting RAGAZZO777 (Reply 19):
I guess IB must be evaluating to operate out of Quito's brand new airport.
Quoting AR385 (Reply 20):
Won´t that change with the new airport? Legitimate question. I would think one of the reasons for the new infrastructure was to decouple UIO from GYE.

With a 4,100m runway an A340-300/600 shouldn't have any issues making it the 5,500 miles to MAD non stop; the new airport is 400m lower and broadly similar to MEX in terms of how performance will be limited. But I don't know what obstacles there are in the departure path to say for sure.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
SCQ83
Posts: 2659
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:32 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:25 pm

Quoting RAGAZZO777 (Reply 19):

True, I had forgot LIM, which is very unlikely to be stopped (fast growing economy with business and VFR ties Spain-Peru as you probably know better   ).
 
Gonzalo
Topic Author
Posts: 1526
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:43 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:46 pm

Quoting AR385 (Reply 18):
However, If somebody else starts a nonstop MVD-Europe, then IB probably wouldn´t stand a chance.

I'm not sure about the legal aspect of this ( since the Uruguayan government changes its mind every day, one day they talk about Open Skies, the next day about subsidize a new PU with exclusive rights for some routes, the next day go back to Open Skies... ), but if LA or JJ can start a non stop service MVD-MAD ( the government could allow this thinking in the fact that there is a big loss of money for the country due to tourism going to other places and lack of connectivity for business ), I agree with you, is basically impossible for IB to be a relevant player again, unless they make deep, deep changes in service and public image.

Rgds.
G.
Gear Up!!: DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20-21 / B732 / B763 / B789
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 11:06 pm

Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 24):
I'm not sure about the legal aspect of this ( since the Uruguayan government changes its mind every day, one day they talk about Open Skies, the next day about subsidize a new PU with exclusive rights for some routes, the next day go back to Open Skies... )

They ought to allow another carrier to fly MVD-Europe. A country like Uruguay ought to have at least one direct flight to Europe. It´s not fair to the Uruguayans, and they are losing business. If no other airline is flying the route, it´s ridiculous that either LA or TAM can´t do it. There may be no attractive market for them, though, but that´s another story. The regulations should allow them.
 
SCL767
Posts: 2812
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Mon Nov 26, 2012 11:29 pm

Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 24):
but if LA or JJ can start a non stop service MVD-MAD ( the government could allow this thinking in the fact that there is a big loss of money for the country due to tourism going to other places and lack of connectivity for business )

That is not going to happen period. Since PU collapsed LA/JJ have added three additional daily flights into MVD. PAX do have the option of connecting via EZE, GIG, GRU, MIA, and SCL. If Uruguay wants a non-stop flight from Europe, they will need to step up and just subsidize a European carrier to operate into MVD.
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:03 am

From the article cited by the OP:

"El jerarca explicó que la ocupación de los vuelos es de 86%"

Trans: "LF is 86%"

So:

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 26):
That is not going to happen period. Since PU collapsed LA/JJ have added three additional daily flights into MVD. PAX do have the option of connecting via EZE, GIG, GRU, MIA, and SCL. If Uruguay wants a non-stop flight from Europe, they will need to step up and just subsidize a European carrier to operate into MVD.

Via EZE: As long as it´s not AR, seems like the most reasonable choice. Still, how many MVD-EZE flights? Most are to AEP. I´m sure the commute between AEP and EZE renders this option pretty inconvenient and unpredictable. Especially considering the frequent pickets on the highway to EZE.

Via GIG: That´s a 3 hr. flight to GIG and whatever connecting time at GIG. Tiresome.

Via GRU: See above, with the added negatives of a 70s era airport that is slot constrained.

Via MIA: You surely can´t be serious? That´s an 8 hr. flight NORTH. It also entails disembarking, going through immigration, going through customs, and then rechecking your luggage. That´s all assuming you have a VISA for the US. And then, a 9hr. flight to Europe. You are talking about a 36 hrs periple, minimum. Unreasonable.

Via SCL: The most reasonable option, it seems. I can attest to great, smooth, seamless connections at SCL, which is also a wonderful airport, with great, friendly staff. Still, as I mentioned before, it´s a 2 and 1/2 hour detour to the WEST, 100% in the OPPOSITE direction.

So it seems to me that for LA and JJ to ignore the opportunity of a flight that connects MVD direct to Europe seems rather un-strategic. The LF is 86%

IB can´t make it work for a variety of reasons, mostly their own. But it´s not due to the Uruguayan market. Pluna flew the route with 707s for God´s sake up to the mid 90s. Then VARIG lent them a DC-10 when PLUNA was their associate or subsidiary. The market is there.

It seems like an excellent opportunity for both airlines, assuming the regulatory framework allows them to start such a flight. LA should seriously consider using their 787s for this city pair.
 
ferminbrif
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 7:04 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:04 am

Quoting anstar (Reply 1):
Full flights don't necessarily equal profitable flights though....

can you please explain a little bit more about this??? I don´t get it. Thanks a lot.
 
SCQ83
Posts: 2659
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:32 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:10 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 27):

MAD-MVD 6,166 mi

According to GCMap, MAD-GRU-MVD is (incredibly) exactly above the GCM:

MAD-GRU-MVD 6,166 mi (+0.0%)

Rio and Buenos Aires might work very well as well, with little to no detour.

MAD-GIG-MVD 6,181 mi (+0.2%)

MAD-EZE-MVD 6,252 mi (+3.7%)

Santiago on the other hand is a substantial detour:

MAD-SCL-MVD 7,499 mi (+21.6%)

And finally Miami (avoiding the transit/visa issues) seems like a really crazy trip:

MAD-MIA-MVD 8,886 mi (+44.1%)

So, very little detour thru GIG, GRU and EZE which on the other hand are the airports with more flights to MVD. It seems very obvious to me.
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:13 am

Quoting ferminbrif (Reply 28):
can you please explain a little bit more about this??? I don´t get it. Thanks a lot.

Simplyfing:

It´s all about "Yield Management" You can have a full flight but if it´s full due to cheap fares and no Premium Traffic (J class being empty) then you will not make much money. Think about it.

If a C class seat is worth $4,000 US against an average Y class seat worth $800, that means that your C class seat is worth 5 times your Y class seat. Essentially, your C class of 26 seats is worth 130 Y class seats, if not more. So having a Y class filled to the brim with few C class seats, being a full service airline, you will be losing money. And IB, on its South American routes, and probably to MVD, can´t seem to get good yields on their C class.
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:16 am

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 29):
So, very little detour thru GIG, GRU and EZE which on the other hand are the airports with more flights to MVD. It seems very obvious to me.

Sure. Taking in mind only the distance. You should also consider the commute times between different airports (AEP-EZE) and the connection times. In the case of MIA, you need to take in mind the hassle of connecting through the US. Add to that the cost of going through the VISA process, if you don´t have one. That adds $180 USD to your fare.

[Edited 2012-11-26 17:18:43]
 
SCQ83
Posts: 2659
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:32 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:19 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 31):

Aerolineas (Austral) also flies MVD-EZE. No need to change airports in BUE.
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:32 am

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 32):
Aerolineas (Austral) also flies MVD-EZE. No need to change airports in BUE.

Yes. You are right. But, the only MVD-EZE flight arrives into EZE at around 21:00 hrs.

All your flights EZE-Europe are long gone by then. You will need to overnight at BUE and then wait until next day´s afternoon, at the earliest. How much will that cost you? How much time lost?
 
SCL767
Posts: 2812
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:04 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 27):
It seems like an excellent opportunity for both airlines, assuming the regulatory framework allows them to start such a flight. LA should seriously consider using their 787s for this city pair.

LAN's priority is to enhance the synergies from the combination with TAM. What would LAN gain by opening a new route to Europe via MVD with the 787s instead of via Brazil where LATAM has hubs at GRU and GIG? Also, LAN will deploy its initial batch of 787s on its own routes to LAX and MAD as LAN begins to phase out the A343s.
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:27 am

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 34):
What would LAN gain by opening a new route to Europe via MVD with the 787s instead of via Brazil where LATAM has hubs at GRU and GIG?

For starters, a higher fare. The current IB MVD-MAD return for December is $948 USD, while going MVD-MAD through GRU with TAM the fare is $1,704

So LA and TAM will have an excellent opportunity for being a MONOPOLY and charging what they wish for MVD-Europe nonstop as long as it does not exceed the fares available with a connection.

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 34):
lso, LAN will deploy its initial batch of 787s on its own routes to LAX and MAD as LAN begins to phase out the A343s.

Right, a company that does not change its plans according to dynamic moves in its market, is not really flexible. Who cares what they have announced? If a new opportunity appears for them, they should at least evaluate it and make changes accordingly. Just saying. This seems an excellent opportnity for LA and TAM.

If you are saying they can´t take advantage of it because "LAN will deploy its initial batch of 787s on its own routes to LAX and MAD as LAN begins to phase out the A343s" well then, they are just not looking at what is going around in their backyard and the opportunities those changes present.
 
SCL767
Posts: 2812
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:47 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 35):
For starters, a higher fare. The current IB MVD-MAD return for December is $948 USD, while going MVD-MAD through GRU with TAM the fare is $1,704

Look at the fares from destinations such as SCL, LIM, GRU, GIG, etc. to certain destinations in the U.S.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 35):
Right, a company that does not change its plans according to dynamic moves in its market, is not really flexible. Who cares what they have announced? If a new opportunity appears for them, they should at least evaluate it and make changes accordingly. Just saying. This seems an excellent opportnity for LA and TAM.

Right now the economy in Spain and Europe in general sucks and LATAM sees more potential in increasing frequencies to the U.S. from its South American hubs due to strong traffic.
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:50 am

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 36):
Look at the fares from destinations such as SCL, LIM, GRU, GIG, etc. to certain destinations in the U.S.

And how is that relevant to MVD-MAD?

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 36):
Right now the economy in Spain and Europe in general sucks and LATAM sees more potential in increasing frequencies to the U.S. from its South American hubs due to strong traffic.

Fantastic news. However, you are not adressing the topic.
 
SCL767
Posts: 2812
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:01 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 37):
Quoting SCL767 (Reply 36):
Look at the fares from destinations such as SCL, LIM, GRU, GIG, etc. to certain destinations in the U.S.

And how is that relevant to MVD-MAD?

LATAM generates more profits from its routes to the U.S. Why should LAN deploy its a/c on a low-yielding route to Europe when the a/c could make a profit flying to the U.S.? And it's quite clear that the MVD-MAD route is a low-yielding route.
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:08 am

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 38):
LATAM generates more profits from its routes to the U.S. Why should LAN deploy its a/c on a low-yielding route to Europe when the a/c could make a profit flying to the U.S.? And it's quite clear that the MVD-MAD route is a low-yielding route.

Because it has a LF of 86%. And it will be a MONOPOLY route. While IB can´t make it work because of a variety of reasons, some of which I´ve explained, I see no reason why wonderful LA can´t make it work. Or are you saying that a monopoly route with an 86% load factor is not worh looking at? That is a strategic mistake. Now, if LA has no capacity, sure, then you have to go with the best performing routes and loose out on other opportunities. Is that the case?
 
RAGAZZO777
Posts: 378
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 6:33 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:12 am

Do Chilean carriers have Fifth Freedom Rights via MVD ?
JESÚS, TE AMO !!
 
User avatar
eta unknown
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:03 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 7:24 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 27):
Via GIG: That´s a 3 hr. flight to GIG and whatever connecting time at GIG. Tiresome.

Via GRU: See above, with the added negatives of a 70s era airport that is slot constrained.

I don't see what the problem is with this option- at least you're going in the right direction.
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 7:43 am

Quoting eta unknown (Reply 41):
I don't see what the problem is with this option- at least you're going in the right direction.

The problem, that you don´t see is below:

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 5):
Not good news for MVD. However ample connections between MAD and MVD are available via GRU:


IB6825 MAD 00:40 GRU 06:30
JJ8046 GRU 09:25 MVD 12:00

JJ8031 MVD 11:45 GRU 14:10
IB6824 GRU 15:35 MAD 06:45+1


JJ8065 MAD 23:00 GRU 04:45+1
JJ8046 GRU 09:25 MVD 12:00

JJ8047 MVD 13:15 GRU 15:50
JJ8064 GRU 20:55 MAD 12:15+1

If you use the IB MAD 6825-GRU connecting to the JJ 8046 GRU-MVD you are going to spend 3 hours and 25 minutes at GRU, coming from a 10 hr flight and having the pleasure of enduring a further 3 hrs to get you to MVD.

If you use the JJ MAD 8065-GRU connecting to the JJ8046 GRU-MVD you are going to spend 4 hrs and 45 mins at GRU, coming from a 10 hr flight and having the pleasure of enduring a further 3 hrs to get you to MVD.

If you use the JJ 8047 MVD-GRU connecting to the JJ8064 GRU-MAD you are going to spend 5 hours at GRU, coming from a three hour flight and looking forward to a 10 hr journey.

Do you still don´t see the problem?
 
SCL767
Posts: 2812
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:06 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 42):
Do you still don´t see the problem?

This is the schedule starting in February:
IB6825 MAD 00:25 GRU 07:35
JJ8046 GRU 09:25 MVD 13:00

JJ8031 MVD 12:45 GRU 14:10
IB6824 GRU 15:55 MAD 06:20+1

Is there still a problem?
 
AR385
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:21 am

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 43):
Is there still a problem?

Well, you provided the scheduled I based my response on reply 42. Now you´ve changed your information. So you were wrong in the first place.

Still, spending 2 hrs on the inbound from MAD at GRU after an 11 hr flight with a 3 hr flight onwards is still a problem.

The same from MVD-GRU. Spending 2 hrs at GRU looking ontowards a 10 hr journey having flown in from a 3 hour flight is still a problem.

I assume you´ve been at GRU? it´s not the most friendly place to connect, nor the most pleasant. As opposed to SCL, which is really a first world airport and a pleasure to connect through. In many ways. Sadly, GRU, is really not that.

It seems most convenient, for sure. If there is no alternative. My point is that there should be an alternative for the Uruguayans. A nonstop alternative.

By the way, you have not answered my question, on reply 39:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 39):
Or are you saying that a monopoly route with an 86% load factor is not worh looking at? That is a strategic mistake. Now, if LA has no capacity, sure, then you have to go with the best performing routes and loose out on other opportunities. Is that the case?

Reiterating, LA has no capacity?

[Edited 2012-11-27 00:47:12]
 
r2rho
Posts: 2439
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:13 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:51 am

Quoting clydenairways (Reply 7):
The old A340 aircraft type argument is irrelevant IMO, it's the core cost base that is uncompetitive.

Thank you for speaking against this a.net-myth even at the risk of being flamed. Indeed, IB has a core cost base problem, not a fleet problem. Of course, A333's will help improve profitability of North & Central America routes, but they are not the magic silver bullet. IB's current cost base will also lose money with A333's.

Quoting clydenairways (Reply 7):
I think all the cuts are technically suspensions. Once IB has their house in order and IAG are satisfied, I think we will see routes returning with more added.

Agree with this view. Once the goal of reducing the cost base is implemented all of these routes will be back again.
Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 13):
Although I basically agree with that view, I think there is a high risk of the route(s) being completely eliminated, if the day IB wants to return "discover" that the public is already doing fine in other airlines and doesn't have the intention to step back and fly IB again.

I agree with both views. IB is experiencing an all-out internal war between management and employees. We need to interpret the various route cuts in this context, and not in the sense of profitability. Some should-be profitable EU routes are being cut in the context of the IB Express conflict for instance.
However as Gonzalo says, pulling out of LatAm - IB's core bread and butter market - is a strategic mistake. The pax will be handed over to LAN-TAM and Avianca-TACA on a one to one ratio. By the time IB attempts a return, it may be too late to retake the market that they've given up.

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 15):
Only 9 "safe" remaining destinations in LATAM:

Without LatAm, IB is nothing. Just another JK. And those destinations are not enough for the airline to remain a viable entity in the long term. IB's long-term survival is definitely at risk.
 
SCL767
Posts: 2812
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:25 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:58 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 44):
Well, you provided the scheduled I based my response on reply 42. Now you´ve changed your information. So you were wrong in the first place.

Actually that's the Southern Winter schedule.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 44):
Still, spending 2 hrs on the inbound from MAD at GRU after an 11 hr flight with a 3 hr flight onwards is still a problem.

That's laughable! I bet those pax traveling between MAD and COR or MDZ via SCL find the transit time at SCL a "problem" as well.

Quoting AR385 (Reply 44):
Reiterating, LA has no capacity?

LAN continues to maintain flexibility with its widebody fleet. LAN has 8 B-767-316ERs on order with three being delivered this year, plus the third B-787 will soon arrive at SCL. However, LAN plans to increase frequencies on profitable routes to North America and will launch GIG-MIA. Next year, LAN will receive more B763s and B787s. LAN will actually deploy the A343s on the SCL-LIM-LAX route during the NS 2013 season when the SCL-MAD-FRA route switches over to the 787s; thus LAN will have a few 787s to deploy on other routes before the A343s begin to leave the fleet during the latter part of 2013. During 2014, 7 more B-787s will join LAN's fleet. Is LAN going to fly to MAD via MVD just to have a monopoly on a route? NOPE!
 
HB-IWC
Posts: 4033
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2000 1:09 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 10:31 am

Quoting AR385 (Reply 44):
Still, spending 2 hrs on the inbound from MAD at GRU after an 11 hr flight with a 3 hr flight onwards is still a problem.

The same from MVD-GRU. Spending 2 hrs at GRU looking ontowards a 10 hr journey having flown in from a 3 hour flight is still a problem.

If every 2-hour connecting time between flights in airline hubs around the world would be a problem, there would not be many connections left. A 2- to 4-hour connecting time at larger hub airports is pretty much standard.

The current MVD MAD nonstop provides IB connections to the likes of London, Paris, Frankfurt and Rome with a connecting time at MAD of 2.5 hours each. Does that make such a connection undesirable too?
 
Gonzalo
Topic Author
Posts: 1526
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:43 am

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 11:12 am

Uruguayan President Mr. José Mujica said he wants LAN (or COPA ¡? ) doing the route MVD-MAD, over the Argentinian BQB ( which only operates turboprops in short flights, but could lease a heavy for the MAD route ).

http://www.elpais.com.uy/121127/ultm...mamente-prefiere-lan-o-copa-a-bqb/

I guess we should add to the other "crazy flight" ( MVD-MIA-MAD ) a new connection flight MVD-PTY-MAD now    

Rgds.
G.
Gear Up!!: DC-3 / EMB-110 / Fairchild-227 / Ab318-19-20-21 / B732 / B763 / B789
 
757gb
Posts: 374
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:11 pm

RE: IB Eliminates MAD-MVD, Effective April 2013

Tue Nov 27, 2012 12:55 pm

Quoting Gonzalo (Reply 48):

He keeps shooting off his mouth without having a clue... When they closed PLUNA and auctioned the airplanes they were sure people would stand in line to grab such a fantastic opportunity. Of course the market said NO, especially considering how much money they wanted for 7 CRJs.

This are the same people who said that they suspect that BQB was planning to fly the route because they are about to lease an A320 (YES, A320!!!) and since they are training the crew in MAD that hinted at their intentions of flying the MVD-MAD route, since it was the SAME KIND OF AIRPLANE THAT IB FLEW ON THE ROUTE! (well, to their credit, IT IS an Airbus...):

http://www.elobservador.com.uy/notic...cubran-la-ruta-a-madrid-de-iberia/
(Spanish only, sorry)

BQB is actually a Uruguayan flag carrier and they requested the route, which was granted to them. The word was that they were going to start MVD-MAD by the end of this year, in cooperation with probably UX. But this was all before the PLUNA fiasco, which in turn distracted resources and put everything else in the back burner.

Now as I understand it BQB does not have the permit anymore to operate it (from the UY authority side) and they are pretty mad at BQB's owner because of the whole PLUNA mess, so the president comes out in public to say that he would prefer LA or CM... Politics + BS if you ask me...
God is The Alpha and The Omega. We come from God. We go towards God. What an Amazing Journey...