AR is increasing frequencies on the EZE-MAD route: eff. Jun 1, the airline will add an eleventh weekly frequency, which in turn gets increased to fourteen weekly frequencies in July.

AR1132 EZE 23:55 MAD 17:10+1 D 330
AR1133 MAD 20:10 EZE 04:20+1 D 330

AR1134 EZE 12:10 MAD 05:25+1 D 340
AR1135 MAD 12:40 EZE 20:50 D 340

EZE is the #1 long haul Latin America destination ex MAD (perhaps the #1 long haul?) in terms of frequencies (adding Iberia's, Aerolineas's and Air Europa's).

How is AR doing? I thought they had a rough time the last few years?

Interesting how large EZE-MAD is when compared against EZE-BCN

Considering the larger Argentinian community in catalan provinces I would've expected AR to start BCN instead of increase MAD. Much less competition and strong VFR traffic

upperdeckfan wrote:

Interesting how large EZE-MAD is when compared against EZE-BCN

Considering the larger Argentinian community in catalan provinces I would've expected AR to start BCN instead of increase MAD. Much less competition and strong VFR traffic

They suspended EZE-BCN route earlier this year instead.

upperdeckfan wrote:

Interesting how large EZE-MAD is when compared against EZE-BCN

Considering the larger Argentinian community in catalan provinces I would've expected AR to start BCN instead of increase MAD. Much less competition and strong VFR traffic

Indeed, there is no lack of demand on the BCN-EZE route: LEVEL just added more frequencies for a total of 9/week. But the demand is not premium at all, and in spite of the volume, AR was losing money on the route, so it was cut last January to concentrate on MAD & FCO that have both volume AND premium traffic. AR has a high cost base and can't compete with LEVEL. On the FCO route AZ & AR have a JBA, so it is metal neutral on the passenger side of the house.

Buenos Aires-Madrid is in the same league as Buenos Aires-Miami in terms of frequencies offered, market demand and healthy yields.

FlyRow wrote:

How is AR doing? I thought they had a rough time the last few years?

Financially they are doing much better than 3-4 years ago. It still needs state support but not at all as in years past. Over the past few months it has been affected by industrial action as a reaction to the airline market liberalization in Argentina, which unions fiercely oppose.

dcajet wrote:

FlyRow wrote:

How is AR doing? I thought they had a rough time the last few years?

Financially they are doing much better than 3-4 years ago. It still needs state support but not at all as in years past. Over the past few months it has been affected by industrial action as a reaction to the airline market liberalization in Argentina, which unions fiercely oppose.

Yeah, unions are not helping, but it also doesn't help the questionable competition (which I don't hate as much as my mates) and in particular the peso devualuation. Nationals are not so eager to travel abroad, and local Argentinians are most of our long haul pax. LF are light, so I hope this second flight comes with improved numbers in travelers. Also hope this helps shut up some of the more hostile critics.

I take it this 2nd daily is thanks to the replacement of the BOG widebody bye a 73G

AtomicGarden wrote:

dcajet wrote:

FlyRow wrote:

How is AR doing? I thought they had a rough time the last few years?

Financially they are doing much better than 3-4 years ago. It still needs state support but not at all as in years past. Over the past few months it has been affected by industrial action as a reaction to the airline market liberalization in Argentina, which unions fiercely oppose.

Yeah, unions are not helping, but it also doesn't help the questionable competition (which I don't hate as much as my mates) and in particular the peso devualuation. Nationals are not so eager to travel abroad, and local Argentinians are most of our long haul pax. LF are light, so I hope this second flight comes with improved numbers in travelers. Also hope this helps shut up some of the more hostile critics.

I take it this 2nd daily is thanks to the replacement of the BOG widebody bye a 73G

What is questionable about the competition?

Madrid is a route that you can throw capacity at without problems; it will absorb it. Question is, are yields going to be diluted?

I know this is Xmas season, but a good example of the demand between the two cities: (today's MAD-EZE flights)

IB 6841: 346 PAX A340-642 (EC-JCY). %LF: 100%
UX 041: 332 PAX B787-9 (EC-MTI). %LF: 99,69%
AR 1133: 292 PAX A340-313X (LV-FPV). LF%:99,66%
IB 6849: 282 PAX A330-202 (EC-MLB). LF%: 97,92%
IB 6845: 278 PAX A330-202 (EC-MJA) LF%: 96.5%
AR 1135: 255 PAX A330-203 (LV-GKO) LF%: 94.5%

dcajet wrote:

AtomicGarden wrote:

dcajet wrote:

Financially they are doing much better than 3-4 years ago. It still needs state support but not at all as in years past. Over the past few months it has been affected by industrial action as a reaction to the airline market liberalization in Argentina, which unions fiercely oppose.

Yeah, unions are not helping, but it also doesn't help the questionable competition (which I don't hate as much as my mates) and in particular the peso devualuation. Nationals are not so eager to travel abroad, and local Argentinians are most of our long haul pax. LF are light, so I hope this second flight comes with improved numbers in travelers. Also hope this helps shut up some of the more hostile critics.

I take it this 2nd daily is thanks to the replacement of the BOG widebody bye a 73G

What is questionable about the competition?

Madrid is a route that you can throw capacity at without problems; it will absorb it. Question is, are yields going to be diluted?

I know this is Xmas season, but a good example of the demand between the two cities: (today's MAD-EZE flights)

IB 6841: 346 PAX A340-642 (EC-JCY). %LF: 100%
UX 041: 332 PAX B787-9 (EC-MTI). %LF: 99,69%
AR 1133: 292 PAX A340-313X (LV-FPV). LF%:99,66%
IB 6849: 282 PAX A330-202 (EC-MLB). LF%: 97,92%
IB 6845: 278 PAX A330-202 (EC-MJA) LF%: 96.5%
AR 1135: 255 PAX A330-203 (LV-GKO) LF%: 94.5%

I don't believe the market warranted so many and so agressive LCCs all of a sudden. The price war they began smells a bit like dumping. I don't think they will survive for long. And while their employees weren't forced to accept working for them, labour conditions and wages could be much better. But like I said, we should before check on our operations and labour relations which are hurting AR much more than any LCC or economic downturn.

As for loads, yes, they are nice in Xmas but last week flights to MIA were around 75%, even in J. Mileage hotsales and promotions are nice for CRM but also an indication that loads are low.

I'm no expert on yields and revenue management but if the demand can absorb it (fingers crossed) then yields shouldn't suffer much, no?

But that is the beauty of capitalism: someone saw an opportunity, invested their money (not the government's) and may win or lose. No one put a gun to the head of folks working for Norwegian, Flybondi or JetSmart. I love AR but folks there got a bit too cozy over the years. There is a sense of entitlement that needs to change.

Loads will pick up again in the summer. For early December (some schools are still finishing their term and people won't travel en masse until after Xmas) 75% to MIA is not bad.

If you increase capacity yields will suffer unless demand increases too. Particularly in a context like the current in Argentina, where fierce competition is fueling a commoditization of air travel.

dcajet wrote:

AtomicGarden wrote:

dcajet wrote:

Financially they are doing much better than 3-4 years ago. It still needs state support but not at all as in years past. Over the past few months it has been affected by industrial action as a reaction to the airline market liberalization in Argentina, which unions fiercely oppose.

Yeah, unions are not helping, but it also doesn't help the questionable competition (which I don't hate as much as my mates) and in particular the peso devualuation. Nationals are not so eager to travel abroad, and local Argentinians are most of our long haul pax. LF are light, so I hope this second flight comes with improved numbers in travelers. Also hope this helps shut up some of the more hostile critics.

I take it this 2nd daily is thanks to the replacement of the BOG widebody bye a 73G

What is questionable about the competition?

Madrid is a route that you can throw capacity at without problems; it will absorb it. Question is, are yields going to be diluted?

I know this is Xmas season, but a good example of the demand between the two cities: (today's MAD-EZE flights)

IB 6841: 346 PAX A340-642 (EC-JCY). %LF: 100%
UX 041: 332 PAX B787-9 (EC-MTI). %LF: 99,69%
AR 1133: 292 PAX A340-313X (LV-FPV). LF%:99,66%
IB 6849: 282 PAX A330-202 (EC-MLB). LF%: 97,92%
IB 6845: 278 PAX A330-202 (EC-MJA) LF%: 96.5%
AR 1135: 255 PAX A330-203 (LV-GKO) LF%: 94.5%

Where or how did you find the load factors?

dcajet wrote:

Indeed, there is no lack of demand on the BCN-EZE route: LEVEL just added more frequencies for a total of 9/week. But the demand is not premium at all, and in spite of the volume, AR was losing money on the route, so it was cut last January to concentrate on MAD & FCO that have both volume AND premium traffic. AR has a high cost base and can't compete with LEVEL. On the FCO route AZ & AR have a JBA, so it is metal neutral on the passenger side of the house..

I also suspect the BCN-EZE market is taking away PAX from MAD and other European airports just because of the cheap one-way fares. I have seen even people from Madrid flying from BCN because of those fares. Even a poster here (PatrickZ80) said that he had flown from California to BCN "self-connecting" onwards to EIN. And an American poster who had flown LAX-KEF-BCN for less than 300 USD in August (!).

Self-connecting in BCN is also increasingly cheaper. With the collapse of the Catalan economy and tourism industry, flights from BCN to anywhere else in Spain and Europe are becoming cheaper and cheaper.

IMO a lot of this demand will dismiss with time. It is just unsustainable; a bubble that will just need to adjust. The advantage of Argentina is that at this time there are only two low-cost flights to Europe (BCN-EZE and LGW-EZE). But when more competition comes online, I suspect we will see adjustments. LEVEL already dropped BCN-LAX (while Norwegian and Iberia are year-round on MAD-LAX). A lot of people is just flying via BCN because of those 250 EUR flights to Argentina and 10 EUR flights with Ryanair to BCN.

dcajet wrote:

EZE is the #1 long haul Latin America destination ex MAD (perhaps the #1 long haul?) in terms of frequencies (adding Iberia's, Aerolineas's and Air Europa's).

NYC is the first long-haul destination ex-MAD if you combine both airports (JFK+EWR). Bogotá and Buenos Aires come second and quite close to each other. I suspect EZE will "win" by the end of the year with the Copa Libertadores stuff. In any case, the Top 3 are BOG, EZE and JFK (in no particular order).

SCQ83 wrote:

dcajet wrote:

Indeed, there is no lack of demand on the BCN-EZE route: LEVEL just added more frequencies for a total of 9/week. But the demand is not premium at all, and in spite of the volume, AR was losing money on the route, so it was cut last January to concentrate on MAD & FCO that have both volume AND premium traffic. AR has a high cost base and can't compete with LEVEL. On the FCO route AZ & AR have a JBA, so it is metal neutral on the passenger side of the house..

I also suspect the BCN-EZE market is taking away PAX from MAD and other European airports just because of the cheap one-way fares. I have seen even people from Madrid flying from BCN because of those fares. Even a poster here (PatrickZ80) said that he had flown from California to BCN "self-connecting" onwards to EIN. And an American poster who had flown LAX-KEF-BCN for less than 300 USD in August (!).

Self-connecting in BCN is also increasingly cheaper. With the collapse of the Catalan economy and tourism industry, flights from BCN to anywhere else in Spain and Europe are becoming cheaper and cheaper.

IMO a lot of this demand will dismiss with time. It is just unsustainable; a bubble that will just need to adjust. The advantage of Argentina is that at this time there are only two low-cost flights to Europe (BCN-EZE and LGW-EZE). But when more competition comes online, I suspect we will see adjustments. LEVEL already dropped BCN-LAX (while Norwegian and Iberia are year-round on MAD-LAX). A lot of people is just flying via BCN because of those 250 EUR flights to Argentina and 10 EUR flights with Ryanair to BCN.

You've already been educated about the state of the Catalan economy in another thread so why do you keep posting the same old baseless shite? Catalan economy and tourism have most definitely not collapsed and flights are cheaper due to excess LCC capacity throughout Europe (Vienna is another example).

SCQ83 wrote:

dcajet wrote:

Indeed, there is no lack of demand on the BCN-EZE route: LEVEL just added more frequencies for a total of 9/week. But the demand is not premium at all, and in spite of the volume, AR was losing money on the route, so it was cut last January to concentrate on MAD & FCO that have both volume AND premium traffic. AR has a high cost base and can't compete with LEVEL. On the FCO route AZ & AR have a JBA, so it is metal neutral on the passenger side of the house..

I also suspect the BCN-EZE market is taking away PAX from MAD and other European airports just because of the cheap one-way fares. I have seen even people from Madrid flying from BCN because of those fares. Even a poster here (PatrickZ80) said that he had flown from California to BCN "self-connecting" onwards to EIN. And an American poster who had flown LAX-KEF-BCN for less than 300 USD in August (!).

Self-connecting in BCN is also increasingly cheaper. With the collapse of the Catalan economy and tourism industry, flights from BCN to anywhere else in Spain and Europe are becoming cheaper and cheaper.

IMO a lot of this demand will dismiss with time. It is just unsustainable; a bubble that will just need to adjust. The advantage of Argentina is that at this time there are only two low-cost flights to Europe (BCN-EZE and LGW-EZE). But when more competition comes online, I suspect we will see adjustments. LEVEL already dropped BCN-LAX (while Norwegian and Iberia are year-round on MAD-LAX). A lot of people is just flying via BCN because of those 250 EUR flights to Argentina and 10 EUR flights with Ryanair to BCN.

well good luck trying to find anything for less than 100 euros from bcn to mad with renfe the high speed train and by air pretty much the same if you include luggage

there is no need to be bias and spreading lies stick to facts !!

Obviously trains are packed to Madrid-Atocha. Madrid is a boomtown those days and traffic from Madrid to anywhere is booming. A lot of people and companies are moving from decaying Barcelona to booming Madrid and AVE trains have more generous luggage policies

Those are facts from this week's press (source: Ministry of Economy). https://www.elmundo.es/madrid/2018/12/2 ... b46e3.html

Madrid received 16 times more foreign investment than Catalonia in 2018. Sixteen times more.

Madrid, Baleares and Canarias are the regions where population grew at a fastest rate in H1 2018. Catalonia had a negative net migration with rest of Spain, meaning more people move from Catalonia to other areas in Spain than the other way around.

https://www.cope.es/actualidad/espana/n ... 213_309516

Even the Financial Times agree:

https://www.ft.com/content/8b86b6ba-f6e ... 65ddf314e9

The Montréal effect is in full swing. Or, since this thread is about Argentina, we might say that Madrid is becoming the Spanish Buenos Aires. What is other than BsAs in Argentina? Córdoba or Rosario...

SCQ83 wrote:

Self-connecting in BCN is also increasingly cheaper. With the collapse of the Catalan economy and tourism industry, flights from BCN to anywhere else in Spain and Europe are becoming cheaper and cheaper.

Capitalism works different for you my friend...

Economy goes down, airlines increase offer and therefore prices go down....really interesting....

I'd suggest you to do some research about how the aviation market has evolved over the last few years in CCS, then you will know how is the behaviour of a market where a real collapse of economy and tourism industry has taken place.

SCQ83 wrote:

dcajet wrote:

EZE is the #1 long haul Latin America destination ex MAD (perhaps the #1 long haul?) in terms of frequencies (adding Iberia's, Aerolineas's and Air Europa's).

NYC is the first long-haul destination ex-MAD if you combine both airports (JFK+EWR). Bogotá and Buenos Aires come second and quite close to each other. I suspect EZE will "win" by the end of the year with the Copa Libertadores stuff. In any case, the Top 3 are BOG, EZE and JFK (in no particular order).

I may be wrong, but I think that MEX is bigger than BOG.

For IB MEX is the biggest market...not an opinion, I asked IB vi a Twitter some m9nths ago

SCQ83 wrote:

dcajet wrote:

EZE is the #1 long haul Latin America destination ex MAD (perhaps the #1 long haul?) in terms of frequencies (adding Iberia's, Aerolineas's and Air Europa's).

NYC is the first long-haul destination ex-MAD if you combine both airports (JFK+EWR). Bogotá and Buenos Aires come second and quite close to each other. I suspect EZE will "win" by the end of the year with the Copa Libertadores stuff. In any case, the Top 3 are BOG, EZE and JFK (in no particular order).

I may be wrong, but I think that MEX is bigger than BOG.

For IB MEX is the biggest market...not an opinion, I asked IB vi a Twitter some m9nths ago

For JAN-NOV 2018, those are top 10 long-haul routes out of MAD. Unsurprisingly, only 2 of the 10 (New York and Dubai) are not in Latin America. As I mentioned, Bogotá and Buenos Aires are very close to each other (a difference of only 12.000 PAX).

1. BOG: 804.779
2. EZE: 792.642
3. JFK: 774.619
4. MEX: 719.985
5. MIA: 650.058
6. LIM: 606.710
7. GRU: 589.209
8. DXB: 480.823
9. HAV: 471.201
10. SCL: 435.705

If you combine JFK+EWR (159.147), MAD-NYC has 933.766 PAX. So for the full year, it will be more than 1 million PAX.

SCQ83 wrote:

For JAN-NOV 2018, those are top 10 long-haul routes out of MAD. Unsurprisingly, only 2 of the 10 (New York and Dubai) are not in Latin America. As I mentioned, Bogotá and Buenos Aires are very close to each other (a difference of only 12.000 PAX).

1. BOG: 804.779
2. EZE: 792.642
3. JFK: 774.619
4. MEX: 719.985
5. MIA: 650.058
6. LIM: 606.710
7. GRU: 589.209
8. DXB: 480.823
9. HAV: 471.201
10. SCL: 435.705

If you combine JFK+EWR (159.147), MAD-NYC has 933.766 PAX. So for the full year, it will be more than 1 million PAX.

I'd add that EZE traffic is mostly point to point, while a portion of BOG (at least on AV) traffic then transfers to other destinations via the AV hub.

How is EZE route point to point when MAD is IB's hub and BOG somehow isn't a point to point route because of AV's hub in BOG?

lhrsfosyd wrote:

How is EZE route point to point when MAD is IB's hub and BOG somehow isn't a point to point route because of AV's hub in BOG?

Please do not attribute things to me which I have not said. I did not say all AV traffic connects beyond BOG. Just a portion of it. But a significant part of it. Per Avianca's own CEO, 60% of its London originated traffic continues beyond BOG and 80% of the new Munich service traffic continues beyond BOG as well, as reported on an ATW recent issue.

At EZE most traffic ends or begins the journey at EZE, regardless where it starts or finishes its trip in Europe, the Middle East, etc. There is no hub at EZE to speak of, just AR's long haul to some domestic and regional destinations (SCL). It's the end of the line. BOG, OTH, is a hub and can distribute traffic to Central America, Ecuador, Peru and as far south as Chile.

In plain English, not all BOG-bound traffic that boards at Madrid has BOG as the final destination. That is not the case with Buenos Aires.

dcajet wrote:

I'd add that EZE traffic is mostly point to point, while a portion of BOG (at least on AV) traffic then transfers to other destinations via the AV hub.

Indeed. Avianca is quite agressive connecting PAX on the Colombian side.

I suspect however that more PAX originating in EZE transfer in MAD VS those originating in BOG. After all Avianca and Colombia overall have a more extensive European network than AR/EZE, so there is less need to use MAD as a gateway for Europe. So it is probably more about MAD-BOG-XXX and EZE-MAD-XXX.

It is annoying that our friends from Northeast Spain take over those threads because they cannot handle how irrelevant their local airport is becoming

dcajet wrote:

lhrsfosyd wrote:

How is EZE route point to point when MAD is IB's hub and BOG somehow isn't a point to point route because of AV's hub in BOG?

Please do not attribute things to me which I have not said. I did not say all AV traffic connects beyond BOG. Just a portion of it. But a significant part of it. Per Avianca's own CEO, 60% of its London originated traffic continues beyond BOG and 80% of the new Munich service traffic continues beyond BOG as well, as reported on an ATW recent issue.

At EZE most traffic ends or begins the journey at EZE, regardless where it starts or finishes its trip in Europe, the Middle East, etc. There is no hub at EZE to speak of, just AR's long haul to some domestic and regional destinations (SCL). It's the end of the line. BOG, OTH, is a hub and can distribute traffic to Central America, Ecuador, Peru and as far south as Chile.

In plain English, not all BOG-bound traffic that boards at Madrid has BOG as the final destination. That is not the case with Buenos Aires.

That's the issue, you do not understand the meaning of the words you have chosen to use. You have written 'EZE traffic is mostly point to point' which means that passengers on the MADEZE route mostly originate in MAD and mostly finish their journey in EZE. That's not what you meant and you have clarified that in the subsequent post. Nonetheless, you have used wrong terminology in the first place.

lhrsfosyd wrote:

dcajet wrote:

lhrsfosyd wrote:

How is EZE route point to point when MAD is IB's hub and BOG somehow isn't a point to point route because of AV's hub in BOG?

Please do not attribute things to me which I have not said. I did not say all AV traffic connects beyond BOG. Just a portion of it. But a significant part of it. Per Avianca's own CEO, 60% of its London originated traffic continues beyond BOG and 80% of the new Munich service traffic continues beyond BOG as well, as reported on an ATW recent issue.

At EZE most traffic ends or begins the journey at EZE, regardless where it starts or finishes its trip in Europe, the Middle East, etc. There is no hub at EZE to speak of, just AR's long haul to some domestic and regional destinations (SCL). It's the end of the line. BOG, OTH, is a hub and can distribute traffic to Central America, Ecuador, Peru and as far south as Chile.

In plain English, not all BOG-bound traffic that boards at Madrid has BOG as the final destination. That is not the case with Buenos Aires.

That's the issue, you do not understand the meaning of the words you have chosen to use. You have written 'EZE traffic is mostly point to point' which means that passengers on the MADEZE route mostly originate in MAD and mostly finish their journey in EZE. That's not what you meant and you have clarified that in the subsequent post. Nonetheless, you have used wrong terminology in the first place.

Thank you for your pedantic answer. You must feel so much better after your proved my obvious challenges grasping terminology. Get a life, man.

SCQ83 wrote:

dcajet wrote:

I'd add that EZE traffic is mostly point to point, while a portion of BOG (at least on AV) traffic then transfers to other destinations via the AV hub.

Indeed. Avianca is quite agressive connecting PAX on the Colombian side.

I suspect however that more PAX originating in EZE transfer in MAD VS those originating in BOG. After all Avianca and Colombia overall have a more extensive European network than AR/EZE, so there is less need to use MAD as a gateway for Europe. So it is probably more about MAD-BOG-XXX and EZE-MAD-XXX.

It is annoying that our friends from Northeast Spain take over those threads because they cannot handle how irrelevant their local airport is becoming

Although no MAD, I am not sure I'd call BCN irrelevant:

LF% on the BCN-EZE route for the past 3 days:

✈22/12: 268 PAX, 85,35% A330-200 (EC-MOY)
✈23/12: 269 PAX, 85,66% A330-200 (EC-MYA)
✈24/12: 283 PAX, 90,12% A330-200 (EC-MOY)
✈24/12: 261 PAX, 83,12% A330-200 (EC-MYA)

dcajet wrote:

Although no MAD, I am not sure I'd call BCN irrelevant:

LF% on the BCN-EZE route for the past 3 days:

✈22/12: 268 PAX, 85,35% A330-200 (EC-MOY)
✈23/12: 269 PAX, 85,66% A330-200 (EC-MYA)
✈24/12: 283 PAX, 90,12% A330-200 (EC-MOY)
✈24/12: 261 PAX, 83,12% A330-200 (EC-MYA)

Quite dreadful loads considering it is peak time (Christmas) in a heavy-VFR route (particularly for Argentinians returning home for X-Mas)

I would not call LF in the 85-90% range as dreadful, even though it is Xmas.