Great news for AA and certainly makes for the loss of Latam in their largest South American Market.

It will be interesting to see what, if anything, they do for Argentina, Chile etc. Hopefully this is just the start.

Interesting that this did not involve a financial investment in GOL by AA. Might prevent GOL from being bought out from under them like LATAM. Still, smart move by both airlines.

OzarkD9S wrote:

Interesting that this did not involve a financial investment in GOL by AA. Might prevent GOL from being bought out from under them like LATAM. Still, smart move by both airlines.

These is just for optics GOL will bring very little for American. They did little for delta and little for American in their previous relationship.
The bigger story are the AA add to attempt to block growth for delta.

What AA has that Delta doesn’t is MIA, the most lucrative Latin American hub. This is a solid defensive move from AA. I would like them to be more on the offense as well.

With the loss of LATAM, AA is left with very few, if any choices in Latin America, as the major network carriers there are largely spoken for in other alliances or commercial agreements. This is a combination of convenience for both carriers and AA gets an anchor in the largest aviation market in the region.

Always wanted DL to try to poach CX away from AA.... but hey, this was good too.

AA's in no danger though, as stated above, they have MIA, which will always strategically serve them better than any partner for the region.

LawAndOrder wrote:

OzarkD9S wrote:

Interesting that this did not involve a financial investment in GOL by AA. Might prevent GOL from being bought out from under them like LATAM. Still, smart move by both airlines.

These is just for optics GOL will bring very little for American. They did little for delta and little for American in their previous relationship.
The bigger story are the AA add to attempt to block growth for delta.

GOL and DL did little for each other because DL had very little presence in South America and did not have a hub in MIA, the only main airport GOL could seeve with its narrow body. DL’s investment in G3 was only a defensive move to prevent it from partnering with UA. At that time, AA had LA for the rest of Latin america. So it is obvious that AA/G3 will dominate US-Brazil including secondary markets. Expect LA to drop secondary Brazil to US routes.

LawAndOrder wrote:

OzarkD9S wrote:

Interesting that this did not involve a financial investment in GOL by AA. Might prevent GOL from being bought out from under them like LATAM. Still, smart move by both airlines.

These is just for optics GOL will bring very little for American. They did little for delta and little for American in their previous relationship.
The bigger story are the AA add to attempt to block growth for delta.

LOL Why is it that people resort to describing everything as petulant, child like moves by Airlines on this Board? This is AA responding to losing its partner in South America. What they gain is an alliance with the biggest domestic carrier in Brazil with a product on par of better than Latam's. So in 1 move they've resolved whatever feed problem they had in Brazil and aligned with the largest carrier in Brazil.

As for blocking DL's growth, Delta has already made its move and its intentions are known. This is about AA keeping the dominant position that it has built up in MIA and replacing the codeshare network that it lost with Latams departure. Watch while IAG now follows suits and GOL signs up with them as well. So these are good and smart moves for AA in replacing what it has lost and ensuring AA's MIA operation stays well out in front of anything that Latam and DL can build. I'd not be surprised at seeing further growth from AA or even a stated intention to shift MIA to a 400 to 500 per day operation from where it currently sits now.

LAX772LR wrote:

Always wanted DL to try to poach CX away from AA.... but hey, this was good too.

AA's in no danger though, as stated above, they have MIA, which will always strategically serve them better than any partner for the region.

And with 50+70 A321neo/XLR on the way, they'll be able to serve just about every major and secondary city in Latin America from MIA if they want to.

At some point PVD-MIA for AA has to be in the cards.

airbazar wrote:

And with 50+70 A321neo/XLR on the way, they'll be able to serve just about every major and secondary city in Latin America from MIA if they want to.

Maybe, but then again, it's not like they didn't have a plethora of paid-off 752s that they could've used similarly over the last 2+ decades.

Definitely expect to see some expansion using those, but nothing dramatic.

A decrease in fuel burn, using aircraft with similar capacity to current options but still has acquisition cost to contend with, isn't going to magically make dozens of formerly unviable markets worthwhile, overnight.

This isn't directly akin to the 777/787 effect, primarily for capacity relative to current options as mentioned.

Seems like the battle has begun. I wonder if this will be a replay of DL/AA at DFW back in the 00s. Good to see more of the 788 coming to MIA. Hopefully we will see some domestic turns on it.

Sydscott wrote:

I'd not be surprised at seeing further growth from AA or even a stated intention to shift MIA to a 400 to 500 per day operation from where it currently sits now.

Maybe, but I'm not sure that AA will go for a superhub at MIA the way they did at DFW - and have announced for CLT.

Building on LAX772LR's response,

1. MIA is poorly placed to be a domestic connecting point.
2. B6's Caribbean success out of BOS and JFK shows passengers would rather have a non-stop than an MIA connection.
3. AA doesn't dominate SoFla the way it does Dallas and CLT. Lots of passengers move through FLL (36 million in 2018 compared to 44 million at MIA) and the LCCs of WN, B6 and NK can use long-range narrowbodies to all of the Caribbean and northern S America just the way AA can.

Miamiairport wrote:

Seems like the battle has begun. I wonder if this will be a replay of DL/AA at DFW back in the 00s.

How so? For the most recent month where stats are available (November 2019), AA carried 10X the number of passengers as DL (2,132,496 vs. 201,554). Delta is an also ran at Miami, and they have no real ability to grow meaningfully.

Not surprised overall, although going from 7 to 12 on MIA-MCO seems like a disproportionate response.

Sydscott wrote:

Watch while IAG now follows suits and GOL signs up with them as well.

Since (if I'm not mistaken) AF/KL is still in a JV or some similar agreement with G3 until 2024, that would be awkward.

Sydscott wrote:

LawAndOrder wrote:

OzarkD9S wrote:

Interesting that this did not involve a financial investment in GOL by AA. Might prevent GOL from being bought out from under them like LATAM. Still, smart move by both airlines.

These is just for optics GOL will bring very little for American. They did little for delta and little for American in their previous relationship.
The bigger story are the AA add to attempt to block growth for delta.

LOL Why is it that people resort to describing everything as petulant, child like moves by Airlines on this Board? This is AA responding to losing its partner in South America. What they gain is an alliance with the biggest domestic carrier in Brazil with a product on par of better than Latam's. So in 1 move they've resolved whatever feed problem they had in Brazil and aligned with the largest carrier in Brazil.

As for blocking DL's growth, Delta has already made its move and its intentions are known. This is about AA keeping the dominant position that it has built up in MIA and replacing the codeshare network that it lost with Latams departure. Watch while IAG now follows suits and GOL signs up with them as well. So these are good and smart moves for AA in replacing what it has lost and ensuring AA's MIA operation stays well out in front of anything that Latam and DL can build. I'd not be surprised at seeing further growth from AA or even a stated intention to shift MIA to a 400 to 500 per day operation from where it currently sits now.

Good post.

I don't think AA is going to build up MIA to that extent. It may see a secondary South America build up, but AA will route domestic pax via DFW and CLT before MIA. Additionally, MIA hadnt been their most profitable hub due to pressures from B6 and NK.

onwFan wrote:

LawAndOrder wrote:

OzarkD9S wrote:

Interesting that this did not involve a financial investment in GOL by AA. Might prevent GOL from being bought out from under them like LATAM. Still, smart move by both airlines.

These is just for optics GOL will bring very little for American. They did little for delta and little for American in their previous relationship.
The bigger story are the AA add to attempt to block growth for delta.

GOL and DL did little for each other because DL had very little presence in South America and did not have a hub in MIA, the only main airport GOL could seeve with its narrow body. DL’s investment in G3 was only a defensive move to prevent it from partnering with UA. At that time, AA had LA for the rest of Latin america. So it is obvious that AA/G3 will dominate US-Brazil including secondary markets. Expect LA to drop secondary Brazil to US routes.

DL did a lot for GOL as far as helping their operation less with the financial side. My point is didn’t AA and GOL partner before LATAM? I’m not saying AA is in danger or MIA to Latin America will be majorly effected. I just don’t see the benefit other than Brazil and it hadn’t been the best performing country. Didn’t all carriers within the last year cut service significantly to GIG? Isn’t this just adding it back (genuine question).

If you think LA will drop anything your delusional. DL is making the necessary adds to replace the high margin flows. People think DL needs to do some very extensive adds but the profitable AA flows were only from the top 25 markets.

12-daily to MCO. Wow. Seems like an overkill. I know there is decent local and a good amount of connections. But still 12 daily. Did not see that coming.

flymia wrote:

12-daily to MCO. Wow. Seems like an overkill. I know there is decent local and a good amount of connections. But still 12 daily. Did not see that coming.

It would be hard to imagine this would all be mainline. I would believe that they could put some E175's with the relatively short stage length. Seems like it would be a waste of an Airbus or Boeing.

flymia wrote:

12-daily to MCO. Wow. Seems like an overkill. I know there is decent local and a good amount of connections. But still 12 daily. Did not see that coming.

I think that shows what a strategically important market MCO is for feeding AA's South America network from MIA. They'd like to kill DL's chances at profitability on this route ASAP. The thing is that the connecting market will be strategically important for DL too, and they may be willing to ride out losses until AA eventually cuts capacity back to a more reasonable level, as they themselves are sure to suffer losses at this level of capacity.

Remember when UA upped DEN-SFO to something like 16x daily when VX entered the market? That worked for UA and now they're back to ~11x daily, but DL has deeper pockets than VX, and the MIA-MCO route is more important to their regional strategy. We'll see where this market is at in two years...

Considering the conectivity that G3 has at GIG, I can see JFK-GIG and this new MIA-GIG becoming year round and DFW-GIG coming back into operation in a medium term.

This will certainly boost some operations at GIG hence the tax reductions for G3 in the state of Rio.

FSDan wrote:

flymia wrote:

12-daily to MCO. Wow. Seems like an overkill. I know there is decent local and a good amount of connections. But still 12 daily. Did not see that coming.

I think that shows what a strategically important market MCO is for feeding AA's South America network from MIA. They'd like to kill DL's chances at profitability on this route ASAP. The thing is that the connecting market will be strategically important for DL too, and they may be willing to ride out losses until AA eventually cuts capacity back to a more reasonable level, as they themselves are sure to suffer losses at this level of capacity.

Remember when UA upped DEN-SFO to something like 16x daily when VX entered the market? That worked for UA and now they're back to ~11x daily, but DL has deeper pockets than VX, and the MIA-MCO route is more important to their regional strategy. We'll see where this market is at in two years...

Both will have double connectivity. AA passengers have the choice of going from MIA to MCO and connect onto GOL and vice versa where DL passengers would be able to do the same with LATAM. This will be very interesting.

The flights to Orlando are always packed. Don't know how 12x day will do, but the ones we have now are always full.

flymco753 wrote:

flymia wrote:

12-daily to MCO. Wow. Seems like an overkill. I know there is decent local and a good amount of connections. But still 12 daily. Did not see that coming.

It would be hard to imagine this would all be mainline. I would believe that they could put some E175's with the relatively short stage length. Seems like it would be a waste of an Airbus or Boeing.

In the press release it states added flying will be on mainline equipment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did I miss something or is the inclusion of MIA-IAH sort of random? The rest of increases are obviously DL/LA related but IAH has me stumped unless it was just something they were planning to do anyway and decided to include in this release.

It is too bad we do not see any service enhancements announced by AA with the addition of the routes. It will be tough for AA to compete on the routes where Delta and LAN fly as their service levels are much more customer focused.

heretothere wrote:

Did I miss something or is the inclusion of MIA-IAH sort of random? The rest of increases are obviously DL/LA related but IAH has me stumped unless it was just something they were planning to do anyway and decided to include in this release.

DL does not fly MIA-BNA either.

And LATAM currently does not fly MIA-GIG, MIA-GIG in the past on AA was double daily at peak times.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So when I will be able to use my Smiles miles for AA flights?

Pi7472000 wrote:

It is too bad we do not see any service enhancements announced by AA with the addition of the routes. It will be tough for AA to compete on the routes where Delta and LAN fly as their service levels are much more customer focused.

I highly doubt AA is going to be dropping out of MIA-TPA/MCO/RDU anytime soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

chepos wrote:

heretothere wrote:

Did I miss something or is the inclusion of MIA-IAH sort of random? The rest of increases are obviously DL/LA related but IAH has me stumped unless it was just something they were planning to do anyway and decided to include in this release.

DL does not fly MIA-BNA either.

And LATAM currently does not fly MIA-GIG, MIA-GIG in the past on AA was double daily at peak times.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure, but BNA is a declared DL focus city (for whatever that’s worth) and MIA-GIG is an obvious hole for DL/LA if they want to serve all the top Latin markets. I can’t come up with any reasoning for IAH though other than the normal course of business.

chepos wrote:

heretothere wrote:

Did I miss something or is the inclusion of MIA-IAH sort of random? The rest of increases are obviously DL/LA related but IAH has me stumped unless it was just something they were planning to do anyway and decided to include in this release.

DL does not fly MIA-BNA either.

And LATAM currently does not fly MIA-GIG, MIA-GIG in the past on AA was double daily at peak times.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I can see BNA and GIG being more preemptive to deter DL and LA from entering, but to me, MIA-IAH seems like a much lower priority for them. That had me scratching my head too.

It turns out that Delta and American are switching Latin American carriers with each other. Before Delta's investment on LATAM, they had stakes with GOL, while AA partnered with LATAM. It became the opposite when DL purchased 20% of LATAM (with the latter exiting Oneworld).

precure787 wrote:

It turns out that Delta and American are switching Latin American carriers with each other. Before Delta's investment on LATAM, they had stakes with GOL, while AA partnered with LATAM. It became the opposite when DL purchased 20% of LATAM (with the latter exiting Oneworld).

And before DL took a stake in GOL, AA used to codeshare with them.

Those flights between MCO and MIA are the most drama filled, more so in summer due to Florida thunderstorms. The flights are regularly late causing severe angst with paxs connecting South. The (not so) funny thing is the number of Brazilians visiting Disney and going back home. Often already wondering how they will get home that night (they are told at MCO they will be re-accommodated/rebooked they just aren't told when) they begin to stand up when the seatbelt sign is on, particularly taxing at MIA and/or being forced to wait for a gate. The FAs yell over the PA in Spanish which of course they don't understand. Sometimes what is suppose to be a gate to gate flight of one hour turns into a 3-5 hour ordeal. Thank god there's an AC now to hang out during wait. When it was a 763 it would often take more than 45 minutes to board the flight.

Meh...

Joining up with an LCC certainly not something that AA's premium and many FF'er will look forward to.

I had to fly Gol once due to no other choice, and they were no different than Ryanair. Not exactly the ground or air experience you'd want coming off AA longhaul.

heretothere wrote:

chepos wrote:

heretothere wrote:

Did I miss something or is the inclusion of MIA-IAH sort of random? The rest of increases are obviously DL/LA related but IAH has me stumped unless it was just something they were planning to do anyway and decided to include in this release.

Houston IS experiencing an upsurge of south American traffic, I've noticed that over the last few months. Although I'm not completely sure about its origins, I have a pretty good idea where its coming from based on what I see; just my opinion though, so I'll reserve it for now, I've been wrong before, LOL. Houston has a mix of Eagle and mainline right now, but I expect that could very well move to all mainline eventually.

I wonder if the increased AA flights to MCO will replace GOL flights into MCO.

Miamiairport wrote:

Those flights between MCO and MIA are the most drama filled, more so in summer due to Florida thunderstorms. The flights are regularly late causing severe angst with paxs connecting South. The (not so) funny thing is the number of Brazilians visiting Disney and going back home. Often already wondering how they will get home that night (they are told at MCO they will be re-accommodated/rebooked they just aren't told when) they begin to stand up when the seatbelt sign is on, particularly taxing at MIA and/or being forced to wait for a gate. The FAs yell over the PA in Spanish which of course they don't understand. Sometimes what is suppose to be a gate to gate flight of one hour turns into a 3-5 hour ordeal. Thank god there's an AC now to hang out during wait. When it was a 763 it would often take more than 45 minutes to board the flight.

Yea, you're not kidding, drama isn't the word. And it's so aggravating how dis-organized, irrational, and stubborn these Brazilians can be. Particularly in the early AM arrivals from south America, heading to MCO. They often travel in large parties, which is a recipe for their disasters. Inevitably, one or two of them will be detained by CBP for any number of reasons. Instead of moving everyone else onward to the connecting outbound gate, they stop EVERYTHING and elect to wait for the one or two detainees. You counsel them, beg them to move on, the other two or whatever will catch up later, but, no. So now the WHOLE group misconnects because of one or two. And then they wonder why they can't all get re-accomodated together.

Sightseer wrote:

chepos wrote:

heretothere wrote:

Did I miss something or is the inclusion of MIA-IAH sort of random? The rest of increases are obviously DL/LA related but IAH has me stumped unless it was just something they were planning to do anyway and decided to include in this release.

DL does not fly MIA-BNA either.

And LATAM currently does not fly MIA-GIG, MIA-GIG in the past on AA was double daily at peak times.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I can see BNA and GIG being more preemptive to deter DL and LA from entering, but to me, MIA-IAH seems like a much lower priority for them. That had me scratching my head too.

AA might just be guessing at where DL could add next, based on DL's stated focus cities (BNA), or based on their own data for highest volume origin stations for connections to their MIA South America network (IAH and BOS wouldn't surprise me).

LAXintl wrote:

Meh...

Joining up with an LCC certainly not something that AA's premium and many FF'er will look forward to.

I had to fly Gol once due to no other choice, and they were no different than Ryanair. Not exactly the ground or air experience you'd want coming off AA longhaul.

Yep, AA fliers will be surprised how LCC they really are at the end of the day. At-least they have an economy+ product and lounges though. But the reality is GOL didn't offer much to DL and there was a lot of backtracking to get to places like MAO. But AA offers that route naturally so their network will work better with AA despite the product not being up-to-snuff.

Sydscott wrote:

LawAndOrder wrote:

OzarkD9S wrote:

Interesting that this did not involve a financial investment in GOL by AA. Might prevent GOL from being bought out from under them like LATAM. Still, smart move by both airlines.

These is just for optics GOL will bring very little for American. They did little for delta and little for American in their previous relationship.
The bigger story are the AA add to attempt to block growth for delta.

LOL Why is it that people resort to describing everything as petulant, child like moves by Airlines on this Board? This is AA responding to losing its partner in South America. What they gain is an alliance with the biggest domestic carrier in Brazil with a product on par of better than Latam's. So in 1 move they've resolved whatever feed problem they had in Brazil and aligned with the largest carrier in Brazil.

As for blocking DL's growth, Delta has already made its move and its intentions are known. This is about AA keeping the dominant position that it has built up in MIA and replacing the codeshare network that it lost with Latams departure. Watch while IAG now follows suits and GOL signs up with them as well. So these are good and smart moves for AA in replacing what it has lost and ensuring AA's MIA operation stays well out in front of anything that Latam and DL can build. I'd not be surprised at seeing further growth from AA or even a stated intention to shift MIA to a 400 to 500 per day operation from where it currently sits now.

This is not AA responding to the loss of LATAM this is indeed to counter DL. Responding to the loss LATAM would be South America adds not Intra Florida adds that’s DL recently announced. Those routes had nothing to do with LATAM.

LawAndOrder wrote:

onwFan wrote:

LawAndOrder wrote:

These is just for optics GOL will bring very little for American. They did little for delta and little for American in their previous relationship.
The bigger story are the AA add to attempt to block growth for delta.

GOL and DL did little for each other because DL had very little presence in South America and did not have a hub in MIA, the only main airport GOL could seeve with its narrow body. DL’s investment in G3 was only a defensive move to prevent it from partnering with UA. At that time, AA had LA for the rest of Latin america. So it is obvious that AA/G3 will dominate US-Brazil including secondary markets. Expect LA to drop secondary Brazil to US routes.

DL did a lot for GOL as far as helping their operation less with the financial side. My point is didn’t AA and GOL partner before LATAM? I’m not saying AA is in danger or MIA to Latin America will be majorly effected. I just don’t see the benefit other than Brazil and it hadn’t been the best performing country. Didn’t all carriers within the last year cut service significantly to GIG? Isn’t this just adding it back (genuine question).

If you think LA will drop anything your delusional. DL is making the necessary adds to replace the high margin flows. People think DL needs to do some very extensive adds but the profitable AA flows were only from the top 25 markets.

Brazil and Argentina are (by a large margin) the largest markets in South America. So roping in the largest carrier in Brazil is not ‘little’. Many secondary destinations in upper South america are already served non stop by AA from MIA. As for DL, they needed LA to have meaningful presence in Latin America, including the major cities; not so that they can serve small town in South America (Neither did AA).

I am sure Aerolineas would follow suit, once it is officially ditched (As usual, DL will be working heavily on making the announcement sweet for PR perspective).

As for LA’s secondary Brazil routes, most are already 1 or 2 weekly - there is no way they are going to survive without AA at MIA. G3 will easily push LA off those routes, especially as they have less business demand.

LAXintl wrote:

Meh...

Joining up with an LCC certainly not something that AA's premium and many FF'er will look forward to.

I had to fly Gol once due to no other choice, and they were no different than Ryanair. Not exactly the ground or air experience you'd want coming off AA longhaul.

I’m not sure any AA or Delta customer will notice a difference coming off a wide body product to GOL or Domestic LATAM.

For context:
AF A321: 184-212
LH A321: 192-199
BA A321 European configs: 205-210
LATAM A321: 220 seats
Spirit A321: 228
Frontier A321: 230

GOL B737: 128-144 seats
LATAM A319: 138-144

In my experience, Azul is the comfy domestic airline, not LATAM or GOL.

onwFan wrote:

LawAndOrder wrote:

onwFan wrote:

GOL and DL did little for each other because DL had very little presence in South America and did not have a hub in MIA, the only main airport GOL could seeve with its narrow body. DL’s investment in G3 was only a defensive move to prevent it from partnering with UA. At that time, AA had LA for the rest of Latin america. So it is obvious that AA/G3 will dominate US-Brazil including secondary markets. Expect LA to drop secondary Brazil to US routes.

DL did a lot for GOL as far as helping their operation less with the financial side. My point is didn’t AA and GOL partner before LATAM? I’m not saying AA is in danger or MIA to Latin America will be majorly effected. I just don’t see the benefit other than Brazil and it hadn’t been the best performing country. Didn’t all carriers within the last year cut service significantly to GIG? Isn’t this just adding it back (genuine question).

If you think LA will drop anything your delusional. DL is making the necessary adds to replace the high margin flows. People think DL needs to do some very extensive adds but the profitable AA flows were only from the top 25 markets.

Brazil and Argentina are (by a large margin) the largest markets in South America. So roping in the largest carrier in Brazil is not ‘little’. Many secondary destinations in upper South america are already served non stop by AA from MIA. As for DL, they needed LA to have meaningful presence in Latin America, including the major cities; not so that they can serve small town in South America (Neither did AA).

I am sure Aerolineas would follow suit, once it is officially ditched (As usual, DL will be working heavily on making the announcement sweet for PR perspective).

As for LA’s secondary Brazil routes, most are already 1 or 2 weekly - there is no way they are going to survive without AA at MIA. G3 will easily push LA off those routes, especially as they have less business demand.

The secondary Brazil flying from LATAM relies on local traffic. There is barely any feed from AA and they aren’t going anywhere.

Ishrion wrote:

Missed this earlier, is this alluding to AA’s return to Fortaleza?

After it is approved by authorities in the United States and Brazil, American and GOL’s new codeshare will allow customers to connect seamlessly to 53 GOL flights beyond GIG, Sao Paulo (GRU), Brasilia (BSB), Manaus (MAO) and Fortaleza (FOR).

Unless I’m misunderstanding, these are destinations where American Airlines passengers can connect onto GOL after arriving the respective city? Or are these just select GOL bases?

GOL flies Miami-Fortaleza (although not sure what status is right now with the Max groundings).

slvrblt wrote:

Miamiairport wrote:

Those flights between MCO and MIA are the most drama filled, more so in summer due to Florida thunderstorms. The flights are regularly late causing severe angst with paxs connecting South. The (not so) funny thing is the number of Brazilians visiting Disney and going back home. Often already wondering how they will get home that night (they are told at MCO they will be re-accommodated/rebooked they just aren't told when) they begin to stand up when the seatbelt sign is on, particularly taxing at MIA and/or being forced to wait for a gate. The FAs yell over the PA in Spanish which of course they don't understand. Sometimes what is suppose to be a gate to gate flight of one hour turns into a 3-5 hour ordeal. Thank god there's an AC now to hang out during wait. When it was a 763 it would often take more than 45 minutes to board the flight.

Yea, you're not kidding, drama isn't the word. And it's so aggravating how dis-organized, irrational, and stubborn these Brazilians can be. Particularly in the early AM arrivals from south America, heading to MCO. They often travel in large parties, which is a recipe for their disasters. Inevitably, one or two of them will be detained by CBP for any number of reasons. Instead of moving everyone else onward to the connecting outbound gate, they stop EVERYTHING and elect to wait for the one or two detainees. You counsel them, beg them to move on, the other two or whatever will catch up later, but, no. So now the WHOLE group misconnects because of one or two. And then they wonder why they can't all get re-accomodated together.

Brasil and organization is like oil and water. Bear in mind you're talking about a group of people who live in one of the most bureaucratic, corrupt countries on the planet. To not make a stink about a problem is to get pushed aside. Also, it's worth considering that those one or two people being detained in CBP may not speak English and MIA readily sends out flights even to Brasil without Portuguese speaking gate agents. But yes in general, Brazilians traveling in groups are not a pleasant experience. My mother-in-law is Brazilian, and just recently she flew VCP-MCO as part of a longer overall journey. Her exact words when discussing her fellow passengers' behavior while on board: "I've never been more embarrassed to hold this passport."

onwFan wrote:

So roping in the largest carrier in Brazil is not ‘little’

Who else were they going to partner with? The size difference between Gol and LATAM in the domestic market is roughly 36% vs. 31%, which from a networking perspective has very little significance.

Lootess wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

Meh...

Joining up with an LCC certainly not something that AA's premium and many FF'er will look forward to.

I had to fly Gol once due to no other choice, and they were no different than Ryanair. Not exactly the ground or air experience you'd want coming off AA longhaul.

Yep, AA fliers will be surprised how LCC they really are at the end of the day. At-least they have an economy+ product and lounges though. But the reality is GOL didn't offer much to DL and there was a lot of backtracking to get to places like MAO. But AA offers that route naturally so their network will work better with AA despite the product not being up-to-snuff.

I don't think most people here have flown LATAM. Their intra-South America is an all Y sardine can. The lounges are by and large mediocre as well.

It's not like losing LATAM is like CX walked out the door. From a pax perspective,it's an LCC to LCC swap.