New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

aaway · Sat Nov 22, 2014 4:47 am

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/11/234335.htm

Specifics not yet published, but apparently falls short of Open Skies. The JetBlue filing for MEX likely portends the type change(s) we'll see for Mexico-U.S. commercial services.

LAXintl · Sat Nov 22, 2014 4:57 am

I posted in the other thread from what I gather some details are:

The agreement removes the current 2 or 3 carrier per market restriction which US carriers had found limiting in some busy pairs.
From what I gather the Mexican side will get new pricing flexibility, beyond traffic rights from the US to third markets, new freighter opportunities and potentially the ability to enter into JV's with US carriers which would normally only be allowed with Open-Skies partners.

I'm happy however Mexico did not fall for the free for all Open-Skies mantra here. The market is already heavily skewed to the benefit of US carriers which in 2013 carried 85.4% of seats between the nations.

SWADawg · Sat Nov 22, 2014 4:58 am

Great news for both Countries.

LAXintl · Sat Nov 22, 2014 5:16 am

Of course this does not change the fact that new MEX slot availability is about zero, as JetBlue mentioned at this weeks investor event. They were in search of 3-slots for their future FLL/MCO-MEX service, but having a hard time.

OA412 · Sat Nov 22, 2014 5:26 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
potentially the ability to enter into JV's with US carriers which would normally only be allowed with Open-Skies partners.

I suspect that once this goes into effect, it'll only be a matter of time before AM/DL apply for a JV.

PIEAvantiP180 · Sat Nov 22, 2014 5:32 am

So we will see AA, DL add LAX to MEX and AA JFK to MEX. I really can't think of any other city pairs where more than 2 airlines want to fly from. And if ATI/JV are allowed we well see DL and AM get one first. I see nothing earth shattering here.

LAX772LR · Sat Nov 22, 2014 9:20 am

Quoting PIEAvantiP180 (Reply 5):
I really can't think of any other city pairs where more than 2 airlines want to fly from.

Houston.

UA splits the two authorities to MEX from IAH with a UAx carrier. WN would no-doubt want one from HOU as well.

Byrdluvs747 · Sat Nov 22, 2014 9:30 am

Quoting PIEAvantiP180 (Reply 5):
So we will see AA, .... add LAX to MEX and AA JFK to MEX.

I've been wishing for this route for years now. I fly LAX-MEX 5-6 times a year so it will be nice to be able to fly it on AA metal.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
...beyond traffic rights from the US to third markets...

Do US carriers receive the same?

skyone · Sat Nov 22, 2014 1:16 pm

I think you are only seeing the opportunities for the US carriers, which I agree with you all. AA and DL do have the slots at MEX to operate LAX and JFK, even if that means going away with PHX, ORD for AA and DL getting a slot or two from partner AM to do at least 2 LAX. But if I remember correctly, MX USA routes from MEX were split evenly between 4O and Y4 in a gentlemen pact with DGAC. And they got the slots too, which are now permanent once MX Chapter 7 was finally declared.

So how about 4O finally opening LAS and LAX from MEX, instead of flying LAS from low yielding TLC and flying to SNA to make it seam as LAX. On the other side, Y4 would sure like to get into the NYC market too, because they are already opening FLL from MEX in a few days, which makes me think FLL and MIA do not count as co-terminals for the bilateral.

adamh8297 · Sat Nov 22, 2014 1:32 pm

Quoting PIEAvantiP180 (Reply 5):
I really can't think of any other city pairs where more than 2 airlines want to fly from

LAX-GDL which I believe is larger than LAX-MEX

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 7):
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
...beyond traffic rights from the US to third markets...

Do US carriers receive the same?

What about non-US/non-Mexican carriers - There were tidbits about EK trying to get rights on DXB-MIA-MEX.

I wonder what beyond traffic rights a Mexican carrier would try to get?

jetlanta · Sat Nov 22, 2014 2:05 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
From what I gather the Mexican side will get new pricing flexibility, beyond traffic rights from the US to third markets, new freighter opportunities and potentially the ability to enter into JV's with US carriers which would normally only be allowed with Open-Skies partners.

AM fought hard for this. Countdown to the Delta/AM Joint Venture announcement begins now...

SWADawg · Sat Nov 22, 2014 2:38 pm

WN will also want to operate LAX-MEX/GDL. Obviously they will also go after HOU-MEX/GDL as well.

usflyguy · Sat Nov 22, 2014 3:33 pm

Quoting PIEAvantiP180 (Reply 5):
So we will see AA, DL add LAX to MEX and AA JFK to MEX. I really can't think of any other city pairs where more than 2 airlines want to fly from.

There are quite a few that WN would want from LAX (one of the reasons they are using SNA instead of LAX), MDW/ORD, HOU/IAH, etc... Don't forget that some carriers hold the authority only to fly it weekly/seasonally while others have all of the rights tied up for mainline along with their "express" partners.

redzeppelin · Sat Nov 22, 2014 3:45 pm

Quoting adamh8297 (Reply 9):
I wonder what beyond traffic rights a Mexican carrier would try to get?

Maybe something like MEX - ASIA via LAX or SEA? I could see AM try something like that if they get cozier with DL.

PIEAvantiP180 · Sat Nov 22, 2014 3:47 pm

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 6):

How is UA/UAX getting away with a two carrier per city rule in the Houston market? They are both UA, or am I missing something.

LAX772LR · Sat Nov 22, 2014 9:18 pm

Quoting PIEAvantiP180 (Reply 14):
They are both UA, or am I missing something.

Yes, you are... look at the first 4 words in your own sentence. They're incorrect.

usflyguy · Sat Nov 22, 2014 9:58 pm

Quoting PIEAvantiP180 (Reply 14):
How is UA/UAX getting away with a two carrier per city rule in the Houston market? They are both UA, or am I missing something.

each operating carrier has to have the route authority, being United, ExpressJet, Skywest, etc... It doesn't matter who it's operating for, it's who it actually operating the flight.

PIEAvantiP180 · Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:11 pm

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 15):

Quoting usflyguy (Reply 16):

Ah it's all in the contract details, thank you. That certainly explains everything.

Tomassjc · Sun Nov 23, 2014 5:36 pm

Quoting skyone (Reply 8):
So how about 4O finally opening LAS and LAX from MEX, instead of flying LAS from low yielding TLC and flying to SNA to make it seam as LAX.

This agreement will definately benefit Interjet. However, they did drop SNA back in July, and have been anxiously awaiting authority to serve LAX since long before that.

Tomas SJC

nomorerjs · Mon Nov 24, 2014 12:40 am

WN wins as MDW and LAX are now open.

AVENSAB727 · Mon Nov 24, 2014 3:34 am

Quoting nomorerjs (Reply 19):

lets not forget HOU! Southwest spent alot of effort and time trying to get the international Terminal there to be under construction! Especially effort!

HKG212 · Mon Nov 24, 2014 4:20 am

Quoting PIEAvantiP180 (Reply 5):
So we will see AA, DL add LAX to MEX and AA JFK to MEX.

Quoting skyone (Reply 8):
AA and DL do have the slots at MEX to operate LAX and JFK, even if that means going away with PHX, ORD for AA

Can't wait to see AA fly both routes, which are a huge gap in the otherwise excellent OneWorld Latin American network. While they are at it, improved attitude of AA ground staff at MEX and a lounge refurbishment are long overdue.

ghost77 · Mon Nov 24, 2014 6:59 am

I see immediately as of January 1st 2016,

AA:

LAX-MEX
JFK-MEX

DL:

LAX-MEX

4O:

MEX-LAX
MEX-LAS
MEX-IAH
MEX-DFW
MEX-ORD

Y4:

MEX-JFK
MEX-MIA

GMT:

MEX-LAS

g77

Byrdluvs747 · Mon Nov 24, 2014 7:23 am

Again. Do US carriers get reciprocal beyond rights, and what possible routes would that entail?

Quoting ghost77 (Reply 22):
AA:

LAX-MEX
JFK-MEX

Is there truly no value to PHL-MEX?

[Edited 2014-11-23 23:24:27]

LAX772LR · Mon Nov 24, 2014 9:10 am

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 23):
and what possible routes would that entail?

You sorta raised the point in contention yourself... what such routes would they really be interested in? The only one that makes any sense from a geographical point of view would be California-MEX-GRU/GIG

But AA (as well as foreign flag) are already flying LAX-GRU nonstop, and it makes no sense for UA to add SFO-MEX-Brazil as it'd much rather feed its own S.Am gateway at IAH.

Other than those, just about any route to LatAm via Mexico would be backtracking.

I sincerely doubt there's a market between MEX and the S.Pacific, sufficient for USA carriers to care about.

SWADawg · Mon Nov 24, 2014 2:43 pm

If beyond rights are permitted for US carriers, look for WN to add HOU/LAX-MEX-S. America Cities right away in 2016. That could help them reach a lot more Cities in S. America with the 737. That will be interesting to watch.

commavia · Mon Nov 24, 2014 3:06 pm

Quoting ghost77 (Reply 22):
AA:

LAX-MEX
JFK-MEX

Agree that both of these - and LAX-MEX in particular - could quite possibly be a priority for AA as soon as permissible. AA has tried before to get LAX-MEX authority, back when Delta quit the market, but it ultimately went to Alaska.

MEX would seem to be a strong candidate as a feeder market for any potential future AA growth in LAX-Asia - ideally (assuming access at MEX, etc.), I would think double-daily, with a ~2330-0100 redeye and ~1100-1300 midday eastbound, and 0700-0800 morning and 1800-1900 evening westbound.

Quoting ghost77 (Reply 22):
DL:

LAX-MEX

Agree here as well that Delta is likely going to want to get back into LAX-MEX, despite having exited the market years ago. It will be interesting, also, to see how and when Delta seeks regulatory authority to deepen its relationship with Aeromexico, and if so, how the two jointly manage capacity in the LAX-MEX market (since Aeromexico already has tons of capacity on the route).

LAXintl · Mon Nov 24, 2014 3:10 pm

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 23):
Again. Do US carriers get reciprocal beyond rights, and what possible routes would that entail?

US already has beyond rights from Mexico (since 1950s).

add - Carriers like Pan Am had long history of using such rights. Even UA did as recently as the 1990s with a MEX-SJO service.

[Edited 2014-11-24 07:15:04]

New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

RE: New U.S.-Mexico Av Agreement From Jan. 2016

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net