It is great news for American Airlines. The proposed to LanArgentina will fill the void in the MIA-EZE market, and I definitley think AA may ask for some more US-Brazil slots and make MIA-GRU 3x daily (up from the current 18 weekly).
However, United Airlines is still going ahead with construction of an $825M international terminal for them and thier Star partners, which will open in about 24-28 months. They are dropping things right now, but are planning to come back in some form. I personally think it is stupid, since they will basiclly have to start from scratch with regards to a customer base, which could be a problem.
It is great news for American Airlines. The proposed to LanArgentina will fill the void in the MIA-EZE market, and I definitley think AA may ask for some more US-Brazil slots and make MIA-GRU 3x daily (up from the current 18 weekly).
However, United Airlines is still going ahead with construction of an $825M international terminal for them and thier Star partners, which will open in about 24-28 months. They are dropping things right now, but are planning to come back in some form. I personally think it is stupid, since they will basiclly have to start from scratch with regards to a customer base, which could be a problem.
IT's a one airline hub. The days of Braniff & Pan Am, two airlines flying to different parts of South America. Eastern & Pan Am, two airlines flying to most of Latin America with mixed results, hardly any competition the locals with Dc-8 and 707 with some 727.
AA, a sleek fleet of 737-800's ,757's, 767 and 777's with A300 to the Caribean. Most locals broke or nearly except, Copa, Taca and Lan Chile. Who next to the grave yard: Avianca, Aerolineas, Varig and/or TAM? AA made these folks get there fleets in order and some did and are stronger for it. LaN Chile and its offspring Lan Ecucador and Lan Peru & TACA. AA's multiple daily flights and 3 - class service and 777 to GRU, SCL and GRI realy have turned fligts south from dread to worldclass.
It is great news for American Airlines. The proposed to LanArgentina will fill the void in the MIA-EZE market, and I definitley think AA may ask for some more US-Brazil slots and make MIA-GRU 3x daily (up from the current 18 weekly).
However, United Airlines is still going ahead with construction of an $825M international terminal for them and thier Star partners, which will open in about 24-28 months. They are dropping things right now, but are planning to come back in some form. I personally think it is stupid, since they will basiclly have to start from scratch with regards to a customer base, which could be a problem.
I doubt that there will be any more FNs hired. The article said United is pulling out of MIA. It did not say that United was giving up the route authorities to Brazil and Argentina. It appears that it is still going to serve those routes from IAD and ORD.
The "open skies" agreements with countries to the South are not really "open skies". Just better than it used to be. AA would have to have permission to increase flights to Brazil, and that is not going to be granted as long as United continues servicing the route. The permission is granted for landing in Brazil. The Brazilian government doesn't care where they a/c took off from.
Well United is trying to beefup their hubs so cancelling the routes make sense. In the future AA may slightly increase service in such markets and may increase their market share. I still feel that UAL will keep its new terminal construction going and may use the majority of their gates for their TED operations. I agree with MAH that it will not make any sense for UA to restart these routes in the future since that will be similar to starting from scratch. TC
So, maybe Star Alliance partners are going to increase their MIA to int'l destination flying! As I understand United is not pulling out of MIA completely. They will still have domestic service which could feed into Star Alliance codeshares.
I'm not sure that this is good news for AA. After all, as far as United itself, we are talking losing competition from only 2 flights a day. And, United is still going to fly to the destinations--just from a different originating airport.
There are a lot of people (and, yes, I admit, me included) who would not connect in MIA given another choice. And, I'm not talking just an AA connection. Over the years I have made int'l connections into or out of MIA on several airlines. None of the experiences was what I would call pleasant.
There are a lot of people (and, yes, I admit, me included) who would not connect in MIA given another choice. And, I'm not talking just an AA connection. Over the years I have made int'l connections into or out of MIA on several airlines. None of the experiences was what I would call pleasant.
I agree with you there, though that is why American/oneWorld is getting a new $1.3B concourse, Star Alliance is getting a new $800M terminal, and skyTeam is getting complete control of the big, airy, and new Concourse H, which will soon have eight international gates. The big three alliances are being grouped together to allow easier, smoother connections, with bigger, more modern terminals.
-- "There are a lot of people (and, yes, I admit, me included) who would not connect in MIA given another choice."
Connecting traffic in MIA doesn't even matter much -- United hasn't had much connecting traffic in MIA lately, and there's no way they competed well for S. America traffic originating in MIA.
I trhink the real loss for United in Miami -- beginning around 2000 -- has been the loss of MIA destination traffic. Lots of wealthy south americans travel to the US frequently, and they only want to go to one place -- Miami. United has flirted with flights to other hubs before, and they were a bit ahead of American in the mid-90s in beefing up their JFK-S. America schedules (e.g. JFK - EZE daily, JFK - GIG nonstop -- United had both of those first), but none of that mattered for securing the lion's share of business originating down there -- for that, you've really needed miami.
