US-Mexico ready to expand bilateral, opportunities

[WorldTraveler]

if you can't find the ignorance and bias in a statement like this, then I would hardly be worrying about human rights in any other context, Kev.

most Mexicans would rather swim across the Rio Grande than fly on an airliner for their travel to the USA.

 

[Kev3188]

if you say so. Looks to me like you're just trying to gin up controversy so you'll have posts to respond to throughout the day.

I'd say that accurate or not, most people's perception of Mexico is of MEX being a big city, and the rest (cun/czm/sjd/zih) being a place to vacation. If you're lucky, someone might mention GDL and it's historical role as an industrial center.

Why not correct that? Frugal came right out and asked. You allegedly want business discussions on this site. Here's your shot; don't squander it.

 

[WorldTraveler]

first, all the business discussions in the world are meaningless with someone who sees Mexicans as wetbacks who have no economic potential except for what Americans can bring them. If you are half as committed to human rights as you say you are, you and others would have no problem condemning that statement. We're simply asking you to affirm the ignorance and disgust of the statement that Frugal made - and which he/she even qualified as potentially sounding ignorant.

your lack of voice on the subject is more than notable, Kevin. I'm disappointed to say the least.

second, regardless if whether Mexico City is the vast majority of the business market in Mexico, the very same thing can be said about a dozen other countries including the UK, Japan, France and many other countries where the economy is heavily concentrated in one city - including the vast majority of Latin economies.

and third, one of the key provisions of this agreement is that it allows for the expansion of services at airports exactly like MEX where two US carriers have dominated the market.

and fourth, it is precisely because AM dominates MEX and DL not only has a current partnership but has the potential to develop a far more extensive one that DL has the potential to significantly expand its presence in Mexico - which is a true intercontinental hub

and finally even if Mexico is a heavily leisure oriented market for American tourists - and it is far more than just that - it generates higher yields than many domestic markets... unless of course you and Frugal want to tell B6 and WN that they are wrong in their strategies to grow there .

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

I should have chosen my words more carefully.
The preference for swimming across the Rio Grande vs. flying was meant to be more humorous instead of racist.  
I apologize.
 
That being said, my question remains:  what is the big deal about service to Mexico?  The way I see it, it is a country with a large population, however I don't think the disposable income is there for too many leisure trips (weekend getaways) to the USA.  Most of the business I'm assuming is done in MEX, and I would imagine the preference in traveling between MEX-any-city-USA probably has to go to USA-based carriers already.
In addition to MEX for business, I see come of the other destinations as tourist traffic (low yield perhaps - I don't know).
 
 
 

 Mexico is the largest air travel market for US carriers already.


it is set to get a whole lot larger due to liberalization of the market because of this agreement and because of the growth of low fare carriers.
 

 
Again I ask:  what is the disposable income of Mexicans?
 
I think the population of Japan is similar to Mexico, however I would wager that the average Japanese person has a lot higher disposable income to spend (on air travel and other things)
 

second, regardless if whether Mexico City is the vast majority of the business market in Mexico, the very same thing can be said about a dozen other countries including the UK, Japan, France and many other countries where the economy is heavily concentrated in one city - including the vast majority of Latin economies.

and third, one of the key provisions of this agreement is that it allows for the expansion of services at airports exactly like MEX where two US carriers have dominated the market.

and fourth, it is precisely because AM dominates MEX and DL not only has a current partnership but has the potential to develop a far more extensive one that DL has the potential to significantly expand its presence in Mexico - which is a true intercontinental hub

and finally even if Mexico is a heavily leisure oriented market for American tourists - and it is far more than just that - it generates higher yields than many domestic markets... unless of course you and Frugal want to tell B6 and WN that they are wrong in their strategies to grow there .

 
RE:  your second and third point
While it is true that many countries have a 'dominant' city (London UK is a perfect example) there are some key differences. 
I would argue that one reason many countries have 1 dominant city is because of geography / size of the country. 
Mexico is approx. 760000 sq. miles as opposed to
248000 sq. miles for France
145000sq. miles for Japan
94000 sq. miles for UK
116000 sq. miles Italy (which has FCO and MXP as dominant cities)
137000 sq. miles for Germany  (which has several important cities (FRA, MUC, DUS, Berlin)
 
Furthermore, in all of those countries listed, the average citizen has a lot more disposable income. For example, the per capita GDP of Mexico is approx. $17000, as opposed to approximately $35000 for UK and Japan and Italy, approx. $40-45000 for France and Germany.  For comparison, I'll throw in USA's neighbor to the north - GPD per capita approx. $45000. 
 
It's a lot more likely that a German or a Britt or a hot Danish blonde are going to take a trip to the USA in addition to hopping around Europe on Ryanair, easyjet, etc. 
I've heard and read several instances of Brits flying to NYC to do some shopping.  Can't say the same for Mexicans flying to California, for example, to find some bargains.
Similarly, a Cannuck is more likely to take a business trip to BOS, ORD, NYC, LAX in addition to the family trip to Disney.  Average Mexican?  I don't think so.
 
So I would argue that the only destination of value in Mexico is MEX, and the others are mostly tourist destinations. 
Unfortunately I don't have all the numbers to back up my conclusion, but if you or somebody else does please feel free to post.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

Why not correct that? Frugal came right out and asked. You allegedly want business discussions on this site. Here's your shot; don't squander it.

 
Thank you.  That is exactly my intention.
DL has the business relationship with AM, and I believe WN has a codeshare with Volaris? 
However, what is the big prize in Mexico?
Canada population is approximately 3x-4x smaller than Mexico, but I would argue the UA-AC relationship is a more valuable business arrangement than DL-AM?

 

[WorldTraveler]

first, I commend you for recognizing what you said was wrong.

there simply is no justification for labeling a group of people the way you did. An honest apology is the only acceptable strategy. I accept what you said but I was not harmed.

Mexico is THE LARGEST foreign market for US airlines - and the current US-Mexico treaty is full of restrictions that prohibit it from growing to the size it otherwise could.

second, the US-Mexico City (MEX) market is almost equally divided between US and Mexico point of origin.

You are correct that Mexico as a whole is largely US point of origin driven by the leisure component in CUN and other locaitons.

and yet there are many markets both from MEX and elsewhere in Mexico where US carriers cannot grow under the current treaty because there are no available frequencies.

even if the US carriers will gain the most - they already have the largest share in most Latin America markets - it is growth that US carriers can use to grow their networks - and for now, B6 and WN are likely to be the biggest beneficiaries of new Mexican growth with DL likely the largest among the network carriers.

DL is already showing the largest rate of growth among US carriers to/from Mexico and it is driven by their partnership with AM; DL execs have said that on their earnings calls and DOT data supports it.

Unlike Canada, Mexican taxes are not terribly burdensome and Mexico is a viable leisure alternative for many Americans.

all of the economic and geographic data you provide doesn't mean near as much as known data about the value of air travel between the US and Mexico.

US airfares to MEX are already worth 50% more than the average price of a ticket within the US.

Even when including Mexico as a whole, airfares are higher than just within the US.

Mexico can easily be served by the same aircraft that are used for domestic services.

Demand for air travel in the US is slowing due in part to higher fares. Mexico is a viable alternative for growth for all of the US carriers.

liberalizing air travel IS a big deal and will lead to real growth for all US airlines.

because of its partnership with AM which is the largest and only real global Mexican carrier, DL will likely reap the biggest dividends.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

and yet there are many markets both from MEX and elsewhere in Mexico where US carriers cannot grow under the current treaty because there are no available frequencies.
 

 
I'm curious:  what are the US cities/markets where there is large unmet demand for service to Mexico?  Geographically and culturally, the southwest USA seems logical.  That could mean that WN, UA and AA hubs are in the perfect spot to pick up extra traffic, although having AM as a partner does somewhat help DL (I'm not sure how extensive the DL-AM partnership is).

 

[WorldTraveler]

there is no publicly available data that provides models of where UNMET demand exists. Airlines have that as proprietary information but it is not public.

Mexican resort traffic is obviously more heavily skewed to the northern US, not the southwest.

business markets such as MEX are not stimulated by new growth - but MEX is not a pure business market either.

as has been noted, MEX is limited by space.

It is precisely the same situation that existed at HND and LHR... a semi-Open Skies agreement that isn't really Open Skies and which disproportionately had the potential to benefit one or two US carriers over the others.

In the case of MEX, DL stands to gain the most.

 

[topDawg]

if you can't find the ignorance and bias in a statement like this, then I would hardly be worrying about human rights in any other context, Kev.

 

ay Barack it was a joke. Don't go sicking Holder on him for it. 
 
 
jeesh. 
 

 
what an incredibly ignorant, biased, and racist statement.

Mexico is the largest air travel market for US carriers already.


it is set to get a whole lot larger due to liberalization of the market because of this agreement and because of the growth of low fare carriers.

to try to reduce the economic potential of the market to racist comments is not only disgusting but typical of the market ignorance that is so common for so many on this board.

 

no, that is what is ignorant.

there are 6 plus carriers in many global markets. there are 3 US megacarriers and 3 of the same in Europe. most countries have 2 or more direct carriers.

Mexico has ONE int'l carrier. DL happens to have an exclusive relationship with it.

DL's investment in AM is about ready to move to a whole new level to DL's benefit and the detriment of other carriers.

what in the whisky tango foxtrot are you talking about? 
 
I don't think i said a word about Mexico in the post. 

 

[topDawg]

first, I commend you for recognizing what you said was wrong.

there simply is no justification for labeling a group of people the way you did. An honest apology is the only acceptable strategy. I accept what you said but I was not harmed.
 

You are one of those people who have minority guilt aren't you? 
 
In other words are you white? if yes then you have have to accept crap. A Latino has the right to be upset (I guess) over the comment. A white person needs to shut up and stay out of it.
 
JMO.  

 

[WorldTraveler]

feel free to argue that white people are supposed to just shut up and not speak out about injustice; that may be the way they do it in Henry County but it isn't the way the rest of the world works.

so sorry to feel that your lot in life is to just bend over and take it and not speak out for what is right.

and it also doesn't change the fact that the comment is based on innuendo and not facts. The US-MEX market is nearly evenly split between the US and Mexico; the leisure markets are heavily skewed toward US point of origin - but that is true of the entire Caribbean as well.

The US-Mexico market is ripe for additional expansion. The new agreement is a boon for all US carriers and comes just as WN is ready to expand.

AM clearly wanted it because it allows them to forge a JV with DL who will gain a significant advantage in having a partner with a true global hub.

DL and WN will be the biggest winners with the new bilateral but DL starts from a fairly large position in Mexico to begin with while AA and UA will be the biggest losers as greatly enhanced competition comes to their key Texas and Florida hubs and challenges their dominance in the markets from the largest markets.

 

[topDawg]

feel free to argue that white people are supposed to just shut up and not speak out about injustice; that may be the way they do it in Henry County but it isn't the way the rest of the world works.

so sorry to feel that your lot in life is to just bend over and take it and not speak out for what is right.

Henry County........? errr nah not even close hahahaha 
 
I don't feel like i need to become Jesus on someone who makes a joke. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

the Henry County mindset even at a different address.

 

[eolesen]

So... it's OK to make slurs about someone living in a poorer or less sophisticated county, but not OK to make slurs about someone living in a poorer country?

If you're going to speak out for what's right, that ain't the way to do it, Pastor.

 

[WorldTraveler]

who said Henry County is poor or less sophisticated? not me.