Lan-Copa

[Aero Honduras]

Regretfully there is a big difference between the "planned" Conviasa and Copa or LAN, the are private companies, a government controlled airline in 2004!!! They "Conviasa" Will have a tough time with all the government officials wanting "free rides". Aeropostal, needs a newer fleet, but rember Venezuela is still Cat 2 and it makes moves tougher.



Aerohonduras

[luisde8cd]

AeroHonduras,

Excuse me, but I did not understand your post. You might want to post it in spanish and I'll happily translate for everyone else.

By the way... is AeroHonduras already operating former Aeropostal's DC9s? There is a picture in myaviation.net that shows an Aeropostal DC9 with AeroHonduras titles....

Regarding Venezuela's CAT II. Well a couple of weeks ago, some goverment official said that they were expecting a visit from an ICAO delegation that was going to inspect Venezuela's aviation facilities. The official said they've invested lots of $$ hoping to get a positive feedback from ICAO and he expects that Venezuela will be back to CAT I by the end of 2004. I seriously don't believe him... but if it does happen, I wouldnt mind;)

[Aero Honduras]

Sorry for the mix up my post was in response to Lan-Aerolineas topic by mistake I pressed "new topic instead of reply!!, my opinion is if Conviasa materializes, it will have a hard time surviving with the competition from "private companies" We all know how public companies or government controlled companies have done in the past. Hope Venezuela gets out of CAT 2 soon and Venezuelan Airlines like Aeropostal or Santa Barbara can grow internationally without Wet leases. AeroHonduras Still is Waiting for permits in Nicaragua and Costa rica to start operations.


Aero honduras

[jrsanch]

Don't think that Conviasa will be a major player, at least in the begining,
It "seems" to have political backing, but have already heard of major money expenditures without even being in the air yet!!!
Anyhow, it it's my belief that sooner or later an airline to survive south of the Rio Grande needs some sort of political backing (and maybe a lot in all quadrants of Rio Grande as well, just look at Alitalia, now they don't know what to do in that mess)
So, I know it becomes ambigous if private enterprise is not followed, but I can bet that even Copa and LAN benefit somehow from it.

[Panama Jack]

I am unsure of what to make of your comment: sooner or later an airline to survive south of the Rio Grande needs some sort of political backing (and maybe a lot in all quadrants of Rio Grande as well, just look at Alitalia, now they don't know what to do in that mess)

The two questions I have is 1) what do you mean by political backing and, 2) what kind of time frame are we talking about?

As Alitalia and other former government-owned carriers have learned after privatization, there have to be massive changes in the company culture and the way they do business. Some will survive and flourish (ie. Lufthansa), others will wither and die. In many parts of the world, tax-payers (read "voters") are not to keen on the idea of subsidizing a money-losing airline simply to show the flag in some foreign apron on the other side of the globe. As a former airline employee, I will agree with you if you were to say "that sucks!" since it puts the hardship on a very personal level.

I am still, however, unsure of what you are eluding to by "political backing." Political backing can take the form of foreign ownership limits, subsidies, route protection, a refusal to allow the Fifth through Ninth Freedom to foreign carriers, price regulation, etc. etc. etc. Even in relatively "open" aviation markets such as the United States or Europe and with such free-wheeling phenonemons as Low-Cost Carriers, you will find some level (either very strong or very weak) of "political backing" for the national carriers. After September 11th, the airlines in countries like the United States and Canada went to their respective governments, hat in hand, asking for various forms of assistance.

Latin America has it's share of success stories of privatized airlines that do not count on significant political backing (note, however, just like airlines in the United States, or for that matter any big business, they tend to be active participants in influencing the political process). Successful airlines include Grupo TACA, COPA, LAN (apoligies for not listing others). I share your frustration that we are coming to a world where not every country will have it's Flag carrier and where air transport at some point in the not too distant future may be dominated by mega-carriers or alliances, yet an acceptable level of service can be provided. In the case of countries like Nicaragua, Honduras and Belize, there has not been a truely international flag carrier for well over a decade and yet few people will be able to complain about their ability to travel abroad.

Yet I think that there are opportunities for at least one or two Latin American carriers to be able to rise to the top in such a fall-out where only a few survive, namely because of their geographical location, the fact that there are excellent potentials for growth in Latin America, as well as relatively low airline employee wage levels in Latin America compared to those of the United States. My unscientific observation has been that Grupo TACA routinely undercuts the airfares of US competitors between the United States and Nicaragua.

[jrsanch]

"Political backing" meaning all of the above!
Ownership, subsidies, route protection/procurement, etc,
A few examples come to mind, such as the money loan guarantee offered by the goverment in the US for the carriers...
One more view, for those being CatII, how come the US airlines can still provide services and even increase them while those punished cannot??? It's not a two way street this one. It's not logical.

[Panama Jack]

I think when it comes down to it jrsanch, no government wants his country completely isolated from air transport. Many people and the economy depend on being able to fly in and fly out without much of a hassle. Many of these countries are increasingly depending on tourism, and fight tooth and nail just to get tourists to come to see their country as is.

Cat II is a country's failure, however, it is also a failure that countries often fail to address out of lack of resources and different priorities. You see plenty of examples from potholed roads to crumbling infraestructure. The majority of the population sees more of a priority to address issues such as hospitals, schools, policing and roads rather than air transport. So aviation loses out, but in the meantime, letting foreign carriers serve keeps the finger in the dyke. Besides, these carriers pay landing fees, airspace fees, and bring money into the country. Why does Cuba allow US airliners to overfly their country?

Money talks, B.S. walks. :E