The earlier reports from Forward Keys that were reported in NYT that traffic had collapsed were click and search driven, which don't track real bookings. No politics please, but it appears the earlier articles were click-bait. I suspect this will be much less reported, and IATA is very trustworthy compared to click data from Forward Keys.

‘The strong demand momentum from January has continued, supported by lower fares and a healthier economic backdrop. Although we remain concerned over the impact of any travel restrictions or closing of borders, we have not seen the attempted US ban on travel from six countries translate into an identifiable traffic trend. Overall travel demand continues to grow at a robust rate‘ said Alexandre de Juniac, IATA’s Director General and CEO.

Middle East carriers had the strongest growth, with a 9.5% demand increase in February compared to a year ago. Capacity rose 7% and load factor climbed for a fourth consecutive month to 74.3%, up 1.8 percentage points over last year.
North American airlines’ traffic climbed 0.3%, which was the slowest among the regions. However, adjusting for the leap year, growth was estimated at 3.4%. Traffic to/ from Asia continues to move upward but transatlantic demand has trended sideways since mid-2016. Capacity inched up 0.1% and load factor edged up 0.1 percentage point to 75.9%.

https://wolfganghthome.wordpress.com/20 ... -february/

Good to see. Hopefully the same continues for other int'l markets into the USA as well.

...before the electronic so ban. It'll be interesting to see how that affects the ME3 in the next quarter or so.
(Please don't turn this into a yeah or nay pver the ban)

ahj2000 wrote:

...before the electronic so ban. It'll be interesting to see how that affects the ME3 in the next quarter or so.
(Please don't turn this into a yeah or nay pver the ban)

I think in general the negative media coverage has been to make a point that America was paying a tourism price for policy changes well beyond the Middle East. That's not the case according to real data.

I'm sure RJ has been hurt by the electronics ban, but even so it is doubtful that is impacting macro tourism.

The electronics ban is more of an inconvenience than a travel-killer. Business people will still travel, and for the leisure traveler it is basically a non-factor.
But there won't be nearly as many clicks for the OP's information. Not nearly as laden with catnip for a fake news clickbait world.

I'm not so sure this is accurate for most markets. In Sweden, bookings to the US have fallen by 13% the last 2 months, year-on-year, while the market in general has grown by 14%. The US falls from 3rd to 5th place among most popular tourist destinations among Swedes. Numbers for Norway and Denmark are similar.

Sorry, only in Swedish:

http://www.aftonbladet.se/resa/a/KJdxM/ ... avskracker

enilria wrote:

ahj2000 wrote:

...before the electronic so ban. It'll be interesting to see how that affects the ME3 in the next quarter or so.
(Please don't turn this into a yeah or nay pver the ban)

I think in general the negative media coverage has been to make a point that America was paying a tourism price for policy changes well beyond the Middle East. That's not the case according to real data.

That's not what I got from it at all. What I got from those news reports was that Europe originating forward demand was down. Nothing more, nothing less. And the IATA report neither proves nor disproves that.

MalevTU134 wrote:

I'm not so sure this is accurate for most markets. In Sweden, bookings to the US have fallen by 13% the last 2 months, year-on-year, while the market in general has grown by 14%. The US falls from 3rd to 5th place among most popular tourist destinations among Swedes.

But on a year-on-year basis, the U.S. dollar is up about 10% on the Swedish krona (from about 8.1 per dollar to just over 9 per dollar), which makes the U.S. a more expensive destination for Swedes. That IMO is a far more important reason why bookings from Sweden to the U.S. are dropping.

Who knows what the effect would've been if the ban were allowed to continue and the first weekend following the ban became the norm? You could just as easily say that the negative and quick reaction to the ban prevented the situation from going off the rails.

Where in the article does it state anything at all about USA/Mideast traffic? Is this an example of alternative news?

Just to clarify. I meant specifically "directly between the U.S. and the Mideast".

ScottB wrote:

MalevTU134 wrote:

I'm not so sure this is accurate for most markets. In Sweden, bookings to the US have fallen by 13% the last 2 months, year-on-year, while the market in general has grown by 14%. The US falls from 3rd to 5th place among most popular tourist destinations among Swedes.

But on a year-on-year basis, the U.S. dollar is up about 10% on the Swedish krona (from about 8.1 per dollar to just over 9 per dollar), which makes the U.S. a more expensive destination for Swedes. That IMO is a far more important reason why bookings from Sweden to the U.S. are dropping.

Not so sure. Trump insulted Swedish in such an explicit way that I would expect Sweden to be among those countries that see the most significant Trump Slump. (Even though there are many who would particularly pay a visit to US to support Trump and unsupport the current government in Sweden).

Also Finnair has cancelled its flights to Miami and reduced flights to Chicago for the summer. They claim to have lack of planes (with their 8th 350 just delivered) and pilots (with a new simulator for 350), which smells an excuse.

jetero wrote:

Who knows what the effect would've been if the ban were allowed to continue and the first weekend following the ban became the norm? You could just as easily say that the negative and quick reaction to the ban prevented the situation from going off the rails.

But the media/others can't say a dip in bookings is caused by the Administration policies when it fits the narrative, and then when bookings are up say you can never prove what is causing changes in traffic. LOL

MalevTU134 wrote:

I'm not so sure this is accurate for most markets. In Sweden, bookings to the US have fallen by 13% the last 2 months, year-on-year, while the market in general has grown by 14%. The US falls from 3rd to 5th place among most popular tourist destinations among Swedes. Numbers for Norway and Denmark are similar.

Sorry, only in Swedish:

http://www.aftonbladet.se/resa/a/KJdxM/ ... avskracker

Again, bookings mean pretty much zero because of fare sales that happen at random times. This year's data could be before the sale, and last year's after the sale creating a huge artificial drop. Flown is much more meaningful.

enilria wrote:

Who knows what the effect would've been if the ban were allowed to continue and the first weekend following the ban became the norm? You could just as easily say that the negative and quick reaction to the ban prevented the situation from going off the rails.

But the media/others can't say a dip in bookings is caused by the Administration policies when it fits the narrative, and then when bookings are up say you can never prove
what is causing changes in traffic. LOL

It's surprising to me that anyone on this site is now shocked that the media doesn't do the best job reporting on the airline industry. In fairness to them, there was plenty of speculation out there at the time that the ban would do just that. I'm not sure why that speculation was surprising to anyone who would think that it might affect air travel demand if there were the perception that there could be increased and unjustified harassment (key word: perception, not saying in a blanket statement that such harassment exists) by CBP officials upon entry into the United States. You live or lived in Canada, so I'm sure you've heard your fair share of stories of peoples' interactions with CBP and how they refuse to fly through the US unless they absolutely have to. (Not that CBSA is a shining example of fair treatment either.) Sure, a lot of it's bluster, but a good amount isn't. QSI is an industry-standard way of forecasting air travel demand on a route-by-route basis. Its theory consists of obvious things that can be measured and quantified easily (e.g., airfare and time of travel) and other things that cannot (aircraft type, frequent flyer program). In trying to quantify ease of transit in this equation, wouldn't you factor in customs and immigration processes? When the TSA ramped up after 9/11 was it any surprise that short-haul travel died?

If you like the presidential administration, or this specific decision, or Alexandre de Juniac, then good for you. Why the need to discuss it? I'm afraid there's only one (or maybe two) narratives that's trying to be fit here (and in my opinion it isn't the one you think it is). One is obviously political, as you've noticed (and, BTW, there's only one segment out there that is labeling posts as "un-American," etc.). The other is typical na-na-na-na-na, look at me, I was right, you heard it here first.

I'm not sure the story is over. A 3% decrease a year from now is a decrease. Breaking that down by component into exchange rate changes and just telling the family, "Oh, hey, remember when we talked about going to Yosemite next summer, on second thought let's go to Banff" will of course be impossible. And on political issues we all should know where confirmation bias will lead us. In any case, if trade wars take hold, it has the potential to be a far worse outcome for the industry.

Uh oh, those un-American liberals have infiltrated Hostelling International, Robert W. Baird, the U.S. Travel Association, and Marriott. FAKE NEWS!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... ge%2Fstory

enilria wrote:

jetero wrote:

Who knows what the effect would've been if the ban were allowed to continue and the first weekend following the ban became the norm? You could just as easily say that the negative and quick reaction to the ban prevented the situation from going off the rails.

But the media/others can't say a dip in bookings is caused by the Administration policies when it fits the narrative, and then when bookings are up say you can never prove what is causing changes in traffic. LOL

MalevTU134 wrote:

I'm not so sure this is accurate for most markets. In Sweden, bookings to the US have fallen by 13% the last 2 months, year-on-year, while the market in general has grown by 14%. The US falls from 3rd to 5th place among most popular tourist destinations among Swedes. Numbers for Norway and Denmark are similar.

Sorry, only in Swedish:

http://www.aftonbladet.se/resa/a/KJdxM/ ... avskracker

Again, bookings mean pretty much zero because of fare sales that happen at random times. This year's data could be before the sale, and last year's after the sale creating a huge artificial drop. Flown is much more meaningful.

Bookings are up, but not to America. Bookings are down to America. And American airlines have the lowest growth of all regions. You twisted this story to fit your political agenda and we caught you in a lie. Fox News commentators strike again.

jetero wrote:

Uh oh, those un-American liberals have infiltrated Hostelling International, Robert W. Baird, the U.S. Travel Association, and Marriott. FAKE NEWS!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business ... ge%2Fstory

Read that article this morning... then again, it was published in the FAILING Washington Post

YIMBY wrote:

Also Finnair has cancelled its flights to Miami and reduced flights to Chicago for the summer. They claim to have lack of planes (with their 8th 350 just delivered) and pilots (with a new simulator for 350), which smells an excuse.

The article above predicted that Miami is expected to be hit hardest by the downturn in international tourism (followed by San Francisco and New York)

UA772IAD wrote:

Read that article this morning... then again, it was published in the FAILING Washington Post

I can't tell what is sarcasm on the internet these days, am I out of touch? No it is the children who are wrong.

Looking carefully at what he says, you notice he is selective. Mixing specific and overall observations. Leaving others out.

Not surprizing. He (IATA) is paid by the airlines, who have a huge interest in spreading perceptions all is fine. They know how important public perceptions are, apart from facts.

What slump?
Latest month stats show 4% growth YoY

U.S.-Inbound Travel Grew in April Despite Travel Ban
http://www.businesstravelnews.com/Globa ... Travel-Ban

At this week IATA AGM CEO of KL, SK, CM, AY see no negative booking effects, instead solid demand for US destined visitors. CEOs are actually concerned about travelers to Europe being scared off by repeated terrorist events.

Foreign Airline CEOs Say They See No Trump Slump on U.S. Routes
https://skift.com/2017/06/07/foreign-ai ... -s-routes/

=