Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
dcajet wrote:Inshallah... But hey, they can't make ends meet to Barcelona, and they want to try Beirut? Allow me to be a skeptic here - can even a fully loaded 787 make it from MEX to Beirut?
It would not, by any stretch of the imagination, be the first air connection from the Americas to Beirut.
* PA operated there for years until sometime in the 70s/Didn't TWA as well?
* ME used to operate to the US, didn't it?
* RG operated to Beirut in the 60s and 70s and before them, either Real or Panair do Brasil did too
* Lest I am mistaken, Viasa operated to Beirut in the 70s too
leleko747 wrote:MEA also had flights to São Paulo in the 1990s, using their 747s and A310.
leleko747 wrote:MEA also had flights to São Paulo in the 1990s, using their 747s and A310.
leleko747 wrote:MEA also had flights to São Paulo in the 1990s, using their 747s and A310.
dcajet wrote:There are significant Lebanese (and Syrian) diasporas in Argentina, Brazil and Venezuela too. Not counting Venezuela for obvious reasons, any flight from EZE or GRU to BEY would be a non starter. I am sure that from these two cities, any traffic to the Levant is well covered by TK, ET, EK & QR. I do understand however, that neither of those fly to MEX.
dcajet wrote:
* PA operated there for years until sometime in the 70s/Didn't TWA as well?
ro1960 wrote:dcajet wrote:
* PA operated there for years until sometime in the 70s/Didn't TWA as well?
PA did via LHR or ORY. I wonder if TW later served BEY via its CDG hub like they did ATH, CAI, TLV...
santi319 wrote:Theres quite a few Lebanese and Palestinian Mexicans! Myself included! So hopefully this is viable.
MalevTU134 wrote:Source?
Don't believe it for a minute. What would be the reasoning behind this?
nine4nine wrote:Uh. This makes absolutely zero sense. Why would they forego major Asian and European for Beirut. I smell BS on this.
Cedric13 wrote:nine4nine wrote:Uh. This makes absolutely zero sense. Why would they forego major Asian and European for Beirut. I smell BS on this.
Because there is a huge Lebanese diaspora in south America and especially Mexico. .
Brazil - 5,800,000
Argentina - 1,200,000
Colombia - 800,000
Caribbean - 545,200
United States - 500,000
Venezuela - 341,000
Mexico - 240,000
Canada - 190,275
Rest of Latin America, ex. Caribbean - 181,800
Ecuador - 98,000
Dominican Republic - 80,000
Uruguay - 53,000
Spain - 11,820
SCQ83 wrote:Cedric13 wrote:nine4nine wrote:Uh. This makes absolutely zero sense. Why would they forego major Asian and European for Beirut. I smell BS on this.
Because there is a huge Lebanese diaspora in south America and especially Mexico. .
According to Wikipedia, the Lebanese diaspora in Mexico is relatively small compared to other countries in the Americas (I have included Spain too):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanese_diasporaBrazil - 5,800,000
Argentina - 1,200,000
Colombia - 800,000
Caribbean - 545,200
United States - 500,000
Venezuela - 341,000
Mexico - 240,000
Canada - 190,275
Rest of Latin America, ex. Caribbean - 181,800
Ecuador - 98,000
Dominican Republic - 80,000
Uruguay - 53,000
Spain - 11,820
IMO the only feasible connection from Latin America to BEY would be GRU on LATAM, with connectivity to Argentina, Colombia, Chile and Venezuela.
Cedric13 wrote:MalevTU134 wrote:Source?
Don't believe it for a minute. What would be the reasoning behind this?
The mexican ambassador to Lebanon met with MEA’s chairman for an air service agreement with the 2 countries expressing Aeromexico’s interest in launching the route.
In addition Aeromexico have publicly expressed that they hope to have this route in the near future.
https://twitter.com/am_escucha/status/1 ... 40384?s=21
https://twitter.com/joseimadrazob/statu ... 69472?s=21
https://twitter.com/joseimadrazob/statu ... 32930?s=21
SCQ83 wrote:Cedric13 wrote:nine4nine wrote:Uh. This makes absolutely zero sense. Why would they forego major Asian and European for Beirut. I smell BS on this.
Because there is a huge Lebanese diaspora in south America and especially Mexico. .
According to Wikipedia, the Lebanese diaspora in Mexico is relatively small compared to other countries in the Americas (I have included Spain too):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanese_diasporaBrazil - 5,800,000
Argentina - 1,200,000
Colombia - 800,000
Caribbean - 545,200
United States - 500,000
Venezuela - 341,000
Mexico - 240,000
Canada - 190,275
Rest of Latin America, ex. Caribbean - 181,800
Ecuador - 98,000
Dominican Republic - 80,000
Uruguay - 53,000
Spain - 11,820
IMO the only feasible connection from Latin America to BEY would be GRU on LATAM, with connectivity to Argentina, Colombia, Chile and Venezuela.
Cedric13 wrote:MalevTU134 wrote:Source?
Don't believe it for a minute. What would be the reasoning behind this?
The mexican ambassador to Lebanon met with MEA’s chairman for an air service agreement with the 2 countries expressing Aeromexico’s interest in launching the route.
In addition Aeromexico have publicly expressed that they hope to have this route in the near future.
https://twitter.com/am_escucha/status/1 ... 40384?s=21
https://twitter.com/joseimadrazob/statu ... 69472?s=21
https://twitter.com/joseimadrazob/statu ... 32930?s=21
SCQ83 wrote:IMO the only feasible connection from Latin America to BEY would be GRU on LATAM, with connectivity to Argentina, Colombia, Chile and Venezuela.
FlyHappy wrote:SCQ83 wrote:IMO the only feasible connection from Latin America to BEY would be GRU on LATAM, with connectivity to Argentina, Colombia, Chile and Venezuela.
I'm with SCQ83 .
I wish AM and the MEX pax the very best in future long haul endeavors, and am personally a big proponent of point to point travel wherever possible; but given the distribution of diaspora numbers, and reality that MEX @ 7700miles is 1000+ further than GRU , and has the hot-n-high penalty...... I cannot see anything other than a flight from Brazil (with nearby feed) happening.
At 7700 miles, BEY is nearly as far as AM's longest route, MEX-PVG (8000miles) which requires a fueling tech stop on the west bound, despite using a very rangy 788. A quick check of fares show Y commanding nearly $2000 US.... I commend AM for running that route, and I bet its a money maker for them long-term, but that's Shanghai, and its hard to see how a nearly as long Beirut flight could possibly command those fares.
In truth, MEX itself is poorly situated to collect feed from anywhere other than a few domestic cities, and maybe the Central American states. Seems like MEX really has to survive solely on O/D for any meaningful route.
Sorry my Mexican-Middle Eastern friends, but I really think you will need to continue to suffer the difficult or expensive European hubs; there just doesn't appear to be a business case for a non-stop.... and certainly not done so more cheaply than is possible via a European hub.
MalevTU134 wrote:Cedric13 wrote:MalevTU134 wrote:Source?
Don't believe it for a minute. What would be the reasoning behind this?
The mexican ambassador to Lebanon met with MEA’s chairman for an air service agreement with the 2 countries expressing Aeromexico’s interest in launching the route.
In addition Aeromexico have publicly expressed that they hope to have this route in the near future.
https://twitter.com/am_escucha/status/1 ... 40384?s=21
https://twitter.com/joseimadrazob/statu ... 69472?s=21
https://twitter.com/joseimadrazob/statu ... 32930?s=21
You're kidding, right? Those tweets are your "source"? They talk about Lebanon and Mexico talking about signing an Air Services Agreement (ASA), then it says ME CEO expresses he wants a code share on BEY-MAD, then some user says he would like to see a direct MEX-BEY and the AM twitter administrator politely replies that he hopes they will have that route soon.
You do know that there is probably an ASA between Fiji and Albania? Or Bolivia and Nepal... That doesn't mean that flights will start tomorrow...or ever.
Read my (and other posters') previous posts as to why this flight has zero chance of happening.
Are you serious? There is nothing on those tweets that supports your original post. One of them is even a Twitter user suggesting AM they should start the route. Nothing but an exchange of platitudes about a potential code share agreement between MAD and BEY and an ASA.
An active imagination indeed.
KLAM wrote:I think I know where this confusion comes from. I saw this post on facebook and instagram (https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/cedaravnews?source=feed_text), and I also got excited! As a Mexican-Lebanese, I go constantly to BEY, and this would be extremely convenient for me; however, what this really means is that ME may codeshare with AM ex-MAD. This means MEX-MAD will be flown on AM's metal, and MAD-BEY will be flown on ME.
Current options connecting MEX with BEY are limited. The most convenient connection is with AZ, which I am no longer sure if it runs year-round, and with AF during the summer (as flight AF562 only runs from June to August); otherwise, connection times can be pretty long as most direct flights to BEY (ex-CDG) depart before AF179 and AM3 arrive. A similar thing happens with BA (BA242 MEX-LHR arrives at LHR at 15:30, and BA149 to BEY leaves at 14:40). Lufthansa offers a 7 hour connection time in FRA (inbound and outbound!).
Connecting in MAD would be very convenient, but not daily. AM1 arrives in MAD at 12:40 and ME242 departs at 14:45.
KLAM wrote:MalevTU134 wrote:Cedric13 wrote:The mexican ambassador to Lebanon met with MEA’s chairman for an air service agreement with the 2 countries expressing Aeromexico’s interest in launching the route.
In addition Aeromexico have publicly expressed that they hope to have this route in the near future.
https://twitter.com/am_escucha/status/1 ... 40384?s=21
https://twitter.com/joseimadrazob/statu ... 69472?s=21
https://twitter.com/joseimadrazob/statu ... 32930?s=21
You're kidding, right? Those tweets are your "source"? They talk about Lebanon and Mexico talking about signing an Air Services Agreement (ASA), then it says ME CEO expresses he wants a code share on BEY-MAD, then some user says he would like to see a direct MEX-BEY and the AM twitter administrator politely replies that he hopes they will have that route soon.
You do know that there is probably an ASA between Fiji and Albania? Or Bolivia and Nepal... That doesn't mean that flights will start tomorrow...or ever.
Read my (and other posters') previous posts as to why this flight has zero chance of happening.Are you serious? There is nothing on those tweets that supports your original post. One of them is even a Twitter user suggesting AM they should start the route. Nothing but an exchange of platitudes about a potential code share agreement between MAD and BEY and an ASA.
An active imagination indeed.
Wow... some people should really really really chill... Yes, the twitter/fb/instagram posts refer to a possible code share between AM and ME... But there is no need of patronizing anyone here. Forums are for asking questions (even if you think they are stupid); not everyone has a background in business or works in aviation, so let's be patient and nice to each other. If you cannot answer in the way you would like to be answered or feel the urge to belittle someone, then better not waste your time writing a post.
GSP psgr wrote:Does AM have the traffic rights to fly MEX-YUL-BEY? Now that's a route with potential.
SCQ83 wrote:The best thing would be MEA getting a codeshare with Iberia.
Yes I know MEA is Skyteam but that is quite irrelevant today (e.g. Czech Airlines - Skyteam - codeshares with IB in MAD). Iberia has all the destinations relevant to Lebanese VFR (MEX, CCS, EZE, GRU, GIG, SCL, BOG, PTY...) and it would also be another connection for the US. Iberia has announced intentions to serve YYZ and YUL in the future, so traffic to Lebanon would be perfect for this.
Iberia and El Al codeshare and have four daily flights (2 on Saturday), 2 each one. With similar traffic patterns (LATAM and the US). Maybe MEA could increase the BEY-MAD to daily and this would make it a more competitive option for traffic LATAM/US-Lebanon.
Cedric13 wrote:GSP psgr wrote:Does AM have the traffic rights to fly MEX-YUL-BEY? Now that's a route with potential.
Air Canada did try multiple times to launch this route but the Canadian gov keeps turning them down... Let’s hope for the best tho during the coming years!
spinkid wrote:If we can manage to set aside the debate over sources, several of you have noted that this is indeed a reasonable route. Connectivity from South America and perhaps even SW USA this route could work.
KLAM wrote:suppose you start a MEX-BEY nonstop. MEX and national passengers connecting there alone are not enough to fill a 788. This flight would be ideally fed by passengers from places like LIM, CCS, GUA and other places in Central America and part of South America. Yet, the number of passengers in the region is not very large, and may already be captured by TK, EK, and QR.
dcajet wrote:Cedric13 wrote:GSP psgr wrote:Does AM have the traffic rights to fly MEX-YUL-BEY? Now that's a route with potential.
Air Canada did try multiple times to launch this route but the Canadian gov keeps turning them down... Let’s hope for the best tho during the coming years!
On security grounds. As much as it is a wonderful and gorgeous city, rich in history and a crossroads of civilizations, the security issue is still something not completely resolved. I'm not sure BEY would be approved by the DHS as a gateway for US-bound flights either.