I searched the flight from IAD to EZE in February and found only few seats available in Y and maybe around 10 more in Y+. Is it really that popular for this route?

I would like to plan to EZE but will not fix my itn until late December.

Are you only checking the seat map?

Yes! Does it mean they block other seats even it is available?

This route is scheduled to have the new seats, but there is the possibility of a substitution. Hence, the seat map shows only the very few seats which would not create trouble, if assigned, in case such a substitution occurs. This happens on lots of international flights currently. The seatmap is usually a poor indicator of availability, however in these cases it is just not an indicator at all.

Noted and Thanks.

What dates are you checking? I just randomly checked 2/9/09 IAD-EZE, 2/18/09 EZE-IAD. I saw at least 10 seats in Y and about that many in Y+, both ways.

It's definitely a popular route -- almost invariably quite full from December through February or March as it's summer in Argentina, plus the holidays. Agree with the other posters though -- I wouldn't rely on the seatmaps. Check www.seatcounter.com to see how many seats are for sale in the various booking classes. The more green you see, the more open it is.

Enjoy EZE!

Do you have status? If you don't, or you don't log in with your MP #, all of E+ will usually be blocked off.

I simply don't understand why fares are regularly so high IAD-EZE, >10 cpEQM in coach. If demand is that high, why not additional service?

It's simple supply and demand. UA would rather want to make more profit by keeping the supply of seats low. By increasing capacity, the relative demand would lessen and any potential profit would decrease. Plus, UA wouldn't be concerned about the possibly of lowering fares to "fill the seats" if it had added more seats, decreasing the risk of losing money.

LAX

UA has a single 767 a day to Argentina, and is the only airline flying IAD-EZE nonstop. Small capacity + nonstop premium = high fares. United is short on aircraft and the South American routes are not the most profitable ones, so it's unlikely we'll see expanded service (unfortunately for me).

It has been more than 40 years since I majored in economics at a first rank school, but I still understand the basics of supply and demand. What I don't understand with regard to UA fares to/from EZE is:

Why should the South American routes be less profitable than other domestic and foreign ones? (Are domestic routes and foreign ones separate discussions for one or more reasons, e.g., different fleet requirements, the need for even non-profitable domestic feeder routes, the costs of maintaining a ground station, etc.?) Are the economics of the EZE routes comparable for the GRU ones?

Are the economics for UA to/from EZE better (or worse) now than when they flew out of MIA and to SCL?

Is there something of a cartel on flights between EZE and the States, as I believe there is on flights between Australia and the States, keeping fares artificially high? What is the story as far as service and fares with other carriers providing non-stop service between EZE and the States? (My interest is primarily IAD-EZE and only infrequently have I looked at non-UA fares out of other cities.)

Why are UA fares to EZE from the States so much more disproportionate in comparison to those to and from Europe than they were 5 years ago?

Presumably, knows its business better than any of us, especially where fare setting is concerned. But rather than just hear it is a matter of supply and demand, I would love to hear what is particular to the EZE routes, especially the IAD-EZE ones. They do add seasonal service on those routes, don't they, so why not add some more as long as the demand is there?

I seem to remember, 3 or so years ago when UA operated ORD-EZE, the Y fares were still fairly high. But Z fares to EZE were abundant too, though, even in peak season. That suggested to me that they were trying to fill up seats in C, and that there wasn't a lot of paid, full-fare traffic on this route when there were flights 2x daily.

Interesting timing as I was planning even further in advance, checking into prices for next June & July which I thought with S. America winter season would be both relatively inexpensive compared to high season and would have decent availability. Sadly, only the former is true as ex LAX the prices in L class are quite reasonable but good luck trying to find anything in the lowest fares levels between May and Aug. when I gave up. Anyone care to share an idea as to why the route is that full up to 10 months in advance? Is this UA "managing" its inventory and will more seats be released later?

FYI being an MP elite I would prefer to fly UA but can only find pricing in the $2300 all in range, quite a bit more than the $1100 range on Air Canada via YYZ & SCL which without E+ would make the journey that much less confortable in economy. The upside is having that much money left over to splurge while in EZE...

I'm not ready to make a decision quite yet but being a longtime FTer if I can find a good price there's nothing to stop me from booking 10 months out either.

Bump for, hopefully, some input.

In general, the question becomes whether the incremental demand from adding seasonal service is at a profitable fare. Just having demand for a route doesn't make it a viable one, and just because a fare seems high relative to years past doesn't mean it is profitable at today's fuel prices.