Swank300 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 49 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 9 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4168 times:
Hey guys,
Anybody know what happened to the UA's evening daily departure from EWR to LAX. SFO still has two, but it looks like LAX now only has the one in the morning....have you guys heard anything?
Cory6188 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2686 posts, RR: 6 Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3734 times:
Quoting BALAX (Reply 4): Not enough demand on the market?
Honestly, I get the impression that the other legacy carriers have almost entirely ceded EWR to CO. You never hear of anyone but CO ramping up or adding service to EWR, while CO has gone gangbusters, clogging up the airport with tons of flights.
I'm not too sure why EWR is such a special case, however, as you don't see the non-hub carriers drop nearly all their service at other carriers' hubs. Take DFW, for example. It's a major AA hub, but everyone else still has a normal amount of service to the airport.
Is there something that unique/difficult about CO @ EWR that keeps everyone else away?
Hiflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2118 posts, RR: 4 Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3676 times:
EWR is a problem for carriers on several layers....congestion on the field...congestion from flts already overhead therefore waiting on space...cost on the airport for facilities....the very (too?) close relationship the airport has with CO...
End result is it becomes a tradeoff...at what expense level do you keep your own tin in there to work for your frequent flyers and are they generating enough to justify it.
UAL, in recent months, has been pulling down at both JFK and EWR so obviously their market research and financial analysis says use the aircraft somewhere else where they can work on their strengths.
Is this a CO effect...probably. Are they setting themselves up for the CO merger? just kidding.....
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3458 times:
Quoting Cory6188 (Reply 5): I'm not too sure why EWR is such a special case, however, as you don't see the non-hub carriers drop nearly all their service at other carriers' hubs. Take DFW, for example. It's a major AA hub, but everyone else still has a normal amount of service to the airport.
Have you ever taken a look at ATL?
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Style From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 261 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 3 days ago) and read 3364 times:
In the end it probably just boils down to an oversaturated market. Just like said above, EWR is not the best place to fly out of due to the logistical nightmare when you have soo much as a sneeze it can cause delays.
Quoting Hiflyer (Reply 6): EWR is a problem for carriers on several layers....congestion on the field...congestion from flts already overhead therefore waiting on space...cost on the airport for facilities....the very (too?) close relationship the airport has with CO...
Yes they do have a close relationship, but every other carrier that has a hub works closely with the operator of their respective airport. CO has made significant investments in EWR and should expect those investments to have some sort of return. But it is not all roses either, when Jetblue arrived the Port Authority took them in with open arms as well.
JFKLGANYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2645 posts, RR: 5 Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 3 days ago) and read 3297 times:
This is just another example of legacy carriers continuing to focus on hubs/focus cities. . . none of which UAL has at EWR.
UAL is no longer the giant they were prior to 9/11 and all p2p service has stopped. Now, LAX is a UAL hub, but EWR/JFK/LGA are considered New York.
They already serve the LAX and SFO hubs with the premium service planes from JFK. They serve ORD and DEN from LGA. And they serve IAD from LGA and JFK.
EWR has service to LAX and SFO plus ORD, DEN, and IAD. But the LAX and SFO service is a token presence. If it's down to one flight, it will be pulled soon.
There is no doubt a large market between LA and NY, but UAL is ceding that market more and more to CO at EWR, DL and AA at JFK, and to some extent B6 at JFK.
Travelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3311 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3262 times:
UA flies P.S. equipped aircraft to JFK, and non-P.S. aircraft to EWR. If you want to go to NYC, and you live in LA, and you are a UA freqent flier, which airport are you going to fly to?
Quite honestly it makes a ton of sense for UA to cut LAX/SFO-EWR altogether, if they are considering JFK/LGA/EWR the same market. The high-yield passengers will continue to fly P.S. to JFK. People that really need to go to EWR will either connect or fly CO.
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 58 Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3232 times:
Its simple....
1. UA is reducing its presence in the NYC area including EWR, which was once a very important station for UA. I guess that EWR no longer warrants two flights per day to UA's "hub but not really a hub" at LAX.
2. CO is growing stronger and becoming more dominant at EWR.....and CO is doing especially well with its transcon services; on 5-6 hour flights, being a full service carrier does give CO certain advantage.....pax do appreciate a complimentery meal and something to drink on these longer segments. ALso, CO's schedule with frequent departures is a competitive bonus on the transcon routes.
3. UA's east coast future is at IAD.....UA made that clear with the recent JFK-London deal with DL and the decision to transfer the JFK-NRT route to IAD. Give UA credit for looking forward and focusing on markets where it can dominate, succeed and make money. The EWR-LAX route is simply not an important part of UA's future, so they are reducing service and may eventually drop the route.
Tommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6172 posts, RR: 9 Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3183 times:
Its obvious that CO is really dominating the EWR-LAX market. In late 2004, AA had 767s on the route 3x a day with full service amenities. AA is still holding out on the route, and my flight this weekend (flight 43) is completely full. As for UA, it is surprising that they keep cutting frequencies, but understandable about how they want to build up their hubs.
"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
JFKLGANYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2645 posts, RR: 5 Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3163 times:
"3. UA's east coast future is at IAD.....UA made that clear with the recent JFK-London deal with DL and the decision to transfer the JFK-NRT route to IAD. Give UA credit for looking forward and focusing on markets where it can dominate, succeed and make money. The EWR-LAX route is simply not an important part of UA's future, so they are reducing service and may eventually drop the route."
I agree with most of that, except the part about giving UA credit. The fact that they can not make money on two of the world's premier routes NYC-LON and NYC-Tokyo is a VERY large problem.
And don't tell me about competition and low yields, etc etc on these routes. These are premium routes that airlines would love to fly if they could get the route.
UA was no longer competitive on the JFK-LHR route because they widdled down service from 3 times daily to once a day. This went against AA with 5 a day and BA with 7 a day.
UA is no longer competitive on EWR-LAX because they widdled that route down from 5 a day to once a day. And they will be off that route soon too.
NY is the nation's largest city. LA is the nation's second largest city. And LA is a UAL hub. If they can't sustain and dominate a route like this, it is not Continental's fault. Nor any other airline.
It's because they have infrequent service compared to AA, DL, and CO. And it's because their in-flight economy service is far off base with the guys in Terminal C.
So why would I fly UAL to LAX from EWR? Perhaps a cheap fare. And that is the problem with UAL from EWR to LAX and JFK to LHR/NRT.
Don't blame the routes, don't blame the competition, and don't CREDIT UAL.
Travelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3311 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3112 times:
Quoting JFKLGANYC (Reply 15): NY is the nation's largest city. LA is the nation's second largest city. And LA is a UAL hub. If they can't sustain and dominate a route like this, it is not Continental's fault. Nor any other airline.
It's because they have infrequent service compared to AA, DL, and CO. And it's because their in-flight economy service is far off base with the guys in Terminal C.
They don't need to fly LAX-EWR, because they fly LAX-JFK. Focusing on strengths IS something that that should be commended. "NY is the nation's largest city and LA is the nation's second largest city" means absolutely nothing.
United IS sustaining their LAX-JFK service, so they are sustaining their route between the nation's largest & second-largest cities. They are obviously choosing to focus on JFK for trans-cons, rather than EWR.
And I'd be hard-pressed to see any advantages CO's Y class service has on UA's P.S. service.
Travelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3311 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3075 times:
Has UA changed? When I was on P.S. last December I didn't pay for food.
AADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 1831 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3075 times:
The biggest hole in UA's domestic route system is NYC and historicly that has always been the case. Prior to 2000 they were attempting to add flights to NYC but obviously short term survival swamped any other business strategy. They are retreating for now since there are already plenty of flights LAX-JFK (although LAX lost one frequency to SFO) and EWR was apparently not profitable.
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 58 Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3041 times:
Quoting Travelin man (Reply 18): Has UA changed? When I was on P.S. last December I didn't pay for food.
Yeah, it did. UAL now has food for purchase on the PS 757 transon flights in coach, its a recent change. (I think this is a mistake.....premium service does not go together with the food for purchase idea in my mind.)
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21025 posts, RR: 60 Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3041 times:
Quoting Travelin man (Reply 16): They don't need to fly LAX-EWR, because they fly LAX-JFK.
After all, CO doesn't exactly fly JFK-LAX non-stop, do they?
CO flies to all three airports in NYC, but only fly transcons into EWR. 7 transcon routes out of EWR, zero out of JFK. So what?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Travelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3311 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3007 times:
Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 20): UAL now has food for purchase on the PS 757 transon flights in coach, its a recent change. (I think this is a mistake.....premium service does not go together with the food for purchase idea in my mind.)
Totally agreed. That's disappointing to hear. Oh well, UA still has 100% Economy Plus in Y, true F & C classes with lie-flat seats, and best of all, Channel 9.
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21): After all, CO doesn't exactly fly JFK-LAX non-stop, do they?
CO flies to all three airports in NYC, but only fly transcons into EWR. 7 transcon routes out of EWR, zero out of JFK. So what?
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16250 posts, RR: 52 Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2952 times:
Here's some food for thought for the conspiracy folks, UAL reducing their NYC presence to remove concerns about a CO/UAL merger.
Sell the JFK-London rights to DL because if/when they merge with CO they would have duplicate authorities, somewhat similar with NRT. CO already has EWR-NRT so might as well move the JFK route to IAD.
Im not saying this as matter of fact, Im just using some speculation to tie in this topic with the various CO/UAL merger topics which are being discussed here, in the various media outlets (Chicago Tribune etc) and the many investor chat boards.
Cory6188 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2686 posts, RR: 6 Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2873 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 23): Here's some food for thought for the conspiracy folks, UAL reducing their NYC presence to remove concerns about a CO/UAL merger.
Sell the JFK-London rights to DL because if/when they merge with CO they would have duplicate authorities, somewhat similar with NRT. CO already has EWR-NRT so might as well move the JFK route to IAD.
Very interesting....it's not the first time I've heard such musings, but it seems to make so much sense given the possible merger rumors we've been hearing so much about in the past few months.
25 Coewraatysaz: United at EWR is turning into a line station. They decided to axe 1 of the 2 daily flights to LAX because they lost a lot of aircraft during the bankr
27 Flyswim: I was on UA 956 SFO-JFK on July 27 and the meal was free in Y+. Can anyone confirm if this change occured in August?
28 STT757: Another thing I have noticed, UAL has abandoned (or vacated) their new Cargo building at EWR, the building was completed in March, 2001. It's right ne
29 RampRat74: We still have 57 mechanics in EWR. They must do all their work on the line or on the hardstand now. I remember management telling us how great the new
30 Planecrazy2: Sorry to say p.s. has been buy on board since August 4.[Edited 2006-08-22 09:28:54]
31 UAL777UK: Exactly, so which ever way you butter it up, FF's on UA are always going to go to JFK more often than EWR. No other airline touches the PS Service UA
32 COewrAAtysAZ: The hangar and the cargo building are no longer used by United Airlines, nor are they owned by United anymore.
33 STT757: I met an older gentleman once who came into my family business from time to time, I noticed a Retired UAL mechanic sticker and got to talking with hi
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 49 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 261 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
