ORDTLV2414 From United States of America, joined Mar 2013, 32 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14251 times:
I've been wondering for sometime why UA runs JFK-SFO and JFK-LAX when their entire hub is at EWR. Wouldn't it make more sense to move it all to EWR? Thoughts??
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16261 posts, RR: 52 Reply 2, posted (2 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14245 times:
Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Thread starter): I've been wondering for sometime why SA)">UA runs JFK-SFO and JFK-LAX when their entire hub is at EWR. Wouldn't it make more sense to move it all to EWR? Thoughts??
Because they can't fly LGA-SFO, LGA-LAX where they operate all their other hub flights (ORD, CLE, DEN, IAH etc..). If their were no perimeter rule at LGA and there were enough slots SA)">UA would not be at JFK. Their NYC destinations would be EWR and LGA, however since LAX and SFO are outside the perimeter of LGA (save SA) they operate their services to JFK for their hubs at LAX and SFO.
jfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2664 posts, RR: 5 Reply 3, posted (2 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 14122 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 2): Because they can't fly LGA-SFO, LGA-LAX where they operate all their other hub flights (ORD, CLE, DEN, IAH etc..). If their were no perimeter rule at LGA and there were enough slots SA)">UA would not be at JFK. Their NYC destinations would be EWR and LGA, however since LAX and SFO are outside the perimeter of LGA (save SA) they operate their services to JFK for their hubs at LAX and SFO.
You really dont know that. Take IAD which is served from JFK and LGA.
Long story short, there are only 3 huge airlines in the US now. They're all going to have a presence at JFK and every other large airport in the country. Welcome to consolidation.
Pre-merger UA had a small presence at all 3 airports in the last few years. JFK had LAX, SFO, and IAD. LGA had ORD, DEN, IAD. EWR served all the hubs with less frequency than LGA or JFK to the respective cities served.
Pre merger CO had a huge hub at EWR and a token presence at LGA. No presence at JFK.
The reality is, CO did themselves a disservice by being focused on only one airport. An airline as large as UA can not do that.
It also speaks to the profitability and importance of the JFK routes that they have their own product; unique to the entire UA system.
FlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1625 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (2 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 13667 times:
UA carries a great deal of premium passengers with the p.s. service, they also carry a great deal of freight and mail. EWR is UA's international gateway. JFK is UA's gateway to the west.
Not completely true, UA does not serve DEN or IAH out of JFK. CO tried JFK to CLE and IAH, but was never satisfied with the results, so they were eliminated obviously. IAH was tried several times. CO also used to run Saturday LGA-AUA trips to further utilize LGA assets on the weekend, one of their few point to point routes. I see in the timetable UA is doing LGA-AUA runs this summer on Saturdays, so this flight obviously has its place at a nonhub NYC airport also.
UA kept the sUA transcons out of JFK because it's boutique market and UA has been there forever and forever, catering to its well heeled clientele there. They are essential routes for UA. I could see DEN-JFK as a challenging route for UA, and IAH would probably be the same. I am booked on DL' DEN-JFK next month, and it's a dirt cheap fare. I have seen 99$ one way on DL's JFK-DEN nonstop. The point is yields on such routes are trash, not the loads themselves.
It was not a drawback for CO to be so heavily focused on EWR, it's what made the most sense with limited resources.
Maybe the combined UA can add some more at LGA/JFK to boost their presence there as well. Or possibly they could have other priorities.
flyingalex From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1005 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (2 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 13044 times:
One thing to remember is that JFK does not only serve New York City. There are quite a few people on Long Island and southern Connecticut for whom JFK is the preferred airport. Some of them are fantastically wealthy (like the residents of the Hamptons, for example).
JFK and EWR overlap in that they both serve NYC, but they remain separate markets. There are areas that naturally gravitate towards either one or the other, and it can make sense to have a presence in both. I can only assume the numbers add up, otherwise UA would not have stuck with their JFK operation for so long.
Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5341 posts, RR: 11 Reply 8, posted (2 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 12836 times:
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 3): The reality is, CO did themselves a disservice by being focused on only one airport.
Um, what?
CO's market share numbers pre-merger would indicate that it was no disservice at all.... not really sure how you're able to convince yourself otherwise.
jfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2664 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (2 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 12730 times:
Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 8): Um, what?
CO's market share numbers pre-merger would indicate that it was no disservice at all.... not really sure how you're able to convince yourself otherwise.
Because I live here. And even though they were the largest in market share, I never flew them. And I didn't go out of my way not to fly them. It just happened. Flying them meant going to Newark. Where flying any other airline meant going to LGA or sometimes JFK.
Nobody I knew flew them for the reason stated above.
It involved crossing 2 bridges and a nightmare of Bronx or Manhattan roadways.
CO built a beautiful hub at EWR. A profitable one too. Can't argue with that.
But they never served NYC the way that made them THE NYC airline because they simply had nothing more than a token presence at the NYC airports themselves.
UA, being a larger airline and now having absorbed CO, can not have a narrow focus when it comes to NYC. Hence, operations at all 3 airports are served. PS service speaks to that philosophy
Agrred. I live in Southern LI and I go. For the most part. Out of my way to fly into/out of JFK because it is a 30 minutes drive for me vs 45-50 to LGA and 1.5 hours to EWR. I also fly out of ISP, but it doesn't always have what I need.
Same here. It is a 1.5-2 hour drive for me to get to EWR plus tolls and bridges and an extended stay on the Belt. I have flown UA from EWR twice in my life, once because I hadn't made the arrangments myself and once because my father wanted to fly a prop.
dartland From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 637 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (2 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 11383 times:
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 9):
Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 8):
Um, what?
CO's market share numbers pre-merger would indicate that it was no disservice at all.... not really sure how you're able to convince yourself otherwise.
Because I live here. And even though they were the largest in market share, I never flew them. And I didn't go out of my way not to fly them. It just happened. Flying them meant going to Newark. Where flying any other airline meant going to LGA or sometimes JFK.
In what world is not serving you a disservice to a major airline? They don't NEED to service Long Island to do well.
Financially, CO/UA has done extremely well by owning EWR and focusing on half the metro area. They have the half with no competition! Much better than battling the other half with fierce competitors like DL and B6.
As for the JFK P.S. service -- this has nothing to do with serving Long Island, being in a different market, blah blah blah. It's quite simple: P.S. O&D service is profitable. Also, it is required by many NY-area corporate contracts (who, by the way, include EWR in their scope of negotiation, and treat NYC as one big market if they're based in Manhattan). It's possible if UA had P.S. service to EWR, they could reduce JFK, but that would leave the vulnerable as the O&D traffic tends to prefer JFK, and they'd have to oversupply P.S. since their EWR connecting traffic doesn't require that level of service.
UAL747DEN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2225 posts, RR: 13 Reply 12, posted (2 months 5 days ago) and read 10523 times:
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 3): The reality is, CO did themselves a disservice by being focused on only one airport. An airline as large as UA can not do that.
You have absolutely NO idea what you're talking about! CO having a full service HUB in EWR is not a disservice whatsoever, it have allowed CO to be #1 in the market.
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 9): Because I live here. And even though they were the largest in market share, I never flew them. And I didn't go out of my way not to fly them. It just happened. Flying them meant going to Newark. Where flying any other airline meant going to LGA or sometimes JFK.
Nobody I knew flew them for the reason stated above.
It involved crossing 2 bridges and a nightmare of Bronx or Manhattan roadways.
CO built a beautiful hub at EWR. A profitable one too. Can't argue with that.
But they never served NYC the way that made them THE NYC airline because they simply had nothing more than a token presence at the NYC airports themselves.
UA, being a larger airline and now having absorbed CO, can not have a narrow focus when it comes to NYC. Hence, operations at all 3 airports are served. PS service speaks to that philosophy
And now we all see the problem, you are commenting on an airlines business decisions based on what you personally prefer! The fact that you have never used CO doesn't really mean a whole lot because the majority of people do not have the same opinion as you can see by looking at the numbers.
airbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 6884 posts, RR: 7 Reply 14, posted (2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 10140 times:
As long as there is no viable alternative to the ridiculously congested Cross Bronx Expy (I-95), and the George Washington bridge, JFK will continue to be airport of choice for anyone on the East side of Hudson.
catiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 2279 posts, RR: 3 Reply 15, posted (2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 10090 times:
Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Thread starter): I've been wondering for sometime why UA runs JFK-SFO and JFK-LAX when their entire hub is at EWR. Wouldn't it make more sense to move it all to EWR? Thoughts??
By that rationale AA and DL shouldn't serve EWR.
Quoting UAL747DEN (Reply 12): You have absolutely NO idea what you're talking about! CO having a full service HUB in EWR is not a disservice whatsoever, it have allowed CO to be #1 in the market.
All things being equal, are you saying that UA (in its present incarnation) wouldn't prefer to have DL's position in NYC (JFK/LGA hubs, int'l presence at EWR)?
klwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 3 Reply 16, posted (2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 10020 times:
Quoting catiii (Reply 15): All things being equal, are you saying that UA (in its present incarnation) wouldn't prefer to have DL's position in NYC (JFK/LGA hubs, int'l presence at EWR)?
Oh dear, let's not go down this path for the 1000th time, the whole EWR vs. other NY airports debate again.
Is there something wrong with going to number #1, from where UA was previously in the market without the CO merger?
ADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1179 posts, RR: 1 Reply 17, posted (2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 9993 times:
Quoting ORDTLV2414 (Thread starter): I've been wondering for sometime why UA runs JFK-SFO and JFK-LAX when their entire hub is at EWR. Wouldn't it make more sense to move it all to EWR? Thoughts??
It is left over from pre-merger United's large presence at JFK in the 70s and 80s. UA has special PS service on this route. It must be making significant money for UA to keep the route, with dedicated aircraft that have a unique layout.
When the profits drop off then it will be moved to EWR, but for now it must be raking in the cash.
flyingalex From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1005 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 9966 times:
Quoting airbazar (Reply 14): As long as there is no viable alternative to the ridiculously congested Cross Bronx Expy (I-95), and the George Washington bridge, JFK will continue to be airport of choice for anyone on the East side of Hudson.
East of the East River, maybe, but I don't see why anyone headed to EWR from Manhattan would even be on the Cross Bronx Expressway or the Bridge. It's a quick ride through the Lincoln Tunnel from there (there's also a shuttle bus from the Port Authority terminal that takes the same route) or an easy train journey from Penn Station.
From Manhattan, it's usually a wash timewise whether you head to EWR or JFK. If cabbing it, EWR will obviously be a lot more expensive though.
Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
flyingalex From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1005 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 9884 times:
Quoting ADent (Reply 17): It is left over from pre-merger United's large presence at JFK in the 70s and 80s. UA has special PS service on this route. It must be making significant money for UA to keep the route, with dedicated aircraft that have a unique layout.
When the profits drop off then it will be moved to EWR, but for now it must be raking in the cash.
Exactly. The amount of second-guessing on this forum is ridiculous.
UA employs a lot of number crunchers, and believe me, if the numbers didn't add up, those routes wouldn't exist. If, at some point in the future, the routes turn out to have become unprofitable, rest assured that they will be cut. Until then, the fact that UA is still at JFK means that they are still making money at JFK, and that is all the justification anyone should need.
Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
corinthians From United States of America, joined May 2008, 277 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 9860 times:
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 13): Lets look at the numbers...last year JFK handled 47 million passengers. LGA 25 million. EWR 35 million.
Why would you not want a piece of the 70million people at the other 2 airports?
That's why UA has JFK and LGA operations
The numbers do speak for themselves. It isn't folklore. 2/3 of traffic into and out of NYC flies into Queens.
Actually, JFK handled over 49M in 2012. And of that 49M, 80%+ was O&D. Not bad for an airport that's somewhat "out of the way" and "not the preferred airport". Compare that to, say, 55% O&D traffic of 34M passengers for EWR.
I never got where the idea that JFK was in the hinterlands and just too inconvenient for a lot of people to use. You're right in that the numbers absolutely speak for themselves.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16261 posts, RR: 52 Reply 21, posted (2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 9679 times:
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 9): Because I live here. And even though they were the largest in market share, I never flew them. And I didn't go out of my way not to fly them. It just happened. Flying them meant going to Newark
Queens is not the center of the New York City universe. For instance there are half a million New York City residents on Staten Island who's closest airport is EWR. There are also many in Manhattan who prefer EWR as it's an easier option, same with the Bronx and Brooklyn. Checking Google maps it's equal distance from Dyker Heights to EWR as it is to JFK, and in current traffic conditions it's a shorter drive right now to EWR.
If you grew up in Queens of course your going to never use EWR, just like if you live in Newark your not going to fly from JFK unless you got a cheap fare or are using a reward. For the majority of New York City residents who live West of Queens they have better options.
Quoting catiii (Reply 15): ll things being equal, are you saying that UA (in its present incarnation) wouldn't prefer to have DL's position in NYC (JFK/LGA hubs, int'l presence at EWR)?
UA's in the best position in the NYC market.
Quoting mesaflyguy (Reply 10): Agrred. I live in Southern LI and I go. For the most part. Out of my way to fly into/out of JFK because it is a 30 minutes drive for me vs 45-50 to LGA and 1.5 hours to EWR.
But the same is also true for New Jersey, Up State New York and even Eastern Pennsylvania travelers for whom EWR is much easier than JFK.
Quoting mesaflyguy (Reply 10): It is a 1.5-2 hour drive for me to get to EWR plus tolls and bridges and an extended stay on the Belt.
Traffic on the Belt Parkway is omnidirectional, what is a deterrent for folks like you drive from the East to EWR is also a deterrent for folks driving from the West to JFK. The only difference is there is a heck of a lot more people West of JFK than there are to the East.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21494 posts, RR: 24 Reply 22, posted (2 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 8855 times:
Quoting klwright69 (Reply 6): Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 5):
JFK is UA's gateway to the west.
Not completely true, UA does not serve DEN or IAH out of JFK.
No doubt because they can serve both points from LGA as IAH is within the perimeter and DEN was grandfathered in as the only exception to the perimeter rule. If memory correct the 1,500 mile perimeter was established based on political pressure to cover both Houston and Dallas.
YULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2109 posts, RR: 6 Reply 23, posted (2 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 8826 times:
Simple: NYC has 20-ish million people in its metro area. 3 major airports scattered at different places of this congested mess (though LGA and JFK are both on Long Island). NY boroughs such as Queens and Brooklyn alone are bigger than most US metro areas... let alone the other 3 million people who live on the rest of Long Island, who have virtually no use for an airport in New Jersey (= on the other side of Manhattan) that UA calls its NYC hub.
And, there is Manhattan itself (the bulk of the high-fare o&d traffic to NYC), who, like it or not, does not always prefer EWR over JFK. In fact, JFK always seems to be more popular than EWR, at least for most people and/or most parts of Manhattan.
So, UA essentially flies to JFK because there is a market, regardless of the fact that they have a hub on the other side of the metro area.
catiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 2279 posts, RR: 3 Reply 24, posted (2 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 8572 times:
Quoting klwright69 (Reply 16): Oh dear, let's not go down this path for the 1000th time, the whole EWR vs. other NY airports debate again.
Right, I can see how that looks in this context. I was responding to his post, which was responding to another post about focusing on only one airport. I'm not saying that EWR is better or worse than the other airports. I meant it in the context of having EWR and additional coverage at the other two.
airbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 6884 posts, RR: 7 Reply 25, posted (2 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 8776 times:
Quoting flyingalex (Reply 18):
East of the East River, maybe, but I don't see why anyone headed to EWR from Manhattan would even be on the Cross Bronx Expressway or the Bridge. It's a quick ride through the Lincoln Tunnel from there (there's also a shuttle bus from the Port Authority terminal that takes the same route) or an easy train journey from Penn Station.
Because a lot of the people who pay the big bucks to fly these routes are more likely to live in CT than in Manhattan.
flyingalex From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1005 posts, RR: 1 Reply 26, posted (2 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 8454 times:
Quoting airbazar (Reply 25): Because a lot of the people who pay the big bucks to fly these routes are more likely to live in CT than in Manhattan.
Believe it or not, there are also people who fly into New York rather than out of it. These people are likely to stay in hotels, which will usually be in Manhattan.
I'm not dismissing JFK, I think it definitely has a massively important place within the wider concept of air travel from the New York area. I'm just saying that it is a mistake to treat EWR as the bastard stepchild that no one could ever love. Doing so would be shortsighted.
Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 27, posted (2 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 7873 times:
Quoting catiii (Reply 15): By that rationale AA and DL shouldn't serve EWR.
Well... they barely do.
Quoting STT757 (Reply 21): For the majority of New York City residents who live West of Queens they have better options (than JFK)
Yes... LGA for short/medium flights.
Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 23): And, there is Manhattan itself (the bulk of the high-fare o&d traffic to NYC), who, like it or not, does not always prefer EWR over JFK. In fact, JFK always seems to be more popular than EWR, at least for most people and/or most parts of Manhattan.
Correct (much to the dismay of the EWR / UA / CO fans on here).
Quoting flyingalex (Reply 26): I'm just saying that it is a mistake to treat EWR as the bastard stepchild that no one could ever love.
FlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1625 posts, RR: 3 Reply 28, posted (2 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7490 times:
People who live in Brooklyn, Queens and Long Island generally perfer JFK as it is 15-30 min away from most neighborhoods there. People in Manhattan generally prefer LGA as it is the same 15-30 min away. EWR has 2 problems for myself and many New Yorkers. 1the traffic. Newark is right on the otherside of the Holland Tunnel but during the hours of 6-11 am and 4-8p or later sometimes that trip can take over 1 hour. Just to get through the tunnel. The second issue is the toll. $13 to enter NYC. The price goes up a dollar almost annually.
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 29, posted (2 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7364 times:
Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 28): People who live in Brooklyn, Queens and Long Island generally perfer JFK as it is 15-30 min away from most neighborhoods there. People in Manhattan generally prefer LGA as it is the same 15-30 min away. EWR has 2 problems for myself and many New Yorkers.
1. the traffic. Newark is right on the otherside of the Holland Tunnel but during the hours of 6-11 am and 4-8p or later sometimes that trip can take over 1 hour. Just to get through the tunnel.
The second issue is the toll. $13 to enter NYC. The price goes up a dollar almost annually.
3) Hailing a NYC cab is going to cost a bundle (that is, if you can convince the driver to take you to EWR).
dartland From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 637 posts, RR: 2 Reply 30, posted (2 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7340 times:
Quoting airbazar (Reply 25): Because a lot of the people who pay the big bucks to fly these routes are more likely to live in CT than in Manhattan.
First of all, not so much true. Manhattan has, by far, the highest concentration of wealth. Probably 10x the number of so-called "people who pay the big bucks" as compared to southeast CT, especially when you factor out those who will fly from HPN or LGA.
Second of all, as someone who grew up in Westchester, JFK and EWR are pretty much even in time/traffic. LGA is preferred, otherwise doesn't matter. GWB or Whitestone / Throgs Neck + Van Wyck? Pick your poison.
Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 28): 1the traffic. Newark is right on the otherside of the Holland Tunnel but during the hours of 6-11 am and 4-8p or later sometimes that trip can take over 1 hour. Just to get through the tunnel. The second issue is the toll. $13 to enter NYC. The price goes up a dollar almost annually.
Traffic is just as bad to JFK. On a Friday afternoon, will take longer to get to JFK than EWR from Midtown in a car, in my experience (and I used to do it every week). Train will take about the same, although I swear the EWR monorail is out to get me.
And the Queens Midtown Tunnel toll is $5 each way, so really not that different. Obviously if you're going to take one of the free bridges, that's different. But if you're coming/going from anywhere in midtown, the tunnel is by far the most convenient.
jfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2664 posts, RR: 5 Reply 31, posted (2 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 6324 times:
Someone mentioned the cab...and that is important.
LGA is a metered fare
JFK is a flat fare
EWR is the fare + the return fare + toll (Toll is only charged inbound from Jersey, but cabs charge it to outbound travellers with the return fare. Plus any Turnpike fare in both directions)
The best way to get to EWR from NYC is car service, bus or train. Not yellow cab.
FlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1625 posts, RR: 3 Reply 32, posted (2 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6051 times:
Quoting dartland (Reply 30): And the Queens Midtown Tunnel toll is $5 each way, so really not that different. Obviously if you're going to take one of the free bridges, that's different. But if you're coming/going from anywhere in midtown, the tunnel is by far the most convenient.
Traffic in NY outside of Manhattan is the highways. The 59th St. Bridge is as convienent to midtown as the tunnel. Deal with a little traffic on the LIE to woodhaven and take woodhaven to crossbay to the airport. Maximum 45 minutes. I have personally spent 45 minutes just trying to approach the Holland Tunnel around 6:30.
BigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2755 posts, RR: 7 Reply 33, posted (2 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6040 times:
UA operates into JFK because it makes them money. The higher yielding transcon traffic prefers JFK. There is no need for UA to really connect too many other dots in/out of there.
UA probably carries a significant amount of California originating traffic in these flights, in particular entertainment and tech. To them, they want JFK.
United Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 8792 posts, RR: 17 Reply 37, posted (2 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 5693 times:
I remember UA used to fly widebodies between LAX/SFO and JFK. AA is still flying widebodies between LAX-JFK. What about UA? Do they fly widebodies between LAX/SFO and JFK occasionally? What are UA's widebody domestic flights?
BigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2755 posts, RR: 7 Reply 39, posted (2 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5577 times:
Quoting United Airline (Reply 37):
I remember UA used to fly widebodies between LAX/SFO and JFK. AA is still flying widebodies between LAX-JFK. What about UA?
No. They only operate their ps configured aircraft between LAX/SFO-JFK. I believe those are all 757s.
Outside of Hawaii, I don't think they operate any domestic widebodies anymore. I remember flying a 747 DEN-SFO about 5 years ago. It was a fun ride as I was upgraded and sat on the the upper deck.
tommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6173 posts, RR: 9 Reply 41, posted (2 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 5449 times:
We also forget that 10 years ago UA had quite a loyalty out of Kennedy pre bankruptcy: EZE, GIG, NRT, LHR, GRU, SJU, CCS etc. By 2005 only LHR, SFO, LAX existed and by 2007 strictly PS.
UA has a nice setup at JFK in T7. JFK-LAX/SFO are high yielding routes and will likely never go away for UA. Over at EWR, it's all about frequency using PMUA 757 and PMCO 757 with the lie flat seats.
"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
Deltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8590 posts, RR: 8 Reply 46, posted (2 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5254 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 21): UA's in the best position in the NYC market.
I'm sorry, not that I want to get into this little pissing match, but just what metric are you using to say this? (other than bias)
I don't know of a metric that puts someone in the "best" position in a market like NYC. Delta is going to end up being about the same size as UA with a hub at LGA the preferred business airport. A respectable hub at JFK and a large spoke at EWR. I bet if you ask someone in Atlanta who has it the best they will tell you Delta does. That is a very subjective statement that I would to see backed up with some kind of facts. (or and edit that says IMO, UA is in the best position.)
having said that.....carry on.
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16261 posts, RR: 52 Reply 47, posted (2 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5217 times:
Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 46): I'm sorry, not that I want to get into this little pissing match, but just what metric are you using to say this? (other than bias)
To connect passengers from Domestic to International does not require a 30 minute taxi ride, that's one of the metrics.
You are just congesting the airport, holding out the competition, raising airfares and stifling growth. All at a slot controlled airport.
There's a reason EWR has been stagnant in growth for the last decade and pays the highest fares in the nation.
Wouldn't it be nice if EWR was also in the mid 40 million passenger range like JFK? It would benefit the region tremendously. Having one airline with a major hub at a high demand airport that is slot controlled benefits no one.
Tomorrow UA has 4 flights a day to BDL. 2 on Dash 8s, 2 on ERJs. This flight is of zero benefit to any O and D passenger. Yet it is taking 8 slots at a slot controlled airport. That's why growth is stagnant at EWR.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16261 posts, RR: 52 Reply 50, posted (2 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5087 times:
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 49): You are just congesting the airport, holding out the competition, raising airfares and stifling growth. All at a slot controlled airport.
It's not as bad as 20 daily LGA-PHL. You can't drive to California from EWR in 2 hours.
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 49): Giant hubs are for giant airports. None such exists in NYC.
EWR Terminal C has 59 mainline gates, that has to be more than double the largest (T-5?) terminal at JFK. Terminal C at EWR was designed from the beginning to be a hub, no other terminal at JFK or LGA can claim such.
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 49): Tomorrow UA has 4 flights a day to BDL. 2 on Dash 8s, 2 on ERJs. This flight is of zero benefit to any O and D passenger. Yet it is taking 8 slots at a slot controlled airport. That's why growth is stagnant at EWR.
It feeds their hub, I remember once upon a time when AA and DL flew to BDL from JFK. I even remember DL flying a 763 to BDL from JFK.
tommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6173 posts, RR: 9 Reply 51, posted (2 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4922 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 50): It's not as bad as 20 daily LGA-PHL. You can't drive to California from EWR in 2 hours.
STT, just let it go with the CO "smoke and mirrors" propaganda.
I really do think DL might have the edge on UA in the NYC market, since UA is only focused on shrinking whereas DL is expanding. Granted, shrinking is a plus for the EWR market as it's far too congested as is.
"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
Art at ISP From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 164 posts, RR: 0 Reply 53, posted (2 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4621 times:
I used to take UA JFK-DEN (my first time was on a DC-8), and I was a semi regular on the JFK-IAH run when CO ran it.
It always seemed like the loads were high, but as we all know, full planes do not necessarily mean profits.
With regard to wide-bodies on transcon routes from JFK, DL is about to upgrade JFK-LAX (and I think SFO, not sure) with 763's in the international configuration, at least on some flights.
delta2ual From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 575 posts, RR: 1 Reply 54, posted (2 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4562 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 47): To connect passengers from Domestic to International does not require a 30 minute taxi ride, that's one of the metrics.
I'm sure you're not referring to DL? You've been on this board a long time and I think you know that is not the case; DL does not sell connections from LGA to JFK. They serve totally different purposes. Pax can connect from the following cities in JFK to DL Int'l.:
I may have missed some, but as you can see, nobody has to fly to LGA to transfer to JFK. That's a silly argument.
As for UA, having worked specifically with the PS service a lot, I can tell you that it does well, but does need to be upgraded and that is why it is being upgraded. It speaks to the importance of JFK that UA serves that niche; it was there prior to EWR (and the merger with CO) and is still there now.
From the world's largest airline-to the world's largest airline. Delta2ual
CODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2167 posts, RR: 8 Reply 55, posted (2 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4538 times:
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 49): Wouldn't it be nice if EWR was also in the mid 40 million passenger range like JFK?
EWR couldn't handle the traffic. JFK is a much higher-capacity airport. The only reason the two were at parity 15 years ago is because JFK was grossly underutilized as a domestic gateway. We have B6 to thank for bringing JFK 'back'.
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 51): since UA is only focused on shrinking
Where? Systemwide, DL is cutting ASMs too, but at EWR UA has been growing average fleet size. sUA 763ERs have replaced most of sCO's 762ERs. 735s are nearly all gone, replaced with A319/320 and larger 737s. Many ERJ flights have given way to Q400s and E70s and some Q300s have replaced some Q200 frequencies. There has been a general trend toward upgauging at EWR, which will be the only way to grow as UA is presently using virtually all of its slots.
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 51): EWR market as it's far too congested as is.
It's unfair to isolate EWR. JFK and LGA both suffer from similar congestion issues, especially during adverse weather. The demand in the market outstrips capacity, and the airlines are just trying to meet it. Carriers aren't flying empty planes out of the NYC-area airports just to occupy slots.
I may have missed some, but as you can see, nobody has to fly to LGA to transfer to JFK. That's a silly argument.
As for UA, having worked specifically with the PS service a lot, I can tell you that it does well, but does need to be upgraded and that is why it is being upgraded. It speaks to the importance of JFK that UA serves that niche; it was there prior to EWR (and the merger with CO) and is still there now.
Indeed, it is a silly argument. Thanks for pointing this out for the benefit of those unfamiliar with the 3 NYC area airports.
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 55): EWR couldn't handle the traffic. JFK is a much higher-capacity airport.
Sure it could - depending on the definition of "traffic" in your comment. If airlines used larger equipment, EWR would be able to easily handle the higher passenger loads. It's the number of movements using smaller aircraft that is causing EWR to be "congested without coming near the airport's passenger capacity."
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 55): at EWR UA has been growing average fleet size. sUA 763ERs have replaced most of sCO's 762ERs. 735s are nearly all gone, replaced with A319/320 and larger 737s.
A step in the right direction!
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 55): Carriers aren't flying empty planes out of the NYC-area airports just to occupy slots.
You are just congesting the airport, holding out the competition, raising airfares and stifling growth. All at a slot controlled airport.
Right, because DL controlling 50% of the slots at LGA, offering 33 flights between LGA and ATL, doesn't hold out competition, raise airfares, and stifle growth. . .
Quoting STT757 (Reply 50):
It feeds their hub, I remember once upon a time when AA and DL flew to BDL from JFK. I even remember DL flying a 763 to BDL from JFK.
PHL too. The utilization on the 76ER's was low, and they used to send them out and back to those stations just to do something with them.
CODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2167 posts, RR: 8 Reply 58, posted (2 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4437 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 56): Sure it could - depending on the definition of "traffic" in your comment. If airlines used larger equipment, EWR would be able to easily handle the higher passenger loads. It's the number of movements using smaller aircraft that is causing EWR to be "congested without coming near the airport's passenger capacity."
This idea that EWR is swamped with small jet traffic is largely a myth. I can see EWR operations from my office and at peak times, most flights are operating with 737s, 757s, A320s and large RJs, along with the occasional widebodies. Most RJ/prop traffic seems to be throughout the day during off-peak hours. UA's operation at EWR is a 'rolling hub', so it does not have traditional inbound/outbound banks so as to reduce congestion.
Regardless, not every city can support frequent large-jet service to the NY area. Look at the heavily RJ-dependent feeder operations of AA, DL and formerly US at LGA. Plus, larger aircraft require greater spacing between arrivals/departures, and then there is the issue of whether the facilities (terminals, security checkpoints, roadways, FIS, parking, etc.) can actually handle 1/3 greater volume, into the mid-40m pax, as indicated in the previous post. I wager EWR could not.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16261 posts, RR: 52 Reply 59, posted (2 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4439 times:
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 51): I really do think DL might have the edge on UA in the NYC market, since UA is only focused on shrinking whereas DL is expanding
Where are they shrinking, they just doubled their flights to LAX and SFO. Also DL has been cutting international flying from JFK for a couple years now since their growth spurt about five years ago. UA's international network at EWR has held up and even had some additions (Istanbul).
Quoting delta2ual (Reply 54):
As for UA, having worked specifically with the PS service a lot, I can tell you that it does well, but does need to be upgraded and that is why it is being upgraded. It speaks to the importance of JFK that UA serves that niche;
I'll refer back to my previous statement, if there were no perimeter at LGA (and enough slots) there would be no UA at JFK. PS would be flown from LGA. In that scenario AA would also be flying their three class service from LGA. There are no UA flights to ORD, DEN, IAH, CLE from JFK because they're at LGA. The title of the thread is "Whats the point of UA at JFK", answer because they can't fly to LAX/SFO from LGA.
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 49):
Wouldn't it be nice if EWR was also in the mid 40 million passenger range like JFK?
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 55): EWR couldn't handle the traffic.
Sure it can. When they began the Global Gateway expansion of EWR the PA were anticipating hitting 40 million passengers at EWR by 2010. There have been a few speed bumps obviously. In fact EWR still hasn't recovered back to it's pre-911 total of passengers. The drastic cuts coming from AA, UA, US, DL etc.. Like LGA EWR needs bigger planes. Hopefully with the new UA pilot contract we will soon see more 70-76 seaters as well as a new narrowbody to replace the lost 735 and 733 capacity.
strfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 488 posts, RR: 0 Reply 60, posted (2 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4448 times:
OH my GOODNESS!!
the UA Premium Service was for JFK to the West Coast LAX and SFO for presumably the more discerning passenger??
A lot of entertainment and Finance people travel on the route and that's who it was built for. It might not work in any other market but it does work for JFK and it's profitable. Isn't that the bottom line?? It isn't rocket science but good marketing and Yield Savy.
Find a need and fill it !! any other airline could have done it but UAL lucked up and did it first and it's making money,, who'd a thought??
corinthians From United States of America, joined May 2008, 277 posts, RR: 0 Reply 61, posted (2 months 3 days ago) and read 4317 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 59): I'll refer back to my previous statement, if there were no perimeter at LGA (and enough slots) there would be no UA at JFK. PS would be flown from LGA. In that scenario AA would also be flying their three class service from LGA. There are no UA flights to ORD, DEN, IAH, CLE from JFK because they're at LGA. The title of the thread is "Whats the point of UA at JFK", answer because they can't fly to LAX/SFO from LGA.
You have absolutely no way of backing this up. None whatsoever. So why do you keep on saying this? Prove it. If UA (or others) was unprofitable flying PS planes out of JFK, they would have abandoned the station a long time ago, especially with this cost-competitive environment. But they did not, even after the merger. Something is working. And you really think PS and everyone else would flock to LGA if there was no perimeter rule? Where would they go? Where's the space? Can the airport really handle more traffic?
People like you keep insinuating that JFK is out in the hinterlands, difficult to get to and that nobody should be using it or would be using it if LGA or EWR were more open. Let's look at the facts and all these are off Port's website. JFK handled 49M passengers in 2012. Of those 49M pax, over 81% of them were O&D. So, more people from the tri-state used JFK than ANY of the other two major airports. Almost double than LGA and even much more than your beloved EWR, where of the 34M pax that went through there last year only slightly more than half were O&D. So, JFK is doing a pretty good job at drawing in people from our area despite your opposite claims or theories. And passenger numbers are increasing, so there is "some" demand.
Quoting STT757 (Reply 59): Sure it can. When they began the Global Gateway expansion of EWR the PA were anticipating hitting 40 million passengers at EWR by 2010. There have been a few speed bumps obviously. In fact EWR still hasn't recovered back to it's pre-911 total of passengers. The drastic cuts coming from AA, UA, US, DL etc.. Like LGA EWR needs bigger planes. Hopefully with the new UA pilot contract we will soon see more 70-76 seaters as well as a new narrowbody to replace the lost 735 and 733 capacity
When Port started the Global Gateway program, EWR wasn’t slot-controlled and Port didn’t foresee it being slot-controlled in the future. Different story today. Even capped at 83 movements an hour, EWR is having problems handling what it does and is the most delay-prone airport in the country. I’m looking at the FAA’s delay status page now and guess which airport has a ground delay program because of “wind”? Hmmmm..
CuriousFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 654 posts, RR: 0 Reply 62, posted (2 months 3 days ago) and read 4261 times:
I live in Queens and more than half of my travel is in premium classes (not counting UA's premium economy which is not much of a premium). Unless it is very very cheap or there is not other possibility, I will not fly from or into EWR, too far for me when I can be in LGA in 10 mns. So when I fly UA, it is from LGA or JFK. Recent trips: LGA to DEN, JFK to SFO, LGA-IAH-EZE (UA was much cheaper than the competition's direct flights).
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16261 posts, RR: 52 Reply 63, posted (2 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4167 times:
Quoting corinthians (Reply 61):
You have absolutely no way of backing this up. None whatsoever. So why do you keep on saying this? Prove it. If UA (or others) was unprofitable flying PS planes out of JFK, they would have abandoned the station a long time ago,
You're really misconstruing what I am saying. I am not saying their current service, PS, from JFK is not successful. In fact there was a Wall Street Journal article from two years ago that stated UA was the leader in terms of yields in the JFK-LAX/SFO market. However that said if they could, which they can't, but if they could they would absolutely move the service to LGA and be done with JFK. I have great confidence in that. So again my answer to the thread starters question is UA is at JFK, with SFO and LAX, because they can't fly those routes from LGA. If JFK were a separate market from LGA, such as EWR, then why doesn't UA fly JFK-DEN, CLE, ORD, IAH etc.. The reason is that they can fly those from LGA, they can't with LAX/SFO.
Quoting corinthians (Reply 61): People like you keep insinuating that JFK is out in the hinterlands, difficult to get to and that nobody should be using it or would be using it if LGA or EWR were more open.
Let's compare service to Chicago:
JFK-Chicago 6 daily flights
2 B6, 1 AA, 3 DL
LGA-Chicago (42 daily nonstops)
AA 14, UA 12, NK 1, DL 10, WN 5
EWR-Chicago 26 daily nonstops
AA 7, UA 14, WN 5
Obviously JFK is not in the hinterlands, they handle the most traffic in the area. However there's an obvious preference for travelers to business destinations to use LGA first, and then EWR second. JFK's paltry service to places like Chicago is really not indicative of O&D demand but rather the preference of the other airports for travelers. Travelers to LAX and SFO do not have a choice of using LGA, if they did you would see service levels on Trans-Cons look very much like service levels to Chicago. Preference of LGA 1, then EWR and JFK with a handful to handle connections to International flights.
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 64, posted (2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4099 times:
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 58): This idea that EWR is swamped with small jet traffic is largely a myth.
Add props and you have swamped. (Or infested).
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 58): then there is the issue of whether the facilities (terminals, security checkpoints, roadways, FIS, parking, etc.) can actually handle 1/3 greater volume, into the mid-40m pax, as indicated in the previous post. I wager EWR could not.
I think it could. And so does this guy:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 59): Sure it can. When they began the Global Gateway expansion of EWR the PA were anticipating hitting 40 million passengers at EWR by 2010.
Quoting corinthians (Reply 61): People like you keep insinuating that JFK is out in the hinterlands, difficult to get to and that nobody should be using it or would be using it if LGA or EWR were more open. Let's look at the facts and all these are off Port's website. JFK handled 49M passengers in 2012. Of those 49M pax, over 81% of them were O&D. So, more people from the tri-state used JFK than ANY of the other two major airports. Almost double than LGA and even much more than your beloved EWR, where of the 34M pax that went through there last year only slightly more than half were O&D. So, JFK is doing a pretty good job at drawing in people from our area despite your opposite claims or theories.
Just proves - yet again - that EWR draws a very small amount of travelers from east of the Hudson.
Quoting corinthians (Reply 61): I’m looking at the FAA’s delay status page now and guess which airport has a ground delay program because of “wind”?
Yeah, you would think in 2013 the human species could have figured out how to deal with "wind" at EWR. What they should have as the reason for the delays is "Overscheduling by UA"
airzim From Zimbabwe, joined Jun 2001, 1105 posts, RR: 1 Reply 65, posted (2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4072 times:
The fact is, closer in airports to any city's business district will generally command a higher yield premium than an airport further away. In the case of New York City, the conversation above is way too focused on people that live in the area, but the real deciding factor is those that live outside NY flying in for business meetings. If you're flying to NY for a business trip, anytime spent traveling to/from the airport is a waste of time and money. LGA is your airport and you'll pay a premium to get into and out of midtown or downtown ASAP.
Quoting corinthians (Reply 61): You have absolutely no way of backing this up. None whatsoever. So why do you keep on saying this? Prove it. If UA (or others) was unprofitable flying PS planes out of JFK, they would have abandoned the station a long time ago, especially with this cost-competitive environment. But they did not, even after the merger. Something is working. And you really think PS and everyone else would flock to LGA if there was no perimeter rule? Where would they go? Where's the space? Can the airport really handle more traffic?
I'm confident that if UA could operate from LGA to the West Coast, the JFK station would be abandoned. It's working because of the restrictions at LGA. However, this is never going to happen since not only would that require relaxing the perimeter rule, it would also likely require infrastructure improvements at LGA (longer runways, reinforcing the piers, etc), coupled with curfews, etc, to handle the transcon flying. It's unlikely to happen so no reason to get worked up about it, but UA could easily introduce additional flying at LGA by changing their current ground movements.
Quoting corinthians (Reply 61): People like you keep insinuating that JFK is out in the hinterlands, difficult to get to and that nobody should be using it or would be using it if LGA or EWR were more open. Let's look at the facts and all these are off Port's website. JFK handled 49M passengers in 2012. Of those 49M pax, over 81% of them were O&D. So, more people from the tri-state used JFK than ANY of the other two major airports. Almost double than LGA and even much more than your beloved EWR, where of the 34M pax that went through there last year only slightly more than half were O&D. So, JFK is doing a pretty good job at drawing in people from our area despite your opposite claims or theories. And passenger numbers are increasing, so there is "some" demand.
Your numbers are misleading. The O&D traffic is heavily dominated by intercontinental flying where the proximity to the business centers in NY are less important. If you've spent 12 hours on a flight from DXB, what's an extra 30 minutes in a cab? But if you're taking the 6am ORD-LGA doing a lunch meeting then heading back to the airport to get home in time for your kids school play, 30 min could make a huge difference. Fact is EWR and JFK both suffer from this issue if you are an inbound passenger to NY, rather than the reverse.
Quoting CuriousFlyer (Reply 62): I live in Queens and more than half of my travel is in premium classes (not counting UA's premium economy which is not much of a premium). Unless it is very very cheap or there is not other possibility, I will not fly from or into EWR, too far for me when I can be in LGA in 10 mns. So when I fly UA, it is from LGA or JFK. Recent trips: LGA to DEN, JFK to SFO, LGA-IAH-EZE (UA was much cheaper than the competition's direct flights).
I flew into JFK last night and I loath going to/from the airport. 11:30 last night and the Van Wyke is dead stop. I live in Lower Manhattan and unless I'm going to ORD, I'm heading to EWR. No airline can take me nonstop to every business destination on one airline from NYC except United. I'm taking 6 or 7am flights out in the morning and generally returning the same day. 20 minute to LGA and EWR from my house, 30 minutes back at night. Other than the car service difference, a wash.
CODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2167 posts, RR: 8 Reply 66, posted (2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4073 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 64): Add props and you have swamped. (Or infested).
Most of the props are 70-seaters. I am curious to hear your opinion of LGA, which handles more RJ and small prop movements than EWR, and handles, on average, smaller aircraft than EWR on a per-departure basis. Is gauge a problem at LGA too?
Quoting N62NA (Reply 64): I think it could. And so does this guy:
In reality, what you, me, or anyone else on these boards thinks is meaningless. We aren't in position to influence those decisions. I travel through EWR on a weekly basis and find the facilities there to be constrained at current traffic figures. I can't imagine it with an additional 10-15 million passengers per year passing through. If we think it's bad now, imagine it then.
I support a transition to larger aircraft, to be sure, and it's slowly happening at EWR, but I think facility and airfield limitations are issues that will plague EWR as it exceeds the 40m pax/year mark.
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 67, posted (2 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3995 times:
Quoting airzim (Reply 65): I flew into JFK last night and I loath going to/from the airport. 11:30 last night and the Van Wyke is dead stop.
Sorry you had issues with the traffic. There's plenty of other ways to lower Manhattan from JFK than the Van Wyck.
Quoting airzim (Reply 65): I live in Lower Manhattan and unless I'm going to ORD, I'm heading to EWR.
OK.
Quoting airzim (Reply 65): No airline can take me nonstop to every business destination on one airline from NYC except United.
Your business destinations, or business destinations in general? If we're talking in general, I would say that DL can (I know AA can't).
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 66): Most of the props are 70-seaters. I am curious to hear your opinion of LGA, which handles more RJ and small prop movements than EWR, and handles, on average, smaller aircraft than EWR on a per-departure basis. Is gauge a problem at LGA too?
Yes!
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 66): In reality, what you, me, or anyone else on these boards thinks is meaningless. We aren't in position to influence those decisions
I get what you're getting at here, but the fact remains that UA would be at JFK in SOME capacity (no pun intended) even with no perimeter rule at LGA. The NYC market is so massive and potentially lucrative that yes, UA would be there. Take DC for example - IAD is by FAR the less preferred airport in the area, but all the big boys fly there to some extent because there is enough of a market to warrant doing so in some fashion, even if limited.
JFK is not an MDW where few competing carriers do much. It's not ideal, but there is enough there for JFK service even with a relaxed LGA perimeter rule and/or improved capacity.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16261 posts, RR: 52 Reply 69, posted (2 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3928 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 64): Just proves - yet again - that EWR draws a very small amount of travelers from east of the Hudson.
According to Port Authority Statistics 33% of EWR's travelers come from East of the Hudson (30.3% from NYC alone). The rest Westchester, Long Island, Connecticut.
KLAXairport From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 118 posts, RR: 0 Reply 70, posted (2 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3794 times:
LAX-JFK is a premier market. UA needs in on it.
I personally flew LAX-JFK in F and it was a GREAT flight. However, with the new seats, I am dying to do the flight again. JFK is also really good on connections and some people just prefer JFK over EWR from LAX and SFO.
Cheers,
KLAXAirport
Last Flights: LAX-YYZ-LAX (AC) Next Flights LAX-IAD-LAX (UA)
jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7348 posts, RR: 7 Reply 71, posted (2 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3520 times:
The primary reasons for flying to JFK for UA from LAX and SFO are the huge size of the market and the important connecting traffic those flights bring to the two west coast hubs. SFO is the main UA hub for Asia with many connection fron JFK.
jfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2664 posts, RR: 5 Reply 72, posted (2 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3403 times:
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 55): EWR couldn't handle the traffic. JFK is a much higher-capacity airport. The only reason the two were at parity 15 years ago is because JFK was grossly underutilized as a domestic gateway. We have B6 to thank for bringing JFK 'back'.
They are both are capped at 82 or 83 movements per hour. However, JFK is much bigger and can probably handle more than that if they had the alotted airspace. EWR is pushing it with that many movements per hour. Although, if they had better airspace (EWR has the worst airspace alottment of the big 3) than they would do better too.
Terminal/gate wise, JFK can handle the big planes better. It just has more space. I always chuckle at the 340s and 777s at Terminal B...they almost look out of scale with the building
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 73, posted (2 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3334 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 69): According to Port Authority Statistics 33% of EWR's travelers come from East of the Hudson (30.3% from NYC alone). The rest Westchester, Long Island, Connecticut.
Here's where you lose all credibility with me.
You're trying to put out there the impression that EWR gets 30.3% of NYC's traffic. You know that is not the case and you know that is not what the stat you posted says.
Yet to the casual reader, it appears as if 30.3% of NYC travelers choose EWR. That is not the case.
So let's put your stat into simpler and clearer terms:
If all the passengers going to EWR to catch a flight on a given day numbers 10, then your stat indicates that 3 out of those 10 passengers came from NYC.
If we look at all the passengers going to JFK to catch a flight on a given day, and the number is 100, and just 20 of those passengers come from NYC, then your stat would say 20% of JFK's passengers are from NYC and that EWR has a greater share of its passengers coming from NYC than JFK.
In other words, in your terms, EWR beats JFK.
Completely overlooking the reality that EWR just pulls 3 passengers to JFK's 20 passengers (in my example).
I really don't understand your "devotion" to EWR that you go to such lengths to present misleading information.
flyingalex From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1005 posts, RR: 1 Reply 74, posted (2 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3124 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 73):
Here's where you lose all credibility with me.
You're trying to put out there the impression that EWR gets 30.3% of NYC's traffic. You know that is not the case and you know that is not what the stat you posted says.
Yet to the casual reader, it appears as if 30.3% of NYC travelers choose EWR. That is not the case.
So let's put your stat into simpler and clearer terms:
If all the passengers going to EWR to catch a flight on a given day numbers 10, then your stat indicates that 3 out of those 10 passengers came from NYC.
If we look at all the passengers going to JFK to catch a flight on a given day, and the number is 100, and just 20 of those passengers come from NYC, then your stat would say 20% of JFK's passengers are from NYC and that EWR has a greater share of its passengers coming from NYC than JFK.
In other words, in your terms, EWR beats JFK.
Completely overlooking the reality that EWR just pulls 3 passengers to JFK's 20 passengers (in my example).
I really don't understand your "devotion" to EWR that you go to such lengths to present misleading information.
Wow. I cannot begin to fathom how you get all of that from what STT757 posted.
Again, his post was:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 69): According to Port Authority Statistics 33% of EWR's travelers come from East of the Hudson (30.3% from NYC alone). The rest Westchester, Long Island, Connecticut.
This was in response to this earlier post of yours:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 64):
Just proves - yet again - that EWR draws a very small amount of travelers from east of the Hudson.
I don't see where he's supposedly making the claim that EWR gets 30% of NYC's total traffic (it doesn't). His claim was that of 100 passengers who use EWR, 33 originate east of the Hudson, and 30 are from NYC. If EWR has 27 million pax per year, then that is 9 million passengers from east of the Hudson, and over 8 million from NYC. Not exactly "a very small amount" in my book, and apparently not in STT757's book either.
Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 75, posted (2 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3064 times:
Quoting flyingalex (Reply 74): I don't see where he's supposedly making the claim that EWR gets 30% of NYC's total traffic (it doesn't). His claim was that of 100 passengers who use EWR, 33 originate east of the Hudson, and 30 are from NYC. If EWR has 27 million pax per year, then that is 9 million passengers from east of the Hudson, and over 8 million from NYC. Not exactly "a very small amount" in my book, and apparently not in STT757's book either.
He's posted the same stats in the past when EWR and JFK were being discussed in an attempt to build up the impression that EWR is on-par with JFK in terms of the passengers originating in Manhattan.
Here's the original exchange from earlier in this thread:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 69): Quoting N62NA (Reply 64):
Just proves - yet again - that EWR draws a very small amount of travelers from east of the Hudson.
According to Port Authority Statistics 33% of EWR's travelers come from East of the Hudson (30.3% from NYC alone). The rest Westchester, Long Island, Connecticut.
His point does nothing to refute my statement, as it cleverly uses "NYC" (which includes Staten Island -west of the Hudson - for which EWR is in its backyard).
Deltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8590 posts, RR: 8 Reply 76, posted (2 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2905 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 47): To connect passengers from Domestic to International does not require a 30 minute taxi ride, that's one of the metrics.
So your just posting crap. Thats ok, just say its bias and I'll be happy to shut up.
Delta has very few (ie less than 10) markets at LGA that don't have flights to JFK. Every major market has a flight to JFK for international feed.
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 55): Systemwide, DL is cutting ASMs too
Who said anything about system wide? In Delta's two markets of focus as of late, NYC and LAX, they are up in basically every metric
Quoting catiii (Reply 57): offering 33 flights between LGA and ATL
uh what? If that is sitting on slots then so the 14 trips UA flies between ORD and EWR, the tons of trips they fly from EWR to LAX/SFO/IAH too. Delta runs 16ish flights to LGA from ATL, hourly shuttle all on 757....its biggest domestic aircraft. WTF are you talking about?
56 daily flights on CRJs to PHL is slot sitting, an hourly shuttle that is almost always full on 757s on a trunk hub to hub route is not slot sitting.
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
flyingalex From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1005 posts, RR: 1 Reply 77, posted (2 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2759 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 75): He's posted the same stats in the past when EWR and JFK were being discussed in an attempt to build up the impression that EWR is on-par with JFK in terms of the passengers originating in Manhattan.
I've skimmed the entire thread again, but I can't find the relevant post. Could you clarify where exactly he said that?
Quoting N62NA (Reply 75): His point does nothing to refute my statement, as it cleverly uses "NYC" (which includes Staten Island -west of the Hudson - for which EWR is in its backyard).
Question for you: what is the population of the Borough of Staten Island? To save you looking it up, Wikipedia currently says about 470,000 (Manhattan 1.6M, Brooklyn 2.5M, Queens 2.2M, Bronx 1.4M).
If every single resident (every man, woman and child) of Staten Island used EWR twice a year, that would result in less than 1 million of that 8 million total. Four visits per capita, and it's less than 2 million pax. Six per capita, and you're at about 2.8M pax. 8 trips per capita, and you're at 3.7M still well shy of 50% of EWR's total NYC-originating passengers. And this is assuming that every. single. resident. takes or generates his share of trips.
I think you may overestimating Staten Island's importance just a wee bit. Its population size limits the impact it can hope to have.
Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 78, posted (2 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2624 times:
Quoting flyingalex (Reply 77): I've skimmed the entire thread again, but I can't find the relevant post. Could you clarify where exactly he said that?
I was referring to past topics, not this one.
Quoting flyingalex (Reply 77): I think you may overestimating Staten Island's importance just a wee bit. Its population size limits the impact it can hope to have.
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 7450 posts, RR: 2 Reply 79, posted (2 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2618 times:
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 71): The primary reasons for flying to JFK for UA from LAX and SFO are the huge size of the market and the important connecting traffic those flights bring to the two west coast hubs. SFO is the main UA hub for Asia with many connection fron JFK.
Exactly. UA needs to serve NYC proper (not just EWR) from freaking Los Angeles and also their crown jewel hub at SFO. It's not optional to serve New York. So, a thread asking why is pretty weird.
JBAirwaysFan From United States of America, joined May 2009, 784 posts, RR: 0 Reply 80, posted (2 months 4 hours ago) and read 2242 times:
Quoting flyingalex (Reply 7): One thing to remember is that JFK does not only serve New York City. There are quite a few people on Long Island and southern Connecticut for whom JFK is the preferred airport. Some of them are fantastically wealthy (like the residents of the Hamptons, for example).
JFK and EWR overlap in that they both serve NYC, but they remain separate markets. There are areas that naturally gravitate towards either one or the other, and it can make sense to have a presence in both. I can only assume the numbers add up, otherwise UA would not have stuck with their JFK operation for so long.
Absolutely! I live on Long Island. Not that I'm a UA flyer by any means, but for those who are and who live on Long Island going to EWR is a pain in the neck and at least an hour drive. Even from the areas on Long Island closest to JFK (which is actually where I live) it is an hour or more. Plus then there are the tolls you have to pay to either drive thru the city or to take the Verrazano to Staten Island and then the Goethals or Outer Bridge Crossing to the Jersey Tpke.
UA is better off offering the JFK service. It is the closest airport to Nassau and Suffolk Counties and they both offer plenty of premium pax.
Not to mention I believe JFK is slot controlled. Why would UA want to give up the slots?
In Loving Memory of Casey Edward Falconer; May 16, 1992-May 9, 2012
CODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2167 posts, RR: 8 Reply 81, posted (2 months 4 hours ago) and read 2219 times:
Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 76): Who said anything about system wide? In Delta's two markets of focus as of late, NYC and LAX, they are up in basically every metric
Check the comment to which I was responding:
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 51): I really do think DL might have the edge on UA in the NYC market, since UA is only focused on shrinking whereas DL is expanding.
It's factually wrong, so I was responding to the point that UA is shrinking and DL is expanding. The only metric on which both carriers are shrinking is systemwide ASMs, and that has more to do with softness in international (Atlantic) demand, where the cutback of a single flight on a given weekday has the same effect as removing about a dozen shorthaul/regional frequencies.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16261 posts, RR: 52 Reply 82, posted (1 month 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1984 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 75):
He's posted the same stats in the past when EWR and JFK were being discussed in an attempt to build up the impression that EWR is on-par with JFK in terms of the passengers originating in Manhattan.
In one way you're right, they are on par. Both EWR and JFK get 24% of their traffic from Manhattan. However since JFK handles more traffic their 24% number is a larger number than EWR's 24%. But on a percentage basis they're equal. For LGA the Manhattan share of their traffic is over 50%. However again since LGA handles less traffic than EWR and JFK the number of Manhattan travelers they handle might not be that far off from EWR and JFK's as the 50% number would lead one to believe.
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 83, posted (1 month 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1778 times:
Quoting STT757 (Reply 82): In one way you're right, they are on par. Both EWR and JFK get 24% of their traffic from Manhattan. However since JFK handles more traffic their 24% number is a larger number than EWR's 24%. But on a percentage basis they're equal.
Thanks. I hope you will point this out as well the next time you post such statistics.
corinthians From United States of America, joined May 2008, 277 posts, RR: 0 Reply 84, posted (1 month 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1687 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 83): Thanks. I hope you will point this out as well the next time you post such statistics.
That number is skewed even more since 53% of EWR’s passengers are O&D and the rest are connecting. So this 24% is 24% of 53% of the overall number and is far smaller than appears.
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 85, posted (1 month 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1652 times:
Quoting corinthians (Reply 84):
That number is skewed even more since 53% of EWR’s passengers are O&D and the rest are connecting. So this 24% is 24% of 53% of the overall number and is far smaller than appears.
And thank YOU.
Sometimes it feels like I'm the only person out here that is speaking the truth about EWR when it comes to its inability to offer premium service and its second banana position to JFK in terms of preference of Manhattan premium O&D.
EWR and JFK, as has been pointed out countless times here, are almost exactly the same distance from any point in Manhattan. Now that UA absorbed CO, it should be simple to move the JFK p.s. flights to EWR, after all, the distance is the same.
BUT.... for whatever psychological reason, people in Manhattan (and east of the Hudson) don't want to go to EWR. Fact!
That number is skewed even more since 53% of EWR’s passengers are O&D and the rest are connecting. So this 24% is 24% of 53% of the overall number and is far smaller than appears.
And thank YOU.
Sometimes it feels like I'm the only person out here that is speaking the truth about EWR when it comes to its inability to offer premium service and its second banana position to JFK in terms of preference of Manhattan premium O&D.
EWR and JFK, as has been pointed out countless times here, are almost exactly the same distance from any point in Manhattan. Now that UA absorbed CO, it should be simple to move the JFK p.s. flights to EWR, after all, the distance is the same.
BUT.... for whatever psychological reason, people in Manhattan (and east of the Hudson) don't want to go to EWR. Fact!
So p.s. remains at JFK.
The only person that seems to care is you. Fine you've won the argument in your head that you bring up in any NYC aviation thread. Can you let it go?
But as a Manhattan dweller, I will happily continue to use EWR while the rest of the island inhabitants slug it out on the BQE.
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3681 posts, RR: 4 Reply 87, posted (1 month 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1479 times:
Quoting airzim (Reply 86): The only person that seems to care is you. Fine you've won the argument in your head that you bring up in any NYC aviation thread. Can you let it go?
Check the BA 787 topic. I'm not the only one with this view (though sometimes it seems like I am).
catiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 2279 posts, RR: 3 Reply 88, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1238 times:
Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 76): Quoting catiii (Reply 57):
offering 33 flights between LGA and ATL
uh what? If that is sitting on slots then so the 14 trips UA flies between ORD and EWR, the tons of trips they fly from EWR to LAX/SFO/IAH too. Delta runs 16ish flights to LGA from ATL, hourly shuttle all on 757....its biggest domestic aircraft. WTF are you talking about?
56 daily flights on CRJs to PHL is slot sitting, an hourly shuttle that is almost always full on 757s on a trunk hub to hub route is not slot sitting.
Pump the brakes sky king. Look at the statement in its entirety.
Quoting catiii (Reply 57): Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 49):
When you have this:
You are just congesting the airport, holding out the competition, raising airfares and stifling growth. All at a slot controlled airport.
Right, because DL controlling 50% of the slots at LGA, offering 33 flights between LGA and ATL, doesn't hold out competition, raise airfares, and stifle growth. . .
So offering 32 flights between the largest, second largest, and ninth largest MSA's, including two hubs, means UA is congesting an airport but DL doing the same at LGA isn't? Right...
CODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2167 posts, RR: 8 Reply 89, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1223 times:
Quoting catiii (Reply 88): So offering 32 flights between the largest, second largest, and ninth largest MSA's, including two hubs, is UA congesting an airport but DL doing the same at LGA isn't? Right...
Right, because EWR, which is 98% small RJ traffic, is far more congested than the capacious, efficient facilities at JFK and LGA that don't seem to have any traffic issues, so only United should voluntarily pull back flights to address these concerns ... this is all true because A.net told me so!
Oh yes, and nobody (as in, not one single person) from Manhattan uses Newark!
mesaflyguy From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 723 posts, RR: 1 Reply 90, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1142 times:
I don't want to ruffle any feathers, but it as pretty clear that the EWR-LAX/SFO increases are in response to VX and, if they are similar to what they did when VX entered ORD, they will be back to realistic numbers soon.
CODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2167 posts, RR: 8 Reply 94, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 835 times:
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 91): Clearly the stats state that NYC traffic from EWR is less than LGA and JFK.
Correct, and a fact never in dispute. However, the repeated assertions that EWR is not an option for Manhattan-originating travelers is complete nonsense. There are millions of Manhattan travelers using EWR every year, and the statistics bear that out.
FlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1625 posts, RR: 3 Reply 95, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 798 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 75): which includes Staten Island -west of the Hudson
Quoting N62NA (Reply 85): EWR and JFK, as has been pointed out countless times here, are almost exactly the same distance from any point in Manhattan. Now that UA absorbed CO, it should be simple to move the JFK p.s. flights to EWR, after all, the distance is the same.
No matter how you go, EWR cost double the price in either tolls, or fare to get to than JFK. More times of the day there is traffic to EWR than to JFK and there are many routes to JFK to avoid traffic where to EWR there are not.
catiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 2279 posts, RR: 3 Reply 96, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 761 times:
Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 95): No matter how you go, EWR cost double the price in either tolls, or fare to get to than JFK. More times of the day there is traffic to EWR than to JFK and there are many routes to JFK to avoid traffic where to EWR there are not.
Penn Station to JFK on LIRR via the AirTrain is 35 mins and $13. Penn Station to EWR via the AirTrain is 25 mins and $12.50.
LHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1369 posts, RR: 1 Reply 97, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 746 times:
Quoting klwright69 (Reply 92): Maybe in the future UA will augment their presence in EWR by adding more services to JFK and LGA.
You might see some of that, but only to a point. Given UA's hub at EWR, it wouldn't be as efficient if they started splitting off chunks of pax and then having to use smaller and higher CASM planes to fly the same NYC-xxx routes from two places now (presuming these pax fly UA n/s from EWR today but would switch to JFK or LGA if given the chance to stay with UA more conveniently). As said before, the JFK and LGA services are tailored to what UA does well from NYC, and somewhat akin to how they serve DCA vs IAD: shuttle service to ORD, good coverage to IAH, their grandfathered service to DEN, and a few flights to CLE at LGA and then your transcon plus IAD connection feeder traffic at JFK. That's actually a very solid overall service level for NYC between the three airports as far as UA is concerned.
So I don't see too many opportunities, especially given that UA is categorically not in the business of running focus cities (CLE jokes aside). Their existing service at LGA and JFK serves their network fine (again since they don't do the DL thing of having numerous focus cities around the country in addition to hubs), and there likely isn't much low-hanging fruit that either AA or DL wouldn't get into a fight over at LGA and/or JFK.
FlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1625 posts, RR: 3 Reply 98, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 751 times:
Quoting catiii (Reply 96): Penn Station to JFK on LIRR via the AirTrain is 35 mins and $13. Penn Station to EWR via the AirTrain is 25 mins and $12.50.
E train to Jamaica, then Airtrain. $7.50 (45 min)
A to Lefferts then Q10 $2.50 (45 min)
A to Howard Beach then Airtrain $7.50 (40 min)
catiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 2279 posts, RR: 3 Reply 99, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 719 times:
Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 98): E train to Jamaica, then Airtrain. $7.50 (45 min)
A to Lefferts then Q10 $2.50 (45 min)
A to Howard Beach then Airtrain $7.50 (40 min)
Ok, but you said:
Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 95): No matter how you go, EWR cost double the price in either tolls, or fare to get to than JFK.
Using comparable modalities, in this case NJT and LIRR, that's not an accurate statement. I provided an example of where EWR does not cost double the price or fare. And in any event, even if you wanted to compare your example to mine, it isn't "double" the cost. You're comparing apples to oranges by comparing the subway to LIRR/NJT.
airzim From Zimbabwe, joined Jun 2001, 1105 posts, RR: 1 Reply 100, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 638 times:
Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 95):
No matter how you go, EWR cost double the price in either tolls, or fare to get to than JFK. More times of the day there is traffic to EWR than to JFK and there are many routes to JFK to avoid traffic where to EWR there are not.
I could care less about the toll difference. That's aboout a 0.1% consideration in my decision of what airport to use.
As for alternatives to JFK, you must be kidding. I've done them all, and they all suck and only give you the sense of arriving earlier but if you're not suck on the BQE or the van Wyke, you're sitting at a light on Atlantic Ave or Flatbush. The Belt is a complete waste.
Let's end the discussion now. The only people this discussion seems to matter too are those that don't even live in Manhattan.
luckyone From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1587 posts, RR: 0 Reply 101, posted (1 month 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 600 times:
Quoting catiii (Reply 99): Using comparable modalities, in this case NJT and LIRR, that's not an accurate statement. I provided an example of where EWR does not cost double the price or fare. And in any event, even if you wanted to compare your example to mine, it isn't "double" the cost. You're comparing apples to oranges by comparing the subway to LIRR/NJT.
Currently, and for the next few months, it is actually possible to only pay $2.25 to get to and from JFK using the A Train to and from Howard Beach. Since the extension to the Rockaways was destroyed by Sandy they are running shuttle buses to and from the Rockaways from the parking lot, and there is a turn style just past the stair well leading to the AirTrain. Near the shuttle pick up is the doorway to the AirTrain, free of charge.
strfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 488 posts, RR: 0 Reply 102, posted (1 month 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 548 times:
You're really misconstruing what I am saying. I am not saying their current service, PS, from JFK is not successful. In fact there was a Wall Street Journal article from two years ago that stated UA was the leader in terms of yields in the JFK-LAX/SFO market. However that said if they could, which they can't, but if they could they would absolutely move the service to LGA and be done with JFK. I have great confidence in that. So again my answer to the thread starters question is UA is at JFK, with SFO and LAX, because they can't fly those routes from LGA. If JFK were a separate market from LGA, such as EWR, then why doesn't UA fly JFK-DEN, CLE, ORD, IAH etc.. The reason is that they can fly those from LGA, they can't with LAX/SFO.
************************************************************************************************************************************
while we can't fly trans-con from LGA the point is NOT whether we Would abandon JFK it's because we Won't !!
No matter Who flies Trans con From JFK. OR whethev we Could move the service to LGA.. Why is that a matter of Discussion? It' hyperbole to say it in the first place.. United Developed a market flying PS service when nobody else was and I say give it up?? For What??. The PS is a market in itself and it provides a reason for it's continuance. Thi i all a business program and maybe airlines need MORE market driven routes and services to fill whatever Niche the market presents. I've aways thought that United should Name their Capital Routes so that passengers build a recognition to those routes regardless of flight numbers that change The Wall Street ORD LGA,The " Windy City" (SFO-ORD)(LAX-ORD) (IAD-ORD)or the "Chi-Town Hustler" (after the 69 Dodge Charger Dragster owned by Farcona-Coil and Minnick) The Liberty Bell (DEN,SFO, LAX, ORD-PHL) "The Capitol"(LAX,SFO,DEN,IAH- IAD) just to name a few, I haven't come up with all of them but the minimal marketing it would take would be based on flight times rather than flight Numbers, the flights would have to be frequent and regular allowing the passenger to have Name and Time recognition and it MIGHT make flying fun again. I take the train to work every day and watch the Am Track names, where this Idea came from.
catiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 2279 posts, RR: 3 Reply 103, posted (1 month 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 534 times:
Quoting luckyone (Reply 101): Currently, and for the next few months, it is actually possible to only pay $2.25 to get to and from JFK using the A Train to and from Howard Beach. Since the extension to the Rockaways was destroyed by Sandy they are running shuttle buses to and from the Rockaways from the parking lot, and there is a turn style just past the stair well leading to the AirTrain. Near the shuttle pick up is the doorway to the AirTrain, free of charge.
The original poster said that every mode of transportation to EWR cost double the price to JFK. That isn't true, and I provided comparable modalities (in this case NJT and LIRR) where it was inaccurate.
I wasn't saying it wasn't possible to get to JFK cheaply, but if we're going to compare apples and oranges then I could argue it's cheaper to walk to EWR (free) than it is to take the subway to JFK.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2013, 32 posts, 
From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 1787 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1005 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21494 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 8792 posts, 
From Zimbabwe, joined Jun 2001, 1105 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
