ORD Boy 2
Topic Author
Posts: 298
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 12:25 pm

JFK And The New UA

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:09 pm

Hey,
Just a thought, now that the UA/CO merger is progressing, does anyone think that UA could add flights to JFK from IAH, ORD, CLE or DEN? I know that LGA is not that far away, but on the other hand, several Star partners operate out of JFK and I am sure the routes could produce some revenue.
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:15 pm

CO hated JFK and UA downsized to LAX SFO and IAD.

The two combined will not add up to much. Perhaps they will reinstate twice daily to IAH
 
tommy767
Posts: 4658
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:18 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:30 pm

I think IAH on 738 or 739 would be a good thing.
"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13221
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:33 pm

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 1):
CO hated JFK and UA downsized to LAX SFO and IAD.

CO hates JFK so much they built a modern $25 Million Cargo building at JFK.

http://www.asiatraveltips.com/travel...ews2002/23May2002Continental.shtml

They truck the cargo from JFK to EWR, several times each day.

In fact UA moved their cargo operations to CO's cargo building (bldg #71) at JFK last June.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
jfk777
Posts: 5861
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:38 pm

Besides the current PS flights to LAX and SFO there is little United should fly from JFK unless they see a need for JFK to LHR flights for the Star Alliance.
 
tsnamm
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 3:28 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:45 pm

Quoting STT757 (Reply 3):
CO hates JFK so much they built a modern $25 Million Cargo building at JFK.

Bingo....it actually ended up costing $32 million... it shows how important JFK is in the CO Cargo network...CO only built 3 new dedicated cargo facilities...1 in EWR, 1 in IAH and 1 in JFK...JFK is the 3 rd largest/profitable cargo station in CO's network operating 10-12 exclusive trucks daily back and forth JFK/EWR...
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13221
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:00 pm

Quoting ORD+Boy+2" class="quote" target="_blank">ORD Boy 2 (Thread starter):
does anyone think that UA could add flights to JFK from IAH, ORD, CLE or DEN?

DEN and CLE no.

If they were to launch any new hub flights from JFK it would most likely be to IAH with a couple daily 737-800s . On the existing IAD-JFK I think Q400s would be a nice improvement.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
nascarnut
Posts: 288
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 3:43 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:28 pm

Quoting tsnamm (Reply 5):
Bingo....it actually ended up costing $32 million... it shows how important JFK is in the CO Cargo network...CO only built 3 new dedicated cargo facilities...1 in EWR, 1 in IAH and 1 in JFK...JFK is the 3 rd largest/profitable cargo station in CO's network operating 10-12 exclusive trucks daily back and forth JFK/EWR...

The EWR vs JFK cargo is a bit like LGW vs LHR. It used to be that over half the cargo that was flown into LGW ended up at LHR due to the majority of your freight forwarders were well established at LHR.
EWR is the same. A majority of your freight forwarders are established at JFK while EWR was not as significant until PMCO established it as a significant hub into Europe.

United may stay clear of JFK and let AA/DL/B6 fight it out. Some still believe it is still easier to get from Manhattan to EWR than it is to JFK. Do they still offer the Helicopter service from Gate 71 to Manhattan
 
m11stephen
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:16 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:14 am

This is something that I don't understand... Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark? Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.
My opinions, statements, etc. are my own and do not have any association with those of any employer.
 
washingtonian
Posts: 749
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 5:56 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:21 am

Quoting tsnamm (Reply 5):
in CO's network operating 10-12 exclusive trucks daily back and forth JFK/EWR...

Jeez! Is most of this cargo flying in on international carriers into JFK and then going onto American cities on United at EWR?

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark

It serves NYC, the most important business market in the country. And that market combined with NJ, a very wealthy state, makes EWR very lucrative. It doesn't serve the city of Newark alone.
 
United1
Posts: 2876
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:25 am

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.

UA's Terminal C is actually very nice and it's convenient to catch a NJ Transit train to Manhattan....just because the city is a wasteland doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the airport besides the usual NYC related delays.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13221
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:31 am

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark?

If your fascinated with crime take a look at this:

http://projects.nytimes.com/crime/homicides/map

Gives you an idea of where the bad neighborhoods are located in NYC.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:34 am

There's not a whole lot of market for CO/UA at JFK - they could probably add a couple of IAH and ORD flights for connecting purposes, but that's about it.

Quoting nascarnut (Reply 7):
Some still believe it is still easier to get from Manhattan to EWR than it is to JFK.

Depending on where in Manhattan you are, they're right.

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
This is something that I don't understand... Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark? Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.

Surely you can't be serious. By that logic, why would DL put a hub in Detroit? And yet that hub is a very nice one that's a great asset to DL's network.

An airport is about more than just the city it's named after. EWR's coverage area is not just the city of Newark.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Jamake1
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 2:30 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:49 am

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
This is something that I don't understand... Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark? Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.

Continental inherited the EWR hub when they took over People Express in 1987. EWR serves a very wide catchment area for NY and NJ and the carrier has leveraged the hub's convenience to Manhattan by transforming EWR during the 1990's from what was primarily a transatlantic and Caribbean gateway to one that has become a premier global gateway that serves Europe, Latin America, Asia, India, and the Middle East...
United's B747-400. "She's a a cruel lover."
 
N62NA
Posts: 4010
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:59 am

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark?

You make it sound like the airport is in downtown Newark!

And, FYI... The city of Newark is not at all as you describe.
 
AussieItaliano
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:42 am

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark?
UA will put a hub (and structure their network) wherever they can make the most money. EWR is extremely profitable for them. Many of UA's premium travellers who work in NYC live in NJ, and this makes EWR the most convenient airport for them, hands down. Many Manhattanites and some from the suburban upstate counties also find EWR to be more convenient, especially when flying to cities that can't be served from LGA because of the perimeter rule.

What some people don't understand about NYC is that both long-haul airports are about equally convenient to Manhattan. So unlike in cities such as London, or Tokyo, where one airport is clearly more convenient for most travellers going to those cities' centres, the difference in travel time between EWR or JFK to Manhattan is so negligible that people on a.net argue all the time about which one is more convenient.  

I grew up in NYC for years, and both airports have their advantages and disadvantages, as does LGA. And believe me, even though there are some crime-ridden and dirty areas in Northern NJ, there are some really nice areas too.

I personally prefer JFK, and would love to see more UA service to JFK. I also prefer BUR here in Southern California. My UA dream come true would be new service to both JFK and BUR from IAH!

But the bottom line about the EWR hub is that airlines are ultimately driven by profit, and the EWR hub has been a gold mine for years.

[Edited 2012-01-26 20:44:37]
Third Runway - LHR, Second Runway - LGW, Build Them Both!!!
 
tsnamm
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 3:28 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:09 pm

Quoting washingtonian (Reply 10):
Jeez! Is most of this cargo flying in on international carriers into JFK and then going onto American cities on United at EWR?

No it is CO business... import/export to from Europe /Asia into/from JFK...as well as air mail....the equivalent of 100-120 LD-3 positions daily....

[Edited 2012-01-27 04:38:02]
 
United1
Posts: 2876
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:26 pm

Quoting AussieItaliano (Reply 16):
My UA dream come true would be new service to both JFK and BUR from IAH!

You almost got your wish a few years ago...UA was looking at P.S. service from BUR-JFK as part of the NBC contract.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
N62NA
Posts: 4010
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:46 pm

Quoting AussieItaliano (Reply 16):
Many of UA's premium travellers who work in NYC live in NJ, and this makes EWR the most convenient airport for them, hands down

But not enough to justify p.s. service to LAX/SFO apparently.
 
User avatar
United787
Posts: 2205
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:52 pm

I think the only reason that UA even has any service to JFK is because they can't fly to LGA from SFO and LAX...otherwise there would be none...
 
caljn
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:37 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:56 pm

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
This is something that I don't understand... Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark? Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.

WOW! Way to jump off a cliff! I'm counting the minutes until your post is deleted.
 
Mir
Posts: 19107
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 9:12 pm

Quoting N62NA (Reply 21):
But not enough to justify p.s. service to LAX/SFO apparently.

The p.s. layout isn't conducive to a hub-to-hub route. SFO is definitely a hub for the new UA, and LAX is a small hub. I suppose they could use three-class 767s on those routes, but those frames may not be available.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
point2point
Posts: 2080
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:54 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 9:20 pm

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark? Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.

Lordy lordy lordy..... I have to chime in here....

As a resident in Manhattan for many years, when I took a trip, yes, LGA was the most convenient, but that is if LGA provide the route, price and time that suited me. Otherwise, my second choice was most likely EWR.

Yes, JFK has it prestige, so to speak, but then this prestige changes into being a pain in the a** after about 2-3 times of going through there. Between the travel there, JFK to/from my home, and just the maneuvering around the airport itself on some occasions, I found JFK to be such a production number, that I avoided it like the plague if I could. EWR, on the other hand, seemed much easier to get to/from either driving or with public transportation, had a pretty good facility, and by no means in a crime-ridden area. Industrial yes, but crime ridden? And yes, with driving there, the ride from/to Manhattan/EWR is anything but pretty most of the way (those big ugly dirty swamps/marshes are hideous), there is nothing dangerous about them, unless one would want to go swimming in them or something like that. And the City of Newark itself has made great strides over the last many years, and is by no means as grim as envisioned maybe in the 60s-70s.

Nonetheless, I think that is quite an unfair characterization of EWR. If one has an opportunity to use it, either as O&D, or to transfer through there, please know that from my numerous experiences with EWR, it is nothing like described above. There may be other issues (such as delays, etc.) but these are on par with the other city airports of LGA and JFK. And if anyone does go through EWR with the impression above, I would suggest trying out EWR if possible, and one will find quite the opposite and be pleasantly surprised as to how good of a facility that it can be.

 
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 9:26 pm

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark?

Well, you don't have to enter Newark to get to the airport. It's as much in Newark as SFO is in San Francisco or IAH is in Houston or DFW is in Dallas or... you get the picture. It's in a swampy area outside of the city, accessed by a billion or so highways. It has a very direct shot to NYC via the holland tunnel, and easy access from various national headquarters of multinational companies.

Growing up in New Jersey, I can count the number of times I actually went to the city of Newark on one hand. But we flew out of the EWR often.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
tommy767
Posts: 4658
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:18 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:36 pm

EWR is technically in Elizabeth, which for you non-tri state area users out there is more of a hole than Newark proper. But don't worry, crime doesn't come anywhere near the airport. Not when you have overpaid Port Authority cops patrolling around the perimeters all day in their brand new police cruisers. They aren't looking for hit and runs either, they are looking for national security concerns.

But getting back on topic, UA threw in the towel with JFK during BK. One of their last non hub routes out of Kennedy was to LHR, which was canned in 2006. So in theory if it was ever allowed for UA to operate PS out of LGA, they'd probably ditch JFK in a heartbeat.
"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13221
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:54 pm

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 24):
EWR is technically in Elizabeth

Not quite, a small part of the Southern end (including Terminal A) is in Elizabeth. The airport was entirely in the City of Newark until the Central Terminal area was built in the early '70s, when they expanded into Union County and the City of Elizabeth with Terminal A.

In this map the dotted line that cuts through Terminal A is the Essex County/Union County border separating the City of Newark (Terminal B & C) with the City of Elizabeth (Terminal A)

http://binged.it/xxXr7Y
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:57 pm

EWR is a major hub for UA because it is a major airport in the largest travel market in the United States.

-Near the largest collection of HQs in the US
-Near the largest collection of wealth in the world

Out of the 3 major airports, I like EWR the least AND personally, I am not a fan of Jersey.

BUT if I ran an airline, and I saw a wide open airport just waiting for service minutes from the wealthy suburbs of Northern Jersey and minutes from Manhattan with 3 new terminals (think 1980s), with one awaiting a white knight to complete it AND an agency looking for anyone to come in and use it, I would have started a hub there too.

Great business decision by Peoples Express and later CO. Probably saved CO from demise and went on to become their most profitable hub.
 
N62NA
Posts: 4010
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 12:31 am

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 26):
BUT if I ran an airline, and I saw a wide open airport just waiting for service minutes from the wealthy suburbs of Northern Jersey and minutes from Manhattan with 3 new terminals (think 1980s), with one awaiting a white knight to complete it AND an agency looking for anyone to come in and use it, I would have started a hub there too.

Precisely. Which has always baffled me why the majors of that time (UA, AA, TW, DL, NW) always treated EWR as an after-thought and focused most of their service at LGA/JFK.
 
caljn
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:37 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 2:14 am

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 26):
Out of the 3 major airports, I like EWR the least AND personally, I am not a fan of Jersey.

That's funny. I detest LGA and JFK and not a fan of the outer boroughs. To each his own I suppose...
 
hnl-jack
Posts: 252
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 10:34 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 2:41 am

UA now has in EWR what every airline would like in a major business market, a "fortress hub." Let the others, AA, US and DL fight it out at JFK & LGA while they dominate one of three major airports serving NYC. Pretty good position to be in if you ask me.
 
gman3
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 11:13 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 2:49 am

The things we have been told so far at UA are that the PS planes are being reconfigured yet again to a 2 class aircraft. There has been no mention at all of adding routes from JFK. I do see that we wll be using United metal on some flights from LGA to IAH starting in April, I believe, Systemwide, there are going to be alof of changeups in terms of aircrafte used to many cities.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:57 am

Having a cargo facility at JFK is very different that having flights at JFK.

The reason there is a CO cargo facility at JFK is due to the fact the bulk of the NYC freight forwarder community is located around JFK. They Simply were not going to tender business to CO if they need to drive across the river to NJ when there is ample other service located a few miles away at JFK.

And CO is not the only airline with such facilities. SAS after moving its NYC ops over to EWR during the late 1980s maintained its JFK cargo facility only until a couple years ago (now they are handled by a 3rd party) for the same reasons to ensure uninterrupted business relationships with the NYC freight forwarder community.

Also other airlines like Lufthansa and Virgin Atlantic also allow one to tender and receive EWR cargo via their JFK warehouses.


So at the end of the day, the new United maintaining a freight facility at JFK is hardly the reason to guarantee any level of future flight activity at the airport as a result.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
AADC10
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:40 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 5:54 am

I do not see UA expanding at JFK. If anything, there may be further reductions. Most NYC O&D prefer LGA, where UA has flights to most of its hubs within the perimeter. EWR is obviously a hub so most of the flights go there. UA has always been small potatoes at JFK and it is mostly a spoke for its p.s. service since California is out of LGA's perimeter. In the 1990s UA tried to expand JFK but eventually gave up. I think the UAX JFK-IAD flight only exists to connect JFK to the PMUA European routes and other hub flights and may eventually get cut.
 
BOACCunard
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 7:59 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 6:57 am

IAH seems plausible to me. CLE, no way, it's a dying hub. If UA wanted to add ORD or DEN it could just have easily done it before the merger.

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
This is something that I don't understand... Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark?

Are you serious?

Quoting N62NA (Reply 21):
But not enough to justify p.s. service to LAX/SFO apparently.

Well, EWR has just become a hub for UA, and UA/CO service levels haven't been aligned yet.

Three-class p.s. is going away anyway, at which point it would be a lot easier to align service levels out of EWR. But EWR needs more capacity than p.s. can provide, simply because EWR-LAX/SFO is a hub-to-hub route with connections on both ends. JFK-LAX/SFO is not and p.s. is focused on O&D traffic.

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 32):
UA has always been small potatoes at JFK and it is mostly a spoke for its p.s. service since California is out of LGA's perimeter. In the 1990s UA tried to expand JFK but eventually gave up.

UA hasn't always been small potatoes at JFK. Just recently. It was once a pretty big UA station, complete with UA's own terminal etc.

[Edited 2012-01-27 23:01:23]
Getting There is Half the Fun!
 
VC10er
Posts: 2231
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 8:29 am

Gosh I have discussed this so many times. I fly Star Alliance exclusively and the vast majority on United or Continental- now it's just United. When I choose an international flight the last thing that matters is if it's in and/or out of JFK or EWR as both airports (especially if you factor in travel) as they are virtually equal. In fact rush hour traffic to JFK can be so awful you can easily miss your flight. Not that the Holland Tunnel is a joy, but EWR can be much faster on a summer Friday than JFK: even if you live on the Upper East Side.

As for the shocking comments about Newark...yes, it ain't Zurich. But there are big companies there and decent places to live. And just west and south of EWR are extremely RICH areas of NJ that are like Beverly Hills!

But I will always choose JFK to SFO/LAX for p.s.

I recall United's heyday at JFK and yes it was great- I wish "any" flight from United came back to JFK. Mostly a 9am UA 3 class 767 to LHR.

ALSO: why does CO "HATE" JFK?
The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
 
BOACCunard
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 7:59 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 8:42 am

Quoting VC10er (Reply 34):
ALSO: why does CO "HATE" JFK?

I doubt there was any hate, it just didn't serve very much purpose when CLE/IAH could be served from LGA and CO had a massive hub at EWR.
Getting There is Half the Fun!
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 4466
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 8:56 am

They certainly aren't the first carrier to retain a presence at all 3 NYC airports, NW did NRT and only a few domestic flights from JFK, and had a larger presence at LGA & EWR, albeit not a huge difference like UA.
Next Flights: PDX-HNL-OGG-LIH-PDX On AS, WP & HA
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 3278
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 9:49 am

Maybe a few flights to IAH? Other than that i don't see any reason they need to. IAH might make some sense for connectivity and cargo because of stars flights into JFK? For o&d reasons neither airline seems to eager on JFK and it has alot more competition with three hubs than their own fortress of EWR. All of the true elites and real frequent flyers who live near JFK are gonna be B6, AA or DL just because of how many flights and destination they have so its not like UA needs to offer more to make elites happy.

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 8):
This is something that I don't understand... Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark?

Newark airport is alot closer to Manhattan than DIA is to downtown Denver and has a train between the two. Your listed location. The area right around JFK is definitiely more dangerous and crime filled than the area right around EWR, JFK is not in some posh area by an means.

As to why continental/united has been so successful there and hubs there
Newark airport is also convenient to many many affluent neighborhoors and commercial areas in new jersey like Bergen County for example, a large population in NY state, and Connecticut. Amtrak sells alot of tickets from Stamford, Bridgeport to EWR and those are some wealthy areas too. Geographically EWR is in a good location to avoid the traffic jam of NYC to millions in the tri state area. To alot of wealthy areas EWR is more convenient than LGA or JFK between an amtrak stop and less risk of NYC gridlock traffic jams it has a large following of fans who prefer it.

[Edited 2012-01-28 01:59:48]
 
washingtonian
Posts: 749
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 2010 5:56 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 1:57 pm

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 26):
BUT if I ran an airline, and I saw a wide open airport just waiting for service minutes from the wealthy suburbs of Northern Jersey and minutes from Manhattan with 3 new terminals (think 1980s), with one awaiting a white knight to complete it AND an agency looking for anyone to come in and use it, I would have started a hub there too.

Very, very, very well said!!
 
User avatar
jfklganyc
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:31 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:09 pm

"That's funny. I detest LGA and JFK and not a fan of the outer boroughs. To each his own I suppose..."

Read my entire post please...it was pro Newark.

"Out of the 3 major airports, I like EWR the least AND personally, I am not a fan of Jersey.

BUT if I ran an airline, and I saw a wide open airport just waiting for service minutes from the wealthy suburbs of Northern Jersey and minutes from Manhattan with 3 new terminals (think 1980s), with one awaiting a white knight to complete it AND an agency looking for anyone to come in and use it, I would have started a hub there too.

Great business decision by Peoples Express and later CO. Probably saved CO from demise and went on to become their most profitable hub."
 
klwright69
Posts: 2393
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 4:22 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 5:58 pm

Quoting washingtonian (Reply 38):
Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 26):
BUT if I ran an airline, and I saw a wide open airport just waiting for service minutes from the wealthy suburbs of Northern Jersey and minutes from Manhattan with 3 new terminals (think 1980s), with one awaiting a white knight to complete it AND an agency looking for anyone to come in and use it, I would have started a hub there too.

Very, very, very well said!!

Exactly.. Hindsight is always 20-20. And it shows how not thinking in new ways can be costly. But in the end UA is reclaiming some its lost shine in the NYC market with this merger.

I would love to see UA have LHR service from both EWR and JFK like they did in the good ole' days. But I am sure I am dreaming on that one. I think it's a matter of time until UA launches JFK-IAH yet one more time. Three narrowbodies a day for this route is not a big risk, hopefully they can find some slots.
 
tommy767
Posts: 4658
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:18 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 6:23 pm

Quoting STT757 (Reply 25):
Not quite, a small part of the Southern end (including Terminal A) is in Elizabeth. The airport was entirely in the City of Newark until the Central Terminal area was built in the early '70s, when they expanded into Union County and the City of Elizabeth with Terminal A.

Don't care enough about Jersey to even address this.

Quoting VC10er (Reply 34):
As for the shocking comments about Newark...yes, it ain't Zurich. But there are big companies there and decent places to live. And just west and south of EWR are extremely RICH areas of NJ that are like Beverly Hills!

That's true. Where I grew up was very Beverly Hills like -- in terms of snobbish and standoffish mindset.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 36):
They certainly aren't the first carrier to retain a presence at all 3 NYC airports, NW did NRT and only a few domestic flights from JFK, and had a larger presence at LGA & EWR, albeit not a huge difference like UA.

Back in the 1990s EWR was the largest UA station in terms of flights but JFK had service to more destinations -- at least internationally. UA had some major corporate contracts back in the day in the New York area.
"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
 
point2point
Posts: 2080
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:54 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 8:38 pm

DEN/JFK might be able to have a flight or two, since the only n/s service are a B6 redeye, and a noon DL flight. I've flown the B6 redeye quite a few times, it is always packed (and I mean EVERY SEAT) going both to and from. Likewise, I once had to do a DL (since I needed to go DEN-NYC on a days notice, and this was the only n/s seat I could get at a decent price) and this was packed as well, but this flight seemed to be mostly connects, and only about 20 pax were claiming bags from about the 150 that filled the 737. B6 once had a noontime flight, which I also took a couple of times, and that plane was packed both to and from.

Now DEN-NYC area already has tons of flights with both EWR (several UA hub to hub as well as 3 daily WN) and then to LGA (several UA and F9, and now DL will soon add a couple of flights, and WN will add 3 flights, and this will become clusterf***), but JFK is still at two daily n/s, with the DL flight being mostly connecting traffic.

There is a sizable population JFK has where it probably has some advantage with catchment (although maybe not that much over LGA) and probably can get O&D DEN-NYC+ which can include Manhattan, the southern areas of both Brooklyn and Queens, plus a lot of parts of Long Island. And I think that there could be room for at least one, if not a couple of more n/s here. I'm pretty surprised mostly that B6 hasn't returned that flight that they cut here (this was dropped when JFK had that runway repair done) a couple of years ago, or even an AA flight for connections like DL does.

It seems like at least B6 or AA would be in good position to add this, but if not, maybe UA can strengthen its hold on the NYC area with a flight or two here?
 
caljn
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:37 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:25 pm

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 41):
Don't care enough about Jersey to even address this.

But address it you did. Interesting.
 
BOACCunard
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 7:59 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sun Jan 29, 2012 2:58 am

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 40):
But in the end UA is reclaiming some its lost shine in the NYC market with this merger.

I'd say it has gone way beyond that. UA is now the #1 airline in NYC, which as far as I know has never been the case before.

UA has the only true NYC hub. That's hugely valuable. AA and DL wish they could have what UA has now in NYC.

EWR was the crown jewel of the CO network, like MIA is for AA.

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 41):
Back in the 1990s EWR was the largest UA station in terms of flights but JFK had service to more destinations -- at least internationally. UA had some major corporate contracts back in the day in the New York area.

Did UA ever have any international service from EWR at all?

UA did have quite a bit of international service from JFK to LHR, South America, and Asia.

Quoting point2point (Reply 42):
There is a sizable population JFK has where it probably has some advantage with catchment (although maybe not that much over LGA) and probably can get O&D DEN-NYC which can include Manhattan, the southern areas of both Brooklyn and Queens, plus a lot of parts of Long Island.

I don't think JFK makes much sense for flights to destinations inside the LGA perimeter. The problem is that there are a lot of people whose first choice is EWR. There are a lot of people whose first choice is LGA. While there are certainly people whose first choice is JFK, I would say that there are probably fewer of them and their preference for JFK is probably less strongly expressed.

A lot of people will only fly from EWR unless there is no other option. A lot of people will only fly from LGA if there is no other option. How many people will only fly from JFK if there is no other option?

There are a lot of people who will take a connecting flight from LGA rather than a nonstop from JFK, or who will pay more to fly from LGA rather than JFK. For how many people is the reverse true?

I know plenty of people who, because of geography, prefer JFK to LGA -- but it is a pretty weakly expressed preference. All other things being equal, they'll choose JFK, but they don't have to be very unequal at all for them to leak to LGA.

That is, if UA only served EWR and JFK it would lose a lot of customers, especially high-yield customers. Same if it only served JFK and LGA. I'm not convinced that it loses many by only serving only EWR and LGA, and those it does lose are probably more likely to be price-sensitive.
Getting There is Half the Fun!
 
N62NA
Posts: 4010
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sun Jan 29, 2012 3:21 am

Quoting BOACCunard (Reply 44):
Did UA ever have any international service from EWR at all?

LHR and NRT
 
nycdave
Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:22 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sun Jan 29, 2012 3:31 am

It's worth pointing out, that in spite of being "small" at JFK, with limited destinations, UA is STILL the #4 carrier out of there!

Granted, the #4 rank is almost a four-way tie between UA, BA, AF, and VX; and it's a long way behind DL, B6, and AA, but it's hardly insignificant. They're carrying twice as many pax as LH or US.

That said, the only real case to be made for expanding service at JFK is to plug into the *A network there -- and UA probably doesn't care too much about that, when it serves most NYC *A routes, and almost all *A hubs on its own metal from EWR.

The only real market that they're losing out on by not having more service at JFK is o/d traffic from Long Island (including Brooklyn & Queens), that's going BEYOND the LGA perimeter. So, they're not losing out on much. I could see possible links to ORD, IAH, and DEN if they want to connect to partner feeds more, or a few west coast routes if they want to get around the perimeter at LGA... and slots at JFK are gold, so I can't imagine any drawdown.

Quoting United787 (Reply 19):

I think the only reason that UA even has any service to JFK is because they can't fly to LGA from SFO and LAX...otherwise there would be none...

  

Quoting HNL-Jack (Reply 29):
UA now has in EWR what every airline would like in a major business market, a "fortress hub." Let the others, AA, US and DL fight it out at JFK & LGA while they dominate one of three major airports serving NYC. Pretty good position to be in if you ask me.

I do believe US is effectively dropping out of the contest at LGA -- or at least backing away from it. It's pretty much just AA and DL. With the merger of CO and UA, and US's swap with DL, the new UA will either surpass US as the #3 carrier at LGA, or at least come very close.
 
Rockinflyer
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 6:32 pm

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sun Jan 29, 2012 4:02 am

Quoting AussieItaliano (Reply 15):
I personally prefer JFK, and would love to see more UA service to JFK. I also prefer BUR here in Southern California. My UA dream come true would be new service to both JFK and BUR from IAH!

BUR is a wonderful airport. I would fly out of BUR rather than LAX any day even if it meant one connection.
AA,AC,AF,BA,BN,BW,CO,DL,FL,F9,HA,KL,NA,PA,RW,TW,UA,WA,WN
 
BOACCunard
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 7:59 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sun Jan 29, 2012 8:36 am

Quoting N62NA (Reply 45):
LHR and NRT

Oh, yeah... I forgot about NRT but I certainly should have remembered LHR. I was just thinking about UA's EWR-LHR service (and AA's) a few days ago. I must be losing it.   

Quoting nycdave (Reply 46):
It's worth pointing out, that in spite of being "small" at JFK, with limited destinations, UA is STILL the #4 carrier out of there!

Granted, the #4 rank is almost a four-way tie between UA, BA, AF, and VX; and it's a long way behind DL, B6, and AA, but it's hardly insignificant. They're carrying twice as many pax as LH or US.

Yeah. It's easy to forget that because there are so few destinations, but UA has a lot of flights from JFK to LAX and SFO. Given that UA, even after otherwise cutting almost all of its JFK service including LHR (which must have been hard to lose from a prestige standpoint), kept its extensive dedicated terminal and lounge facilities and created a whole sub-fleet and sub-brand just for JFK, it's fair to say that UA never stopped seeing it as an important station. It was still the primary showcase of the UA brand and product in NYC before the merger, and obviously UA still saw NYC as an important market in some sense.

Quoting nycdave (Reply 46):
That said, the only real case to be made for expanding service at JFK is to plug into the *A network there -- and UA probably doesn't care too much about that, when it serves most NYC *A routes, and almost all *A hubs on its own metal from EWR.

If we're talking about expanding service to other UA hubs, it would be pretty pointless as far as connections go.

As far as I can tell, there is one destination served by a *A member from JFK that isn't from any UA hub (CAI) and two by a future *A member (CLO, MDE). There are some that aren't served from EWR like IST and JNB, but they're served from IAD.

At this point I honestly wonder why UA bothers with its 4d JFK-IAD service. Surely there must be a more valuable use of those slots... Like even more LAX/SFO flights? Or even IAH? How many people want to fly JFK-IAD anyway?

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense to me for UA to just concentrate on LAX and SFO from JFK, and ORD, DEN, IAH, and IAD from LGA.

Quoting nycdave (Reply 46):
I do believe US is effectively dropping out of the contest at LGA -- or at least backing away from it. It's pretty much just AA and DL. With the merger of CO and UA, and US's swap with DL, the new UA will either surpass US as the #3 carrier at LGA, or at least come very close.

That's an interesting observation. Obviously DL will be a lot bigger than AA, which will in turn be a lot bigger than anyone else.

I'm not sure I'd say US is quite abandoning LGA though. It's holding on to the Shuttle flights to BOS and DCA, along with flights to its hubs at PHL and CLT and its former hub at PIT. These are all important markets from LGA, but those hourly BOS and DCA flights in particular represent a lot of seats.
Getting There is Half the Fun!
 
tpaewr
Posts: 396
Joined: Sat May 19, 2001 9:01 am

RE: JFK And The New UA

Sun Jan 29, 2012 8:58 am

EWR,EWR,EWR, always find it interesting that it is such a lighting rod.

What is funny the issue never comes up with IAD, or CVG, or any other place. Which really high-lights the import of NYC.

The only thing I will say about EWR is when I land there I can see the Empire State Building and Statue of Liberty. Yet it being a NYC airport is alway in question.

Yet oddly no one ever seems to take issue with NRT, CDG, or HKG all of which are very far from the city center.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anthonyde, babatonton, Baidu [Spider], cougar15, DexSwart, DobboDobbo, Google Adsense [Bot], hOMSaR, J343, morrisond, MrHMSH, neutrino, rutankrd, spacecookie, StTim, SyeaphanR, User001, Vinka, xyzzy01, yochai and 199 guests