Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
jerseyewr777
Topic Author
Posts: 122
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 1:06 am

Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:24 am

Not to open a can of worms but I find this interesting. A foreign airline opens a route to EWR that loses money the first few years & the route is cancelled or moved to JFK. The same airline runs the same route from JFK & the losses are the same but they run the route for 30+ years. Is it a notch on an airlines belt just having JFK on it? It seems there's quite a few airlines serving JFK making no money. These same airlines would NEVER serve EWR if they were making NO money! Perfect example....does anyone think PIA has turned a $1 profit the past 30 years at JFK???? China Airlines hasn't! I'm sure there's more.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14586
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 2:33 pm

Do you dispute that JFK is closer to most of the O&D? Between that and the competition with UA at EWR, there are good reasons why JFK might perform better for many carriers.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2077
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 2:37 pm

JFK and NYC are the largest O&D market in I think the world. Slots at JFK at peak times are not always easy to secure. It's certainly a profitable market for most who serve it or at the very least, a prestige route.
 
B747forever
Posts: 13853
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 2:46 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
JFK and NYC are the largest O&D market in I think the world. Slots at JFK at peak times are not always easy to secure. It's certainly a profitable market for most who serve it or at the very least, a prestige route.


Actually LAX is the world's busiest O&D airport.
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
User avatar
sassiciai
Posts: 1118
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:26 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 2:52 pm

OP, your post is full of opinion, but devoid of fact and support

Maybe you could also define what you imply by a "notch on their belt". If it might be what I think it could be, the airline's corporate trousers would be at their ankles, with all the other notches in that belt! What's so important and unique about JFK?

I wonder where you live, and how much you have traveled from there?
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 5:03 pm

There are airlines that serve JFK for political or prestige reasons. This isn't necessary EWR vs JFK, but there are some airlines that fly to New York for reasons other than profit. For example I seriously doubt that Uzbekistan Airways earns a profit from flying twice a week from Tashkent to JFK via Riga.
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2414
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 5:50 pm

Seems everyone forgets freight.

Airline X might well lose some money on the seats side, but how much freight (and high value cargo) are they also hauling into and out of JFK? There may be real reasons why they need their operations to be at Kennedy to obtain contracts with shippers and agencies based there.

Concorde was originally conceived as a cargo and mail plane after all, as was the original Comet, and both were to operate the Atlantic.
 
gunnerman
Posts: 1147
Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 7:55 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:50 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
There are airlines that serve JFK for political or prestige reasons. This isn't necessary EWR vs JFK, but there are some airlines that fly to New York for reasons other than profit. For example I seriously doubt that Uzbekistan Airways earns a profit from flying twice a week from Tashkent to JFK via Riga.

I seriously doubt whether you have data to back up your belief. HY picks up fifth freedom traffic at RIX and operates the fuel efficient 787-8 to the biggest city in the US. This does not at all mean a money-losing operation.
 
VX321
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:53 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 7:04 pm

That RIX stop on HY is being cut for nonstop soon. However, I think that HY's JFK flight services the Uzbek diaspora in North America, albeit it's small. Is it making money? I doubt it, however people use it. One of my über drivers in Chicago just moved from Tashkent and flew HY to the US.
 
User avatar
AAlaxfan
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 7:08 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 7:15 pm

The answer to your question is simple....yes. They operate to JFK for both reasons. One, it is the "premier" airport in the greater NYC area so it is a notch on their belt. When people think of flying into NYC, the majority think of JFK. Two, if they make money on it, why drop it. They're hope is someday one will bring two.
Grumpy. Not a dwarf, not an attitude. It's a lifestyle.
 
Yflyer
Posts: 1731
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 4:05 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 7:25 pm

B747forever wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
JFK and NYC are the largest O&D market in I think the world. Slots at JFK at peak times are not always easy to secure. It's certainly a profitable market for most who serve it or at the very least, a prestige route.


Actually LAX is the world's busiest O&D airport.


True if you're just talking a single airport, but I assume Cointrin330 was talking about the entire NYC market, that is JFK and EWR and LGA combined. I don't have the data in front of me to verify that, but I would buy that the combined O&D for the three NYC airports is greater than the O&D at LAX, or even that of all the LA area airports.
 
User avatar
AAlaxfan
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 7:08 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 7:51 pm

AAlaxfan wrote:
The answer to your question is simple....yes. They operate to JFK for both reasons. One, it is the "premier" airport in the greater NYC area so it is a notch on their belt. When people think of flying into NYC, the majority think of JFK. Two, if they make money on it, why drop it. They're hope is someday one will bring two.

Couldn't edit but last line should read:
They're hoping someday one will bring two.
Richard
Grumpy. Not a dwarf, not an attitude. It's a lifestyle.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 7:57 pm

B747forever wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
JFK and NYC are the largest O&D market in I think the world. Slots at JFK at peak times are not always easy to secure. It's certainly a profitable market for most who serve it or at the very least, a prestige route.

Actually LAX is the world's busiest O&D airport.

LON is the largest pax market, both in O&D and aggregate pax..... by a long shot.
NYC is the busiest (total number of aircraft operations) aviation market, slightly edging out LON.
LAX is the largest O&D single airport, but is not larger than LON in total metro O&D.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3615
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:11 pm

The same argument works for LAX and I'll say that I'll presume that the argument is for flights across the ocean applying to both. For airlines like Malaysia Airlines and Thai Airways International, Los Angeles and (for Thai) New York were their only Western Hemisphere destinations. It depends on the carrier, and I'll go for ultra-long haul discussions here.

1. When TG flew to New York and LA nonstop from BKK, that wasn't really a vanity route, but fuel prices killed the route (the flight to New York was averaging 80 percent load factors on an Airbus A340-500). TG now codeshares with NH.
2. CX definitely makes money going to and from New York, although their passenger planes carry almost exclusively passengers while the cargo is on separate planes (21 weekly nonstops HKG-JFK, plus a daily EWR-JFK flight, and daily service via Vancouver with 5th freedom rights). That Newark flight was added to meet demand, plus there are frequent cargo schedules into New York as well. Airlines like CA and MU also likely make money on the services to New York (CA, which recently added a flight to Newark, is actually shifting one flight to overnight to meet the morning bank of flights in Beijing, and MU recently went double-daily to Shanghai---both Shanghai and Beijing were a former CAAC route).
3. From Taipei, it's a tale of contrasts between CI and BR. BR recently went double daily (although it's cutting back to 10-11 weekly soon), but CI on the same route is bleeding money on its passenger flights (although its cargo flights remain frequent at 5x weekly).
4. Airlines that I would call having service to New York as vanity routes include: JU (going from 5 weekly to 4 weekly in winter, and 3 weekly before back to 5 weekly in the spring on what was a former JAT route resurrected after a 24-year suspension), PK (which has one other North American destination in YYZ), and HY (whose TAS service is going nonstop later this month). J2 is hard to categorize, as they coordinate freight with Silk Way West's cargo 747, which also flies GYD-JFK nonstop, and Flight 7L777 definitely carries a lot of freight. I have to wonder if JNB-JFK for SA is kept only because JFK is slot-restricted (that route is now nonstop year-round).
5. The Chinese invasion (other than MU and CA). CZ began services to Guangzhou using a 77W at 3 weekly, and now it's 10 weekly. HU is starting service to New York and wants a Tianjin base for more, and MF recently used its new 787-9s to open FOC-JFK, which would have been heavily restricted on a 787-8 (that flight is eastbound both on the forward and return trips). These are hard to categorize as whether or not they're vanity or not.
6. SQ: they operate to JFK using a 5th freedom from FRA (and they're about to enter into a full-fledged JV with Lufthansa)., but they're also planning on bringing back a nonstop to New York from Singapore (they have both 1-stop and nonstop services to LAX). It may have been vanity before, but with a W cabin now, I suspect that money will be made now and SIN-FRA-JFK could be downsized to a 77W.

A lot of this has been made possible because of the Dreamliner and A350 (although JFK only sees one daily A350 flight).
 
abul1988
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:12 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:23 pm

It depends on location. From Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn, Long Island, Westchester, Connecticut - JFK is the airport of choice. From Staten Island, New Jersey, West side of Manhattan Newark would be the choice. Then you also need variety and destinations. JFK has a lot more airlines from around the world, that the immigrant population needs access to.

to sum it up - jfk is the airport of choice for most international travelers, given the variety of international airlines that serves there.
 
Arion640
Posts: 3078
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 9:59 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
B747forever wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
JFK and NYC are the largest O&D market in I think the world. Slots at JFK at peak times are not always easy to secure. It's certainly a profitable market for most who serve it or at the very least, a prestige route.

Actually LAX is the world's busiest O&D airport.

LON is the largest pax market, both in O&D and aggregate pax..... by a long shot.
NYC is the busiest (total number of aircraft operations) aviation market, slightly edging out LON.
LAX is the largest O&D single airport, but is not larger than LON in total metro O&D.


Was going to say it has to be London as no other city in the world has that many major airports operating on those type of passenger numbers.
 
User avatar
Irehdna
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 12:40 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 10:35 pm

The fact of the matter is that most airlines at JFK do not have the capacity to run both JFK and EWR. So they will have to choose one of the other. JFK is the primary and most prestigious international airport serving NYC, so they will only serve JFK to begin with.

Later on, there is more demand for XXX-NYC for the airline, and they have 2 options: expand at JFK or start at EWR. Most will expand at JFK, if this means making a 3/wk flight daily, or even adding multiple daily, because the fixed costs of adding the airline's facilities at JFK have already been paid for (Economics 101). There is a reason why none of EK/EY/QR and even some *A carriers only serve JFK: maximize potential with scarce resources.

As for serving JFK for prestige vs money, I do agree JFK slots are expensive. However, most flights run on connecting traffic, so the strong O/D at JFK could have chain benefits on other flights from the airline's home base.

Nearly all international destinations with a flight to NYC have it to JFK. There are only a few airports with solely EWR service that come to my mind, like LFW, BHX, and BOM.
Last edited by Irehdna on Sat Jul 08, 2017 10:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
RichardWelling
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 2:45 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 10:45 pm

Irehdna wrote:
There is a reason why none of EK/EY/QR and even some *A carriers only serve JFK: maximize potential with scarce resources.


EK serves both JFK and EWR, from what I have been told that QR has been going out full on both of their flights. I dont think either airline has scarce resources. But there may have been an incentive for EK to start EWR over JFK. One may never know what goes on behind the scenes.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 4529
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 10:53 pm

jerseyewr777 wrote:
It seems there's quite a few airlines serving JFK making no money. These same airlines would NEVER serve EWR if they were making NO money!

If EWR become the only usable airport in New York, then airlines will fly to EWR. Otherwise, what would be the reason for them to fly to EWR? There are many carriers in the world that are public instead of private, and what route they operate are not just a mere consideration of profit but also the need of the community, country, government, society and economy it serve, and EWR don't have the international recognition that JFK have and EWR is also farther away from where most thhing's are occuring in NYC than JFK.
Perfect example....does anyone think PIA has turned a $1 profit the past 30 years at JFK???? China Airlines hasn't! I'm sure there's more.

CI said they lost money on their JFK route in most years, not every years.
It's pointless to attempt winning internet debate. 求同存異. よく見て・よく聞いて・よく考える
(≧▽≦) Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan!
(≧▽≦) Meow Meow Meow! Meow Meow Meow Meow!
 
User avatar
Irehdna
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 12:40 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:03 pm

RichardWelling wrote:

EK serves both JFK and EWR, from what I have been told that QR has been going out full on both of their flights. I dont think either airline has scarce resources. But there may have been an incentive for EK to start EWR over JFK. One may never know what goes on behind the scenes.


Whoops, almost forgot about DXB-ATH-EWR. But all of the nonstops are to JFK.

Every entity in the world in constricted by scarce resources. Scarce resources simply means not unlimited. Even the best-run companies have to make wise decisions to maximize utility/profit with their resources. There is a reason why no EK A380 is operating every city pair in the world.
 
SurfandSnow
Posts: 1567
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 7:09 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:07 pm

You are familiar with loss leader pricing strategy, right? Many businesses - not just airlines - will sell certain products/services at a loss so as to attract customers or otherwise generate sales of additional, profitable products/services. Gas stations, at least here in the U.S., are probably the most ubiquitous example. Gas prices are prominently displayed, and most drivers simply opt for the lowest price they can find. Lower gas prices mean more customers, and as such, gas is typically sold for a very small profit or even at a loss. These businesses may make most of their revenue from gas, but most if not all of their profits come from anything other than gas - convenience store sales, car washes, etc. The most profitable item of all? Bottled water. In many cases it is a perfectly sound business strategy to sell gas at a loss, even though gas sales account for the vast majority of overall revenue, since the low gas prices drive traffic into the much more profitable convenience store.

Now let's get back to the airlines. NYC is such an attractive destination for leisure travelers and an important destination for business travelers that most major airlines are more or less compelled to be there. Certain routes and stations may in and of themselves be operated at a loss, but these efforts may still be *very* worthwhile. Maybe the unprofitable NYC services provide hub feed that helps support other routes that are profitable. Maybe the unprofitable NYC services generate FFer loyalty elsewhere (UA learned this the hard way when it cut JFK, but more on that later). Maybe the unprofitable NYC services simply promote the airline's brand in one of the world's most glamorous, high profile markets. You really have to look beyond the individual routes in question and consider the overall business strategies at play...

Now let's just go back to UA cutting JFK for a minute. A seemingly logical move - why continue to slug it out on the highly competitive LAX/SFO-JFK routes when those resources could be shifted to nearby EWR? As it turns out, many very important customers on the West Coast were *NOT* willing to use EWR rather than JFK. Those folks took their business elsewhere, and apparently UA now publicly regrets leaving JFK! UA's JFK services were the perfect example of loss leader strategy - losing money in their own right, but enticing key business travelers and other valuable FFers in California hub markets. While those folks may not be paying enough for their JFK flights, they may be some of the only customers willing and able to pay higher fares elsewhere (such as SFO-SEA or LAX-OGG).

As for the customer preference of JFK vs. EWR, I think we can all agree that New Jersey simply doesn't have the cachet that New York does. Even if New Jersey's rather unsavory reputation isn't holding EWR back, JFK still tends to offer much nicer amenities/experience than EWR does...
Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:20 pm

c933103 wrote:
If EWR become the only usable airport in New York, then airlines will fly to EWR. Otherwise, what would be the reason for them to fly to EWR? There are many carriers in the world that are public instead of private, and what route they operate are not just a mere consideration of profit but also the need of the community, country, government, society and economy it serve, and EWR don't have the international recognition that JFK have and EWR is also farther away from where most thhing's are occuring in NYC than JFK.

1) what the heck are you TALKING about?
2) there are carriers that do/have served EWR even to the exclusion of JFK due to stronger market synergies and/or relationships to CO/UA that are more lucrative to them. LO, SK, TP, etc are fair examples thereof.
3) there are markets to which EWR generates an equal and sometimes even greater demand from NYC metro than JFK: India, Israel, etc are among them.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
avek00
Posts: 3254
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:27 pm

I expected a better dialogue than this.

There are multiple factors that drive an international airline's decision to serve JFK, EWR (or both, or neither).

In fact, driving itself is among the chief factors -- nowadays, metro NYC longhaul travelers tend to strongly favor the airport on their side of the Hudson, and don't consider options that burn time (and considerable expense) trekking from Northern/Central NJ to JFK, or from Brooklyn/Queens/East Side Manhattan to EWR. Airlines closely study which side of the river their desired customers reside or do business, and it impacts airport choice.

Connections also come into play. EWR tends to be the stronger O&D airport for international flying, and United plays hardball on interline prorates (except for its Immunized partners). Airlines strongly dependent on connecting flows tend to find JFK more economically advantageous.
Live life to the fullest.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3615
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:32 am

abul1988 wrote:
It depends on location. From Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn, Long Island, Westchester, Connecticut - JFK is the airport of choice. From Staten Island, New Jersey, West side of Manhattan Newark would be the choice. Then you also need variety and destinations. JFK has a lot more airlines from around the world, that the immigrant population needs access to.

to sum it up - jfk is the airport of choice for most international travelers, given the variety of international airlines that serves there.


Also, JFK isn't a fortress hub for anyone. However, EWR is a fortress hub for United.
 
B752OS
Posts: 1252
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 2:50 am

Irehdna wrote:
The fact of the matter is that most airlines at JFK do not have the capacity to run both JFK and EWR. So they will have to choose one of the other. JFK is the primary and most prestigious international airport serving NYC, so they will only serve JFK to begin with.

Later on, there is more demand for XXX-NYC for the airline, and they have 2 options: expand at JFK or start at EWR. Most will expand at JFK, if this means making a 3/wk flight daily, or even adding multiple daily, because the fixed costs of adding the airline's facilities at JFK have already been paid for (Economics 101). There is a reason why none of EK/EY/QR and even some *A carriers only serve JFK: maximize potential with scarce resources.

As for serving JFK for prestige vs money, I do agree JFK slots are expensive. However, most flights run on connecting traffic, so the strong O/D at JFK could have chain benefits on other flights from the airline's home base.

Nearly all international destinations with a flight to NYC have it to JFK. There are only a few airports with solely EWR service that come to my mind, like LFW, BHX, and BOM.


JFK is this country's most prestigious airport.
 
abul1988
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:12 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 2:56 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
abul1988 wrote:
It depends on location. From Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn, Long Island, Westchester, Connecticut - JFK is the airport of choice. From Staten Island, New Jersey, West side of Manhattan Newark would be the choice. Then you also need variety and destinations. JFK has a lot more airlines from around the world, that the immigrant population needs access to.

to sum it up - jfk is the airport of choice for most international travelers, given the variety of international airlines that serves there.


Also, JFK isn't a fortress hub for anyone. However, EWR is a fortress hub for United.


Last I worked at JFK, Delta was taking over the B concourse of T4 but I'm not sure now if Delta allows other airlines not partnered with it to use its gates.
 
ctnyc12
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 2:29 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 2:59 am

SurfandSnow wrote:
As for the customer preference of JFK vs. EWR, I think we can all agree that New Jersey simply doesn't have the cachet that New York does. Even if New Jersey's rather unsavory reputation isn't holding EWR back, JFK still tends to offer much nicer amenities/experience than EWR does...


Yet another person who clearly does not understand the greater New York City market.... The cachet of EWR and JFK is essentially the same; both equidistant in driving time to Manhattan; sure EWR is undesirable to NY residents living in Long Island/BK/QNS, but JFK is undesirable to anyone west of the Hudson, including Eastern PA - so the population for cachet areas is the same if presented with the same flight options.

At the end of the day, people living in the NYC area are not going to pick JFK over EWR because it offers "nicer amenities/experience than EWR" (which is not true, UA's Term. C at EWR is the nicest terminal in the NYC region imo, just beating out B6's T5 at JFK)... New Yorkers are going to pick the most convenient airport as long as prices are close; as any airport in the NYC region, whether it be LGA, JFK or EWR are a pain in the a** to get to unless it is early in the morning or late at night and you are willing to spend $$ for an Uber/Taxi. LGA IS the most desirable airport for anyone coming to/from NYC, but the airport is a complete s**thole!!! People could care less about experience or amenities, people want convenience...

As a resident of the East Side of Manhattan LGA is preferred, and I fly out of it whenever I can whether for leisure or business; but when I have to fly outside of the LGA perimeter to the West Coast or Internationally, I, and many of my coworkers, prefer EWR even though I do not enjoy flying UA, as it seems like JFK is always in a Ground Delay Program these days and the drive from our office in Midtown Manhattan to EWR is done in 45-55 mins consistently, while JFK is always over an hour unless it is 5am...
 
BENAir01
Posts: 420
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:42 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 3:10 am

There are many airlines who serve the US for prestige, and many flying from places other than east Asia and Oceania choose JFK if they can get their hands on slots, and many do not make money on these routes. It also does seem like very few serve EWR for these reasons. However I really don't think its as big of a deal as the OP thinks.
Why is flying so expensive? And why is flying well so much more?
 
raylee67
Posts: 922
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:27 am

Many foreign airlines view the NYC route as a prestige route, something to proudly tell its own countrymen that they connect their country with the "centre of the world". Now whether NYC is the centre of the world is of course debatable. But the name of "New York" does provoke a lot of imagination (rightly or wrongly) with many in small far-away (and/or poor) countries. And for those airline that serves NYC for prestige, EWR is not NYC. JFK is. So they won't fly to EWR. They would fly to JFK only.

One example is Biman Bangladesh. It hanged on to the dear route for many years, making staggering losses, even with just one flight a week, until its DC10 us banned by FAA. Even for a reputable airline like SQ, when it finally withdrew from NYC-SIN non-stop A345 service, it also acknowledged that it never made money on the non-stop service, but it just tried to hang on to the title of serving NYC with SIN non-stop. Last week, China Airlines of Taiwan also acknowledged that its JFK route never made a profit, and it's finally thinking about axing it, after serving JFK for over 20 years.

I also doubt Azerbaijan Airlines and Uzbekistan Airlines are running the JFK routes with any profit at all.
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 359/51 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI LX
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2624
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 5:25 am

jerseyewr777 wrote:
Perfect example....does anyone think PIA has turned a $1 profit the past 30 years at JFK???? China Airlines hasn't! I'm sure there's more.


How much have PIA and China Airlines lost on their JFK service, and are the losses increasing or decreasing? If you would post these financials for, say, the past five years, it might show a trend that things are improving or one might be able to pinpoint something that caused results to get worse.

Also please don't forget that China Airlines is subsidized by the Chinese government; it received $162,000,000 in 2014. If China Airlines dropped JFK, how much of these subsidies would they lose?

https://centreforaviation.com/insights/ ... ies-222454
 
User avatar
OA412
Moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 5:59 am

IPFreely wrote:
jerseyewr777 wrote:
Perfect example....does anyone think PIA has turned a $1 profit the past 30 years at JFK???? China Airlines hasn't! I'm sure there's more.


How much have PIA and China Airlines lost on their JFK service, and are the losses increasing or decreasing? If you would post these financials for, say, the past five years, it might show a trend that things are improving or one might be able to pinpoint something that caused results to get worse.

Also please don't forget that China Airlines is subsidized by the Chinese government; it received $162,000,000 in 2014. If China Airlines dropped JFK, how much of these subsidies would they lose?

https://centreforaviation.com/insights/ ... ies-222454

???? China Airlines is a Taiwanese, not a Chinese, carrier.
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2624
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 6:09 am

OA412 wrote:
???? China Airlines is a Taiwanese, not a Chinese, carrier.


My bad, the OP wrote China Airlines, not Air China. So if the OP will just provide the financials for PIA and China Airlines at JFK, someone on this board can probably answer his question. Since he did not mention Air China they are evidently profitable at JFK, perhaps because of their subsidies. And luckily for Air China it must be okay for them to accept subsidies since no airline is producing videos about it.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5353
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 6:15 am

ctnyc12 wrote:
SurfandSnow wrote:
As for the customer preference of JFK vs. EWR, I think we can all agree that New Jersey simply doesn't have the cachet that New York does. Even if New Jersey's rather unsavory reputation isn't holding EWR back, JFK still tends to offer much nicer amenities/experience than EWR does...


Yet another person who clearly does not understand the greater New York City market.... The cachet of EWR and JFK is essentially the same; both equidistant in driving time to Manhattan; sure EWR is undesirable to NY residents living in Long Island/BK/QNS, but JFK is undesirable to anyone west of the Hudson, including Eastern PA - so the population for cachet areas is the same if presented with the same flight options.

At the end of the day, people living in the NYC area are not going to pick JFK over EWR because it offers "nicer amenities/experience than EWR" (which is not true, UA's Term. C at EWR is the nicest terminal in the NYC region imo, just beating out B6's T5 at JFK)... New Yorkers are going to pick the most convenient airport as long as prices are close; as any airport in the NYC region, whether it be LGA, JFK or EWR are a pain in the a** to get to unless it is early in the morning or late at night and you are willing to spend $$ for an Uber/Taxi. LGA IS the most desirable airport for anyone coming to/from NYC, but the airport is a complete s**thole!!! People could care less about experience or amenities, people want convenience...

As a resident of the East Side of Manhattan LGA is preferred, and I fly out of it whenever I can whether for leisure or business; but when I have to fly outside of the LGA perimeter to the West Coast or Internationally, I, and many of my coworkers, prefer EWR even though I do not enjoy flying UA, as it seems like JFK is always in a Ground Delay Program these days and the drive from our office in Midtown Manhattan to EWR is done in 45-55 mins consistently, while JFK is always over an hour unless it is 5am...

That last part is complete misleading. I have never had drive time of even an hour from midtown to JFK when leaving outside the rush hours. Always under 45 minutes for my late evening flights when I head out after 7 pm. Put it on google map and check. During rush hours, I take e train and air train which reliably gets to JFK terminal 8 in 75 min and to terminal 1 in under an hour. Ewr during afternoon rush hours, I get stuck at holland tunnel alone for an hour sometimes. I have nearly missed European flights out of ewr when I allocated 90 minutes for travel time.
 
Andy33
Posts: 2568
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:30 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 8:16 am

While most (but not all by the look of it) of a-net members agree that there are parts of NYC for which JFK is more convenient, and parts for which EWR is more convenient, there's less agreement on which parts are more accessible from which airport. Isn't it at least possible that airlines based outside the USA and expecting to sell mainly to the populations of their own countries believe that their fellow countrymen/women don't grasp the nuances of this argument. As a result the simplistic view of infrequent international travellers that JFK is inside the city and state of New York and EWR, er, isn't take priority over the actual situation in terms of journey times to and from the airport.
The airline executives almost certainly do understand the situation, and consider that those tickets they'll sell to NYC residents will be on the basis of the only non-stop flight there is (in most examples we've seen here), so time lost getting to the airport is more than regained in not having to connect anywhere.
Now if connecting traffic forms a significant part of the hoped-for passenger flow, then who the international airline partners with for US domestic flights matters. This is obviously why there are Star Alliance carriers who only fly to EWR. Airlines that partner with AA or DL are more likely to choose JFK, as the range of flights from there is greater even though both do have a presence at EWR.
Given that both EWR and JFK are controlled by the same airport authority, is there any difference in charges for the same sized plane?

And of course, the remaining question the first post poses, which other posters have partially answered in terms of network traffic benefits and promotional value, if you can't make a profit flying to JFK, why do it at all? Unless those airport charges are significantly lower, or you're very good friends with UA, you aren't going to do any better at EWR. Now for new entrants, the change in the slot rules makes EWR much more attractive, and this can apply to airlines wanting to add extra flights as well. There's very little in the way of fixed costs for one flight a day. Outsourced ground handling above and below the wing, outsourced sales, gate rented for a few hours a day. In fact if they don't do this and their flights to NYC are less than multiple daily, it probably explains why they make a loss....
 
whatThe
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 2:43 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 11:08 am

Andy33 wrote:
While most (but not all by the look of it) of a-net members agree that there are parts of NYC for which JFK is more convenient, and parts for which EWR is more convenient, there's less agreement on which parts are more accessible from which airport.


For those that are unsure, the chart below shows which airport is quickest to get to by driving (not subway) and by how much relative to the next closest airport. It's just for JFK and EWR.

Image

I have sympathy to the argument that people that don't live in or near NYC would be confused about EWR being an airport that serves NYC instead of NJ. However, if I'm looking up airfares on Kayak and type in "New York City" EWR shows up as an option, as it does for any travel website. So that should help mitigate that perception problem that might exist among consumers.
 
abul1988
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:12 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 12:59 pm

Don't forget about tolls. You have to pay the toll twice to get to ewr from nyc.
 
User avatar
enilria
Posts: 10284
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:06 pm

I think a lot of foreign carriers serve JFK/LAX/ORD just out of offering "what their customers want" rather than pure economics. Those markets are massively over-competitive, plus passengers often double -ticket onward anyway to places that could have had non-stops. Change is coming...
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15283
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 1:41 pm

Prestige and politics in having to serve JFK or other major airports is giving away to the need by airlines for profits to their shareholders and to end subsidies of home governments. For some countries, having service to JFK allowed for certain benefits for diplomatic reasons including the UN being in NYC.
Let us also not forget how PanAm, (and to a lesser extent TWA) mainly operating international services out of JFK had effective subsidies and protections by the USA government into the 1980's to serve what would be unprofitable services around the world for political, security, espionage, to transport sensitive goods (like certain military and technical freight) and prestige reasons.
 
edmountain
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:00 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 2:39 pm

ctnyc12 wrote:
SurfandSnow wrote:
As for the customer preference of JFK vs. EWR, I think we can all agree that New Jersey simply doesn't have the cachet that New York does. Even if New Jersey's rather unsavory reputation isn't holding EWR back, JFK still tends to offer much nicer amenities/experience than EWR does...


Yet another person who clearly does not understand the greater New York City market.... The cachet of EWR and JFK is essentially the same; both equidistant in driving time to Manhattan; sure EWR is undesirable to NY residents living in Long Island/BK/QNS, but JFK is undesirable to anyone west of the Hudson, including Eastern PA - so the population for cachet areas is the same if presented with the same flight options.

At the end of the day, people living in the NYC area are not going to pick JFK over EWR because it offers "nicer amenities/experience than EWR" (which is not true, UA's Term. C at EWR is the nicest terminal in the NYC region imo, just beating out B6's T5 at JFK)... New Yorkers are going to pick the most convenient airport as long as prices are close; as any airport in the NYC region, whether it be LGA, JFK or EWR are a pain in the a** to get to unless it is early in the morning or late at night and you are willing to spend $$ for an Uber/Taxi. LGA IS the most desirable airport for anyone coming to/from NYC, but the airport is a complete s**thole!!! People could care less about experience or amenities, people want convenience...

As a resident of the East Side of Manhattan LGA is preferred, and I fly out of it whenever I can whether for leisure or business; but when I have to fly outside of the LGA perimeter to the West Coast or Internationally, I, and many of my coworkers, prefer EWR even though I do not enjoy flying UA, as it seems like JFK is always in a Ground Delay Program these days and the drive from our office in Midtown Manhattan to EWR is done in 45-55 mins consistently, while JFK is always over an hour unless it is 5am...

I think you misunderstand the meaning of cachet. Cachet has nothing to do with catchment; cachet is all about prestige or admiration.
 
BENAir01
Posts: 420
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 7:42 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 4:10 pm

Yeah honestly it can be easier to get to HPN from some parts in the far north of the city sometimes, it's just HPN doesn't offer enough services.
Why is flying so expensive? And why is flying well so much more?
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3615
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 7:20 pm

BENAir01 wrote:
Yeah honestly it can be easier to get to HPN from some parts in the far north of the city sometimes, it's just HPN doesn't offer enough services.


HPN actually had mainline service for a long time with the legacies, but now only B6 provides mainline service.
 
e38
Posts: 733
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 10:09 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Sun Jul 09, 2017 8:20 pm

Quoting Abul1988 (Reply #26), "Last I worked at JFK, Delta was taking over the B concourse of T4 but I'm not sure now if Delta allows other airlines not partnered with it to use its gates."

Abul1988, at Terminal 4, Delta does not control Gates B-27, B-29, and B-31. Those are common use gates, and I have seen them used regularly by El Al, South African Airways, Swiss, Avianca, Uzbekistan, China Airlines, and others. In addition, Gate B-23 is a common use bus loading gate used to transport passengers from Terminal 4 to the remote hard stands, when necessary. However, I have not seen Gate B-23 used very frequently.

e38
 
NichCage
Posts: 916
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Mon Jul 10, 2017 12:31 am

Not every airline serves JFK. SK used to serve JFK but moved over to EWR.
 
enzedder
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 11:32 pm

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Mon Jul 10, 2017 3:48 am

Outside the US most people used to associate JFK with 'THE' airport for New York.
I remember that it was only in the 80's or maybe early 90's that European airlines started to serve Newark as well. Once LH started serving Newark lots of people were confused as it was a completely unkown airport to most people from the European side of the ditch. But nowadays you book your flights depending as to which airport is more convinient for you and your travels.
 
klwright69
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 4:22 am

Re: Airlines serve JFK for a notch on their belt or to make money?

Tue Jul 11, 2017 7:10 pm

I want to point out one thing....
Historically speaking JFK was the primary international gateway to the USA transatlantic.
In the 80's, when traveling to Europe if it wasn't on PA or TW, it was via a foreign carrier through JFK. That was often the default thought process. I remember this vividly. There were other choices at the time, but this was often how people thought.
I recall in 1989 SAS decided to cooperate with CO, and moved operations to EWR from JFK. EWR started getting more visibility with international carriers.

viewtopic.php?t=227289

I am just saying there is historical precedent and tradition benefiting JFK.
Nowadays people choose JFK over EWR or vice versa, for price, schedule, service, and convenience.
I am always amused when so many people here talk about prestige of JFK, and have forever in this forum.
I don't feel VIP or special when I fly into JFK as opposed to other airports, and I have been to JFK recently. I don't feel the glow and prestige. But I can't speak for others. It's just an airport people.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos