PANJNY (to me NY never comes first!) offers a Christmas present of the October 2018 pax numbers for its airports. Since I care only about EWR I'm happy to report that for the month there were 3.88 MM revenue pax (2.75 MM domestic (+3.1%) and 1.12 Int'l (+11.9%)) and 0.11 MM non-revenue pax for a total of 3.99 MM. The y-t-d numbers are 31.73 MM domestic (+4.9%) and 13.91 MM Int'l (+9.1%) for a total of 45.63 MM (+6.1%) revenue pax. Add in 1.32 MM non-revenue to get a y-t-d total of 46.95 MM pax. Should the November and December numbers show similar upward trends, EWR will comfortably exceed 47 MM pax. That suggests that 2019 will have two significant milestones related to Newark, NJ aviation: 1. 50 MM pax reached by EWR in its 91st year of existence and 2. 100 years of scheduled aviation service in Newark where US airmail service began in 1919 at Heller Field near Branch Brook Park.

I'm proud to be a native Newarker!

[quote="EWRandMDW"]PANJNY (to me NY never comes first!)

Lol what

Thanks for posting this! I was wondering what the numbers were for this year!!

Certainly impressive numbers! I know over the years I have been one of the many of those statistics, as I discovered EWR is better connected to Manhattan than any other airport (LOVE NJ Transit!), and having married a Sussex County man, he's used it much more than I have, going back to the early 1970's!

EWR and my hometown airport of SAN (and to a lesser extent, LAX) have significant factors in common that make their accomplishments even more impressive: both SAN and EWR are hemmed in on all sides and are expected to continue growing, all three are disproportionately smaller than one would think, and all three utilize their available space nearly to the square millimeter. And yet they still come through, day after day. Both also have very old and crowded facilities in one area and much more modern terminals elsewhere. Oh, and both are in the works for new terminals, too! Hopefully SAN's new Terminal One build can starts soon, along with EWR's Terminal D. Are there any updates on that? I've only ever heard speculation...

PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:

I discovered EWR is better connected to Manhattan than any other airport (LOVE NJ Transit!)

Uhh ohh

Hold on to your butts

No slots=growth.

Btw, cut the NJ/NY crap. Seriously

I avoid EWR when I can. Between weather and staff who seemingly just want to avoid helping customers at all costs (and even have a bad attitude most of the time to boot), it’s never really a great experience. Before I get roasted I am sure there are great airline staff there but I get consistently horrible service (to be fair LAX staff is also consistently terrible IMO).

EWRandMDW wrote:

PANJNY (to me NY never comes first!)

lmao. the delusion is real

Anyways, congrats to EWR. I think UA's campaign to make EWR seem like a more relevant option in NYC has been somewhat paying off. Good for Newark!

NYCVIE wrote:

EWRandMDW wrote:

PANJNY (to me NY never comes first!)

lmao. the delusion is real

Anyways, congrats to EWR. I think UA's campaign to make EWR seem like a more relevant option in NYC has been somewhat paying off. Good for Newark!

Condescending much. And the use of "relevant" is superfluous.

To be fair, the Port Authority is the most vile, corrupt public organization in the US, so calling it PANJNY is fitting - as much as New York State/City have really tried to ramp it up lately and get up there in the corruption rankings, they still cannot match NJ (although they are trying hard).

As for the airport - good news, I guess. None of the NYC area airports, but I do generally find it more agreeable than any of the other two, particularly if you are flying United out of Terminal C. Once the PATH extension is complete (shouldn't take too long, as most of the infrastructure is there already, but knowing the PA it will be at least a decade), will be far and away the best NYC area airport.

[photoid][/photoid]

Pyrex wrote:

To be fair, the Port Authority is the most vile, corrupt public organization in the US, so calling it PANJNY is fitting - as much as New York State/City have really tried to ramp it up lately and get up there in the corruption rankings, they still cannot match NJ (although they are trying hard).

As for the airport - good news, I guess. None of the NYC area airports, but I do generally find it more agreeable than any of the other two, particularly if you are flying United out of Terminal C. Once the PATH extension is complete (shouldn't take too long, as most of the infrastructure is there already, but knowing the PA it will be at least a decade), will be far and away the best NYC area airport.

I wish there was a “LIKE” option on a.net

caljn wrote:

NYCVIE wrote:

EWRandMDW wrote:

PANJNY (to me NY never comes first!)

lmao. the delusion is real

Anyways, congrats to EWR. I think UA's campaign to make EWR seem like a more relevant option in NYC has been somewhat paying off. Good for Newark!

Condescending much. And the use of "relevant" is superfluous.

Not meant to be condescending at all. I used "relevant" meaning EWR has always had the issue of being overlooked by some as a NYC airport (even though it definitely is), and UA's campaign has definitely made it seem like a more relevant option in NYC.

The campaigns that had average travel times to EWR on taxis showed people that you could get to EWR just as fast or even faster than JFK from NYC, and that's what I mean by saying relevant.

UA has several things going for it at EWR that make it a serious competitor in the Tri State region. It has an expansive route network from EWR with (almost) all flights under one roof (save for what goes out of A and arrives into B). The Polaris lounge at EWR is a game changer over the rebranded President's Club that it replaced. If the United Clubs at EWR are refurbished to a standard similar to what it has at SFO and LHR, then it will truly have a well developed premium ground product at Newark. UA is deploying selectively its newest aircraft at EWR (777-300ER to HKG, joining NRT, TLV, and BOM) and the 787-10's to TLV, CDG, BCN, DUB, and BRU in 2019 are a competitive advantage over the 767-300ERs, 767-400ERs, and 777-A's that they are replacing on these routes. UA is smart to shift some Express flying to marginal and secondary turboprop destinations from EWR to IAD and shift the traffic patterns around a bit to optimize the fact that it has two hubs within 200 miles of each other. The terminal refurbishments are already a vast improvement. The check in areas also need work. The EWR vs. JFK/LGA argument in terms of accessibility has some merit but EWR is a NY Area airport regardless.

Cointrin330 wrote:

UA has several things going for it at EWR that make it a serious competitor in the Tri State region. It has an expansive route network from EWR with (almost) all flights under one roof (save for what goes out of A and arrives into B). The Polaris lounge at EWR is a game changer over the rebranded President's Club that it replaced. If the United Clubs at EWR are refurbished to a standard similar to what it has at SFO and LHR, then it will truly have a well developed premium ground product at Newark. UA is deploying selectively its newest aircraft at EWR (777-300ER to HKG, joining NRT, TLV, and BOM) and the 787-10's to TLV, CDG, BCN, DUB, and BRU in 2019 are a competitive advantage over the 767-300ERs, 767-400ERs, and 777-A's that they are replacing on these routes. UA is smart to shift some Express flying to marginal and secondary turboprop destinations from EWR to IAD and shift the traffic patterns around a bit to optimize the fact that it has two hubs within 200 miles of each other. The terminal refurbishments are already a vast improvement. The check in areas also need work. The EWR vs. JFK/LGA argument in terms of accessibility has some merit but EWR is a NY Area airport regardless.

The construction of the new Terminal One at EWR is proceeding nicely, the steel is already forming the concourses. What has not been announced yet is what UA's footprint will be in the new Terminal, how many gates will they have and what type of operation. Will they just move the Express operation from Terminal A, or will it be something else? With DL moving to the new Terminal One UA could move their Express operation to Terminal B, and utilize the new Terminal One gates for their Trans-Con routes. They could build a new lounge at Terminal One and dedicate it exclusively for their Trans-Con flyers.

Quick question: TK will be coming to EWR in August, what are the chances if TK wanted to fly 2 x Daily after that? Not sure about restrictions at EWR. Thank you.

TK787 wrote:

Quick question: TK will be coming to EWR in August, what are the chances if TK wanted to fly 2 x Daily after that? Not sure about restrictions at EWR. Thank you.

There's no slot restrictions at EWR anymore, if they wanted to go to 2x daily there's nothing to stop them. They might need to be flexible with scheduling due to gate constraints. EK launched EWR-ATH-DXB, then quickly added a second daily flight (EWR-DXB).

STT757 wrote:

TK787 wrote:

Quick question: TK will be coming to EWR in August, what are the chances if TK wanted to fly 2 x Daily after that? Not sure about restrictions at EWR. Thank you.

There's no slot restrictions at EWR anymore, if they wanted to go to 2x daily there's nothing to stop them. They might need to be flexible with scheduling due to gate constraints. EK launched EWR-ATH-DXB, then quickly added a second daily flight (EWR-DXB).

Correct, in that EWR is no longer slot restricted. EK launched EWR-ATH a while before it started EWR-DXB nonstop. EWR-ATH was launched in March 2017. EWR-DXB launched in 2018.

Cointrin330 wrote:

STT757 wrote:

TK787 wrote:

Quick question: TK will be coming to EWR in August, what are the chances if TK wanted to fly 2 x Daily after that? Not sure about restrictions at EWR. Thank you.

There's no slot restrictions at EWR anymore, if they wanted to go to 2x daily there's nothing to stop them. They might need to be flexible with scheduling due to gate constraints. EK launched EWR-ATH-DXB, then quickly added a second daily flight (EWR-DXB).

Correct, in that EWR is no longer slot restricted. EK launched EWR-ATH a while before it started EWR-DXB nonstop. EWR-ATH was launched in March 2017. EWR-DXB launched in 2018.

I would imagine an airline with no service to an airport launching additional international service a year later after the inaugural falls into the category as "Quickly"!

NYCVIE wrote:

Anyways, congrats to EWR. I think UA's campaign to make EWR seem like a more relevant option in NYC has been somewhat paying off. Good for Newark!

Somewhat? United is the #1 airline in NYC and is increasing their lead over every other airline. That's better than "somewhat". Try "completely".

2017 passenger totals (combined LGA + EWR + JFK):
1. United 31,125,467 (+6.9% over 2016)
2. Delta 27,682,140 (-4.0%)
3. JetBlue 17,113,459 (+1.8%)
4. American 16,723,462 (-5.8%)

2016 passenger totals (combined LGA + EWR + JFK):
1. United 29,111,000
2. Delta 28,848,000
3. American 17,758,000
4. JetBlue 16,810,000

IPFreely wrote:

NYCVIE wrote:

Anyways, congrats to EWR. I think UA's campaign to make EWR seem like a more relevant option in NYC has been somewhat paying off. Good for Newark!

Somewhat? United is the #1 airline in NYC and is increasing their lead over every other airline. That's better than "somewhat". Try "completely".

2017 passenger totals (combined LGA + EWR + JFK):
1. United 31,125,467 (+6.9% over 2016)
2. Delta 27,682,140 (-4.0%)
3. JetBlue 17,113,459 (+1.8%)
4. American 16,723,462 (-5.8%)

2016 passenger totals (combined LGA + EWR + JFK):
1. United 29,111,000
2. Delta 28,848,000
3. American 17,758,000
4. JetBlue 16,810,000

United is EWR + LGA only & they still hold the lead!!!

jfklganyc wrote:

No slots=growth.

STT757 wrote:

There's no slot restrictions at EWR anymore, if they wanted to go to 2x daily there's nothing to stop them. They might need to be flexible with scheduling due to gate constraints. EK launched EWR-ATH-DXB, then quickly added a second daily flight (EWR-DXB).

It’s still a Level 2 slot restricted airport, which means the FAA still has to approve the schedules ahead of time so it doesn’t become a free-for-all mess. When EWR was slot controlled, UAL scheduled fewer flights and EWR was averaging a little more than 70 movements an hour and nobody else could enter. Slots were lifted to allow more entries.

Even now, the FAA probably won’t allow more than 77-78 flights an hour. And even with that, it’s the only airport that goes through a daily GDP...even in good weather.

Since the slots were lifted (somewhat) the airport has grown quite a bit the past few years in terms of airline options & passenger volume. It's amazing an airport as little as EWR in terms of space can be such a powerhouse for one of the biggest airlines in the world. EWR also manages to hold it's own while having one of the biggest airports in the world around it's corner...JFK!

IPFreely wrote:

Somewhat? United is the #1 airline in NYC and is increasing their lead over every other airline. That's better than "somewhat". Try "completely".

2017 passenger totals (combined LGA + EWR + JFK):
1. United 31,125,467 (+6.9% over 2016)
2. Delta 27,682,140 (-4.0%)
3. JetBlue 17,113,459 (+1.8%)
4. American 16,723,462 (-5.8%)

2016 passenger totals (combined LGA + EWR + JFK):
1. United 29,111,000
2. Delta 28,848,000
3. American 17,758,000
4. JetBlue 16,810,000

jerseyewr777 wrote:

United is EWR + LGA only & they still hold the lead!!!

It's great that EWR and UA at EWR are doing so great, honestly. Just to be clear though, UA is the #1 airline in NYC due to its dominance of EWR which, while a NYC airport, is overwhelmingly dominated by passengers originating from New Jersey with more of its passengers coming from even Pennsylvania than Brooklyn or Queens. I'm not starting a EWR vs. JFK battle because as I've stated multiple times, EWR is a NYC airport since it carries a significant amount of NYC traffic but according to PANYNJ's own statistics, most of EWR's originating traffic is from New Jersey (and obviously they are carrying more connecting traffic than JFK or LGA). I would say Delta is definitely carrying more NYC (5 boroughs) traffic than UA is which is why I made my comment about UA's campaign changing the opinions of travelers originating from NYC . This is also coming from a UA frequent flyer, so not a UA or EWR hater at all.

http://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf-traf ... T_2018.pdf

Just for the OP, here is JFK through October.

Some interesting tidbits:

DL is now almost 3 times larger than AA at JFK.

B6 is more than 2 times larger than AA at JFK.

Norwegian is slightly smaller than BA and larger than AF.

Certainly the perceptions of EWR are changing. I have to assume that UA’s advertising has given it a big boost (especially the digital taxi tops).
Last Sunday I got an Uber to pick me up on West 10th st to TC and we pulled up just a minute or two before 7:30.
Once the construction inside TC before security is finished providing a much larger area for foot traffic and security lines, TC will be even better. The concourses are already great. The last piece of the puzzle will be an additional, large United Club.
I haven’t a clue what UA has up its sleeves, but I recently asked a receptionist at the UC “what is the company going to do, because the pop-up clubs are as temporary looking as a Union Square Farmer’s Market booth?”
She said that they have been told solutions for permanent, new United Club/s are in the works- that this current situation is not sustainable

jfklganyc wrote:

http://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf-traf ... T_2018.pdf

Just for the OP, here is JFK through October.

Yeah, that really shows the changing dynamics between the airports:

For the twelve months ending October, 2018.

DOMESTIC:
EWR 4.9%
JFK 3.1%

INTERNATIONAL:
EWR 9.1%
JFK 2.9%

Total:
EWR 6.1%
JFK 3.0%

EWR is growing much faster.

Correction to my post: the Uber picked me up at 7pm last Sunday, we were parked in front of TC a few minutes before 7:30pm- it took less than half an hour! That, in my mind means: the more New York City dwellers realize how quickly one can get to EWR by car service- the more NYC fliers will use EWR, it’s bound to grow.
And I’d wage a bet that UA would be among the top 3 outdoor ad media spenders. NYC is blanketed with UA ads- reminds me of pmCO days.

Pyrex wrote:

To be fair, the Port Authority is the most vile, corrupt public organization in the US, so calling it PANJNY is fitting - as much as New York State/City have really tried to ramp it up lately and get up there in the corruption rankings, they still cannot match NJ (although they are trying hard).

As for the airport - good news, I guess. None of the NYC area airports, but I do generally find it more agreeable than any of the other two, particularly if you are flying United out of Terminal C. Once the PATH extension is complete (shouldn't take too long, as most of the infrastructure is there already, but knowing the PA it will be at least a decade), will be far and away the best NYC area airport.

PANYNJ is a freaking disaster. We don't have to dig too far back into the history books to remember the Smisek blunder that got him terminated from UAL over the "Chairmen's Route."

Flying out of EWR is really nothing to get excited about as it's operationally a huge nightmare. Terminal C is a mess, I actually prefer B these days. They actually did a nice job with the recent retrofits.

I'll be more excited when the new Terminal A opens up and the PATH extension is completed. The renderings look gorgeous. I just wish they would keep part of the original Terminal A open for additional gates but I think the satellites are going to be demolished and it will be kept around for utility space.

I work there and I'm also proud of EWR. The new Terminal 1 is coming up quickly and in the next few years the face of the new EWR will finally begin to emerge. I'm happy to see I'm not the only one who feels this way. Interesting also that EWR is the oldest of the area's 3 major airports.

SESGDL wrote:

Questioning where these numbers come from as they conflict with what's on the PANYNJ traffic statistics summary. Strangely, the DL numbers you posted are farther off than the UA numbers (PANYNJ statistics show that both UA and DL grew 2016-2017... What a surprise! Surely you would never post anything that makes DL look good.

Jeremy

I am sorry to inform you that these numbers come directly from the PANYNJ annual traffic reports:

https://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf-traffic/ATR2017.pdf
https://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf-traffic/ATR2016.pdf

STT757 wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

http://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf-traf ... T_2018.pdf

Just for the OP, here is JFK through October.

Yeah, that really shows the changing dynamics between the airports:

For the twelve months ending October, 2018.

DOMESTIC:
EWR 4.9%
JFK 3.1%

INTERNATIONAL:
EWR 9.1%
JFK 2.9%

Total:
EWR 6.1%
JFK 3.0%

EWR is growing much faster.

I don't see the reason for excitement by you or the OP. PANYNJ data, 12 mos ending 10/18, show JFK with 15.8 million more revenue passengers than EWR. Faster growth (over a short period) from a much smaller base really isn't meaningful.

MIflyer12 wrote:

STT757 wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

Just for the OP, here is JFK through October.

Yeah, that really shows the changing dynamics between the airports:

For the twelve months ending October, 2018.

DOMESTIC:
EWR 4.9%
JFK 3.1%

INTERNATIONAL:
EWR 9.1%
JFK 2.9%

Total:
EWR 6.1%
JFK 3.0%

EWR is growing much faster.

I don't see the reason for excitement by you or the OP. PANYNJ data, 12 mos ending 10/18, show JFK with 15.8 million more revenue passengers than EWR.

EWR is growing, JFK is pretty flat. I'm excited about that, it's a trend going on for the last couple of years. For 2017 JFK grew 0.5%, EWR grew 6.6%

Looking at the report, does anyone know WHAT CANAIR is?

STT757 wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

STT757 wrote:

EWR is growing, JFK is pretty flat. I'm excited about that, it's a trend going on for the last couple of years. For 2017 JFK grew 0.5%, EWR grew 6.6%

So...you're actually excited that JFK's growth is "flat"? I'd hardly call 3% y-o-y growth "flat". But pray-tell, why, in general, would an airport's lack of growth "excite" you? That's pretty morbid.

jerseyewr777 wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

STT757 wrote:

There's no slot restrictions at EWR anymore, if they wanted to go to 2x daily there's nothing to stop them. They might need to be flexible with scheduling due to gate constraints. EK launched EWR-ATH-DXB, then quickly added a second daily flight (EWR-DXB).

Correct, in that EWR is no longer slot restricted. EK launched EWR-ATH a while before it started EWR-DXB nonstop. EWR-ATH was launched in March 2017. EWR-DXB launched in 2018.

I would imagine an airline with no service to an airport launching additional international service a year later after the inaugural falls into the category as "Quickly"!

It wasn't quickly after at all and EK dropped a JFK frequency to add the EWR one.

United is EWR + LGA only & they still hold the lead!!![/quote]

That is extremely impressive. Look at AA and DL. They serve EWR, JFK and LGA and UA is doing extremely well!

UWPAviation wrote:

United is EWR + LGA only & they still hold the lead!!!

That is extremely impressive. Look at AA and DL. They serve EWR, JFK and LGA and UA is doing extremely well![/quote]

And UA is the only one without 2 airports being hubs!

EWR had a decade of stagnant growth with slots and UA slot squatting.

A year or two and it will even out in terms of growth percentage.

I’m impressed that JFK is back on the growth chart again after a stagnant year last year

leader1 wrote:

STT757 wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

So...you're actually excited that JFK's growth is "flat"? I'd hardly call 3% y-o-y growth "flat". But pray-tell, why, in general, would an airport's lack of growth "excite" you? That's pretty morbid.

I'm excited about EWR getting over six percent growth two years in a row. JFK is pretty much flat in comparison when for the last two years their growth was 0.5 and 3.%.

Not putting Kennedy airport down, just pointing out the changing dynamics.

jfklganyc wrote:

EWR had a decade of stagnant growth with slots and UA slot squatting.

A year or two and it will even out in terms of growth percentage.

I’m impressed that JFK is back on the growth chart again after a stagnant year last year

Right now the only constraints for airlines are gates, in 2021 when the new Terminal One opens several airlines will have the ability to increase their presence. I expect B6. NK, WN to increase their EWR flying. So I actually expect the current growth rate at EWR to continue.

STT757 wrote:

I'm excited about EWR getting over six percent growth two years in a row. JFK is pretty much flat in comparison when for the last two years their growth was 0.5 and 3.%.

Not putting Kennedy airport down, just pointing out the changing dynamics. .

3% is not flat growth. Stop neglecting that to fit your narrative. Also, JFK's growth has picked up in recent months.

STT757 wrote:

Right now the only constraints for airlines are gates, in 2021 when the new Terminal One opens several airlines will have the ability to increase their presence. I expect B6. NK, WN to increase their EWR flying. So I actually expect the current growth rate at EWR to continue.

Gate are not the only constraints. Read what I had said above. EWR is still monitored by the FAA so things don't get out of control. They're not going to allow much more than 77 flights an hour, even if there is no "hard cap". And considering that EWR still ranks dead last in on-time performance and is the only airport in the nation that goes through a Ground Delay Program every day, even when the weather is good, airlines will still find it challenging to add additional flights.

Does anyone have any theories they would like to share on how the gates in the new Terminal 1 will be distributed? And what would happen if Delta moved there.

For a funny bit of history — when I was in college in the 1970s, PANYNJ ran ads calling Newark “New York’s Best-Kept Secret!”

I used to fly out of Newark on Piedmont back then, even though I lived in NYC. I still use Newark now because I live on the west side of the Hudson, so it’s still more convenient for me than JFK/LGA, which I think are both unmitigated disaster zones. But hey, rising water lifts all boats, so I’m happy when all three airports do well.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

Does anyone have any theories they would like to share on how the gates in the new Terminal 1 will be distributed? And what would happen if Delta moved there.

My feeling is that if DL and any other domestic carrier currently in B moves to the new terminal then their current gates in B can be added into the International Arrivals area making all of Terminal B an IAB. Perhaps C can be expanded to allow UA to integrate all their flights under one roof?

leader1 wrote:

STT757 wrote:

I'm excited about EWR getting over six percent growth two years in a row. JFK is pretty much flat in comparison when for the last two years their growth was 0.5 and 3.%.

Not putting Kennedy airport down, just pointing out the changing dynamics. .

3% is not flat growth. Stop neglecting that to fit your narrative. Also, JFK's growth has picked up in recent months.

STT757 wrote:

Right now the only constraints for airlines are gates, in 2021 when the new Terminal One opens several airlines will have the ability to increase their presence. I expect B6. NK, WN to increase their EWR flying. So I actually expect the current growth rate at EWR to continue.

Gate are not the only constraints. Read what I had said above. EWR is still monitored by the FAA so things don't get out of control. They're not going to allow much more than 77 flights an hour, even if there is no "hard cap". And considering that EWR still ranks dead last in on-time performance and is the only airport in the nation that goes through a Ground Delay Program every day, even when the weather is good, airlines will still find it challenging to add additional flights.

Also 2016:

EWR 8.2%
JFK 3.9%

DaveFly wrote:

For a funny bit of history — when I was in college in the 1970s, PANYNJ ran ads calling Newark “New York’s Best-Kept Secret!”

I used to fly out of Newark on Piedmont back then, even though I lived in NYC. I still use Newark now because I live on the west side of the Hudson, so it’s still more convenient for me than JFK/LGA, which I think are both unmitigated disaster zones. But hey, rising water lifts all boats, so I’m happy when all three airports do well.

The Port Authority always had a Jersey bias and EWR bias.

Everything was always about NJ...has to do with the politics of the board and the Chair being a NJ appointee.

They literally ran JFK into the ground in the 80s concentrating on EWR.

Luckily, NYCs 1990s rebound and efforts by airlines at JFK spurred a late 90s boom at JFK in terms of construction and a 2000s boom in pax.

Terminal 1 was built out of desparation as T4 was in a state of disrepair by the PA...all while a new facility opened in EWR.

The politics have also changed. Tha chair position now rotates and an over-sized NY Governor is making sure NYS gets its fair share (and then some out of the PA)

LGA redevelopment and planned JFK rebuild would go nowhere without current NY Gov pushing privitization and expediting.


Sadly, the PA is still a corrupt cesspool...its current politics have just been realigned to elminate the past NJ bias.

jfklganyc wrote:

DaveFly wrote:

For a funny bit of history — when I was in college in the 1970s, PANYNJ ran ads calling Newark “New York’s Best-Kept Secret!”

I used to fly out of Newark on Piedmont back then, even though I lived in NYC. I still use Newark now because I live on the west side of the Hudson, so it’s still more convenient for me than JFK/LGA, which I think are both unmitigated disaster zones. But hey, rising water lifts all boats, so I’m happy when all three airports do well.

The Port Authority always had a Jersey bias and EWR bias.

Everything was always about NJ...has to do with the politics of the board and the Chair being a NJ appointee.

They literally ran JFK into the ground in the 80s concentrating on EWR.

Luckily, NYCs 1990s rebound and efforts by airlines at JFK spurred a late 90s boom at JFK in terms of construction and a 2000s boom in pax.

Terminal 1 was built out of desparation as T4 was in a state of disrepair by the PA...all while a new facility opened in EWR.

The politics have also changed. Tha chair position now rotates and an over-sized NY Governor is making sure NYS gets its fair share (and then some out of the PA)

LGA redevelopment and planned JFK rebuild would go nowhere without current NY Gov pushing privitization and expediting.


Sadly, the PA is still a corrupt cesspool...its current politics have just been realigned to elminate the past NJ bias.

Your missing the big item, the World Trade Center. That project has cost the Port Authority about $20 Billion for office buildings and a mall that have nothing to do with the Port Authority's core mission (transportation and commerce). When you include that their is a huge deficit between Port Authority spending in NY vs. NJ.

N649DL wrote:

Pyrex wrote:

To be fair, the Port Authority is the most vile, corrupt public organization in the US, so calling it PANJNY is fitting - as much as New York State/City have really tried to ramp it up lately and get up there in the corruption rankings, they still cannot match NJ (although they are trying hard).

As for the airport - good news, I guess. None of the NYC area airports, but I do generally find it more agreeable than any of the other two, particularly if you are flying United out of Terminal C. Once the PATH extension is complete (shouldn't take too long, as most of the infrastructure is there already, but knowing the PA it will be at least a decade), will be far and away the best NYC area airport.

PANYNJ is a freaking disaster. We don't have to dig too far back into the history books to remember the Smisek blunder that got him terminated from UAL over the "Chairmen's Route."

Flying out of EWR is really nothing to get excited about as it's operationally a huge nightmare. Terminal C is a mess, I actually prefer B these days. They actually did a nice job with the recent retrofits.

I'll be more excited when the new Terminal A opens up and the PATH extension is completed. The renderings look gorgeous. I just wish they would keep part of the original Terminal A open for additional gates but I think the satellites are going to be demolished and it will be kept around for utility space.

Hi,
I’m not challenging you, but you say “TC is a mess”, however that doesn’t match my experience at all. I’m out and back EWR TC 2-4 times a month, 12 months a year, on both international and domestic flights. I have been an eyewitness to every change and I am one of those people who notice virtually everything.
Aside from a few things that still need help: disgusting public restrooms dating back to old CO’s initial TC renovation, the lack of United Clubs now that Polaris Lounge took the giant lounge and current construction before security- I find it a) a quite attractive terminal b) very easy to navigate c) really great food & drink options, really nice, modern and well designed gate areas seating and even at the most crowded times, still easy to walk around. So, what about TC makes it a mess?
Do I think if it was leveled and some spectacular new structure built it would have been better...yes (depending on how much was spent on a new terminal) But as a heavy user, I think they made some great tasting lemonade from the lemon of a 1970 building.