CO Announces EWR - ARN Service

Nicollo · Tue Oct 19, 2004 1:29 pm

Continental announces scheduled service to Stockholm starting July 02,2004.

FLIGHT NO. DEPARTS ARRIVES EQUIP / STOPS TRAVEL TIME FIRST MEAL COACH MEAL

68 EWR - 6:00 PM ARN - 7:55 AM 757 / 0 7 hr 55 min None None

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUNDAY, JULY 31, 2005 ARN to EWR

FLIGHT NO. DEPARTS ARRIVES EQUIP / STOPS TRAVEL TIME FIRST MEAL COACH MEAL

69 ARN - 9:25 AM EWR - 12:10 PM 757 / 0 8 hr 45 min None None

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ual777contrail · Tue Oct 19, 2004 1:35 pm

Great news, CO has some cool European routes.

UAL 777 CONTRAIL

ARN · Tue Oct 19, 2004 1:49 pm

This is great. As of july 2005 we have 3 scheduled carriers between ARN and EWR (MH, CO, SK).

Lufthansa · Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:15 pm

Hmmm, im not so sure about this one.

If i were a travel agent, I'd be booking my customers on the SAS A330 for this flight. I think CO is going to need a 762 for this service. The regular economy passengers will be savy enough to opt for the SAS service (in other words the business market) Although a 762 may be a bit harder to fill now MAS is flying 777s into JFK. Hmmm, interesting times indeed.

solnabo · Tue Oct 19, 2004 5:08 pm

Fantastic news!!

B757-ER?

Way to go CO Big grin

Flightlover · Tue Oct 19, 2004 5:15 pm

It's good news for Continental. One thing I don't like about it is the B757 on the ARN route. I've never been a big fan of narrowbodies on trans-pondic flights!

cfm-56 · Tue Oct 19, 2004 5:19 pm

Nice to see CO in Scandinavia, It will be interesting to see how it works out,
the price, cabinservice, seatpitch does anyone have more info on that?
I have travelled on the SAS 330's to EWR and I must say the level of comfort
was vey good in coach.And price was not bad either.

fraT · Tue Oct 19, 2004 5:28 pm

The big advantage for CO is that compared to SK and MH they can offer connections to more than 100 destinations all over the Americas. SK and MH do only serve the O/D market.

Lufthansa · Tue Oct 19, 2004 5:36 pm

frat

very true.
Also, they can draw from the frequent flyer program from over 100 destinations in north america to fill that flight. Shouldn't be a problem as far as bizfirst is concerned, but im still not sure how regularly business ppl who travel in economy are going to like it.

Still, we all know how much Americans love miles.

fraT · Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:18 pm

Lufthansa,

CO's 757 flights to smaller British destinations are running very well. Why should ARN be different. Most people don't care about the aircraft type anyways. And even a lot of the "experts" on a.net don't care about a narrowbody on transatlantic flights.
The example Oslo shows that people accept that it is better to have a 757 than no flight at all. ARN is a bit different as there is competition but as I said before, the others are only flying to NYC and not beyond.

Lufthansa · Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:40 pm

Well frat i agree that the OSL 757s are a good idea and i fully support direct 757 services.

It is a common fallicy to believe that business ppl dont know what kind of aircraft they are on. Frequent travellers do anyway. I think the 757 isn't really a problem for busines first customers because they're going to be sitting in full sized full pitch up to full international business standard. I do think however, particularly on the european end where this route is more likely to attract STAR frequent flyers, business travellers, who are travelling in economy are likely to select SAS and MAS. That is why i think ARN should be different. Then again, CO may see it like this. They are only likely to carry leasure travellers in economy on this route, and if they can keep their costs down, and have a high load factor, and offer competitive fairs as well as miles, they are likely to make money out of it.

I've been on 5.5 hr flights on the 757 and its not a bad aircraft at all. I really think CO are going to be going after American based passengers living in the NY area with this one, and the bait will be miles. I doubt this service will be as popular with ppl living in Stockholm, and the nearby connecting areas such as finland and northern germany. SAS is gonna get their business. That is the big difference. With OSL and the british destinations, CO are the only ones.

fraT · Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:00 pm

People from Northern Germany won't go via ARN as CO just announced daily flights to TXL and HAM.
I agree that CO most likely is more looking on the US market than the swedish one.

gkirk · Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:25 pm

Seat pitch and width on the 757 is more than likely the same as on CO 777s, so why would people complain?

Lufthansa · Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:50 pm

Frat.... very true
This is going to be BAD news for CPH and AMS i would imagine. ARN to a lesser extent... i forgot about those two new german services. I wonder if CO get brave and send a '57 to CPH?

THE CO service to TXL and Hamburg i think is also a good idea... actually that could impact more on the CPH hub than by CO offering a direct service to ARN.

I think CO is trying to build up the American equiv of BA's LHR at EWR. This is something both Pan Am and TWA should have done a long time ago but never did, and nor did their successors.

HB-IWC · Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:48 pm

Seat pitch and width on the 757 is more than likely the same as on CO 777s, so why would people complain?

Anyone who has been on a BizFirst equiped CO B757 will be able to tell you that the pitch is not the same as on the company's B762/764/777. I was in 3A on a EWR-LIS last year and as the passenger in 2A fully reclined his seat, there was no way I could squeeze myself out of my seat to go use to bathroom without disturbing both 2A and 3B big time. So, I'd rather go for a widebody, and I wouldn't underestimate the number of business travelers who know the difference...

pera · Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:25 pm

Great news for ARN, it's great to see a US-carrier returning to Stockholm after more than 3 years when Delta and AA left ARN. One day I really hope AA(favourite airline Smile

come back to their old route ORD-ARN!

windshear · Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:32 pm

I still pray for some airline to open up LAX-CPH! Smile

Seriously congrats Swedes...

Boaz...

mischadee · Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:40 pm

Very good news. Finally som serious competition. You will get in to EWR a bit early and you will stay in New York a bit longer with the CO flight. And the best thing is that you can experience the famous terminal C in EWR.

A question... How is the IFE on the CO 757?

Mischa.

drerx7 · Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:47 pm

honestly, I think that the type of aircraft on this route will not deter as many passangers as some on the board think, while most frequent flyers know what type of plane they are on, convenience is more important. And this flight also has the added benefit of connections in Newark to the Americas. As said before--the MH and SK flights are based upon O&D markets.

SESGDL · Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:06 am

That's great but I'm starting to get the feeling that CO's expanding too fast. What's this, like 6 international destinations in a month? That's crazy. Anyway, I hope they do well.

Jeremy

drerx7 · Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:09 am

I believe that they think that the money lies in international flights were there is not much competition, especially from LCCs. Using efficient 757s is a good fleet utilization as well as demand/capacity match. So we'll see--I'm also sure these will be all 757s with winglets reducing fuel cost here and there.

FinnWings · Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:49 am

Good news for ARN! I hope this new route will be successfull for CO!

However, I'm a little bit worried that there is over capacity now on the ARN-EWR route. Nowadays 3 airlines fly the route even short time ago there was just one (SK). Even if all 3 airlines will achieve good load factors on this route I believe that there will be too much pressure towards the ticket prices as a result of this fierce competition. The main question will be are those airlines able to operate ARN-EWR route profitable even with good loads?

Best Regards,
FinnWings

Danny · Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:54 am

Good news. Since Continental is doing so well on less popular european destinations perhaps they could look at eastern europe? Any chance they would consider BUD, PRG or WAW?

dutchjet · Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:00 am

There are rumors that Prague may be the next city on the list.....Stockholm is the fifth new destination announced and there were supposed to be 6 new transatlantic routes. It seems that Dakar and Moscow are not yet definite, but we should hear another announcement from CO by the end of the month.

SK A340 · Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:21 am

Really good news!

Pherhaps it's time for SK to look over their prices. I have a feeling that they, espesially on the long distance filghts to/from ARN where there are no competition (yet), are pretty high, aren't they?

And finally we'll have "our" first 777 at ARN (not CO though as you all know).

/SK A340

ORD777 · Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:23 am

I can't believe CO's international expansion. It's incredibly audacious I have to say and really interesting for us airplane geeks. I have a feeling it's either going to be incredibly profitalbe and a huge success or a total disaster. I'm pretty optimistic that most of these new routes will be great for CO, however, I do have my doubts about the success of the Berlin service.

traveler_7 · Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:28 am

Intersting would they expand more in Scandinavia for example to CPH or HEL?

mischadee · Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:46 am

SK A340

In the last six months the price that I paid on SAS ARN-EWR (the cheapest) had risen about 140 dollars.

Mischa.

jb · Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:50 am

There is going to be hard competition for Continental because both SAS and Malasyan flies the route.

sw733 · Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:50 am

I doubt CO will be in Hungary or Poland anytime soon. Looking at national airlines, even Malev and LOT, respectively, can only pull a 767-200 on these routes. Now, I understand that is the biggest they have, but when you look at other places like ARN, CPH, DUB, even PRG, their national airlines are pulling very large 330s, 340s, 310s, etc. across the pond. Now, I am no aviation expert, but I seriously doubt seeing CO in BUD or WAW anytime soon. But it WOULD be awesome!

Checo77 · Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:51 am

Eastern Europe would be a very profitable market, since the income of the people is arising, the demand for travel as well. And if you want to travel from PRG to EWR, your only choice is Czech Airlines, the same from other Easter Europeans cities (BUD-EWR by Malev and WAW-EWR by LOT Polish).
If any US carrier expands to these places, they would surely get a big profit. Because people will travel!!! And between CSA and CO, I would definitely choose CO.
Hope I will once fly EWR-PRG on CO!
Regards,
Adam Bechny

iowaman · Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:53 am

Here's the offical Press release from Yahoo.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041019/datu052_1.html

ltbewr · Wed Oct 20, 2004 2:39 am

With these new routes of CO to ARN, Berlin, other cities, are they reducing the use of 757's on domestic USA routes, replacing with 737-800's? Are the reducing frequency of some domestic routes (ie: like 4 instead of 5 flights a day)?

burnsie28 · Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:27 am

Well after reading that, I wouldn't want to fly CO, WTF is up with no meal service in Either class? Thats just downright cheap.

dutchjet · Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:57 am

With these new routes of CO to ARN, Berlin, other cities, are they reducing the use of 757's on domestic USA routes, replacing with 737-800's? Are the reducing frequency of some domestic routes (ie: like 4 instead of 5 flights a day)?
----------
CO is adjusting some domestic frequencies, but not in any signficant way.....remember, the 752s going to transatlantic services are being effecitvely replace by newly delivered 738s and the 753s that CO accepted delivery of in late 2003 and early 2004. Also, the international 752s are frequently used on domestic services, and the aircraft go back and forth between international and domestic flights on almost a daily basis depending upon scheduling, so utilization is quite high.

Well after reading that, I wouldn't want to fly CO, WTF is up with no meal service in Either class? Thats just downright cheap.
---------
I am not quite sure what your are refering to, but on CO transatlantic services, there is full meal service in both coach and BusinessFirst.....dinner and breakfast out of EWR and lunch and a snack out of Europe (in general). CO BusinessFirst has excellent catering and is world-class, certainly one of the best among US carriers, with 5 course meals.

flybynight · Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:46 am

Anyone else put off a little by flying that distance in the 752? Don't get me wrong, the 752 is a good plane, but when I fly trans atlantic I prefer something larger. Kinda goes back to the days of 707's and DC8's!

LO231 · Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:26 pm

I doubt CO will be in Hungary or Poland anytime soon. Looking at national airlines, even Malev and LOT, respectively, can only pull a 767-200 on these routes. Now, I understand that is the biggest they have, but when you look at other places like ARN, CPH, DUB, even PRG, their national airlines are pulling very large 330s, 340s, 310s, etc. across the pond. Now, I am no aviation expert, but I seriously doubt seeing CO in BUD or WAW anytime soon. But it WOULD be awesome!

LOT frequently flies 767-300s, which I think is bigger than CSA's 310, or am I wrong?

The problem with WAW is that while they have full planes in the summer or around Christian holidays, in the low season it's pretty hard to fill up the plane...

Also, look at the frequencies from PRG to NYC and from WAW...

1...5.7 PRG EWR 1235 1545 OK 52 313 B
.234567 PRG JFK 1240 1555 OK 50 313 B

......7 WAW JFK 1250 1625 LO 6 762
.2..5.. WAW JFK 1250 1625 LO 6 763
..3.... WAW EWR 1305 1650 LO 11 763
1...... WAW EWR 1620 1950 LO 15 763
...4.6. WAW JFK 1620 1950 LO 26 763

Summer frequencies were much higher for LOT, and they also had a direct flight from Krakow, I believe.

So the market is there, imagine how many Poles fly LH, KL, BA to visit their families in the US...

Regards,
Peter

MAS777 · Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:26 pm

This is interesting indeed as Malaysia Airlines is widely tipped to join SkyTeam in the near future.

MAS had (many years ago) expressed an interest in working with CO on its almost defunct EWR-DXB route and now that they are rerouting via ARN - CO seems to be attempting to compete with MAS on the very same route.

Flying Dutchman members in Europe and WorldPerks members in North America have already been aware of this new MAS offering as both FFPs are able to earn/redeem mileage with Malaysia Airlines - so it is envisaged by KLM and MAS that they will be able to fill seats on the ARN-EWR route quite well as an alternative to the other Skyteam hubs at CDG, AMS and PRG and to a lesser extent MXP.

Maybe we may see MAS and CO combining operations in the future to take on SAS and other STAR alliance members...and lets also not forget that MAS and NWA still have antitrust immunity which is yet to be exercised and this could be an ideal opportunity to see NW place its code on the ARN-EWR route...

...except that they are still stalling on their Transpacific networks...

klwright69 · Thu Oct 21, 2004 2:05 am

I do not think CO is expanding too fast because they are not acquiring lots of new aircraft to fly all this. They are repositioning existing aircraft. Of course there are costs involved in opening new foreign stations. But a station can be closed. It is a much different situation when super expensive, new aircraft are acquired to serve a route that fails!

I remember in the late 90's, CO launched a number of new routes in one summer (99). They launched TLV,BRU,AMS,ZRH and CLE-LGW. None of these routes were dropped (although CLE-LGW went seasonal). These new routes for CO should work fine for them cause they are starting out with narrowbodies(except Moscow of course), a low risk proposition. The last big international growth expansion I just brought up was mostly a widebody affair. For example, BRU and AMS were NOT started with narrowbodies, they were started with DC10-30's.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net