nzworldtraveller1

Hi all, I keep hearing from some people around that NZ should have had launched the flight to EWR instead of JFK. Alleged reasons listed include better customer experience at EWR, can connect to Star Alliance partner UA, even faster trips by taxi to Manhattan than coming from JFK.

but I also know from other accounts that EWR is far worse than JFK, almost no non-Americans readily recognise that EWR is New York at all (like EVA Air left EWR for JFK at the first opportunity years ago), and people don’t normally transfer onwards via New York.

So I like to hear you all’s comments, thanks.

nzkarit

Given the arrival time onwards connections are going to be tricky. Even at Newark.

So flying from NZ and you want to to connect. Best to pick a Houston or a O'Hare. For mid and east coast. If going to Europe, I would pick Singapore. Doing international transit in the US is a pain seeing they don't do sterile international departures.

Given that JFK has better brand recognition.

LyingFlat

From my understanding connecting traffic isn't being heavily targeted due to connection times as well as the lack of a true transit facility. What NZ are looking for is traffic NZ-UK/EU v.v. with a stopover in NYC. People who are doing a stopover in NYC won't need to worry about arriving/departing in either JFK/EWR.

nzworldtraveller1

Yeah that's what I think too. The worst case scenario is you can count with both hands every person in NZ who knows where Newark is, and that EWR is New York too.

nzkarit

I don't think that is a big factor. 99% of people will be typing New York into the search box not the Airport name.

Guess is the same for Tokyo, people type in Tokyo. Though the airline will have the stats on that from their site analytics.

Suspect I am one of the few who types Airport code into search box opposed to city name when booking flights.

nzworldtraveller1

The difference is Tokyo Narita is known by everyone as Tokyo. Not as many know Newark is New York too...

Edit: I think you type in New York on airline search engines even today and you still won't come up with Newark, only JFK and LGA. I know European airlines' print timetables in the 80s and 90s didn't put Newark as New York so a lot of non-American people didn't know back then that Newark is New York too...

nzkarit

On United engine types "New York" and got:
* EWR
* NYC All Airports
* JFK
* LGA
* NYS

Delta
* Area
* JFK
* LGA
* EWR

So airlines do show EWR when type New York.

Searching for New York on AirNZ on a non JFK days gives you mostly EWR flights

Thai-Kiwi

Few, but growing!. I have been spreading the work for the past 30 years, and extended family are now all over DUD, PMR, PPQ, DMK, SGN, HAN, PNH, REP …..

But, still a minority of travellers….

nzworldtraveller1

That clarified things up, things were very different pre-internet on the older booking systems...Glad it's now a different thing.

grapegrower

If you just want to go to NYC then in my opinion JFK is the best arrival point.
There’s a flat taxi fare to Manhattan between $52 and $57 depending on the time of day. Plus 20% tip of course.
EWR to Manhattan taxi can cost anywhere up to $70 plus tip depending on the destination. There is no flat fee.
And traffic from EWR can be horrendous.
When it comes to transfers to UA flights obviously EWR has an advantage over JFK but the place can be a zoo and anything under 3 hours connection time is a gamble. Likewise incoming connections.
As someone has already said I’d rather make connections from/to Air New Zealand with UA in IAH or with some reservations ORD before EWR.

narvik

It makes you wonder though, if they really knew the implications of JFK vs. EWR. The marketing department certainly doesn't seem to....at the very least a bit misleading:

"Through Air New Zealand's strong partnership with United Airlines, domestic customers across the US can easily connect to New Zealand through New York as well as Air New Zealand's other gateways."

From:
https://www.airnewzealand.com/press-...-the-big-apple

SilverChris

To be fair, transferring between EWR and JFK is about as "easy" as changing terminals/piers in EWR...

narvik

EWR gets a lot of hate, but the one thing I like about it is that you can walk between terminals, the car rental places, and even P4 parking....and if you don't mind jumping a guard rail, the Marriott also!

SFO_FT

NZ certainly would have put a lot of thought into the decision, but is surprising that EWR wasn’t the choice given the opportunity to feed some traffic through UA’s hub there, including the opportunity to offer 1 stop service to lots of destinations in Europe
, and access to the UA Polaris lounge. My money is on the service shifting to EWR in 2023, after QF starts its JFK service.

kiwifrequentflyer

I am surprised we are even discussing connections as a possibility, given that the NYC flight lands at midnight. What United Flights are you going to connect onto? Their 6am domestic connections? That sounds truly miserable. Some road warriors would certainly do it, but me, I would do everything I could to not. I have a hard enough time sometimes connecting to good flights in LAX, landing at 1pm.

If connections are out the door, and you are targeting people that actually want to go to New York, then JFK is the obvious best choice. I don't know who has had the experience of better traffic to EWR because my experience been very different! EWR is further away by far and it has always taken me longer. The worst story among my friends was that it took them 3 1/2 hour to drive out there.

JFK is also a much nicer airport too.

There will also be some people making the interesting choice of transiting through NYC to Europe, and so for those brave souls, JFK has far more onward flight choices. Clear customs, stay at an airport hotel, then onward travel to your final destination the next day.