EWR-EGE now JFK-EGE
Jul 8, 2008, 7:20 pm
#16
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: los angeles, calif.
Programs: Alaska Airlines Gold MVP
Posts: 7,170
Jul 8, 2008, 8:35 pm
#17
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: New York City
Programs: AA EXP, DL DM, SPG Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 2,127
How about just a hub/presence at JFK vs. a very small operation at EWR? Makes perfect sense for connecting traffic, building on AA's strengths, preserve a slot at JFK etc etc etc
Jul 8, 2008, 9:23 pm
#18
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 27,231
Of course it makes perfect sense, but the question is why are they just making the change NOW? Your points have been relevant for a number of years, yet they continued to serve EGE from EWR and not JFK.
Jul 8, 2008, 9:23 pm
#19
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SAN
Programs: AA EXP/LT Plat (4 MM), SPG LT Plat (Bonvoy doesn’t exist to me), HH Diamond via cc, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 1,713
This makes much more sense. But all of these were true last year as well. AA has always had a stronger presence in JFK than EWR.
Jul 8, 2008, 9:33 pm
#20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 27,231
I guess you mean that ZRH is the only European city from which you couldn't get to EGE via ORD/DFW, which I guess is true, but if there really is a sharp increase in Euros wanting to ski in Colorado then at least offering a connection in JFK increases the available capacity to EGE from cities like CDG, BRU and LHR.
Jul 9, 2008, 12:18 am
#21
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: los angeles, calif.
Programs: Alaska Airlines Gold MVP
Posts: 7,170
And, again, with an expected decrease in domestic travel demand to Vail, they hope to make up for it with the increased European traffic.
This makes much more sense. But all of these were true last year as well. AA has always had a stronger presence in JFK than EWR.
I have given the answer as to why the switch was made, and that's that. The switch was made to feed Europe. It's really that simple. I'm not just making up some random guesses. The answer I am giving is the actual and official reason route planning decided to make the switch. If someone would like to argue otherwise, so be it, but any other answer is wrong.
Jul 9, 2008, 1:30 pm
#22
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 544
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0) BlackBerry8310/4.2.2 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102)
They used to fly ege-ewr 4:00 departure got in to ewr like 11:00. Problem was they were verry weight restricted and many times had to stop in denver for fuel. By moving to a morning departure its a lot cooler.
I will they would move back to 4pm. Used to ski the day then fly home.
They used to fly ege-ewr 4:00 departure got in to ewr like 11:00. Problem was they were verry weight restricted and many times had to stop in denver for fuel. By moving to a morning departure its a lot cooler.
I will they would move back to 4pm. Used to ski the day then fly home.
Jul 10, 2008, 8:23 am
#23
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 63
[QUOTE=MAH4546;9998197]
Even though CO flies EWR-EGE, AA has always carried more passengers on the route than CO; and it was not until very recently that CO flew the route daily. For years, as recently as 2006, AA's service was daily while CO was weekend-only.
QUOTE]
Besides frequency, IIRC doesn't CO in fact fly the route with a 737 vs. AA's 757?
Even though CO flies EWR-EGE, AA has always carried more passengers on the route than CO; and it was not until very recently that CO flew the route daily. For years, as recently as 2006, AA's service was daily while CO was weekend-only.
QUOTE]
Besides frequency, IIRC doesn't CO in fact fly the route with a 737 vs. AA's 757?