That is certainly an issue. I should have clarified that to say that I don't expect a dedicated PS-style offering, just the same as we see now on SFO/LAX-IAD, where there are int'l 3-class birds flying a couple times a day to rotate them and position for service. The only change I would foresee would be to offer those with the full-on international service levels whenever the 3-class is on the route (is it DL that does that currently with BE on transcons out of JFK?).

You are of course correct, but there are plenty of reasons to prefer to stay on UA/CO metal the whole way -- mostly the ability to use miles and SWU's/GPU's to upgrade, but also for purposes of potentially better EQM, RDM and elite mileage bonuses; increasing the lifetime mileage counter; avoiding a possible change of terminals in Europe; hitting the new "four flight minimum on UA to stay elite" threshold, etc.

I actually prefer EWR over JFK-the station is much nicer and its a much quicker trip into Manhattan for me. However, considering how inflated fares to EWR are, I'd like to say I'd rather PS stay at JFK.

It's a pain navigating around JFK with the airtrain etc..where as the experience at EWR seems a lot faster.

I don't think UA would want to give up its slots at JFK like CO did. PS is probably very O&D limited, atleast ex-East coast

Nail --> head. EWR mid-week transcons are typically in the $1,000 range, where the JFK transcons can be had for less than half of that.

Newark is a fortress hub. UACO can charge premium pricing. JFK has DL/AA/B6/VX to compete with on non-stop transcon routes. PMUA used P.S. as the differentiating product.


SunLover

My guess is it is the opposite. While I would think a lot of PS travelers are hopping from CA to NYC and back, I think the lack of Asian/Oz flights from the NYC area mean more ex-JFK travelers continue on to somewhere else.

Three year old article, but still relevant (maybe a bit less with the new SAG contract)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121728185716790977.html

It is really, really not difficult to change that. Jeff will give a thought of that, coz currently CO 752 transcon is the best in the business. They can easily change the First and market it as P.S., then they are good to go. My guess is they will also determine if EWR-SFO should be marketed as P.S. as well. I don't see why you just touch LAX but not SFO.

So a 2 class ps bird will have 26 J seats, 10 more than a PMCO 752, so any other difference between these two birds than the 2.5 more rows of J?

Many more E+ seats and fewer E- seats. I'm pretty sure they also committed to keeping wifi on the p.s. fleet while awaiting the broader deployment on the rest of the domestic fleet.

1. will never happen...not enough to fill premium cabins in DC
2. could happen if rule was lifted, and i feel that would be better than JFK, and then, would pull out of JFK so i like that. but, probably won't happen.
3. will never happen, 752 i don't think can take off from BUR and make it to JFK, plus, they won't pull out of LAX and go to BUR.

we have this discussion ever year...why not DC? why not BOS? it's because p.s. is a unique product, strictly from JFK-SFO/LAX. that's it. also, NY, SF, and LA can afford the high fares that these flights demand. plain and simple, DC and BOS can't.

I'm not so sure about DCA. There is a lot of SFO/LAX originating demand that could potentially pay a premium.

Actually, UA was literally weeks away from announcing BUR-JFK on ps in 2008 or so. The ps 752 is pretty light due to the lower density. It was apparently going to be specifically to support their Disney contract.

interesting...wonder why they don't have anything on their flights to/from MCO, because i believe that is there for disney.

and because of all of the low government fares, and a lot of the tech/consulting firms up the dulles corridor, you get more business out of IAD. DC just can't support the fares that p.s. demands, because if it could, it would be there.

I think if P.S. moves to EWR, it's dead.

Personally, P.S. being at JFK is one of the few factors which allows me to justify continued use of them now that I don't live near IAD. Although, all the cool kids have moved to Virgin America, which I must admit would be a nice alternative.

I'd really love to see more flights move back to JFK, quite frankly. They have the gates, and now they have the aircraft. How about at least connecting to the rest of the hubs: ORD/IAH/DEN. LGA is such a pit, and EWR might as well be in Philly. It's a crying shame that the best connected NY airline seems to be Delta.

The fact UA runs anything at all on the route, and that they ran 2-class planes with F when to everywhere else ex-MCO they ran TED, amount to their concessions to the Disney business market...

It's a couple of years old, but the Boyd Group published some financial data on JFK-LAX:

http://www.aviationplanning.com/DataMinerFlash1.htm

Scroll to February 9, 2009 or search for JFK-LAX.

Summary: UA's ticket yield was 24 cents, AA was 14, DL 10, and VX 9.5.