EWR764

The abysmal United Club situation at EWR has screamed this long before COVID.

st530

I did not; I'm basing that on my two July visits when there was no premium bubbly, just prosecco. Also, a friend of mine was there yesterday and said no premium bubbly either. I guess you got lucky (or I unlucky).

fumje

Three visits in August and no Champagne any time. The third time I did ask if they were out for the day or they simply aren't stocking it, and the bartender did not respond directly to that question but redoubled his efforts with a prolonged search (nothing).

I think once I saw someone with a split of Heidsieck rose, but it was a total zoo as per usual, and I was more interested in just having a seat.

manstein58

The Club situation at EWR is a total disgrace and no end in sight

PTahCha

It's been that way since July 2020.

ani90

But fixing the lounge situation and at least providing a lounge to cater for Polaris passengers would be one way to increase that handful of international business flyers that opt for UA. At this point UA does not seem interested in competing for the few business flyers that they are right now. For example with such bad lounge situation, why should a business flying taking a flight to London choose UA ahead of DL, VS or BA? Surely you deserve more flying out of a flagship hub? It is very short-sighted if they imagine that because most of those flying Polaris now may be leisure flyers there is no need to maintain quality and competitiveness.

WineCountryUA

UA must believe and I suspect they are right, at the moment, that would not move the needle. Sure a few, especially FT types, maybe.
The real problem is an across-the-board, all carriers, all flights, a distinct lack of HVF purchasing intercontinental preCOVID business fares. The revenues are not there. More upgraders does not help.

ani90

True it may not move the needle now but it may move it (or prevent it moving backwards) when HVF travel recovers.

It is shortsighted if UA thinks that abysmal service during COVID will have no impact post-COVID. The lounges are not going to suddenly improve the day business travel picks up. UA may end up paying dearly for the neglect and underinvestment in it's lounges through the COVID period. Once COVID is done they will be playing catch up and will be impossible game as the competition may have long left them behind. Some airlines took advantage of the pandemic to renew and refresh their lounges whereas for United it has been an even more advanced degree of decay and decline.

What I saw in the EWR lounge this weekend is without question the worst lounge I have ever witnessed in a US airport - and to imagine that this is their main hub serving a large section of the country. There is simply no excuse for such a deplorable lounge and lounge situation - regardless of what's happening with business travel. I am not sure though that business travel alone should be what drives investment in airline lounges. Lounge access is the most tangible benefit of gold status with major alliances and one that all can truly benefit from (unlike say upgrades). If there is effectively no star alliance lounge (of international standard) in EWR terminal C then that is an impetus to seek another alliance or to fly other airlines in the alliance.
​​​​​​

dilanesp

We've debated this ad nauseam here, so I won't rehash old points, but one mistake I think people are making is drawing a bright line between "COVID" and "post-COVID". If international business travelers spending Other People's Money come back, it will be a gradual process. And it may return to an equilibrium that is higher than it is now but well below pre-COVID levels.

it's not just a matter of "maintaining service so we don't get killed when all those business travelers come back and remember our lousy service or dislike the vestiges of it". It's a matter on your service improvements being a gamble on what the market is going to look like 1 year from now, 2 years from now, 5 years from now, etc. If, in fact, United's (and the two other US legacy carriers') internal numbers say that it is going to be a very slow process of travelers spending Other People's Money returning to travel, that could easily make it not worth it to improve service right now. Yes, theoretically, you are alienating a few future customers, but meanwhile, you are saving gobs of money and the customers you are alienating are a small percentage of a small market well into the future.

I suspect the numbers for travelers spending Other People's Money are grim for the foreseeable future, due not only to the dynamics of COVID (future outbreaks, variants, lack of consistent vaccination), and the restrictions on international travel which have persisted, but also due to a lot of businesses finding alternatives to business travel, sending fewer people out, changing travel policies.

If those numbers are what I think they are, United is acting extremely intelligently and preparing for a very different future of air travel.

ani90

I agree with all else you say but can you explain how accepting the current state of EWR lounges (the subject of this thread) can constitute extremely intelligent acts? What then is the different future of air travel they are planning - is it to close the lounge entirely and run a service like Ryanair?

WineCountryUA

Such as UA?
The Status of new permanent EWR United Clubs?, the IAD Polaris lounge (202X?) and various reports of UCs getting refreshes. It would have been foolish to also shut down EWR C74 UC and had no lounge at EWR.

I'm not here is defend UA, the lounge situation at EWR is a problem but it is easy to second guess UA decisions. That may be factors we are not aware -- the issues with PANYNJ are legendary. UA made a call, versus competitors to keep reasonable customer service and avoid last-minute cancellations / operational issues (which competitors messed up on) and has been slow to get lounges back up. Which problem will have a longer memory for travelers, time will tell.
Then why the new EWR lounge work?

seanp7

Specific to this thread, the dismal EWR lounges, I flew through a contract lounge in Naples (the Italian one) last week with lounge attendants safely serving scrambled eggs, bacon, tomato & mozzarella, prosecco in glassware, cappuccinos to customers at 6am. You just requested what you wanted, with COVID protocols followed. Same system in Madrid. Maybe apples and oranges in terms of customer volumes - granted - but UA has far more UC memberships and throughput to also draw revenue from and invest in something a little (lot?) better than what we see at C74 and non-existent A lounges. They just choose to spend it on packaged oreos, blue plastic cups, 20 cent noodles, and premium drink vouchers for non-existent champagne.

dilanesp

It won't be like Ryanair. Basic economy is the Ryanair model.

But let's say that there are profitable opportunities in domestic service, which is booming, and a very dicey situation in international premium cabins. What would your lounge product look like?

And one response to that might be "well, you would operate it mostly at your domestic hubs, close down your swanky international business class lounges, and orient it more towards domestic travelers who just want a quiet place to work during a connection rather than luxury-minded international J travelers".

Which would look a lot like what we have now.

WineCountryUA

I doubt a "Mad Max" scenario is high on UA's planning charts, as UA has said it (had) hope to open more lounges including some PLs and international UCs in Q4. Might that get pushed out a bit with the Delta/Mu Varient, perhaps, but I think UA is far from giving up on the international markets. Suspect UA still sees this as a transition phrase of unknown duration.

But getting back to the EWR situation, for all the talk if UA is giving up on the EWR flyer -- why then is UA investing in a new club and new Terminal A??

Are things moving slower than most want? -- Yes
Is the present situation undesirable? - Yes

Is UA doing nothing? -- No

UA is trying to ramp up its capital investments but they need to be careful not to get too far ahead of demand. It would be easy / correct to say, that in the case of EWR lounge situation, UA has gotten behind -- unclear the reason for this. And not it is not that UA hates EWR flyers or does not see the issue -- the work on the EWR new lounge counters that. There is more to this story that we do not have insight. But that does not change the EWR lounge situation for passengers.

goodeats21

I am paying VERY high prices for domestic itineraries. 9 days out, I am having to buy "M" fares, for simple UAX direct round trips. Profitable

United has 2 very easy ways to address the chronic overcrowding/sub-par Club experience.

• Extend the hours of the existing "pop-up" Club in Terminal C.
• Open the existing Terminal A Club

They are doing neither of these for their "High-Value, High-Fare" domestic passengers. Even when they reduce the size of the existing club by curtaining off flooded areas.

The situation at Newark can in no way be described as "a quiet place to work during a connection"