Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

p.s. Operations Transitioning to EWR on October 25, 2015

p.s. Operations Transitioning to EWR on October 25, 2015

Old Jun 16, 2015, 12:47 pm
  #151  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: LAX
Programs: UA 1K MM; Bonvoy Titanium; most other FF programs...
Posts: 654
Originally Posted by as219
And by the way, EWR is "convenient" as the crow flies, but making the subway-to-NJ Transit-to-Airtrain connection with heavy bags is no picnic, and cabs to/from EWR get really expensive, really quickly, not to mention the horrible tunnel delays that can't be avoided. I never willingly choose EWR over JFK from Midtown.
I whole-heartedly agree... at least to Manhattan there are various routes and even some city streets to get to/from JFK even in the worst rush hour. Have you ever tried to drive into Manhattan from NJ in the morning... tunnels and bridges have a 30-60-90 minute wait most days. No thank you.

And there is something about the "simplicity" in practice about just jumping into a cab which has a FLAT FARE to JFK instead of a subway/taxi to PENN Station (which deserves its own level in Dante's Circle of Hell) to the AirTrain. That's not convenient nor efficient.
FoxFlyer is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 12:48 pm
  #152  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,299
Originally Posted by milesmuncher
I just don't see what makes JFK so special for UA passengers, apart from maybe the smallness of the terminal.
1. JFK is easier to and from midtown east.
2. JFK is far less prone to air traffic delays.
3. JFK T7 is super easy and compact. There's no quicker walk to the gate, nor is there any quicker baggage delivery.
4. EWR is one of the nastiest airports in the country. Long lines, surly employees, frequent delays.
5. The Lincoln tunnel is a nightmare at rush hour.

Originally Posted by red grenadine
I live in Manhattan. I work in finance. I fly business class on business. I am talking business customers who work in midtown east. Bankers. Lawyers. Private Equity. Hedge funds. Advertising guys. Fashion guys. They are not taking public transportation into or out of manhattan to freaking Newark

Now personal flying? It's great. I live on the west side. I take the Holland tunnel and am there quickly. But there is no way in hell I am taking a black car from midtown east to Newark via the Lincoln Tunnel at 5 or 6PM trying to catch a business flight to SFO. I'll fly Delta out of JFK where I can feasibly get off the island
This is spot on. I work with these people. They're not going to fly out of Newark. Period, end of discussion.
Kacee is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 12:51 pm
  #153  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: LA
Programs: UA MM | BA Ag
Posts: 7,189
Originally Posted by as219
And by the way, EWR is "convenient" as the crow flies, but making the subway-to-NJ Transit-to-Airtrain connection with heavy bags is no picnic, and cabs to/from EWR get really expensive, really quickly, not to mention the horrible tunnel delays that can't be avoided.
yup, plus the reliability of the Airtrain and NJ Transit should give everyone pause.
anc-ord772 is online now  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 12:52 pm
  #154  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Suburban Philadelphia
Programs: Marriott Lifetime Plat, IHG Gold
Posts: 3,392
Originally Posted by red grenadine
Getting to/from Newark from Midtown Manhattan is a disaster. They are going to lose a decent chunk of customers
Because getting to JFK from Manhattan and vice versa was a piece of cake.

Getting to/from JFK from anywhere not on Long Island just plain sucks.

Originally Posted by Kacee
1. JFK is easier to and from midtown east.
2. JFK is far less prone to air traffic delays.
3. JFK T7 is super easy and compact. There's no quicker walk to the gate, nor is there any quicker baggage delivery.
4. EWR is one of the nastiest airports in the country. Long lines, surly employees, frequent delays.
5. The Lincoln tunnel is a nightmare at rush hour.

.
Not sure when the last time was that you were in EWR, but at worst, it's no better or worse than JFK as it relates to air congestion, employee attitude, etc.

Don't talk to me about the Lincoln Tunnel - the Belt Parkway and 678 are just as God-awful at the wrong time of day.

Last edited by Cargojon; Jun 16, 2015 at 12:57 pm
Cargojon is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 12:52 pm
  #155  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Platinum, AF, Chase, Hyatt Explorist
Posts: 1,085
Originally Posted by blueman2
You nailed it with the OAK comparision. EWR is a nasty airport with nasty employees in an inconvenient location to NYC. Just like OAK to San Francisco. For people who live near EWR, this is a win, of course.

Just shows that when it comes to competing with other airlines, UA runs for the hills. Or, in this case, for EWR.
I actually think OAK is a really bad comparison. I may be biased since I'm from the East Bay and OAK is a lot closer, but OAK is a great airport. Have you been there recently? The renovated terminals are actually quite nice now (not as nice as SFO T3 Boarding E, but 10x better than Boarding F), security is always a breeze, and with the new BART extension, SFO and OAK are roughly equidistant from downtown SF. OAK is another market that UA retreated from post-merger, and a lot of people (myself included) were sad to see it go, as it was a welcome alternative to SFO.

I can't speak for EWR as it's actually the one NYC airport that I've never flown into, but to me, EWR seems to be more inconvenient to get to from Manhattan than OAK is from downtown SF.
char777 is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 12:53 pm
  #156  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: LAS, ZQN
Programs: UA PP (2MM), BA gold
Posts: 2,170
I lucked out with my last flight to JFK end September.
I dislike EWR and avoid it when possible. I have other *A options from USA but
returning via the east (Europe and Mid-East) will cause issues. I already booked
DL one flight after arriving JFK on Qatar. If a choice between EWR using UA or
JFK on another carrier- I'll stick with JFK.
zebranz is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 12:54 pm
  #157  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MRY - CNX - TXL
Programs: UA 1K / *G / Marriott PE / Expedia Gold+ / Hertz PC
Posts: 7,058
If only we had things like the NEX, Flytoget, RhonExpress from NYP for EWR and Grand Central for JFK we could all be in a much better place.
JVPhoto is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 12:55 pm
  #158  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: San Francisco, CA
Programs: UA Plat, Copa Pres. Plat, Hyatt Diamond, Hilton Diamond, SPG LT Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 769
Originally Posted by Kacee
1. JFK is easier to and from midtown east.
2. JFK is far less prone to air traffic delays.
3. JFK T7 is super easy and compact. There's no quicker walk to the gate, nor is there any quicker baggage delivery.
4. EWR is one of the nastiest airports in the country. Long lines, surly employees, frequent delays.
5. The Lincoln tunnel is a nightmare at rush hour.



This is spot on. I work with these people. They're not going to fly out of Newark. Period, end of discussion.
We're not going to agree here, which is fine. But I would debate #1 (which is related to #5 - not disputing #5, but the Van Wyck is also a nightmare) and #4 (Terminal C). #3 I already agreed with. I'll give you #2 as well

Last edited by milesmuncher; Jun 16, 2015 at 12:56 pm Reason: fixing mistake
milesmuncher is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 12:56 pm
  #159  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,299
Originally Posted by char777
I actually think OAK is a really bad comparison. I may be biased since I'm from the East Bay and OAK is a lot closer, but OAK is a great airport. Have you been there recently? The renovated terminals are actually quite nice now (not as nice as SFO T3 Boarding E, but 10x better than Boarding F), security is always a breeze, and with the new BART extension, SFO and OAK are roughly equidistant from downtown SF. OAK is another market that UA retreated from post-merger, and a lot of people (myself included) were sad to see it go, as it was a welcome alternative to SFO.
Agreed. OAK/SFO has no relevance to this discussion. OAK is an excellent regional airport with on time flights, short lines, and easy parking. Unlike NYC, the bay area can only support one international airport.

I can't speak for EWR as it's actually the one NYC airport that I've never flown into, but to me, EWR seems to be more inconvenient to get to from Manhattan than OAK is from downtown SF.
It's very similar to getting to EWR. You can drive and get stuck in bridge/880 traffic or you can take a jam-packed, delay prone BART train and then transfer to the airtran at Coliseum.
Kacee is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 12:58 pm
  #160  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Programs: DL Diamond, UA 1K MM, SPG Plat For Life, Marriott Plat, Nexus/GlobalEntry
Posts: 9,198
Originally Posted by Kacee
1. JFK is easier to and from midtown east.
2. JFK is far less prone to air traffic delays.
3. JFK T7 is super easy and compact. There's no quicker walk to the gate, nor is there any quicker baggage delivery.
4. EWR is one of the nastiest airports in the country. Long lines, surly employees, frequent delays.
5. The Lincoln tunnel is a nightmare at rush hour.



This is spot on. I work with these people. They're not going to fly out of Newark. Period, end of discussion.
Then they'll fly on AA or DL... and there are plenty of other people on the west side and lower Manhattan who can even more easily get to EWR and are willing to pay premium fares who don't want to go to JFK. That's the beauty of New York. Money everywhere...
SEA1K4EVR is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 1:02 pm
  #161  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Programs: Million Miler, 1K - Basically spend a lot of time on planes
Posts: 2,202
United will prioritize the PS departures out of EWR, and they will not be subjected to the same delays as some other flights. I'm not sure I'd agree that delays at JFK are less across the board. I've been part of some pretty insane delays there while EWR has ben flowing just fine.

I LOVE this change. For folks that are primarily United flyers going from West coast into Europe (other than London, Paris and a few others), you now go lay flat the entire way..
CO_Nonrev_elite is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 1:03 pm
  #162  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: ROC/NYC/MSP/LAX/HKG/SIN
Posts: 3,212
Originally Posted by tuolumne
Wow....The end of an era. Thanks for the good times T7 and all my loved RCC staff. what a bitter moment
That's bad for JFK, but for all of people connecting in EWR, it was a huge improvement.

Assuming it's the same plane, same service, same hard and soft product

1. Your upgrade rates will increase, which requires everyone to use upgrade instruments.

2. Take-over of PMCO 752s. Not sure if you all noticed, but the daily PMCO 752 was completely gone from specifically EWR-LAX/SFO routes. And obviously, all other 738s, A320s, A321s, and 753s.

3. You can still use Gogo with Unlimited rate plan and not $16.99 for the 5.5 hour of the flight by United WiFi.

4. It means you may not need United Club access if you fly BF in EWR-SFO/LAX

Last edited by PaulInTheSky; Jun 16, 2015 at 3:27 pm
PaulInTheSky is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 1:04 pm
  #163  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco/Tel Aviv/YYZ
Programs: CO 1K-MM
Posts: 10,757
Fundamentally, I guess for UA, sure, they can say they're "moving" the flights to EWR. The capacity in November might be A+B, if A is EWR's transcon traffic and B is PS today. In a year its going to be A. People used to flying to JFK are just going to switch carriers, and people who weren't schlepping to EWR aren't going to suddenly do so.

They're not going to be attracting anyone new with this move, its not like they're starting up VNY-TEB.
entropy is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 1:05 pm
  #164  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: EWR
Programs: UA Gold, UA MM, Marriott Gold, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 1,329
Originally Posted by Always Flyin
I am able to get a lot of work done in the back of a car that I certainly couldn't/wouldn't do on a train.
To each his own.....I would rather get my work done in my office and know i have a 30 or 40 minute commute than leave my office 2 hours earlier than needed because I may or may not hit traffic. Not saying you're wrong just saying you and I differ on how we would rather spend our time.

Commute aside, I have real doubts whether its a good decision financially. Only time will tell.
Weez_1000 is offline  
Old Jun 16, 2015, 1:06 pm
  #165  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: DEN
Programs: UA MM Plat; AA MM Gold; HHonors Diamond
Posts: 15,866
And the answer is...

Gotham Air’s New $99 Helicopter Between Manhattan And JFK/EWR

The cost for first time users will be just $99 one way, and after that they’ll charge $199-219 depending on the departure time.

While it seems slightly unnecessary for a six minute flight, they’ll be serving hors d’oeuvres provided by Chef Thomas Keller’s Bouchon Bakery, as well as drinks on afternoon flights.

Furthermore, they’ll have an inclement weather guarantee, whereby if the helicopter can’t fly due to high winds or low cloud coverage, you’ll be driven door-to-door in a Tesla S.


Pocket change for the finance guys, eh?
Bonehead is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.