p.s. Operations Transitioning to EWR on October 25, 2015
Jun 16, 2015, 1:30 pm
#181
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada
Programs: UA*1K MM SK EBG LATAM BL
Posts: 23,314
Air Canada Terminal A
Air India Terminal B
Austrian Terminal B
Lufthansa Terminal B
Scandinavian Airlines Terminal B
SWISS Terminal B
TAP Portugal Terminal B
JFK:
Air Canada Terminal 7
Air China Terminal 1
Air India Terminal 4
ANA Terminal 7
Asiana Airlines Terminal 4
Austrian Terminal 1
Avianca Terminal 4
Brussels Airlines Terminal 1
Copa Airlines Terminal 4
EGYPTAIR Terminal 4
EVA Air Terminal 1
LOT Polish Airlines Terminal 1
Lufthansa Terminal 1
Singapore Airlines Terminal 4
South African Airways Terminal 4
SWISS Terminal 4
Turkish Airlines Terminal 1
Jun 16, 2015, 1:30 pm
#182
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: United Premier 1K 1MM; AA Plat Pro; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott Platinum; Avis President's Club
Posts: 2,529
I don't get giving up on JFK in its entirety. I guess we should have seen this coming when they stopped the IAD-JFK flights.
Again, United's solution to competition is to give up on operations/airports entirely. They don't have a product that can truly compete.
Again, United's solution to competition is to give up on operations/airports entirely. They don't have a product that can truly compete.
Jun 16, 2015, 1:32 pm
#183
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: ROC/NYC/MSP/LAX/HKG/SIN
Posts: 3,215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulakers2010
I drove from ROC to EWR and JFK a couple of times, and you can't imagine how much easier and more cost effective to just get to EWR.
I've driven from ROC to NYC a couple of times. Even got stuck on 81 one Christmas Eve and had to spend the night in a motel. I can't imagine driving from ROC just to originate at EWR/JFK.
Originally Posted by Paulakers2010
I drove from ROC to EWR and JFK a couple of times, and you can't imagine how much easier and more cost effective to just get to EWR.
I've driven from ROC to NYC a couple of times. Even got stuck on 81 one Christmas Eve and had to spend the night in a motel. I can't imagine driving from ROC just to originate at EWR/JFK.
However, sometimes the worst thing happened was out of ROC was canceled, so I had to make a choice of either getting to EWR or JFK to make the flight.
Jun 16, 2015, 1:34 pm
#184
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Los Angeles
Programs: UA 1K, AA 2MM, Bonvoy LT Plt, Mets fan
Posts: 5,073
I regularly go desk to terminal in an hour, for $7.75...which is half the time and less than half the money for getting to EWR by transit. And by car it's worse: EWR takes longer by car, and is a $100+ taxi, or an $80 uber - vs $60/$55 from JFK.
Jun 16, 2015, 1:34 pm
#185
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: LAX
Programs: UA Silver, AA, WN, DL
Posts: 4,091
I really liked JFK because it was easy to get to via mass transit. It was pretty straightforward to figure out the subway transit time and there was more frequency.
I guess from UA's POV, EWR allows them to have a captive audience fly to all those destinations instead of relying on JFK code-shares with *A members. More for UA; better for UA... not so great for those who want to fly partner airlines.
I guess from UA's POV, EWR allows them to have a captive audience fly to all those destinations instead of relying on JFK code-shares with *A members. More for UA; better for UA... not so great for those who want to fly partner airlines.
Jun 16, 2015, 1:35 pm
#186
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: DAY
Programs: UA 1K 1MM; Marriott LT Titanium; Amex MR; Chase UR; Hertz PC; Global Entry
Posts: 10,159
Certainly UAs right to abandon JFK, even if it means losing a lot of high end PS customers from NYC, Westchester and southern CT. But they sure should be blocked from selling gates to Delta. Enough of these smug oligopolies where everyone winks but no words are ever spoken about how to raise prices. Fares between EWR and JFK and LA/SFO were rarely the same, with UA demanding a EWR premium for its captive customers. I, for one, will be urging regulators to turn down the gate swap proposal with Delta. How about a nice new, foreign competitor? Fool us 7 times, shame on them. Fool us an 8th time, get out your check book.
Preach!
Jun 16, 2015, 1:40 pm
#187
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 1,380
For context, I believe BA's lease on T7 is up this year. Not sure what the status is, but that could have something to do with this transaction as well. For example, the rent likely did or will go up, and it's possible BA wanted UA out of its terminal anyway.
Jun 16, 2015, 1:41 pm
#188
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Somewhere I've Driven To
Programs: HiltonHonors, IHG Hotels, DL Skymiles
Posts: 2,070
Hi everyone,
Today we are announcing the transition of our transcontinental p.s. premium service from JFK to EWR, for flights to SFO and LAX, beginning October 25. When we transition p.s. operations to EWR, we will cease operations at JFK.
The launch of p.s. at EWR will bring an upgraded airport product to p.s. customers, and coincides with investments already in progress at SFO and LAX. Customers flying out of EWR will have access to near-hourly transcontinental service, with the most flat-bed seats in the New York-SFO/LAX combined market. In addition to the p.s. aircraft we are moving from JFK to EWR, we will also reposition some of our flatbed-equipped 757s from trans-Atlantic routes to transcontinental routes in order to maintain or grow our existing EWR frequency levels. When we have completed this schedule adjustment, all of our flights from EWR to LAX and SFO will feature flat-bed seats.
Read more about the p.s. transition in our press release. If you are already booked on a p.s. flight departing after October 25, we will be rebooking you on one of our Newark-based p.s. flights. This change will happen the weekend of June 19. Once the change is processed, if the schedule or route doesn’t work for you, please contact us for other options.
-UA Insider
Today we are announcing the transition of our transcontinental p.s. premium service from JFK to EWR, for flights to SFO and LAX, beginning October 25. When we transition p.s. operations to EWR, we will cease operations at JFK.
The launch of p.s. at EWR will bring an upgraded airport product to p.s. customers, and coincides with investments already in progress at SFO and LAX. Customers flying out of EWR will have access to near-hourly transcontinental service, with the most flat-bed seats in the New York-SFO/LAX combined market. In addition to the p.s. aircraft we are moving from JFK to EWR, we will also reposition some of our flatbed-equipped 757s from trans-Atlantic routes to transcontinental routes in order to maintain or grow our existing EWR frequency levels. When we have completed this schedule adjustment, all of our flights from EWR to LAX and SFO will feature flat-bed seats.
Read more about the p.s. transition in our press release. If you are already booked on a p.s. flight departing after October 25, we will be rebooking you on one of our Newark-based p.s. flights. This change will happen the weekend of June 19. Once the change is processed, if the schedule or route doesn’t work for you, please contact us for other options.
-UA Insider
What happens to the hundreds of UAL employees that work there ?
Also people that live in Queens and Long Island will have a much longer (2 hour) commute to New Jersey. Southern and Western Connecticut would be about a three hour drive one way = No one from these areas is going to use United at Newark unless they love driving through the entire metropolitan region = gridlock for hours.
Will this also mean (as rumor has it) that transcons are soon to be offered from LGA ?
Last edited by FlyingNone; Jun 16, 2015 at 1:52 pm
Jun 16, 2015, 1:49 pm
#189
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,394
Certainly UAs right to abandon JFK, even if it means losing a lot of high end PS customers from NYC, Westchester and southern CT. But they sure should be blocked from selling gates to Delta. Enough of these smug oligopolies where everyone winks but no words are ever spoken about how to raise prices. Fares between EWR and JFK and LA/SFO were rarely the same, with UA demanding a EWR premium for its captive customers. I, for one, will be urging regulators to turn down the gate swap proposal with Delta. How about a nice new, foreign competitor? Fool us 7 times, shame on them. Fool us an 8th time, get out your check book.
https://www.panynj.gov/airports/jfk-airlines.html
Now you may get some traction for allowing increased access to WN, B6, VX, et all.
Jun 16, 2015, 1:49 pm
#190
Formerly known as jsfrSuperElite
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hong Kong, Montreal
Programs: Air Canada SE100K-1MM, Hilton Honors Lifetime Diamond
Posts: 590
Was there a crew base at JFK? Will there be?
I wonder if any of the *A carriers at JFK will leave for EWR. Quite a few - AC, CA, AI, NH, OZ, OS, AV, SN, CM, MS, BR, LO, LH, SQ, SA, LX, TK ( http://www.staralliance.com/en/servi...on/airport/jfk ).
I wonder if any of the *A carriers at JFK will leave for EWR. Quite a few - AC, CA, AI, NH, OZ, OS, AV, SN, CM, MS, BR, LO, LH, SQ, SA, LX, TK ( http://www.staralliance.com/en/servi...on/airport/jfk ).
http://www.aircanada.com/en/flights/...F-Kennedy.html
Jun 16, 2015, 1:49 pm
#191
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Programs: United Global Services, Lifetime Hilton Diamond
Posts: 353
Has someone addressed the question of whether all LAX-EWR-LAX flights will now be rebranded the PS service?
I regularly flew LAX-EWR until the merger happened. Then a whole new world opened up to me on the JFK service. On the LAX-EWR route, a CPU pretty much never happened and seats were never released in advance. To and from JFK, without the CPU's, I could still always use my miles for an upgrade in advance-- even with the new co-pays, the seats were available in advance. With the move to EWR, the only downside is that you have to make the decision to either buy the full fare ticket or use the miles and co-pay.
My thoughts on possible Pros and Cons:
1. Con: With there now being a choice of aircraft with either 16 of 28 businessfirst seats, the flights that have the 16 seats might no longer allow the advance upgrades that JFK did.
2. Con: Yield management. At EWR, I have never personally been able to upgrade in advance using miles, but JFK made it easy to do almost every trip with a little flexibility on flight times. Might that go away if the EWR PS service uses the same yield management as the prior non-PS EWR service?
3. Pro & Con: Not as much capacity to upgrade on the flights with the 16 BF seats instead of the 28. I recently purchased a first class ticket for the sole purpose of having the 757-200 with the 16 BF seats from LAX-EWR only to have it swapped out for an aircraft with no entertainment of any type. Other people who flew the route more regularly said it happens enough to be remembered. Maybe with the branding of PS Service, this means less likely to have the aircraft downgraded.
I regularly flew LAX-EWR until the merger happened. Then a whole new world opened up to me on the JFK service. On the LAX-EWR route, a CPU pretty much never happened and seats were never released in advance. To and from JFK, without the CPU's, I could still always use my miles for an upgrade in advance-- even with the new co-pays, the seats were available in advance. With the move to EWR, the only downside is that you have to make the decision to either buy the full fare ticket or use the miles and co-pay.
My thoughts on possible Pros and Cons:
1. Con: With there now being a choice of aircraft with either 16 of 28 businessfirst seats, the flights that have the 16 seats might no longer allow the advance upgrades that JFK did.
2. Con: Yield management. At EWR, I have never personally been able to upgrade in advance using miles, but JFK made it easy to do almost every trip with a little flexibility on flight times. Might that go away if the EWR PS service uses the same yield management as the prior non-PS EWR service?
3. Pro & Con: Not as much capacity to upgrade on the flights with the 16 BF seats instead of the 28. I recently purchased a first class ticket for the sole purpose of having the 757-200 with the 16 BF seats from LAX-EWR only to have it swapped out for an aircraft with no entertainment of any type. Other people who flew the route more regularly said it happens enough to be remembered. Maybe with the branding of PS Service, this means less likely to have the aircraft downgraded.
Jun 16, 2015, 1:51 pm
#192
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: LAX
Programs: AA Gold (prev. Ex Plat for 10 years); DL Plat; UA Gold; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 2,339
Aside from a service upgrade to p.s. standards on EWR-LAX/SFO and a likely slight frequency increase, this seems like an overall net decline in the NYC market. They are already running pretty close to hourly flights as it is in the EWR-LAX/SFO markets.
IMO, this takes them further away from being a competitive global airline. What's next for them - abandon LGA, consolidate everything at EWR?
EWR is a difficult airport to love (not that JFK or LGA are particularly lovable either), and for LAX/SFO o/d traffic to Manhattan, the JFK terminal was much more convenient than the trek to EWR with its subsequent security and terminal congestion.
This is just about retrenching to their hub markets, which seems to be their operating strategy. AA and DL, along with B9, WN and VX are increasingly growing into point-to-point markets.
United might well need those A380s after all - gotta move all that traffic between their mega hubs!
IMO, this takes them further away from being a competitive global airline. What's next for them - abandon LGA, consolidate everything at EWR?
EWR is a difficult airport to love (not that JFK or LGA are particularly lovable either), and for LAX/SFO o/d traffic to Manhattan, the JFK terminal was much more convenient than the trek to EWR with its subsequent security and terminal congestion.
This is just about retrenching to their hub markets, which seems to be their operating strategy. AA and DL, along with B9, WN and VX are increasingly growing into point-to-point markets.
United might well need those A380s after all - gotta move all that traffic between their mega hubs!
Jun 16, 2015, 1:57 pm
#193
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Somewhere I've Driven To
Programs: HiltonHonors, IHG Hotels, DL Skymiles
Posts: 2,070
Yes but some have extremely high seniority so will be offered jobs openings at EWR or LGA. Others may default as seniority dictates or to other stations outside of these two.
Jun 16, 2015, 1:59 pm
#194
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Somewhere I've Driven To
Programs: HiltonHonors, IHG Hotels, DL Skymiles
Posts: 2,070
Ask people who live on Long Island NY or Queens, Westchester, Putnam counties and Southern/Western Connecticut. They will have to make a big adjustment in driving distances........or not use United.
Jun 16, 2015, 2:06 pm
#195
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: DC|NYC
Programs: UA GS, DL Plat, Marriott Bonvoy LIfetime Titanium/SPG refugee, Hertz Prez, Amtrak Select
Posts: 3,201
I'm on a PS flight right now and the crew had no idea. I'm responsible for some tears and serious devastation.
Sad.
Sad.