UA-NYC

Why?

Will you be flying paid business each time? If so, I don't disagree.

But if you're trying to upgrade...it's not free, and it's a big mileage + copay.

So why does it rock then?

EsquireFlyer

...

PV_Premier

the end of an era

quite a shocking fall from grace that UA has experienced at JFK, to this final resting place of crawing back to their cave in EWR with their tail between their legs

any wagers on what the fare pricing starts at for BF on this "new" route?

UA keeping it classy, putting it out social media before telling their employees.

ijgordon

JFK isn't supporting the $4k fares that you seem to want UA to get either now. @:-)


They are going to fly whatever airline their corporate policy allows them to. They'll often need to justify a non-preferred carrier if it's significantly more expensive, and saying "I like JFK better than EWR" probably won't cut it. What may cut it is that "I live in Long Island/CT and my flight back from LAX lands at midnight and it's an hour closer to my home".

You mean the money-losing traffic?

airzim

You forgot the GW Bridge which is perfectly viable if you live on the UES, UWS, or Hells Kitchen.

I live in Lower Manhattan and as a Manhattan resident, I can get to EWR in 20 minutes in the morning (before 8am) and 30 minutes return (after 8pm).

LGA is about the same

Sure but all you need is a stalled vehicle on the Kosciuszko Bridge and you're toast. There's no alternative around that mess once you've crossed the lower Manhattan bridges. I can't tell you how many times I've nearly missed a flight at LGA in the morning because of something on that bridge. At least with the Holland you can choose 78 or the 1/9.

Nobody is ever going to take the Verrazano bridge from downtown Manhattan.

Honestly those are not really viable options because you always end up in the same place, BQE which is a mess. The real alternative is to take Flatbush Ave through the back reaches of Brooklyn but that has many lights, and can easily take over an hour.

I disagree. The goal is to get around the bottlenecks no doubt the Holland is bad, but once through it normally sails. Alternatively, it's easy to get over the Brooklyn/Manhattan/Williamsburg bridges but they all spill onto the BQE/LIE/Van Wyke which is the corresponding bottleneck.

I think the main issue with EWR is perception. EWR has proven to be much more reliable for travel for me in Lower Manhattan than JFK. LGA is slightly better but obviously has more limited flight options.

EWRMAN

I'm due to fly EWR SFO on Nov 7.

Just got this email from united:


Also I have no idea whose milagePlus number that is because it isn't mine.

EsquireFlyer

Hmm.. I visited the website but it's just an advertisement, with no explanation of how to set up a flight (or crowdsource a charter, or whatever the term is). How do you actually "do it"?

ozziegumby

The headline does not make sense with the words "Premium" and "Newark" as they are like oil and water and can never mix :-)

As other posters have said this was bound to happen, as it's the next step in 'de Uniting' in the new UA/CO. JFK is symbolically 'the place to be' for airlines and its sad that United is no longer going to be there.

EWRMAN

EWR V JFK from midtown.

Psychologically JFK feels closer and easier but it isn't. I think a large part of it is down to the fact that taking a yellow taxi to EWR was always such a hassle.

I'm not a real FF but in the last couple of years must of done midtown to JFK and EWR 15 times each and I've had far more horrible taxi journeys trying to get to JFK.

EsquireFlyer

The midtown law firms that people are probably thinking of, generally don't have a corporate policy requiring travel on a specific airline. The travel expenses just have to be reasonable so that they can be billed to the client, and typically there is no side-by-side comparison across different airports when doing the billing.

Also, lawyers often bill for travel time, so if it takes even an extra .5 hours (meaning any number between 16 minutes and 30 minutes) to get to EWR instead of JFK, that can easily cost the client $350 or more. That alone should offset any fare difference that might exist between UA and AA/DL/B6.

LAXIAD8

The lower frequency on the competitors compared to UA (up to 17x SFO 15x LAX) may also cost those "clients" some productivity.

It's always funny when people tout "frequency is king", but that doesn't apply when UA is the frequency king.

JVPhoto

Most likely a invalid data point because my Mother & I are not lawyers.
To recap a conversation I had earlier with her today regarding paid F tickets on SFO-EWR-SDQ r/t

"So are the flights to NY & home going to have the flat beds like I flew back last time?"
No, those go to JFK we have to fly to EWR in recliners for our connection to the wedding.

Unfortunately this in September.

sfozrhfco

Except that UA nearly has that frequency now to EWR so if the person is not flying into EWR now and will not fly to EWR in the future, frequency doesn't matter much to those flyers.

ijgordon

You mean the money it was successfully losing for ~4 years before Smisek et. al. came on the scene?

Kacee

Yes, the whole point of ps originally was to attract the level of HVF who are not bound by restrictive corporate travel policies.

Perhaps you don't understand the fundamental point of a fare war, which is to drive out competition so you can eventually raise fares higher. J Fares will climb back up on JFK-LAX/SFO. EWR-LAX/SFO will not support the same fares.