BrianCUnited

I agree with others that this is probably part of gradual wind-down of PS. I can't imagine they'll still be flying 15-17 757s between EWR/SFO-LAX in a few years. What will be interesting to see is if they cut back on capacity, service (start mixing in 739s), or both.

Maybe they'll redeploy some of these 757s on "new" (restarted) TATL routes and call it another "enhancement" to the network.

BearX220

Precisely so.

LAXIAD8

Other than certain airports such as GIG or ATH, UA flies to far more global destinations from the "wrong" gateway than DL and AA combined out of the "right" gateway

From a passenger's perspective, what is more important? "Prestige", or convenience and practicality ? "Prestige", or frequency ?

lhrsfo

No one will change their views on the merits, or otherwise, of EWR over JFK. Only the market will tell that, and will reveal it within a few years.

However, the fact that UA's competitors clearly think that UA has left substantial business on the table is indicative of the way they think the market will move.

LAXIAD8

Take NYC-SAN

AA JFK-SAN 1x
UA EWR-SAN 4x

Would you pick "Prestige" or practicality here ?

entropy

Which is why they come up with calling in Newark/New York. Or Liberty ... its all about making people forget its in the middle of the sewer that's NJ.

There are plenty of people who think/know EWR isn't the end of the world if you're going to Manhattan, but many more don't know and won't consider it. Perception and group think is a hard think to change. CO tried for years to convince people that Gatwick was an easier/better/at least just as good as LHR, and they were salivating over the end of Bermuda2 because they knew that as much as they wanted to pretend it was the same, its not. Which is why slots are still worth megabucks. All that nevermind that LHR is a cluster--- of an airport.

Airlines that couldn't fly into LHR made LGW work as best they could. CO made a great investment in EWR, 15 years ago, and are still trumpeting that investment as if its new. but no question, they did build a very strong O/D and connecting operation. Newark is a huge city in its own right, and they do get plenty of catchment from NY and of course NJ, where there is plenty of industry, pharma and chemical.

SS255

I agree that the p.s. branding is likely to fizzle out in the next couple of years, but I think that UA will keep running flights flat-bed seats on the LAX & SFO routes during peak business travel hours. A Saturday redeye on a holiday weekend? Not so much!

cestmoi123

Personally, I'd take one of the 3x DL JFK-SAN flights.

cestmoi123

Definitely true about the NJ catchment, but Newark's population is only 280k, it's slightly smaller than Toledo, OH.

bobbysfca

I disagree completely.
JFK Airtrain is fast (50+ MPH would be my guess), generally reliable and frequent.
EWR airtrain is like a kiddie-park ride in comparison. Slow (20-25 MPH would be my guess), sporadic and uncomfortable mini cars.

Then there's the issue of the infrequency and unreliability of NJ Transit. Last trip I waited at the station for 50 minutes for a train. 25 minutes until the next scheduled train + 25 minutes late. Then the train took 48 minutes to get to NYP from EWR because one of the 2 tunnels to NY was closed for maintainance work.
And - since NJs silly governor blocked the building of train tunnels 3&4 to NYP and ran off with the funding, it probably wont get better anytime soon.


No, the biggest issue is that EWR is an annoying, crowded cluster fudge of an experience from start to finish.

What Newark airport needs is a new airport.

LAXIAD8

The population that actually lives inside Newark city proper is also jerk poor, so I don't think that should factor anywhere into UA's calculus. If they're actually banking on these 280K, they deserve to fold.

hockey7711

It sucks to arrive at EWR after 10pm...and wait for NJ Transit.
At JFK, LIRR runs about every 10 mins.

Austin787

That is just one route. Try looking at NYC-PDX, NYC-SEA, NYC-LHR, NYC-FLL, NYC-MCO, NYC-NRT, NYC-HKG, etc. Plus, AA has a token presence on many of its JFK flights. DL or B6 would be a better comparison.

Newark airport would benefit from a name change, where "New York" is part of the airport's name. Newark is close enough to Manhattan to be considered a NYC area airport. I'm aware of the challenges getting EWR to/from Manhattan but it's not much different than the challenges of getting JFK to/from Manhattan. Maybe name the airport New York Liberty, or New York Newark (like BWI is named Baltimore Washington to signify its presence in Baltimore and Washington DC metro areas)

dkc715

I was on a PS flight yesterday from LAX to JFK. Two GS agents were on board holding the hands of GS customers, listening to their customers tell them their transcon business is going to Jet Blue or Delta. The extremely nice agents were trying to get them to consider the service into EWR and touting the corporate lines. These particular customers appear to have made up their minds. Interesting to watch it play out on board.

Just sent the following to the US DOJ. It won't make a difference, but I feel better!


Dear US DOJ:

Under United's withdrawal from all services from JFK Airport in NY, management has proposed a gate swap with Delta Air lines which would allow Delta to pick up additional slots at JFK in exchange for Delta slots at Newark.

I strongly recommend denying the two gate swap proposals. Each airline is a dominant U.S. player at each airport and any additional consolidation of local power will drive up airfares for NYC consumers. Consumers have a strong travel preference between EWR and JFK based on where they live/work and do NOT view them as interchangeable. Airlines know this and with one less competitor in each area airfares are certain to rise.

The DOJ allowed the U.S. airline industry to merge into a 3-legged oligopoly. Please don't allow this game of airport dominance to be the next step in giving our industry a reason for raising returns to shareholders way above competitive levels.

One gate swap between United and Delta in NYC is one too many! Compromising with an oligopoly is just bad public policy, regardless of airline spin about all the great things that will come.

Respectfully,

chinatraderjmr

EWR for many many many NYC Travellers is neither convienant nor practical. Let's just cut out everything & go to baggage claim. The few times I've flown UA into EWR THE AVERAGE WAIT FOR LUGGAGE WAS AT LEAST 45 min (1st class bags). NO THANK YOU. How bout all those coming from Manhattan (I won't even bring up Long Island or Queens/Brooklyn. For many (granted not all) Manhattan residents EWR is a longer drive factoring in traffic, etc EWR is not the premier ny Airport nor a major gateway to the U.S. (Unless your married to Mileage Plus). This is a huge step back for UA. WHATS NEXT? Rebranding back to People's Express?