p.s. Operations Transitioning to EWR on October 25, 2015
Jun 16, 2015, 11:56 am
#106
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: ORD-LAS
Programs: UA MM 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Titanium Elite
Posts: 4,419
Why not? I am a leisure 1K who flies in GF-F/BF-J on *A and I have no problem taking the train for 25-30min at times when I could be sitting in traffic for 60-80 min?
If you strip away the allure of the JFK name it comes out to a wash with EWR. A dinky T7 for UA flights, have you been stuck there for hours over EWR C? Have you seen the security clusterfudge by way of gong show at T4 for the evening departures?
If you strip away the allure of the JFK name it comes out to a wash with EWR. A dinky T7 for UA flights, have you been stuck there for hours over EWR C? Have you seen the security clusterfudge by way of gong show at T4 for the evening departures?
You have now far exceeded the 30 minutes you claim. Let's be real, I took the train recently, and it took me over an hour just to get into Penn Station. Add another 15 minute walk, to my hotel.
Jun 16, 2015, 12:01 pm
#107
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
I looked it up. Star routes to JFK:
(Bold indicates route not duplicated at EWR)
AC: YYZ
CA: PEK
AI: DEL, BOM
NH: NRT
OZ: ICN
OS: VIE
AV: BOG, CLO, CTG, MDE, PEI, SAL, SAP
SN: BRU
MS: CAI
BR: TPE
LO: WAW
LH: FRA, MUC
SQ: FRA (SIN)
SA: JNB
LX: GVA, ZRH
TK: IST
Star routes to EWR:
(Bold indicates route not duplicated at JFK)
AC: YYC, YYZ, YVR, YUL
AI: BOM, AMD
OS: VIE
LH: DUS, FRA, MUC
SK: CPH, OSL, ARN
LX: ZRH
TP: LIS, OPO
Really I think it's a wash, especially considering how many more connections UA can offer ex-EWR on their own metal to the destinations of most of those carriers that only have a select few flights to JFK. SK and TP appear to be the odd Star carriers that have selected EWR over JFK.
It's also worth considering that there's probably a fair amount of duplication if you also include IAD as well.
(Bold indicates route not duplicated at EWR)
AC: YYZ
CA: PEK
AI: DEL, BOM
NH: NRT
OZ: ICN
OS: VIE
AV: BOG, CLO, CTG, MDE, PEI, SAL, SAP
SN: BRU
MS: CAI
BR: TPE
LO: WAW
LH: FRA, MUC
SQ: FRA (SIN)
SA: JNB
LX: GVA, ZRH
TK: IST
Star routes to EWR:
(Bold indicates route not duplicated at JFK)
AC: YYC, YYZ, YVR, YUL
AI: BOM, AMD
OS: VIE
LH: DUS, FRA, MUC
SK: CPH, OSL, ARN
LX: ZRH
TP: LIS, OPO
Really I think it's a wash, especially considering how many more connections UA can offer ex-EWR on their own metal to the destinations of most of those carriers that only have a select few flights to JFK. SK and TP appear to be the odd Star carriers that have selected EWR over JFK.
It's also worth considering that there's probably a fair amount of duplication if you also include IAD as well.
In addition, there are several of those JFK-exclusive destinations that probably won't be impacted significantly from this - either because they're already served directly from SFO/LAX (IST, FRA) and/or because routing via JFK would be significantly out of the way (pretty much anything in Asia).
Jun 16, 2015, 12:04 pm
#108
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Programs: DL Diamond, UA 1K MM, SPG Plat For Life, Marriott Plat, Nexus/GlobalEntry
Posts: 9,198
The urban flyer talk myth about the SAG contract and why UA went away with F on that route. They went away with F, because sCO leadership no longer wanted F. Let's not blame the contract. And in all honestly, most of those "contract" members were flying AA anyways. UA was making money before the merger on this route. UA had no reason to drop F, but they did, why? Because they didn't think it was enough of a "difference".
UA will NOT be able to sustain paid BF on LAX,SFO-EWR. They just won't. You have people flying that route weekly, they will choose another airline, they will not fly into EWR. They just won't. UA will be filling those seats up with cheap upgrade fares for non elite.
The paid traffic will continue to fly into JFK, the budget people will fly Y into any airport that is cheaper.
This route made money, if in fact they no longer made money on this route, which they are claiming, then shouldn't that reflect bad on current management?
UA will NOT be able to sustain paid BF on LAX,SFO-EWR. They just won't. You have people flying that route weekly, they will choose another airline, they will not fly into EWR. They just won't. UA will be filling those seats up with cheap upgrade fares for non elite.
The paid traffic will continue to fly into JFK, the budget people will fly Y into any airport that is cheaper.
This route made money, if in fact they no longer made money on this route, which they are claiming, then shouldn't that reflect bad on current management?
Very shortly after the SAG contract was changed to no longer require full F fares for certain members... UA announced it was changing to a 2 class configuration. Now.. I'm not disagreeing that a part of it also had to do with the fact that the former CO management likes 2 class configs. But I do believe the SAG contract change was a significant catalyst that lead to the change.
As for the rest..time will tell. I think they'll do fine with EWR and it makes way more sense to have these flights feed into a hub than isolated at JFK.
Jun 16, 2015, 12:05 pm
#109
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
Yes, it is, now there are competitors with (much) better products. United has eviscerated MP as competitive tool, where they used to offer promos to keep travelers loyal, they seem to have forgotten how useful it was in keeping travelers(even business travelers) on UA metal.
In the past they would've offered a 1-2-3-4-5 roundtrip get X miles, a SWU or CR1s.. these days, gornicht. Keep them off the other airlines before they even get on but today, UA has lost the connection and trust to their flyers.. and boom, they go off and find the better experience with B6/VX/DL/AA and they never return.
As for P.S. at EWR... give it time, it'll be gone too. They're going to run their spreadsheets, and see that the yield just isn't there to offer the dedicated product, and will slough off the PS 752s, and keep the few CO 752s rotating through the system as they used to. They're going to look, and say ... well, we can run a 752PS with 114 Y seats and 28 J seats, or a 739ER with 45 more Y seats, and 20 F seats we mostly sold anyways, so those 4 J seats aren't worth the 45 Y seats AND the 739 has a lower op cost than the 752.. goodbye PS.
In the past they would've offered a 1-2-3-4-5 roundtrip get X miles, a SWU or CR1s.. these days, gornicht. Keep them off the other airlines before they even get on but today, UA has lost the connection and trust to their flyers.. and boom, they go off and find the better experience with B6/VX/DL/AA and they never return.
As for P.S. at EWR... give it time, it'll be gone too. They're going to run their spreadsheets, and see that the yield just isn't there to offer the dedicated product, and will slough off the PS 752s, and keep the few CO 752s rotating through the system as they used to. They're going to look, and say ... well, we can run a 752PS with 114 Y seats and 28 J seats, or a 739ER with 45 more Y seats, and 20 F seats we mostly sold anyways, so those 4 J seats aren't worth the 45 Y seats AND the 739 has a lower op cost than the 752.. goodbye PS.
We can go around and around about why this change was necessitated, but it's difficult to argue that there weren't some major external factors at play here...
Aside from a handful of 752s on no more than 2-3 frequencies a day, this is true. OTOH, UA operated three-cabin 777s and 767s on hub-hub routes to meet major international banks. There's certainly some wisdom in that approach.
Jun 16, 2015, 12:06 pm
#110
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco/Tel Aviv/YYZ
Programs: CO 1K-MM
Posts: 10,762
This is a horrible move for large groups of travelers:
-- Long Island, Queens, Brooklyn, Westchester & Connecticut residents
-- Upper East Side residents
-- Anyone heading to any of those places
-- People needing taxis to/from the airport (EWR is 2x the cost, and less predictable (and with fewer options) than JFK, even as bad as the Van Wyck is at all times [other than between 12:00am and 11:59pm])
-- People with a choice of airlines.
-- Long Island, Queens, Brooklyn, Westchester & Connecticut residents
-- Upper East Side residents
-- Anyone heading to any of those places
-- People needing taxis to/from the airport (EWR is 2x the cost, and less predictable (and with fewer options) than JFK, even as bad as the Van Wyck is at all times [other than between 12:00am and 11:59pm])
-- People with a choice of airlines.
Jun 16, 2015, 12:07 pm
#111
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
Not to mention the fact that you could just skip NYC and fly straight to LAX or SFO on a lot of those airlines.
I mean, really, how many CA pax are flying PEK-JFK-LAX/SFO instead of PEK-LAX/SFO? How many SQ pax are flying SIN-FRA-JFK-LAX/SFO instead of SIN-NRT/HKG/ICN-LAX/SFO? How many AV pax are flying from South America into JFK to connect to LAX/SFO?
I have a very hard time believing that there's a ton of *A connecting traffic at JFK that UA is going to miss very badly.
I mean, really, how many CA pax are flying PEK-JFK-LAX/SFO instead of PEK-LAX/SFO? How many SQ pax are flying SIN-FRA-JFK-LAX/SFO instead of SIN-NRT/HKG/ICN-LAX/SFO? How many AV pax are flying from South America into JFK to connect to LAX/SFO?
I have a very hard time believing that there's a ton of *A connecting traffic at JFK that UA is going to miss very badly.
Jun 16, 2015, 12:09 pm
#112
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 6,546
UA will now have a bunch of flat beds LAX-NYC. Love being able to travel transcon in a flat bed for 25,000 miles one-way.
Last edited by goalie; Jun 16, 2015 at 12:43 pm Reason: Per FT Rule 16: Using symbols, spaces or other methods to mask vulgarities is not allowed.
Jun 16, 2015, 12:09 pm
#113
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: IAH, HOU
Programs: MileagePlus 1K, HHonors Diamond, Marriott Titanium/Lifetime Plat
Posts: 1,073
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 ).
Jun 16, 2015, 12:12 pm
#114
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Platinum, AF, Chase, Hyatt Explorist
Posts: 1,091
Thanks for pulling this list, it's pretty interesting to look through. I realize that many here would probably take any Star partner over UA for a TATL, but obviously UA brings a ton of options out of EWR.
In addition, there are several of those JFK-exclusive destinations that probably won't be impacted significantly from this - either because they're already served directly from SFO/LAX (IST, FRA) and/or because routing via JFK would be significantly out of the way (pretty much anything in Asia).
In addition, there are several of those JFK-exclusive destinations that probably won't be impacted significantly from this - either because they're already served directly from SFO/LAX (IST, FRA) and/or because routing via JFK would be significantly out of the way (pretty much anything in Asia).
Sure, it's a warm feeling to think that droves of people are flying p.s. to connect onto, say, SN to BRU, but the truth is that UA can probably serve those people much more effectively and profitably on their own metal ex-EWR.
Jun 16, 2015, 12:14 pm
#115
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,480
UA already has the connecting traffic ex-EWR. That's why this is going to be a net loss of connecting traffic for UA.
The bigger loss will be the HVF O/D traffic though.
Jun 16, 2015, 12:15 pm
#116
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: ORD-LAS
Programs: UA MM 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Titanium Elite
Posts: 4,419
I don't believe it to be an urban FlyerTalk myth... the timing of it was too coincidental... and unless you're the one who was booking travel for everyone in the union I doubt you are qualified to say "most" everyone was flying AA when UA was supplying a significant amount of the 3 class F capacity on the route at the time...
Very shortly after the SAG contract was changed to no longer require full F fares for certain members... UA announced it was changing to a 2 class configuration. Now.. I'm not disagreeing that a part of it also had to do with the fact that the former CO management likes 2 class configs. But I do believe the SAG contract change was a significant catalyst that lead to the change.
As for the rest..time will tell. I think they'll do fine with EWR and it makes way more sense to have these flights feed into a hub than isolated at JFK.
Very shortly after the SAG contract was changed to no longer require full F fares for certain members... UA announced it was changing to a 2 class configuration. Now.. I'm not disagreeing that a part of it also had to do with the fact that the former CO management likes 2 class configs. But I do believe the SAG contract change was a significant catalyst that lead to the change.
As for the rest..time will tell. I think they'll do fine with EWR and it makes way more sense to have these flights feed into a hub than isolated at JFK.
From day 1, Smisek was not a fan of PS and they dismissed it and it's success.
The high paying premium passenger will not pay to go into EWR. Whatever UA leftovers they had on LAX-JFK, will finally jump ship on that route.
The only positive of this announcement will be for those who are flying BF from SFO,LAX via EWR to reach Europe an TLV.
Jun 16, 2015, 12:15 pm
#117
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.75MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,172
Ha...you're not going to see much, if any, I/IN space on these routes
Last edited by goalie; Jun 16, 2015 at 12:44 pm Reason: edited quoted post to match edited original post
Jun 16, 2015, 12:15 pm
#118
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: ORD-LAS
Programs: UA MM 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Titanium Elite
Posts: 4,419
That's a waste of 25K miles. You will find dirt cheap fares on that route now.
Last edited by goalie; Jun 16, 2015 at 12:44 pm Reason: edited quoted post to match edited original post
Jun 16, 2015, 12:19 pm
#119
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SFO South Bay
Programs: UA 2MM
Posts: 3,052
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.
Just shows that when it comes to competing with other airlines, UA runs for the hills. Or, in this case, for EWR.
Last edited by blueman2; Jun 16, 2015 at 12:31 pm
Jun 16, 2015, 12:19 pm
#120
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: LAX
Programs: UA MM | BA Silver
Posts: 7,193
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha
ROTFLMAO
EWR ≠ JFK except in crazy bizarro UNITED Willis tower world.
ROTFLMAO
EWR ≠ JFK except in crazy bizarro UNITED Willis tower world.