I used to time it, and once T7 got "full blown" tsa pre, I could consistently walk from the airtrain to my gate in 8 minutes. JFK T7 was civilized. Combined with taking the left turn when boarding the 752 and the great ground staff and flight crews, it was often like flying private.
Can't say that about EWR. I haven't taken a single p.s. flight since UA left JFK (I live in CT). I thought I'd be able to make EWR work with Amtrak, but too few Amtrak trains stop there. Metropark has more daily one-seat rides to/from new Haven than EWR. I'm not sure what the current status of the UA-Amtrak relationship is, but there's a ton of untapped potential there. |
It continues to be annoying that this thread turned into EWR v JFK ex Manhattan. Seriously Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, Long Island, anybody heard of those places?
Anyway, before moving to LA we were in Brooklyn and the LIRR Jamaica -> Atlantic Terminal was heaven. Walked home from AT. No traffic I could be at LGA in 15 minutes by cab via the BQE. Memories. Remember this is about west coast originating passengers and the network effect on lost business by axing JFK. |
Originally Posted by riphamilton
(Post 28214736)
I'm not sure what the current status of the UA-Amtrak relationship is, but there's a ton of untapped potential there.
|
Originally Posted by anc-ord772
(Post 28214808)
It continues to be annoying that this thread turned into EWR v JFK ex Manhattan. Seriously Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, Long Island, anybody heard of those places?
Anyway, before moving to LA we were in Brooklyn and the LIRR Jamaica -> Atlantic Terminal was heaven. Walked home from AT. No traffic I could be at LGA in 15 minutes by cab via the BQE. Memories. Remember this is about west coast originating passengers and the network effect on lost business by axing JFK. I think there's gotta be a psychological element to it to be honest, like landing "in" NYC feels closer/better/more premium than landing in New Jersey even if objectively speaking there's not much of a practical difference. But perception is reality, so if customers *feel* it's better to land in New York than in New Jersey, then that's just the way it is. |
Originally Posted by channa
(Post 28213469)
Southwest does not position itself as a global airline. A global airline is expected to fly major routes such as these. You have a hub in SFO and LAX and you don't fly to the largest city in the country from there. It's simply inexcusable. Kirby acknowledged this. Most on this board knew this.
And frankly, it's practically unprecedented. Tough to think of an airline pulling out of such a prominent city relative to its market space. United may have hard data today that says they should have maintained service to JFK. Since we don't see the same data, it is acceptable to approach that conclusion skeptically, just as the decision to end service to JFK was received with skepticism. |
Originally Posted by Ber2dca
(Post 28215018)
I think there's gotta be a psychological element to it to be honest, like landing "in" NYC feels closer/better/more premium than landing in New Jersey even if objectively speaking there's not much of a practical difference. But perception is reality, so if customers *feel* it's better to land in New York than in New Jersey, then that's just the way it is.
|
Originally Posted by fly18725
(Post 28215096)
I think these arguments are a stretch in an attempt to find additional reasons to disparage a decision you disagreed with and a management team that is disliked. There is no requirement to serve certain domestic airports in order to receive an arbitrary marketing label just as there is no requirement to fly to an airport in the same state/county/city as a metropolitan area to qualify as serving said metropolitan area.
United may have hard data today that says they should have maintained service to JFK. Since we don't see the same data, it is acceptable to approach that conclusion skeptically, just as the decision to end service to JFK was received with skepticism. These are not optional items. When that corporate customer places his office supply order and finds out that Staples no longer carries paper, Staples is no longer a serious office supply supplier and they look for someone else. It's that simple. SFO JFK and LAX JFK are must have routes to be a comprehensive business carrier. That's what happened here. You don't carry the basic necessities, people are forced to shop around, and that's precisely what they did. Some stayed for the parts of the business UA still offered, some moved everything, and some shopped around on each transaction, meaning UA did not win as much as they used to. |
The two things I miss the most about JFK were T7 and the ps crews.
Even when it didn't have full blown pre check, I never waited more than 10 minutes in security and usually it was shorter. Once through, being right at the gate was fantastic. It was perhaps the crews on those flights that I miss the most. Got to know them very well and they had a tremendous amount of pride in what they did. Since the move to EWR I have generally taken B6 Mint to NYC for a number of reasons, all of which I think have been covered here. All that being said: I have to admit that I don't hate EWR as much as I once did. I used to rant and rave about OTR, but it's actually grown on me. Sure the lounges are bad, but I generally avoid them. Depending on the time of day, I'll jump in an uber which actually works pretty well, and I finally broke down and used the train, which I found very easy and very efficient. Now, being GS is a huge help with the lobby. When I'm inevitably back to being a 1K or less one of these days I'm sure I'll be singing a different tune, but for now? I think there's plenty of worse experiences out there (looks sideways at IAD, checks heart monitor). |
Originally Posted by channa
(Post 28215142)
Nonsense. Staples has to sell paper to be taken seriously as an office supply store. Likewise, Safeway must sell bananas, Home Depot must stock paint, Kohl's must sell jeans, and so on.
These are not optional items. When that corporate customer places his office supply order and finds out that Staples no longer carries paper, Staples is no longer a serious office supply supplier and they look for someone else. It's that simple. SFO JFK and LAX JFK are must have routes to be a comprehensive business carrier. That's what happened here. You don't carry the basic necessities, people are forced to shop around, and that's precisely what they did. Some stayed for the parts of the business UA still offered, some moved everything, and some shopped around on each transaction, meaning UA did not win as much as they used to. I don't see this as a black and white issue. |
Originally Posted by channa
(Post 28215142)
Nonsense. Staples has to sell paper to be taken seriously as an office supply store. Likewise, Safeway must sell bananas, Home Depot must stock paint, Kohl's must sell jeans, and so on.
These are not optional items. When that corporate customer places his office supply order and finds out that Staples no longer carries paper, Staples is no longer a serious office supply supplier and they look for someone else. It's that simple. SFO JFK and LAX JFK are must have routes to be a comprehensive business carrier. That's what happened here. You don't carry the basic necessities, people are forced to shop around, and that's precisely what they did. Some stayed for the parts of the business UA still offered, some moved everything, and some shopped around on each transaction, meaning UA did not win as much as they used to. |
Originally Posted by elitetraveler
(Post 28213900)
This isn't about people in Manhattan - Nassau and Suffolk County on Long Island has something like 53 'major' publicly traded companies with headquarters there, including tech and pharma. For many of the people who work there or are visiting, EWR is not a convenient airport to fly into, particularly as you get further out on the island.
|
Originally Posted by fly18725
(Post 28215172)
Clearly, you are passionate about having SFO/LAX-JFK for your corporate travel. If you are able to adopt a broader perspective, consider that most of corporate America doesn't live in SFO or LAX.
Originally Posted by HoyaSFOIAD
(Post 28215245)
Not sure I understand. United flies to NYC via EWR. Is it the most convienent? For some yes, for some no. Just as for some JFK is easier, for some it's not. The Staples analogy works in UA's favor - United flies to NY. Actually has a huge hub there. Dogmatically saying they don't seems to be quite a stretch. The way people think of JFK kind of reminds me of when Amex used to market itself on "prestige" alone. Cute, but limiting.
United’s new president, Scott Kirby, says moving the flights from JFK was a mistake. Many of United’s most lucrative West Coast customers, he said, want to fly into New York City and not New Jersey. And United lost some of them when it switched the flights to Newark, Kirby told employees at a recent town hall meeting in Newark. The routes may have been unprofitable alone, but the customers on them were unusually important. “The real reason it was a mistake was it let American Airlines in particular go win a bunch of big corporate accounts,” he said. “People like Disney and Time Warner — two big examples — are corporate accounts that had been United exclusive corporate accounts and not only flew United on the transcon [routes] but flew United from L.A. to Heathrow and all across the country.” “Those are the kind of corporate accounts [where] on-air talent has contracts that say they fly first class,” he said. “They pay first class fares — it’s completely irrelevant what the price is. … We opened the door and let American in on contracts like that.”
Originally Posted by channa,28215142
It's that simple. SFO JFK and LAX JFK are must have routes to be a comprehensive business carrier.
That's what happened here. You don't carry the basic necessities, people are forced to shop around, and that's precisely what they did. Some stayed for the parts of the business UA still offered, some moved everything, and some shopped around on each transaction, meaning UA did not win as much as they used to. |
Originally Posted by HoyaSFOIAD
(Post 28215245)
Not sure I understand. United flies to NYC via EWR. Is it the most convienent? For some yes, for some no. Just as for some JFK is easier, for some it's not. The Staples analogy works in UA's favor - United flies to NY. Actually has a huge hub there. Dogmatically saying they don't seems to be quite a stretch. The way people think of JFK kind of reminds me of when Amex used to market itself on "prestige" alone. Cute, but limiting.
Of course, most of the world's famous cities' airports aren't actually in the city that's on their signage but then they aren't typically competing vs a bigger airport that is. |
Originally Posted by anc-ord772
(Post 28214808)
It continues to be annoying that this thread turned into EWR v JFK ex Manhattan. Seriously Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, Long Island, anybody heard of those places?
Anyway, before moving to LA we were in Brooklyn and the LIRR Jamaica -> Atlantic Terminal was heaven. Walked home from AT. No traffic I could be at LGA in 15 minutes by cab via the BQE. Memories. Remember this is about west coast originating passengers and the network effect on lost business by axing JFK. And I don't know about you guys, but I really don't enjoy having to schlep across two rivers or deal with a two-and-a-half hour NJ Transit sojourn just to catch an early morning transcontinental, when JFK was a half-hour away. It's why I switched to Delta when I lived in Brooklyn. Hopping on the A, or taking the 2/3 to Atlantic and switching to the LIRR was infinitely more convenient. |
How can United tout its network and NOT serve one of the most important airports in the country!?
United should have been able to put enough resources into JFK to make it work. It was a very old station, and they inherited a Pan hub. Over the years, United chose to retreat rather than to compete. Now, United is a no-show in a world class airport. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 8:47 pm. |
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.