United Airlines President: Leaving New York’s JFK ‘Was the Wrong Decision’ {2017}
#46
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Cape Cod
Programs: Free agent
Posts: 1,535
I also live in Chelsea. I take the train 95% of the time and the transit time to either jFK or EWR is roughly the same. EWR costs $10 more but both are under $20. And if you're taking a car anyways I'm not suer what the hassle is. Call dispatch, stand on the curb, get in, ride, get out.
Almost every cab I've taken back from EWR has had some sort of issue, won't go the quickest route or try to buck me out of a few more dollars. It's not a huge thing but a contribution factor. JFK gets my business because it fits my needs. EWR does not and the airport itself doesn't help.
#47
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2012
Programs: AAdvantage Executive Platinum, Delta Silver Medallion, Marriott Bonvoy Ambassador
Posts: 14,110
SQ uses JFK (not sure if it uses EWR, though I know it used to).
LX uses both JFK and EWR.
Yes, there are AC flights to and from LGA (though the AC terminal at LGA could use some work). I'm not even sure if AC flies to/from JFK, now that I think of it.
#48
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,604
I also live in Chelsea. I take the train 95% of the time and the transit time to either jFK or EWR is roughly the same. EWR costs $10 more but both are under $20. And if you're taking a car anyways I'm not suer what the hassle is. Call dispatch, stand on the curb, get in, ride, get out.
#49
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Programs: UA Premier Gold
Posts: 503
I said "overall bottom line", which means the entire network. Again, if every factual statement he says is correct, that means JFK was only worth the capital already invested. That's actually an admission that JFK was worthy to be cut. At that point it's a sunk cost scenario (except for the aircraft and some equipment and employees which can be reallocated), and the only question that needs to be answered is if higher returns can be found by moving capital elsewhere.
#50
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2013
Programs: DL PM, MR Titanium/LTP, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 10,130
LH uses both JFK and EWR.
SQ uses JFK (not sure if it uses EWR, though I know it used to).
LX uses both JFK and EWR.
Yes, there are AC flights to and from LGA (though the AC terminal at LGA could use some work). I'm not even sure if AC flies to/from JFK, now that I think of it.
SQ uses JFK (not sure if it uses EWR, though I know it used to).
LX uses both JFK and EWR.
Yes, there are AC flights to and from LGA (though the AC terminal at LGA could use some work). I'm not even sure if AC flies to/from JFK, now that I think of it.
Last edited by Duke787; Apr 21, 2017 at 9:34 am
#51
Join Date: Apr 2011
Programs: WN, AA, UA, DL
Posts: 1,313
Uh, just that, we. Or those not in in the executive group at UA, which is all of us here as you made sure to point out. Economic logic problems aren't subjective paths to solve. You can't go "I" on it.
He's given us all the evidence we need. It's simple economic logic. We know executives are paid to lie and mislead when it's convenient. Logic says his "wrong move" belief is misleading at best and a lie at worst.
I'll add another point. He doesn't mention anything about SFO-based traffic. I find it interesting that AA is a minor player in SFO-NYC now. UA dominates that market.
He's given us all the evidence we need. It's simple economic logic. We know executives are paid to lie and mislead when it's convenient. Logic says his "wrong move" belief is misleading at best and a lie at worst.
I'll add another point. He doesn't mention anything about SFO-based traffic. I find it interesting that AA is a minor player in SFO-NYC now. UA dominates that market.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 21, 2017 at 12:08 pm Reason: Discuss the issues, not the poster(s)
#52
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,466
The T7 experience at JFK was excellent (despite the very tired UC and crowded gates). So compact and never a meaningful wait for anything. Super nice agents, too.
#53
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
If I only ever flew transcons then I could see maybe a tiny bit of incremental value in the JFK T7 experience. But I fly lots of places.
Conceding the underlying conclusion that some customers no longer fly UA and instead spend that money on OALs, I find it interesting that the conclusion is because there are no flights between JFK and SFO/LAX for the past few years rather than because the company was an operational shitshow during most of that same time.
#54
Join Date: Apr 2011
Programs: WN, AA, UA, DL
Posts: 1,313
Now it doesn't mean they won't return, but, if they do, then we know he was misleading at best when he said UA will bolster EWR instead of returning.
#55
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,719
UA is not diving back into JFK in the short / medium term because, of course:
Also, right now the UA brand doesn't have the magnetism to re-attract fat corporate contracts away from AA. Most cost-is-no-object key influencers are probably not clamoring to fly United.
#56
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
They are also killing all the possible *A connections via JFK. It's still a head-scratcher. To some of us, going out of JFK may make the upgrades easier, because any connections through EWR wouldn't go out of their way to JFK to try that PS.
It was a wrong decision, but it's not impossible that it couldn't undone.
It was a wrong decision, but it's not impossible that it couldn't undone.
#57
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,466
#58
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,452
I don't think there was any doubt that UA would lose customers moving p.s. from JFK to EWR, nor do I think Kirby's sentiment logically leads to a conclusion that moving p.s. to EWR has not been a successful decision in its own right. I think the idea was meritorious and I don't think you'll find anyone to make that claim that EWR p.s. has not been successful.
But, it was clearly not a move free of consequence, and that was acknowledged at the time the decision was made. It would be a bit revisionist to suggest that UA apologists claimed all UA customers would reflexively follow the company to EWR after closing up shop at JFK. In an ideal world, it might have made sense to continue to run the EWR/JFK operations in parallel, but that gets to a question of resource allocation.
Throwing previous management under the bus for their incompetence is an easy bucket, but justifiable. Hopefully Kirby is able to right the ship...
Arguably still is. United was ahead of the curve in bringing flat beds to the TCON market, but was quickly surpassed by carriers much more willing to invest in their respective hard and soft products.
But, it was clearly not a move free of consequence, and that was acknowledged at the time the decision was made. It would be a bit revisionist to suggest that UA apologists claimed all UA customers would reflexively follow the company to EWR after closing up shop at JFK. In an ideal world, it might have made sense to continue to run the EWR/JFK operations in parallel, but that gets to a question of resource allocation.
Throwing previous management under the bus for their incompetence is an easy bucket, but justifiable. Hopefully Kirby is able to right the ship...
Arguably still is. United was ahead of the curve in bringing flat beds to the TCON market, but was quickly surpassed by carriers much more willing to invest in their respective hard and soft products.
#60
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
As a UA customer, yes. UA flew to 3 places from JFK (one of which was IAD) and scores of places from EWR. And T7 is a dump, albeit a less crowded dump than EWR.
If I only ever flew transcons then I could see maybe a tiny bit of incremental value in the JFK T7 experience. But I fly lots of places.
From SFO or LAX all of those airline hubs are one stop anyways. Connecting in Europe (or ORD/IAD/IAH) instead of in NYC doesn't change that you need a connection to get there. And all of those connections at JFK were a terminal change outside security.
Conceding the underlying conclusion that some customers no longer fly UA and instead spend that money on OALs, I find it interesting that the conclusion is because there are no flights between JFK and SFO/LAX for the past few years rather than because the company was an operational shitshow during most of that same time.
If I only ever flew transcons then I could see maybe a tiny bit of incremental value in the JFK T7 experience. But I fly lots of places.
From SFO or LAX all of those airline hubs are one stop anyways. Connecting in Europe (or ORD/IAD/IAH) instead of in NYC doesn't change that you need a connection to get there. And all of those connections at JFK were a terminal change outside security.
Conceding the underlying conclusion that some customers no longer fly UA and instead spend that money on OALs, I find it interesting that the conclusion is because there are no flights between JFK and SFO/LAX for the past few years rather than because the company was an operational shitshow during most of that same time.