FlightGlobal: United seeks return to New York JFK
May 31, 2018, 3:39 pm
#16
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Honolulu Harbor
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 15,023
...and Hudson Yards just a couple of blocks walk from NJtransit at Penn. Google at Chelsea Market. Construction near the Whitney. West Side is happening. East side a bit static w/ far fewer re-development opportunities.
Last edited by IAH-OIL-TRASH; May 31, 2018 at 3:51 pm
May 31, 2018, 3:43 pm
#17
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, UA Gold, WN, Global Entry; +others wherever miles/points are found
Posts: 14,414
And for those of us who would rather not risk sitting in a massive traffic jam, there are frequent trips from Penn Station to both JFK and EWR on the long island railroad and new jersey transit, respectively, both about 22 minutes. Then add about 10-15 minutes for the air train at JFK and about 5-10 minutes at EWR. And truth be told, from midtown its' usually about 30-35 minutes by car to EWR and at 45-60 minutes to JFK, except at rush hours.
May 31, 2018, 3:54 pm
#18
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Programs: MYOB
Posts: 1,292
This thread tile is a bit of a misnomer. "Seeks to" and "Would like to" are two different things. The linked article clearly indicates that there are no immediate plans (as in "seeks to" ) for actively pursuing service at JFK.
May 31, 2018, 3:55 pm
#19
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,452
It's like LHR versus LGW. Rationally, you know Gatwick is only ten minutes further away from London via train, and in many respects a friendlier, more usable airport. But perception-wise, Heathrow is "close in" and Gatwick is "in the middle of nowhere," and business travelers are most averse to Gatwick. EWR, same bias. I'm sure EWR costs United overseas-originating business, too, because everyone around the world think of JFK as synonymous with NYC, but Newark isn't even in the same state as NYC.
It was dead foolish of UA to leave JFK and I expect AA, DL, and B6 will move heaven and earth to obstruct a return.
It was dead foolish of UA to leave JFK and I expect AA, DL, and B6 will move heaven and earth to obstruct a return.
Gatwick, on the other hand, actually is about twice as far from 'central' London (as if that actually exists) as LHR using the fastest methods of transportation, and the scope of service reflects it. Neither EWR nor JFK have such a significant advantage over each other in terms of access. In fact, I'd argue that both are easier to get to from major business districts in NYC than LHR from most of London.
I don't think there is an analogue of the EWR/LGA/JFK situation anywhere else in the world, and the well-worn "EWR isn't even in New York" argument is silly, because it's really a distinction without a difference.
The other point, that is often lost in the whole discussion, is how yields on the LAX/SFO-JFK routes have plummeted due to the competition in the market. These used to be ironclad, uber-high-margin, gold-plated routes for AA/UA. That's no longer the case with anyone...
May 31, 2018, 4:00 pm
#20
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.995MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,854
Kirby's feelings about this are not new --- https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unit...-decision.html from a year ago.
May 31, 2018, 4:21 pm
#21
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Programs: UA Premier Gold
Posts: 503
It's the title of the article, but I agree with your assessment.
May 31, 2018, 4:27 pm
#22
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2003
Programs: UA*Lifetime GS, Hyatt* Lifetime Globalist
Posts: 12,332
I was sad to see UA left JFK.
Now I don’t miss it at all....don’t miss LGA neither.
I am just fine with EWR.....
Now I don’t miss it at all....don’t miss LGA neither.
I am just fine with EWR.....
May 31, 2018, 4:57 pm
#23
formerly FrequentFlyKid
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Programs: United Global Services, Marriott Bonvoy Ambassador, National Executive Elite
Posts: 981
I just can’t see the logic in wanting to restart JFK operations. UA won’t be able to build a network of connecting traffic that would support international destinations and, as many have already said, JFK vs EWR isn’t really a thing anymore. For all intents and purposes, they’re equal distance to Midtown but distance and time. UA also has what no other airline has: being the single hub/focus city at any one NYC airport. They do what they want at EWR.
May 31, 2018, 5:06 pm
#24
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MRY - CNX - TXL
Programs: UA 1K / *G / Marriott PE / Expedia Gold+ / Hertz PC
Posts: 7,058
The only thing I can think of on the East Side is that new giant tower at the base of the Manhattan Bridge.
May 31, 2018, 5:07 pm
#25
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 1,357
Why not have UA start up a premium (PS-like) run from EWR to LCY (London City Airport), comparable to what BA does from LCY to JFK? From London's financial district, it can be faster to LCY than to LHR. That would be an interesting way for UA to get its toes back into the NYC-London premium market.
May 31, 2018, 5:19 pm
#26
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, NY
Programs: BAEC Gold, Delta Platinum, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Gold, AMEX Platinum (US)
Posts: 18,487
It's actually amusing that you picked Westminster because it's far more convenient to get to LGW than LHR from there....Victoria, which is right on the edge of Westminster, has non-stop trains to LGW which take less than 30mins.
May 31, 2018, 5:33 pm
#27
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G, Marriott Bonvoy Gold; Avis PC
Posts: 9,005
Why not have UA start up a premium (PS-like) run from EWR to LCY (London City Airport), comparable to what BA does from LCY to JFK? From London's financial district, it can be faster to LCY than to LHR. That would be an interesting way for UA to get its toes back into the NYC-London premium market.
Certainly interesting to think about, but it won’t happen anytime soon.
May 31, 2018, 5:35 pm
#28
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,452
Running an all-J 73G or A319 would be interesting, but aside from neither being ETOPs-certified (I think), the one thing I never found appealing / would find irritating would be the westbound fuel stop. Maybe there’s a way to do a configuration so light that they could still make money and avoid the fuel stop?
Certainly interesting to think about, but it won’t happen anytime soon.
BA recently reduced their A318 fleet to a single ship (G-EUNA) after selling G-EUNB to Titan, with a commensurately reduced schedule, so it must not be a huge moneymaker... To loosely paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen, I knew Concorde, and A318, you are no Concorde!
May 31, 2018, 5:42 pm
#29
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: NYC
Posts: 20
Once they get past the whole "but it's in NEW JERSEY" thing, it's all downhill from there....
May 31, 2018, 6:00 pm
#30
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 2P, UC, Hertz 5*, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 513
They can be ETOPS-rated, but neither are certified for the extra-steep 5.5 degree approach into LCY. The 318 and CS100 are the only mainline-size aircraft with transatlantic range that can land at LCY, and neither can make it to the East Coast off the <5000ft runway with sufficient fuel (ETOPS reserves++) for the westbound TATL leg.
BA recently reduced their A318 fleet to a single ship (G-EUNA) after selling G-EUNB to Titan, with a commensurately reduced schedule, so it must not be a huge moneymaker... To loosely paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen, I knew Concorde, and A318, you are no Concorde!
BA recently reduced their A318 fleet to a single ship (G-EUNA) after selling G-EUNB to Titan, with a commensurately reduced schedule, so it must not be a huge moneymaker... To loosely paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen, I knew Concorde, and A318, you are no Concorde!