Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

FlightGlobal: United seeks return to New York JFK

FlightGlobal: United seeks return to New York JFK

Old May 31, 18, 1:29 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Programs: UA Premier Platinum, DL Platinum Medallion
Posts: 438
FlightGlobal: United seeks return to New York JFK

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...rk-jfk-449086/

To me, it sounds more like Kirby would like to get back to JFK, but not something happening anytime soon.
smxflyer is online now  
Old May 31, 18, 1:33 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 7,251
If slot controls are lifted at JFK as they were at EWR, United would probably get back in, but securing gate space during the prime afternoon/evening hours would be challenging.
EWR764 is online now  
Old May 31, 18, 2:18 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Programs: UA GS, AS MVPG 75K, AA PLAT, DL FO
Posts: 194
Time to resurrect rumors of a UA / B6 merger?
SvenB1414 is offline  
Old May 31, 18, 2:38 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NYC/SFO/LAX
Programs: UA GS, AS 75K, Hyatt Explorist, Marriott Platinum, SPG Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 816
I wonder why he wants to go back to JFK. Those transcontinental routes to my understanding arenít the money minters they used to be. Then again he kept First Class on the A321s at AA to my amazement, so perhaps there still is an opportunity to make high profits on those flights.

I also know that JFK is still many corporate travelers go-to airport. Iíve never understood the aversion to EWR but again, perhaps it is just reality, and by not having JFK maybe the company loses out on some potentially lucrative corporate client contracts.
boat9781 is offline  
Old May 31, 18, 2:49 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Programs: United Global Services, Amtrak Select Executive
Posts: 3,067
The massive office buildup in Hudson Yards should shift the balance for business travel further in favor of EWR over JFK: half hour drive to EWR.
physioprof is offline  
Old May 31, 18, 3:09 pm
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 7,251
Originally Posted by boat9781 View Post
I wonder why he wants to go back to JFK. Those transcontinental routes to my understanding arenít the money minters they used to be. Then again he kept First Class on the A321s at AA to my amazement, so perhaps there still is an opportunity to make high profits on those flights.

I also know that JFK is still many corporate travelers go-to airport. Iíve never understood the aversion to EWR but again, perhaps it is just reality, and by not having JFK maybe the company loses out on some potentially lucrative corporate client contracts.
The aversion to EWR seems to be more West Coast-oriented. New Yorkers know EWR is a perfectly viable option versus JFK, and in some cases easier, in many Manhattan neighborhoods. The reverse is also true in some cases.

Kirby mentioned that the transition to EWR cost UA business at the West Coast point of sale. That makes more sense to me, especially because the pre-merger p.s. operation was more oriented to LAX/SFO originators than JFK. I wouldn't doubt the move to EWR actually strengthened UA's franchise in the NY region, but there's little doubt that losing the JFK spoke hurt contracts in LAX/SFO. The net effect is probably the negative Kirby discusses, and the JFK bias on the West Coast (LAX especially) hurts UA in competing for corporate business.
SkiPremier likes this.
EWR764 is online now  
Old May 31, 18, 3:16 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Anchorage, AK
Programs: CO - Onepass Gold Elite--> UA - MileagePlus Gold Premier--> Silver --> AS - MileagePlan MVPGOLD!
Posts: 708
Just further proof that the previous management team was a bunch of buffoons.
As was pointed out at the time.
The only airline that can't make JFK work is... United.
And now they want back, so I'm sure Delta will just hand over the slots that they bought! And some gate space, for good measure!
Legend717 is offline  
Old May 31, 18, 3:17 pm
  #8  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New England
Programs: United 1K, Delta PM, Marriott Titanium, HH Gold, Club Carlson Gold
Posts: 6,269
Noooo but I like the insanely crowded lounges and gate areas at EWR <sarc>
blueman2, Microwave and perkele like this.
demkr is offline  
Old May 31, 18, 3:56 pm
  #9  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: AA, HH, MR elite. Fly mostly AA/WN/B6.
Posts: 18,856
Originally Posted by EWR764 View Post
The aversion to EWR seems to be more West Coast-oriented. New Yorkers know EWR is a perfectly viable option versus JFK, and in some cases easier, in many Manhattan neighborhoods...

Kirby mentioned that the transition to EWR cost UA business at the West Coast point of sale.
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.
FlyingNone, kop84 and AceReport like this.
BearX220 is online now  
Old May 31, 18, 4:01 pm
  #10  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Programs: SPG, Marriott, UA, AA, CX, SQ
Posts: 163
The illogical aversion to EWR is partially the literally decades of messaging campaigns by the old guards of (mostly) LGA trying to put a stop to the threat that was looming at EWR.

The rapid implosion of PeoplExpress, mostly due to their own hubris, and the rapid subsequent bankruptcy for CO for the 2nd time in 1990 may have led some to incorrect conclude that the confounding factor at play must be the undesirability of EWR, and thus comfortably resting on their yannys [sic.]

Remember the childhood fairy tale about the turtle and bunny racing ? By the late 90s the threat has fully formed once Gordon managed to right the ship ... but the airline execs 2 rivers across were still comforting themselves with fairy tales on how CO was nothing but a huge greyhound operation on JT8Ds (AA had double the condescending fun with JFK+DFW versus COís swampy EWR+IAH jitney offerings)

The implosions of both PanAm and TWA + TowerAir a decade later on one side and the nonstop change of hands of the Shuttle operations (NYAir, Eastern, PanAm, Trump, some weird syndicate led by Citigroup, USAir, Delta, AA) on the other shouldíve been major warning bells about the viability of the old guards, and yet theyíve chosen to dig their heads in the sand while hoping the messaging campaign could stem any flow of tides.

Fast forward to today, AA (and others) have very successfully instilled the notion that bankers and Hollywood jetsetters only fly JFK while EWR is where the Justice Department charters commercial capacity when shipping people off to Supermax .... all while relegating themselves to #4 ranking in the market.

= = = = = = =

ďThe only airline that canít make JFK work is ... UnitedĒ

The only airline posting both higher pax volume and higher NYC margins than any airline hubbing at JFK is ..... United
williambruno1975 is offline  
Old May 31, 18, 4:01 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: NYC
Programs: B6 Mosaic
Posts: 754
Originally Posted by SvenB1414 View Post
Time to resurrect rumors of a UA / B6 merger?
Please god no.
sfo789 likes this.
MSYtoJFKagain is offline  
Old May 31, 18, 4:06 pm
  #12  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Programs: UA Premier Platinum, DL Platinum Medallion
Posts: 438
Originally Posted by MSYtoJFKagain View Post
Please god no.
He did mention there is no "organic" way to get back to JFK. An acquisition would be one way to get back. But the DOJ would likely require massive divestment of slots at JFK.
EWR764 likes this.
smxflyer is online now  
Old May 31, 18, 4:13 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Programs: SPG, Marriott, UA, AA, CX, SQ
Posts: 163
Originally Posted by BearX220 View Post
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.
not even remotely close to Apples to oranges. Westminster to LHR is 15.8 Miles and to LGW itís 27.2mi, a good 72% further. it makes sense to fly the closer airport.

but in JFKís case itís the furthest for many parts of Manhattan. Take Goldman Sachs global HQ at 200 West Street. Theyíre 12.3mi to EWR, 13.6mi to LGA, and itís either 20.5mi to JFK if u deal with the congested BQE+VanWyck, or 26.1mi if u avoid that by taking Belt Parkway.

even when u take a major midtown east point like MetLife Building on top of Grand Central Station (the old PanAm Building), the shortest path is 14.4mi to EWR and 14.7mi to JFK. JPMorganís global HQ of 270 Park is right next to that point.

so weíre here listening to folks tell us why these bankers and lawyers should fly from the FURTHEST airport.
sfo789 and NJSwamplands like this.
williambruno1975 is offline  
Old May 31, 18, 4:28 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: New York NY
Programs: UA Gold, CO Plat, CO Million Miler
Posts: 2,519
Originally Posted by williambruno1975 View Post


not even remotely close to Apples to oranges. Westminster to LHR is 15.8 Miles and to LGW it’s 27.2mi, a good 72% further. it makes sense to fly the closer airport.

but in JFK’s case it’s the furthest for many parts of Manhattan. Take Goldman Sachs global HQ at 200 West Street. They’re 12.3mi to EWR, 13.6mi to LGA, and it’s either 20.5mi to JFK if u deal with the congested BQE+VanWyck, or 26.1mi if u avoid that by taking Belt Parkway.

even when u take a major midtown east point like MetLife Building on top of Grand Central Station (the old PanAm Building), the shortest path is 14.4mi to EWR and 14.7mi to JFK. JPMorgan’s global HQ of 270 Park is right next to that point.

so we’re here listening to folks tell us why these bankers and lawyers should fly from the FURTHEST airport.
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.
onthesam and NJSwamplands like this.
hughw is offline  
Old May 31, 18, 4:37 pm
  #15  
1P
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: LAX and LHR. UA lifetime Gold 1.8MM 1K , DL PM, HHonors Gold, Marriott Gold, BW Plat, Hertz #1 Gold PC, Avis Preferred
Posts: 3,076
Originally Posted by BearX220 View Post
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.
Can't agree that LGW is "in many respects a friendlier, more usable airport" than LHR. LGW, impossibly clogged as it is with the Kettle family leisure travellers, is never going to be able to rival LHR in its abilty to handle passengers. I am under no illusion that LHR is the epitome of all that is good and wonderful in airports. Indeed, it is increasingly becoming unable to handle the passengers who pass through it. But by comparison, LGW has been so much inferior for years and is getting even worse far more rapidly than LHR. It's just too small. I can't imagine that something like LHR's flagship United Club could ever be built at LGW.
sfo789 likes this.
1P is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: