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

UA returned to JFK<> SFO/LAX -- 28 Mar 2021, experiences

UA returned to JFK<> SFO/LAX -- 28 Mar 2021, experiences

    Hide Wikipost
Old Mar 30, 21, 2:29 am   -   Wikipost
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been on FT for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
Wiki Link
Start of service has been delayed -- now 28 March 2021
In April 2021, single flight M,Th,F,Sa,Su
SFO UA520,UA523
LAX UA514, UA517
UA's 2021 Return to JFK - Inaugural Flights on 28 March thread

We are Back! United Announces Return to New York's JFK Airport

Airline to offer new transcontinental service from JFK to the west coast starting February 1

November 10, 2020
-- United Airlines announced today that it will be returning service to New York City's John F. Kennedy Airport (JFK) on February 1, 2021 with nonstop service to the west coast. The airline's entry back into JFK after five years reflects not only its strong commitment to the New York City area, but a continuation of aggressively and strategically managing the impact of COVID-19 by increasing service to and from the places where customers want to fly. The new United service will operate out of Terminal 7.

Effective February of next year, United will serve both JFK to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) and JFK to San Francisco International Airport (SFO) with two round-trips for each west coast city. The flights will utilize the reconfigured Boeing 767-300ER aircraft on the routes offering customers an extended premium cabin featuring 16 additional United Business class seats –providing all-aisle-access seating – bringing the total premium cabin seat count to 46. The aircraft will also feature 22 United Premium Plus® seats, 47 Economy Plus® seats and 52 Economy seats. United offers the most premium seats between the New York City area and Los Angeles and San Francisco markets. Tickets are now available for purchase on United.com.

"I have been waiting a long time to say this - United Airlines is back at JFK," said United's Chief Executive Officer Scott Kirby. "Come early next year, we will be serving all three major New York City area airports with a best-in-class product to provide our customers unmatched transcontinental service from New York City and the west coast."


"The upcoming return of United to JFK while continuing service at Newark Liberty and LaGuardia Airports will offer more choices for transcontinental flights just as travelers return to the skies," said Kevin O'Toole, Chairman of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. "As the recovery begins, we're pleased to see these increased options for those who choose to fly in and out of the Port Authority's airports."

"United Airlines' return to JFK Airport is a clear sign that air travel is returning in New York and across the region," said Rick Cotton, Executive Director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. "As numbers start to rise, the Port Authority is ready to welcome travelers back to JFK, Newark Liberty and LaGuardia Airports with increased cleaning and sanitizing in all terminals and touch-free options from curb to gate to ensure a world-class travel experience even in these unprecedented times."

United's premium cabin will feature flat-bed seats on all flights similar to the current Newark-Los Angeles and Newark-San Francisco offerings, providing a consistent and comprehensive NYC-west coast product. Additionally, United's wide-body service can participate in the robust cargo market between JFK and the west coast.
Earlier related threads
FlightGlobal: United seeks return to New York JFK
United Airlines President: Leaving New York’s JFK ‘Was the Wrong Decision’ {2017}
p.s. Operations Transitioning to EWR on October 25, 2015
Print Wikipost

Old May 5, 20, 4:11 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 200
UA returned to JFK<> SFO/LAX -- 28 Mar 2021, experiences

Obviously all the airlines have been hurting, but if an airline like AA or even DL has significant cutbacks at JFK, is there a once in a lifetime opportunity to get back to JFK? Scott Kirby himself admitted $misek was foolish for dumping it in 2015. The premium transcon market is in the toilet now, but if slots were to become available is it prudent for UAL to acquire them for future use?
ContinentalFan likes this.
UAL757222 is offline  
Old May 5, 20, 4:12 pm
  #2  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 69,213
Could it? Sure.

Should it? Probably not.
sbm12 is offline  
Old May 5, 20, 4:34 pm
  #3  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 16,578
I say no way. They exited JFK years ago, why on earth would they return? As much as I hate every square inch of the EWR hell-hole, that choice has been made.
milepig is offline  
Old May 5, 20, 5:12 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G; Marriott Bonvoy Gold; ALL Gold; Hertz PC
Posts: 8,134
I don’t think UA has the money to think about that given the current burn rate. If things stabilize and other airlines bail, it wouldn’t be the worst idea. But the route itself (particularly to JFK) seems highly predicated on business demand - who knows how long it takes to come back. I also doubt UA wants to put capex into new space at this time either, if they hit pause on the Polaris Lounge at IAD (which was nearly done).
PsiFighter37 is offline  
Old May 5, 20, 6:50 pm
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 12,999
Never.

NYC, by itself, constitutes almost 15% of all the confirmed cases nationwide. That number does not reflect the severity of the tri-state area. Practically, NYC just experienced another 9/11, but more deadly.

In this case, why would an airline re-invest to a location that it has previously abandoned?
garykung is offline  
Old May 5, 20, 6:54 pm
  #6  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 69,213
Originally Posted by garykung View Post
In this case, why would an airline re-invest to a location that it has previously abandoned?
Because NYC isn't going to completely die nor even be shut down indefinitely.

Look beyond the immediate now and figure if it is worth UA (or anyone else that survives) trying to pick up the pieces of those that fail. That's what's at question here.
TBD likes this.
sbm12 is offline  
Old May 5, 20, 6:56 pm
  #7  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BOS/EAP
Programs: UA 1K, MR LTT, HH Dia, Amex Plat
Posts: 26,348
not a chance. EWR-SFO/LAX has been super successful for UA. All the other domestic itineraries they can serve from LGA. Other than connecting to *A carriers at JFK it never made much sense.
drewguy likes this.
cfischer is offline  
Old May 5, 20, 7:08 pm
  #8  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G; Marriott Bonvoy Gold; ALL Gold; Hertz PC
Posts: 8,134
Originally Posted by cfischer View Post
not a chance. EWR-SFO/LAX has been super successful for UA. All the other domestic itineraries they can serve from LGA. Other than connecting to *A carriers at JFK it never made much sense.
I think the cachet is to fly into an NYC airport. LGA has the perimeter rule, so forget about TCON flights. Rightly or wrongly, a lot of folks do not associate EWR with NYC (even though it is arguably easier to get to Manhattan from it vs. JFK). The ship has sailed, though, and any revisiting of the decision, if UA makes it, won't be for years, if even this decade.
PsiFighter37 is offline  
Old May 5, 20, 7:14 pm
  #9  
VFR
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: BOS/PVD/ORH
Programs: AA PP
Posts: 647
Let me preface this with the fact that I never say never... but as I type it out it seems more unlikely with every keystroke.

Hypothetically, it could be possible that they pick up some slots for certain markets that their corporate clients demand. Remember that UA used to have all of Disney's business... until they left JFK. So they might pick up slots from AA/DL/AS/B6 for certain key hubs that either have high corporate/premium demand (LAX, SFO) or are in-demand for connections off of partners (ORD, IAD, I guess?). The issue then becomes the high fixed costs associated with operating a station with service 16 hours a day, and premium passengers are interested in expensive lounges, and even which terminal could they get space in (Likely T7, but T1 isn't off the table if DY or another carrier there goes kaput, and in T1 they could use the LH lounge). If it lets them pick up multiple $50M+/year clients, they might do it.

I bet UA can capitalize on its extremely strong point of sale in SFO in a way that AA/DL/B6 have not (supposedly JFKLAX is more profitable than JFKSFO for all 3), but EWR gives them everything they need right now, with the added benefit that it's cheaper. So it really depends on whether they have a corporate customer that they can't afford to lose (anyone with satellite offices in Queens?)
VFR is offline  
Old May 6, 20, 2:21 am
  #10  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 539
It seems like they’re starting to replicate the “mistake” they regret from JFK at LAX now. Considering they’re cutting international routes from LAX in favor of their SFO hub. With that being their current mindset, I can’t imagine them going back to JFK with their dominance at EWR.
Merlinrnr is offline  
Old May 6, 20, 3:31 am
  #11  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 12,999
Originally Posted by sbm12 View Post
Because NYC isn't going to completely die nor even be shut down indefinitely.

Look beyond the immediate now and figure if it is worth UA (or anyone else that survives) trying to pick up the pieces of those that fail. That's what's at question here.
Still no, given future travel can be seriously impacted.
garykung is offline  
Old May 6, 20, 6:11 am
  #12  
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: 19,123
Originally Posted by garykung View Post
NYC, by itself, constitutes almost 15% of all the confirmed cases nationwide.
Silly basis for long-term planning, but even so, NYC cases are falling right now. You want to isolate a market for COVID surges? Cut off MSY, DTW, ORD, and maybe all of Texas. Point is, all current data is the shortest of short term.

Originally Posted by garykung
In this case, why would an airline re-invest to a location that it has previously abandoned?
Airlines do it regularly as market assessments change.

But just because JFK will see fewer movements for the next few years, and just because UA regrets leaving, doesn't mean it has the vision or wherewithal to return. A surviving, smaller airline will emphasize SFO, EWR, and IAH.
BearX220 is offline  
Old May 6, 20, 8:29 am
  #13  
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by VFR View Post
Hypothetically, it could be possible that they pick up some slots for certain markets that their corporate clients demand. Remember that UA used to have all of Disney's business... until they left JFK. So they might pick up slots from AA/DL/AS/B6 for certain key hubs that either have high corporate/premium demand (LAX, SFO) or are in-demand for connections off of partners (ORD, IAD, I guess?). The issue then becomes the high fixed costs associated with operating a station with service 16 hours a day, and premium passengers are interested in expensive lounges, and even which terminal could they get space in (Likely T7, but T1 isn't off the table if DY or another carrier there goes kaput, and in T1 they could use the LH lounge). If it lets them pick up multiple $50M+/year clients, they might do it.
This is asssuming corporate travel picks back up anytime in the near future. And also why would UA be better positioned to pick up these contracts, instead of the current contract holder? Is UA uniquely positioned to come out of this situation financially better than DL or AA (AA, yes, DL probably not)? Even though UA is telling people to expect massive layoffs come October 1st, so they aren't expecting to be in a finacially healthy spot after this.
Lux Flyer is offline  
Old May 6, 20, 8:43 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Morris County, NJ
Programs: UA 1K/*G, Avis Pres, Marriott Plat
Posts: 1,780
Originally Posted by cfischer View Post
not a chance. EWR-SFO/LAX has been super successful for UA. All the other domestic itineraries they can serve from LGA. Other than connecting to *A carriers at JFK it never made much sense.
Exactly right. And if anyone is being actually fair, folks from Manhattan that have actually tried connecting to EWR almost universally admit it's faster and more convenient from midtown than JFK.

It's not that UA can't move into JFK ... it's "why would they?" Makes no operational sense whatsoever.

Originally Posted by garykung View Post
That number does not reflect the severity of the tri-state area. Practically, NYC just experienced another 9/11, but more deadly.
Orders of magnitude more deadly.

Here in NJ, we lost 704 of our own in the 9/11 attacks. Horrific.
As of yesterday, we've lost more than 8,200 to COVID-19.

For those outside the NY area, I know it's not as hard hit, and please be grateful for that. Here, it's a very tough time. Everyone here is - at most - a degree of separation from someone who's passed from this thing. Not sick, not had the sniffles, but gone.
Say Vandelay likes this.
dmurphynj is offline  
Old May 6, 20, 8:44 am
  #15  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 11,651
Unless UA invests a bit more in their product, they don't really have the ability to compete with B6, DL, or AA at JFK. All three of the aforementioned airlines offer better products on this route at the moment (AA offering F, otherwise their J is essentially the same as UA's).
cmd320 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: