United Pulling out of JFK
- Thread starter derg
- Start date
Screaming_Emu
Well-Known Member
I dunno...a chuckle maybe? You may be correct, but your post was a bit reminiscent of @Trip7 talking about the new DL TA.
Screaming_Emu
Well-Known Member
That is indeed what I find strange.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Why would Continental keep a pair of hubs 15 miles from each other when they have a well oiled machine in Newark?
And I mean that very seriously. The New York area is a disaster on a good day, but the folks in Newark have got it figured out.
The hub makes money, and you can hit Europe or the west coast no problem from Newark since it has a 11,000' long runway. Hell, Singapore was serving the place for a while.
Newark makes sense for the New York area.
Trip7
Well-Known Member
You chuckling because the man is providing facts?
Screaming_Emu
Well-Known Member
Seggy
Well-Known Member
Once again, look at what some third party folks are saying about this move. Not ONE I have read said it is a bad business decision.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
Your only 'con' for this was that you were full flying under United Express to JFK. So factually, why do you think this is a bad idea to pull out of JFK?
Screaming_Emu
Well-Known Member
Eh, I'm good. My stance isn't a "oh my god what are they doing!?!?" but rather "hmmm, that's kind of strange."
If it makes sense it makes sense. I'm not professing to be the knower of all things.
Screaming_Emu
Well-Known Member
Because pretty much every airline on earth flies there. Just seems odd to voluntarily pull out.
In fact I always thought it was pretty strange that we were flying 50 seat jets between IAD and all three NYC airports.
Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
Not suggestion they should keep hub service at 2 or more but not even having a flight to get passenger out of JFK and into another hub seems strange. I'm sure the bean counters have counted all the beans however and made the best decision.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
United and American don't have any flights going into MDW, and American doesn't have any flights going into DAL.
Why send flights into an airport across town when you have major hubs within 20 miles? I can't figure out why United has ANY flights going into LGA, and I expect it be next on the chopping block. Especially if the PATH extension to EWR happens before LGA gets train service.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
Probably a lot of it is just marketing/bragging rights.
Do you want to fly from LAX to LHR or LGW?
DFW to Phoenix-Mesa Gateway or Phoenix Sky Harbor?
ATL to Sanford Orlando Airport or MCO?
Except Newark is easier/as easy to get to NYC as JFK is. Also, JFK is a pain in the ass to get to from the affluent parts of NJ/CT/New York.
Screaming_Emu
Well-Known Member
FIFY
The NYC airports are all, in general, pains in the ass to begin with!
LGA is the "Fall of Saigon"
JFK is a little better now since T3 is gone.
EWR just feels like I'm going to end up in the side of a crane or getting shanked waiting for the shuttle.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
Who cares? They make our companies boat loads of $$$.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
Au contraire! JFK didn't make your company a boat load of money!
Exactly! So pull out of it then! My airline doesn't need our ego stroked that we serve JFK!
Ecl!pse
Well-Known Member
EWR is no more convenient than JFK go get to - both are a pain. That said, EWR is a good $15-$20 more in cab fare. Trains are a wash.
Agreed with Seggy that this is the right move for UAL. Retrench, beef up your fortress hub, redeploy the 737s and A320s elsewhere in the network.
This should be drilled into every single airline employee's head. Full and profitable are by no means synonymous. In fact, if you are consistently flying 90%+ load factors you are likely leaving money on the table.
Au contraire! JFK didn't make your company a boat load of money!
Nor was the NYC metro for you until ~2014
Last edited: