... sleeps?

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040802/nym076_1.html

Seems as if SOMEONE has realized there is a need for not just a premium transcon product but a THREE class transcon product. I bet most of the passengers who fly in the two front sections have never even thought about flying Southwest. JetBlue, maybe. Southwest, no. While I know that NYC-LAX has always been a premium market, you'll have a hard time convincing me that NYC is the ONLY place on the east-coast where passengers are willing to pay for true FC service levels at a reasonable fare.

Cheers! (in a plastic cup)

... sleeps?

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040802/nym076_1.html

Seems as if SOMEONE has realized there is a need for not just a premium transcon product but a THREE class transcon product. I bet most of the passengers who fly in the two front sections have never even thought about flying Southwest. JetBlue, maybe. Southwest, no. While I know that NYC-LAX has always been a premium market, you'll have a hard time convincing me that NYC is the ONLY place on the east-coast where passengers are willing to pay for true FC service levels at a reasonable fare.

Cheers! (in a plastic cup)

"Reasonable" F for $4,500???

That's the point - US charges what they consider a full-fare for FC service and then deliver a substandard product. US has already found limited success with "realistic" first-class fares to the Caribbean and to LAS. If they improved the product for premium markets like SFO & LAX, they could charge a "reasonable" fare. Who knows, maybe they just might find there is a market for a reasonably priced F seat. You know, one they can sell vs. giving them to all the cockroaches...

LAX-JFK is a huge "Hollywood" route. The major Hollywood unions have language in their contracts that specifically stipulates "first class on a three-class aircraft." The studios routinely pay $4,500+ to fly talent and executives to New York in F. The travel just gets charged to the production budget. Y+ would get filled up with mid-level Ent. industry workers shuttling back & forth on full-fare Y tickets, and C would get filled up with UA upgraders. If there is ever a market for such an aircraft, it would no doubt be the LAX-JFK route. My guess is they're using LAX-JFK as a test route. If they can't fill these planes on this route, chances are they won't be able to fill the planes on other transcon routes.

Why not use a larger aircraft for something like this? Why the 757? United has plenty of 767's and 777's they could use for this route, that already have cabins configured in this exact way. I don't understand why this is such a "new" thing to configure a cabin in a 3-class design when their int'l fleet already is configured as such.

Or could it be since they're only testing it out, they're only offering limited seats to see if they fill? In that case a 757 does make sense. Maybe I just answered my own question.

Why not use a larger aircraft for something like this? Why the 757? United has plenty of 767's and 777's they could use for this route, that already have cabins configured in this exact way. I don't understand why this is such a "new" thing to configure a cabin in a 3-class design when their int'l fleet already is configured as such.

Or could it be since they're only testing it out, they're only offering limited seats to see if they fill? In that case a 757 does make sense. Maybe I just answered my own question.

They're downgrading the routes from 767s to 757s due to lack of demand.

I think they'd have better luck adjusting the price from $4,500 to something a tad more "reasonable" -- the feckless Hollywood types are flying private jets these days anyway.

MGM Grand Air tried it for years on the NYC to LAX route with all First Class. It went away. Actually, Lufthansa, and shortly Swiss, have found a niche, hiring a small private Swiss aviation company called PrivatAir to fly a specially configured Boeing 737 from Newark, nonstop to important commercial centers, like Duesseldorf. All seats are sold as Business Class. There are others. Meantime, corporate America has discovered fractional jets, and the private guys are bringing prices to a point where if 3 or 4 execs travel at the same time, it isn't much different in price from a commercial flight. One amusing thing I noticed. Flying from DCA to West Palm, I was checking the load in front, and happened to see that while a one way in F on USAirways was $500, UA, codesharing that flight, was charging $350 for the same exact seat. Didn't make much difference. Triple B would love to see us sweating at the gate, chasing the few seats left. In reality, on a bread and butter route like that, on a busy weekday, they had 11 of 12 seats open, 7 days out. Always with their priorities straight, they're busy beating us up. That will surely help. As an aside, UA codeshare made no difference.

I can directly speak towards the cost savings possible with fractionals, or even directly own corporate fleets. My firm has the latter (utilizing the former for overages and flights that our Lears don't have legs for), and with more than 3 going executive class (eg, paid first) or 4/5 going on short notice (at Y coach rates), it's cheaper about %50 to take the coporate jet.

That's before you figure the intangibles (no/little security waits, being able to hit the nearest airport instead of the big commercial field, etc). It's a huge draw.

The fact that Netjets and the like are buying equipment at the same rate US is buying plastic glasses for F should be telling.

FYI ... Flew UA SEA-LAX and LAX-SEA this past weekend. No glassware! No napkins! And the meals on both flights were served in cafeteria style plastic trays! Seems UA is learning a few tricks from its marketing partner.

The fact that Netjets and the like are buying equipment at the same rate US is buying plastic glasses for F should be telling.

To add more fuel to the proverbial fire, the small jets phenomenon is about to really take off. Saffire, Eclipse, Diamond, Adams all have small 6 seat private jets selling for under $2M, designed for one pilot and 5 passengers (one of which can sit up front!). It needs to be stressed that none of these guys have gotten FAA certification yet, but expect to in the coming 2-3 years.

Several entrepreneurs have already put in orders for quite a few of these birds with the hope of setting up a truely bonafide air taxi service that can whisk people along at airline speeds. It will work especially well for routes of around 1000nm or less.

For carriers like US, whose routes are predominantly short haul, this could spell more trouble. I would expect the longer haul routes will still go to the fractional jet operators that have the equipment for transcons and any airlines that are still standing.

...the small jets phenomenon is about to really take off.
<snip>

Several entrepreneurs have already put in orders for quite a few of these birds with the hope of setting up a truely bonafide air taxi service that can whisk people along at airline speeds. It will work especially well for routes of around 1000nm or less.

Given that we are finding ATC delays more and more common and the majors continued movement to smaller (more numerous) RJ's, I'd probably think twice before investing. ;)

"Reasonable" F for $4,500???

Before the corporate discount......

They're downgrading the routes from 767s to 757s due to lack of demand.

I think they'd have better luck adjusting the price from $4,500 to something a tad more "reasonable" -- the feckless Hollywood types are flying private jets these days anyway.

Actually UA is phasing out the B767-200s because they are the most expensive to fly in its fleet. The B757-200s are less costly.

FYI ... Flew UA SEA-LAX and LAX-SEA this past weekend. No glassware! No napkins! And the meals on both flights were served in cafeteria style plastic trays! Seems UA is learning a few tricks from its marketing partner.

FWIW... you were on a 737 ex-sh*ttle plane that did not have a galley. Fly that same route on a 737 WITH a galley or any other mainline aircraft in F and you'll get a full meal service with glassware.

As far as cafeteria style trays... I'm not sure when I've seen domestic F served on sterling silver platters, but I'll keep an eye out...

They're downgrading the routes from 767s to 757s due to lack of demand.

I think they'd have better luck adjusting the price from $4,500 to something a tad more "reasonable" -- the feckless Hollywood types are flying private jets these days anyway.

wouldnt call this a downgrade considering that the 762s were very old and were not equipped with Economy Plus seating.

FWIW... you were on a 737 ex-sh*ttle plane that did not have a galley. Fly that same route on a 737 WITH a galley or any other mainline aircraft in F and you'll get a full meal service with glassware.

As far as cafeteria style trays... I'm not sure when I've seen domestic F served on sterling silver platters, but I'll keep an eye out...

I meant UA served the meals in what looked like a TV dinner tray. And, yes, you are correct in that I believe both were ex-Shuttle planes. The one to LAX was still painted in Shuttle colors. The one to SEA had been repainted in the new paint scheme. It just struck me as odd that, even though UA couldn't serve a warm meal, that the meal was so radically different than when I flew the same flights a month ago on a 757.

Given that we are finding ATC delays more and more common and the majors continued movement to smaller (more numerous) RJ's, I'd probably think twice before investing. ;)

Naw. Just fly smarter.

Our corporate guys will cry bloody murder about heading into PHL, but absent a complete meltdown of WAS or NY Centers, we can usually make it into PNE even if it's pouring and racked/stacked in the holding patters over PHL.

Same thing for TEB. MHT. FLL. DAL (or, in our case, the occasional trip to AFW :eek: )

It's a great model, even at the 121/135 levels. Just ask Southwest.

Star alliance partner US will just not follow UA in this transcon market. If they really see the need, they can negotiate a codeshare on this route and sell some seats for corp contracts but that is it. UA has a strong west coast presence and a lot of corporate deals (rumored with many studios , entertainment industry players and investment banks) so they can experiment this. I am not sure that this experiment will succeed for UA. Let us not forget that they cannot seem to make profits even under Chap 11 protection - forget about emerging out of Ch 11.

at least US makes a profit :rolleyes:

Of course they do, they have a F product that doesnt cost them much at all to keep running while still selling it at F prices, this WILL result in profit no matter how you cut it.

But only if they can sell F seats at F prices. :rolleyes:

Given that we are finding ATC delays more and more common and the majors continued movement to smaller (more numerous) RJ's, I'd probably think twice before investing. ;)

That's more because of fewer airports/runways to handle the airline traffic. The small jets concept is to access all those small airports in the US (there are several thousand of them, by the way) to pick passengers up very close to their home and drop them off very close to their destination. For example, there are over 20 airports in NJ alone. Most of them can handle small jets. PA, too, has well over 30 airports throughout the state. Not even 10 of those are handling airline traffic now. So, I don't think the small jets will have a problem at the non-airline airports, which is the whole premise of the concept of convenient travel.

The FAA and all the independent studies have pointed to the number one problem in ATC delays. LACK OF RUNWAYS. That's the bottleneck. The sky can handle more planes if they have somewhere to land.

I would hold judgement before proclaiming the UAL model on this route the new prototype. Time will tell if the increased revenue will justify the reduction in seats. My bet is that this experiment proves to be a failure.