TalkBoard Topics - Proposal: United/Continental should be merge the thread?

Hi All,

I am already heard the news came in yesterday afternoon. DOJ has been approvals with UA/CO is mergers. Can you guys need to have any suggestions for me to be merges with UA/CO. So it was sad days for me yesterday and can you have proposal for Continental/United will be merge the original thread. I wasn't aware of UA/CO is long awaited to be mergers for after 79 years flying. Lets try to have more opportunity to be merge the original thread. So let's the speculating about this one.

Regards

Aren't there enough FT precedents in recent years with HP/US and NW/DL that the two forums will remain separate until the FFP's are merged so what's different with UA/CO? While I haven't been following the merger play-by-play AFAIK they aren't quite at the FFP merger stage yet and when that's announced the merger of the FT forums can follow in good time.

Aren't there enough FT precedents in recent years with HP/US and NW/DL that the two forums will remain separate until the FFP's are merged so what's different with UA/CO? While I haven't been following the merger play-by-play AFAIK they aren't quite at the FFP merger stage yet and when that's announced the merger of the FT forums can follow in good time.

Agreed. ^

Aren't there enough FT precedents in recent years with HP/US and NW/DL that the two forums will remain separate until the FFP's are merged so what's different with UA/CO? While I haven't been following the merger play-by-play AFAIK they aren't quite at the FFP merger stage yet and when that's announced the merger of the FT forums can follow in good time.

That's the plan.

With UA being such a large forum already, personally I would prefer to see UA and CO forums NOT be merged and certainly NOT merged early before all is completed with the merger. I would also prefer that the airlines NOT merge either :(. But that's just me :D.

With UA being such a large forum already, personally I would prefer to see UA and CO forums NOT be merged and certainly NOT merged early before all is completed with the merger. I would also prefer that the airlines NOT merge either :(. But that's just me :D.

Agree with both points.

With UA being such a large forum already, personally I would prefer to see UA and CO forums NOT be merged and certainly NOT merged early before all is completed with the merger. I would also prefer that the airlines NOT merge either :(. But that's just me :D.

If I had a vote, I'd vote No Merger too. :(

I think we need to see how the merger goes.

My previous position has been no merger until the frequent flyer programme is merged, and although I was outvoted on this recently it remains my position.

I think we need to see how the merger goes.

My previous position has been no merger until the frequent flyer programme is merged, and although I was outvoted on this recently it remains my position.

I agree with you, too. I think it will perfect for me to merge the thread and I vote to says yes to merge this thread immediately. Let's the speculating about this one. However, lets wait to see if UA/CO members will decide to approval. This is particular consideration for UA/CO members will have to decide to says YES to merge this thread.

With UA being such a large forum already, personally I would prefer to see UA and CO forums NOT be merged and certainly NOT merged early before all is completed with the merger. I would also prefer that the airlines NOT merge either :(. But that's just me :D.agreed on not merging but perhaps a master forum with both fourms listed separately inside so they are "both in the same place"?

agreed on not merging but perhaps a master forum with both fourms listed separately inside so they are "both in the same place"?

I can't see why FT could, would or should consider not merging UA & CO when the FFP themselves merger simply because the UA is one of the larger & more active FT fora.

I can't see why FT could, would or should consider not merging UA & CO when the FFP themselves merger simply because the UA is one of the larger & more active FT fora.

I think it should considering to merge the thread and do yourselves to voting the Talkboards will have more comfortable on CO/UA forums. I wasn't curious about entire forums will kept separately or merge this thread.

Do you fly either of those carriers?

Do you fly either of those carriers?

No. I am never flown on UA/CO either. Only where I fly on US, DL and no one anyone else.

I do not see a reason to merge before the two FF programs are officially merged. Also UAL is too large to merge with CO before then.

I think this is an important question to discuss, but not for the reasons mentioned.

The two forums have totally different mentalities. The UA forum is a bastion of utility threads, whereas the CO forum is a bit more freeform. Which culture ends up take over the combined forum is of great import to some, including myself.

Certain adjustments will be made and it'll all take us a while to find that new mentality but who's to say the new merged forum can't blend the best of two exisiting forums?

I think this is an important question to discuss, but not for the reasons mentioned.

The two forums have totally different mentalities. The UA forum is a bastion of utility threads, whereas the CO forum is a bit more freeform. Which culture ends up take over the combined forum is of great import to some, including myself.
It may be best, if the FFPs merge, but the branding remains, to retain a set up similar to that of AF/KLM or LH/Swiss, where both airlines retain a sub-forum, but there is a shared master forum for discussing FFP issues.

This worked well to sort out some major cultural differences between the AF and KLM forums, where complete merger with no warning was a disaster.

major cultural differences

And that makes sense given the mergers you've outlined and the different nationalities involved but why make an exception with the merger of two American carriers & their respective FFP's? Simply because of different atmospheres on the FT forums? Sorry not something I'd favor but YMMV.

I do not see a reason to merge before the two FF programs are officially merged. Also UAL is too large to merge with CO before then.

Yeah, too many of them! I do not likes to used on UA forums very often. Besides, I am still have more favorable to posts on DL forums is more convenient for me.

And that makes sense given the mergers you've outlined and the different nationalities involved but why make an exception with the merger of two American carriers & their respective FFP's? Simply because of different atmospheres on the FT forums? Sorry not something I'd favor but YMMV.
It's simply a tool, which can be used as a way of introducing step change, if required, to give the boards time to adapt to each other.

Also, (and since i'm not following the merger plans, I don't know for sure), if the branding remains intact, there could be an argument for doing it.

Afterall, there are indications that the AA/BA/IB FFPs could be being standardised/aligned or even merged in a worst case scenario... would you really want the AA and the BA boards being merged :eek: :eek: :eek:

Personally, looking at each situation and seeing what will work best in each situation, rather than providing a one size fits all is going to make for happier members in the long term.

Personally, looking at each situation and seeing what will work best in each situation, rather than providing a one size fits all is going to make for happier members in the long term.

I hear what you're saying and it makes sense however I'm unconvinced we need to break the FT forum merger mold in this case with these particular airlines simply because some users who may already be unhappy with the merger itself will bring that unhappiness to the new merged forum. I recall and old advertising slogan about fighting rather than switching and to some degree catering to that outlook seems to validate that viewpoint rather than helping the far larger number of FTers who want a focused forum from which to draw their information. Just MHO and YMMV. :)

It will be a good year before the 2 airlines operate as one airline. They are using a 2011 date.

I think this is an important question to discuss, but not for the reasons mentioned.

The two forums have totally different mentalities. The UA forum is a bastion of utility threads, whereas the CO forum is a bit more freeform. Which culture ends up take over the combined forum is of great import to some, including myself.

I follow both forums very loosely (i.e. taking the occasional peek in and subscribing to and regularly reading a few threads I find interesting).

Likely due to my habitation in the AS forum, I find the CO forum to be more to my taste, but I, too, am curious what will end up.

It may be best, if the FFPs merge, but the branding remains, to retain a set up similar to that of AF/KLM or LH/Swiss, where both airlines retain a sub-forum, but there is a shared master forum for discussing FFP issues.

This worked well to sort out some major cultural differences between the AF and KLM forums, where complete merger with no warning was a disaster.

AFAIK (and I haven't been following the merger nooz too closely), the branding won't remain. There will be one airline (much like the DL/NW merger), branded UA but probably run largely by the CO management team and probably (thankfully for most of the employees!) importing the CO employee culture. I'm not sure how the forums would be kept separate in that case.

I will admit I have not looked into this issue deeply and have only briefly skimmed the posts in this thread without any further pondering, but it seems to me that, while it has had its own issues, the precedent set by the DL/NW forum merger seems to be the most appropriate way to handle this issue--wait until the programs are merged and then go forth from there.

Frankly, I'm not really sure exactly what this thread is about. Are some people proposing merging the forums ahead of the airline merger? In general, I'm willing to consider a forum merger when the corporate merger happens even if the programs are not quite merged at that point (i.e. in the Midwest/Republic issue), although in this instance, I don't initially believe that would be the best course of action, given the sheer size and distinct differences in culture between the forums. In this case, moving cautiously appears to be the best course of action.

It's a long way off from being needed, but perhaps at the right time, a committee of affected citizens--CO and UA forum regulars, or perhaps the moderators--may be formed to discuss how to handle merging the cultures of the forum. Or, we could just toss the two forums together and see what happens... :o

What happens to moderators in a combined forum? Do they all just gravitate to the combined forum? There would be 6 moderators if they all stayed around.

What happens to moderators in a combined forum? Do they all just gravitate to the combined forum? There would be 6 moderators if they all stayed around.

TalkBoard does not make any moderation decisions. It will be up to management (i.e. Randy) how the new forum will be moderated.

In the meantime, as we've stated, there's already a mechanism in place for merging forums where the airlines have merged. As the airlines have not yet merged, I see absolutely no reason to deviate from that plan.

TalkBoard does not make any moderation decisions. It will be up to management (i.e. Randy) how the new forum will be moderated.

In the meantime, as we've stated, there's already a mechanism in place for merging forums where the airlines have merged. As the airlines have not yet merged, I see absolutely no reason to deviate from that plan.

With the DL/NW merger, all mods merged into one brand new forum. I'd imagine that is what would happen with this merger but you never know...

With the DL/NW merger, all mods merged into one brand new forum. I'd imagine that is what would happen with this merger but you never know...

Obviously, I think it should have separately the forums CO/UA. Because it was too many people on UA forums. I do not wants to read the UA forums very often.

Echoing colpuck, given the difference in posting cultures between the two forums, I would suggest that more thought be given than to simply merge the forums.

This thread as of now is like beating a dead horse. Not sure what the point is to suggest a forum merger with the ultimate completion of this being probably a year ahead. Lets freeze it for good.

Obviously, I think it should have separately the forums CO/UA. Because it was too many people on UA forums. I do not wants to read the UA forums very often.

You don't have to read the UA forum if you don't want to. For right now, the CO and UA forums will remain seperate until the merger is completed.

Can I ask why we have two members who by their own statements dont fly UA or CO making pronouncements on what will be in the UA/CO forums as if they were the decision makers?

Can I ask why we have two members who by their own statements dont fly UA or CO making pronouncements on what will be in the UA/CO forums as if they were the decision makers?
entertainment value perhaps? :D

Can I ask why we have two members who by their own statements dont fly UA or CO making pronouncements on what will be in the UA/CO forums as if they were the decision makers?

Taken into account, believe me. @:-)

Can I ask why we have two members who by their own statements dont fly UA or CO making pronouncements on what will be in the UA/CO forums as if they were the decision makers?
If you mean me, because I do have experience both with being involved in forum mergers as a forum participant of merged forums and also as a TB member in overseeing forum mergers, and I'm worried about the one-size-fits-all approach which some are advocating here (despite the reservations being expressed by a number of UA/CO members already), which I know from my own experience isn't always successful.

Obviously, I think it should have separately the forums CO/UA. Because it was too many people on UA forums. I do not wants to read the UA forums very often.

It's certainly true that the largest forums are the hardest to manage, both for participants and for moderators. For one thing: It's pleasant to be able to read absolutely everything on a forum, but at some point it begins to take too much time.

However, size is a mark of success, and we all have to do the best we can with it.

I can see a merged CO/UA forum generating traffic comparable to the BA forum once the merger euphoria subsides and discussion returns to brass tacks, so the volume of traffic is technically manageable. However, the convergence of two distinctly unique forum style/culture will create challenges, for sure.

I think we need to see how the merger goes.

My previous position has been no merger until the frequent flyer programme is merged, and although I was outvoted on this recently it remains my position.

I agree with the above - keep the boards separate until the FF programs are merged.

and I'm worried about the one-size-fits-all approach which some are advocating here (despite the reservations being expressed by a number of UA/CO members already), which I know from my own experience isn't always successful.

The suggestion you posted earlier about keeping separately branded forums won't work because there won't be separate brands. Given that fact, what would you suggest doing differently than DL/NW (which is what I assume you mean when you say the one-size-fits-all approach).

I can't think of a workable solution that doesn't involve basically doing what happened with DL and NW. I'm not trying to be antagonistic at all--just pointing out the challenges as I see it. I'm definitely open for suggestions--I just can't think of any off the top of my head.

Assuming the FFP is called Mileage Plus, how about two forums similar to the Mileage Run forums:

Mileage Plus Program
Mileage Plus Discussion


This would allow for the utility-type threads (which UA has), and for the more open, free-form threads (predominently CO, but also UA threads like DEQM, Channel 9, etc).

Would set a precedent... not sure if that's okay.

Assuming the FFP is called Mileage Plus, how about two forums similar to the Mileage Run forums:

Mileage Plus Program
Mileage Plus Discussion


This would allow for the utility-type threads (which UA has), and for the more open, free-form threads (predominently CO, but also UA threads like DEQM, Channel 9, etc).

Would set a precedent... not sure if that's okay.

I don't know that it should be ruled out because it's not following any previous precedent.

My worry is that it would be too hard to clearly delineate what is appropriate for which forum. If it's going to cause more confusion, it might not be the optimal solution.

But thinking outside of the box--I like that. Keep going! :)

The suggestion you posted earlier about keeping separately branded forums won't work because there won't be separate brands. Given that fact, what would you suggest doing differently than DL/NW (which is what I assume you mean when you say the one-size-fits-all approach).

I can't think of a workable solution that doesn't involve basically doing what happened with DL and NW. I'm not trying to be antagonistic at all--just pointing out the challenges as I see it. I'm definitely open for suggestions--I just can't think of any off the top of my head.
Then in that case, I'd consult widely with the forum members, so they don't feel like the changes are being imposed on them, and do what they want. But I'd certainly consider having a period when both brands are still extant when somehow you have a joint forum where members from both boards can go and meet each other, but still have their own home forums - perhaps a UA/CO merger discussion forum, which is jointly modded by mods from both forums, while the existing UA and CO forums remain apart...

It's more of a staged process then wake up and suddenly you have a whole bunch of new roomies to get used to...

Then in that case, I'd consult widely with the forum members, so they don't feel like the changes are being imposed on them, and do what they want. But I'd certainly consider having a period when both brands are still extant when somehow you have a joint forum where members from both boards can go and meet each other, but still have their own home forums - perhaps a UA/CO merger discussion forum, which is jointly modded by mods from both forums, while the existing UA and CO forums remain apart...

It's more of a staged process then wake up and suddenly you have a whole bunch of new roomies to get used to...

Well, if we follow the precedent of DL/NW, the forum merger is still a LONG ways off. From what I've heard (keeping in mind I haven't followed the merger news very closely), the program merge isn't happening until late next year, which would mean we have almost a full year to prepare the membership for the forum merger, since we'd be doing it at the time the programs merge. It's not like this is happening overnight (unless TalkBoard doesn't follow precedent and opts to merge the forums sooner, which I find highly unlikely).

As for communication: from what I understand, there is already a line of communication open between the CO forum mods and UA forum mods, and they are actively working on ways to best handle the merger from a moderation and cultural standpoint. As I said above, they have close to a year (unless I'm misremembering the program merger date) to work on this, so I don't think it's something to stress about right now.

That's great, and consulting the mods is good. But all I know is that as a KLM forum member, I was pretty furious to discover changes were made to the forum I used without any warning and consultation - we woke up one morning and it had all been changed and then we woke up again and it had all been changed again and at no point was I ever actually asked about the forum I used the most and was a regular on! TB is meant to represent the members - while gaining input from the mods is important, it certainly used to be that TB would actually go out and ask the members. Here's the threads I started in the LX and LH forums when we were seeking feedback from those members about what they thought about forum management post M&M merger.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/miles-more-lufthansa-austrian-swiss-other-partners/673683-ot-question-talkboard-should-lh-lx-forums-merged.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/swiss-international-airlines/673684-ot-question-talkboard-should-lh-lx-forums-merged.html

It should be noted that in the past, any TB member has initiated this kind of thread to seek feedback, it's not just a function of the vice president or president.

And I agree, it is a long way off. However, I know as a project manager that what seems a long way off suddenly isn't!

While I agree that forum mergers are not easy, and that the participants in the forum should be consulted, there also has to be some practicality for new FTers and for occasional visitors to a forum (like me, a LH flyer who sometimes uses the United forum because code shares and the like).

One thing that is quite different about the two mergers to which Jenbel refers is that in both cases while there is a single frequent flyer program, the airlines have not merged lock, stock, and barrel.

In the Air France/KLM case, the brands are not only separate, they provide different types of service and their management responds differently to specific situations. The same is true for LH and LX. So, for example, I know if I want to ask a question about AF, I go to the AF forum, KL, the KL forum and the overarching FB forum for FFP questions.

My understanding, though, is that at the end of the day, there will be one airline - United, with one FFP. If I, as a new user two years from now want to ask a question, I wouldn't want to be faced with two fora: United (pre-merger United) and United (pre-merger Continental). So, while it is premature to be merging the fora now before the airlines and FFPs are completely merged, preparations should be made for the eventuality that only one FFP/one airline will remain at the end of the day.

The change in forum style may be painful to one group or the other or both, just as aspects of the merged airline may be disappointing to ex-Continental flyers, ex-old United flyers or both, but I think it would be even worse to maintain two fora for just one airline, solely because the current forum styles differ.

I can't think of a workable solution that doesn't involve basically doing what happened with DL and NW.

Neither can I and hundreds of words later still see no need to reinvent the wheel regardless of real or imagined posting sensitivities or varying forum styles.

It's certainly true that the largest forums are the hardest to manage, both for participants and for moderators. For one thing: It's pleasant to be able to read absolutely everything on a forum, but at some point it begins to take too much time.

However, size is a mark of success, and we all have to do the best we can with it.

Yeah, you're right about this one. I couldn't agree with you this. Because it was so toughen to reading the UA forums but, I don't go on UA forums very often. I can't have it to merge the forums. It should have remains separately.

I can't guaranteeing you to do that. I wasn't aware of UA/CO that is not real specific time for me at all. Because it was too many people who posting on UA forums. However, I can't readability in the UA forums. It should have keep reductions the anti-UA frequent flyers. I won't considering to see CO is not ready to merges with UA for awhile unless Talkboads will whether who makes decide to gets approvals or not.

If you mean me, because I do have experience both with being involved in forum mergers as a forum participant of merged forums and also as a TB member in overseeing forum mergers, and I'm worried about the one-size-fits-all approach which some are advocating here (despite the reservations being expressed by a number of UA/CO members already), which I know from my own experience isn't always successful.

I was NOT referring to you.

Haven't read this entire thread but I'll throw my 2 cents in anyway ...

Go ahead and create a UA/CO combined forum at some point. At no point should the existing forums be merged, but at some point new threads should no longer be allowed (and possibly a lockdown of existing thread, as well). If something from one of the old forums is needed, the mods can move it into the combined forum for review there.

The forums are EXTREMELY different and similar to NW/DL, it will take awhile for everyone to get used to each other (and play nicely, NW/DL is still working on that one).

I understand that there are different personalities for each respective forum, and within the moderating teams. However I look to TB assess the situation and make decisions that are in the best interests of the FT members.

Despite the official merger being a year away, there have already been many changes. I think it would be prudent to initiate a pre-merger discussion forum. I don't have all the dynamics and specifics worked out, so pardon me for coming with an only partially complete idea. However, since FT is just a reformating of database posts, it would make sense to look at having the forum exist as subforums under both programs. I don't know that vbulletin offers this ability, but it doesn't sound that hard to do.

In any event, I just wanted to bring this topic up again. I think it would be in my interests as a US flyer to have this venue.

kind regards,
stp

I don't know that vbulletin offers this ability, but it doesn't sound that hard to do.

I seem to recall an idea of cross-listed subforums or cross-listed threads coming up before and finding they weren't supported, at least under the current version if vBulletin we're using.

Not opposed to the idea of giving people a place to ask questions about the merged program. Not being intimately involved in the merger myself, can you show that there is not a sufficient place to discuss such questions now--i.e. would the types of questions you would ask fit in either the UA or CO forums (or some other broader forum like MilesBuzz)?

...--i.e. would the types of questions you would ask fit in either the UA or CO forums (or some other broader forum like MilesBuzz)?I think that there are a number of discussions that are happening in each forum today that would likely exist quite well in a combined forum. Details about the new livery, for example, are currently being hashed over in both fora (with quite different tones, I might add) but the general topic is one that makes sense to only really discuss once, not twice (or 5x as is seemingly the case these days :eek:). Discussions of the new upgrade instruments (SWUs/CR1s) and status levels would also be ripe for inclusion in the new, combined forum.

Based on what the programs have announced to date the unified program won't really exist until 1/1/12. But there are going to be a LOT of incremental steps that get us to that point over the coming 54 weeks. I'm not sure that we're quite there yet, but it makes sense to have the parent/child forum relationship before that time IMHO.

As for communication: from what I understand, there is already a line of communication open between the CO forum mods and UA forum mods, and they are actively working on ways to best handle the merger from a moderation and cultural standpoint. As I said above, they have close to a year (unless I'm misremembering the program merger date) to work on this, so I don't think it's something to stress about right now.

Any update on this from the TB moderator liaison, since that's probably the only way us regular members are ever going to get an update about the process.

Any update on this from the TB moderator liaison, since that's probably the only way us regular members are ever going to get an update about the process.

Although not a TB Mod liaison, allow me to respond.

The UA and CO Mods will be meeting in Chicago next month to discuss items connected with the merging of the forums. After that, we are hoping to have something set up around the end of the first quarter 2011.

I will refrain from answering any more questions on this subject here. I am acting as an individual Moderator and not representing the new group; thus, any more discussion would be inappropriate at this time. I am hopeful that my fellow Mods and Mods-to-be are fine with this post.

Hope this helps.

Although not a TB Mod liaison, allow me to respond.

The UA and CO Mods will be meeting in Chicago next month to discuss items connected with the merging of the forums. After that, we are hoping to have something set up around the end of the first quarter 2011.

I will refrain from answering any more questions on this subject here. I am acting as an individual Moderator and not representing the new group; thus, any more discussion would be inappropriate at this time. I am hopeful that my fellow Mods and Mods-to-be are fine with this post.

Hope this helps.

Meeting in Chicago and not Houston - what should we draw from that? :D

Just kidding... in all seriousness, glad that our volunteer moderators are putting so much thought and preparation into this. Looking forward to the news!

Although not a TB Mod liaison, allow me to respond.

The UA and CO Mods will be meeting in Chicago next month to discuss items connected with the merging of the forums. After that, we are hoping to have something set up around the end of the first quarter 2011.

I will refrain from answering any more questions on this subject here. I am acting as an individual Moderator and not representing the new group; thus, any more discussion would be inappropriate at this time. I am hopeful that my fellow Mods and Mods-to-be are fine with this post.

Hope this helps.

Thanks for the update. Will forum members get a chance to give their input, either before or after the meeting?

- I hope Teh Penalty Box Stays

- Words like COnned and CO-olaid banned

- Sub thread for people still needing to get over the loss of the tulip