United MileagePlus (Consolidated) - Open Letter to UA Insider (Shannon)

Shannon,

The response to the thread you started, "Expert Mode" Changes, has been nothing short of astounding.

In just a few days: more than 57,000 views and 800 responses.

These responses are overwhelmingly negative, and express both an extreme sense of disappointment, frustration, and anger with the company that the CO executive team has created. It doesn't resemble the company we knew as UA, that I admired, that I flew on with 100% loyalty for 10 years, and that I bought shares in after 9/11.

I've been reading FT nearly every day since the days leading up to 3/3. Very few threads compare with this one in terms of interest level and participation rate. This means something. As the "Director" of "Customer Insights" for United Continental Holdings, how can you not take note of this? These are your customers. They are speaking. You ought to be taking insights from this.

One might dismiss a lot of messages on FT as coming from misinformed random posters or from the "gang of 11" - an infamous group of very vocal and consistent posters.

But, you can't dismiss that thread.

This thread is unique both for the unanimity of opinion expressed by the posters and for the breath of posters it has attracted. Unlike a lot of other threads that devolve into circular debate amongst a handful of regulars, this one has drawn people to post who I've never before seen posting here. This is different. And, if there's even a shred of truth to the title that you sign your messages with, you've got to take some "insights" from this.

The point here isn't R space, fare buckets, expert mode, or your method of communication. These are distractions. The real point is the astounding level of anger and disappointment that was aroused by that post.

We can discuss R space, fare buckets, expert mode, and all the other details in that thread. In this thread, I want to discuss the up-swelling of anger, and I challenge you to understand why. If your job is to get insights from customers, and you're a director level employee no less, then isn't this a question that matters to you? If it doesn't, then what's the point of your position?

It's clear to me that a root issue leading to this "online revolt" is the lack of transparency, and frankly, the huge gap between what we're told should be happening and what we actually experience, in regards to upgrade policy under this regime. This is why we need to see R space. This is why we need alerts on EF. If upgrades cleared the way they used to, then there would not be such broad disappointment, nor would so many people have been moved to comment so strongly against the decision to hide this data and take it away from EF, because we'd just book flights and get upgrades. This matters, and people care, because they are paying a lot of money to fly and remain loyal to UA, but they're simply not getting upgrades the way they used to. And, they don't feel that the process is fair or transparent. Upgrades aren't being given because the process keeps breaking in countless ways. Because people can jump the queue. Because TODs are being sold from underneath flyers who paid higher than necessary fares to secure a place on the wait list. And now, they take away the only method we had to measure and manage all of this nonsense?

I knew something was terribly wrong with this company when I took my first flight with CO, after the merger but before 3/3. At the time, I was a GS flying on a Y fare and when I got to EWR for my flight, I was told that I'm #64 on the wait list, that GS means nothing, and that if I want a seat in the front of the plane, I've got to pay for it. Forget about upgrades. It's because of that experience, and very similar experiences I had on **every** subsequent CO operated flight on SHARES, that I was one of the first to start raising red flags after UA's system was replaced with SHARES. And, in fact, I wrote to you shortly after 3/3 asking for clarification. I never got a reply.

It's clear now that a lot of others have put together the pieces in the same way that I did from those early experiences. Everything I've experienced post 3/3 is identical to the nonsense I experienced with CO pre-3/3. Every last thing. And, it's all bad.

Meanwhile, Jeff lectures us at the beginning of each flight with smug assurances that we're going to like these changes, and you post messages here about how things are supposed to work that posters have shown, time and time again, are false. You've communicated things to us on behalf of the company that don't match with what many of us are actually experiencing on a daily basis.

Something is wrong here. Very, very wrong. Forget about expert mode. It's a distraction. The real issue is that the upgrade process is broken. It's broken because upgrades don't clear when they should clear and it's broken because of CO's TOD policies that are not consistent with what you've told us about how it's supposed to work. If we were getting upgrades, we wouldn't care about micro-managing R space.

I realize that SDC is also an important reason why this information has been requested, but you didn't pull that data from EF or other channels, so I'm not focusing on that here.

Shannon, I'm asking you to level with us. Tell us the truth. What are the real intentions of the CO regime with respect to upgrades using GPUs, RPUs, and $/miles? Have the "glitches" been studied, triaged, and prioritized? If so, are they scheduled to be fixed? If so, when? What policy changes have been made in regards to TODs or HODs that we need to know about? Give us the information we need to understand what is going on in regard to upgrade processing, or lack thereof.

excellent letter mitch. You can see that I don't post much here (am a lurker). In many many many years of flying, I've never been loyal to an airline, choosing whichever flight suits me best whether it be schedule or price. THIS YEAR, after making a great amount of effort, I made sure to fly only United even if it cost me extra or inconvenience schedule/routing wise. And I am now platinum, will be 1k before December. And trust me, I spent way more on United (> $ 10k) than I would have had if I picked and chose my flights on different airlines. I know $10,000 might not seem much to some of you regulars who fly way more than I do, but then I would have saved a lot if I didn't fly United. If I knew beforehand that United intends to make it very difficult to use RPUs/GPUs as many of use here fear, I wonder if I didn't make a mistake in keeping myself loyal to United? Am very unhappy and disillusioned.

Why bother to write such a long letter?
They don't care and you know that.
I am so happy with DL and AA now.
Vote with your money.
COdbaUA=pmCO=One Voice=Borg

Why bother to write such a long letter?
They don't care and you know that.
I am so happy with DL and AA now.
Vote with your money.
COdbaUA=pmCO=One Voice=Borg

Umm, I imagine your analogy wouldn't pass muster with even the SAT folks.

Now, back to the original post:

I actually applaud mitchmu's letter, but why post it, and not simply PM UA Insider?

As much as I am disappointed with UA recent actions, I see little purpose in calling the UA representative, or any FT poster, a liar. Your letter is not a call for contrustive dialogue but rather diatribe.

Why bother to write such a long letter?
They don't care and you know that.
I am so happy with DL and AA now.
Vote with your money.
COdbaUA=pmCO=One Voice=Borg

Because I want to show Shannon that I am a real, thinking person who cares a lot about this, and not just a snarky one-line poster here for entertainment.

Yes, we should vote with our money, but there are logistical reasons why UA makes a lot more sense for me than any other airline out of SFO. Hence, I'd rather not leave.

Maybe they don't care. Maybe Shannon does care. We'll know soon enough.

Umm, I imagine your analogy wouldn't pass muster with even the SAT folks.

Now, back to the original post:

I actually applaud mitchmu's letter, but why post it, and not simply PM UA Insider?

Because she has never responded to my PMs.

As much as I am disappointed with UA recent actions, I see little purpose in calling the UA representative, or any FT poster, a liar. Your letter is not a call for contrustive dialogue but rather diatribe.

I actually took care NOT to call her a liar. Unclear where you got that impression.

I actually took care NOT to call her a liar. Unclear where you got that impression.

"I'm not accusing you of intentionally lying, but you've said things that simply don't match with what many of us are actually experiencing on a daily basis. I don't know why, I don't care why, but it's so."

"I'm not accusing you of intentionally lying, but you've said things that simply don't match with what many of us are actually experiencing on a daily basis. I don't know why, I don't care why, but it's so."

Yes. That's what I've said. Is that not the truth?

Yes. That's what I've said. Is that not the truth?

Kind of a slippery slope. I liked your letter, it was well written & said a lot of what we are thinking but I did cringe a little when I read that sentence. (she may not take it the way you intended)

Kind of a slippery slope. I liked your letter, it was well written & said a lot of what we are thinking but I did cringe a little when I read that sentence.

Understood. When I wrote that, what I had in mind was the early posts from Shannon about how upgrades are supposed to work. I'd be hard pressed to imagine how someone could fly with UA and keep up on FT and believe that the system works as she said it is supposed to work. Maybe I could have done better with those words, but is it not fundamentally true that Shannon has told us things about the upgrade process that don't match with what is being reported here? And that the disconnect has been ongoing since 3/3 and reported by a large number of posters?

Yes. That's what I've said. Is that not the truth?

maybe change it something to the effect of "you've communicated things to us on behalf of the company that don't match reality" or something like that. put it on UA, not her.

They don't care and you know that.
I am so happy with DL and AA now.

Yes, because those corporations surely care about you :cool:

maybe change it something to the effect of "you've communicated things to us on behalf of the company that don't match reality" or something like that. put it on UA, not her.

Edited. Thank you for the suggestion.

Why do people listen to these "insiders" or give them any credence? They are marketing hacks for their corporations. To think that the UA insider gives one whit about what people write on FT is delusional. To think she can make any decisions within the UA organization is also delusional. Just read what she posts, digest the changes and then get on with your life....you ain't gonna change UA's mind.

Is it really necessary to call out UA Insider every time there's a change we don't like? Or PM for every little problem we have? What do you expect UA Insider to do? Shannon/Carlos/whoever are not our personal concierge or personal help desk or whatever people think they are. And they're not going to tell us anything except what PR and/or the higher ups want to tell us. Maybe they'll gauge our response and forward that to others who can make a decision, but calling out UA Insider to respond isn't going to be productive.

Why do people listen to these "insiders" or give them any credence?
Mostly because many of us have actually seen the actions they speak of put into practice. And many have met them in person.

I put a lot more faith in what they say than in what some random anonymous handle here types out as a missive/rant/screed/post.

As to the original letter: tl;dr.

Mostly because many of us have actually seen the actions they speak of put into practice. And many have met them in person.

I put a lot more faith in what they say than in what some random anonymous handle here types out as a missive/rant/screed/post.

As to the original letter: tl;dr.

No, not "many." Some, including yourself.

As much as I am disappointed with UA recent actions, I see little purpose in calling the UA representative, or any FT poster, a liar. Your letter is not a call for contrustive dialogue but rather diatribe.I'm not sure what was in the pre-edited version, but I don't have an issue with what's currently posted. Yes, it's a bit long, and yes, it doesn't quite leave as much wiggle-room for Shannon as I'd prefer (as in, verbiage to the effect that we understand it's her job to explain policies and put a face on them, but realize she didn't create those policies herself).

It's a nice letter that could generate a response that says yes, I hear you, we don't take the grievances of our elites lightly, and your post clearly comes from someone who would like United to be the best it can be. Many, perhaps most posts on FT are too polarizing for that sort of response; instead, they'd just scare Shannon away from our forum in general.

No, not "many." Some, including yourself.

How many is "many" to you? I can probably identify hundreds. I think that qualifies.

Mostly because many of us have actually seen the actions they speak of put into practice. And many have met them in person.

I put a lot more faith in what they say than in what some random anonymous handle here types out as a missive/rant/screed/post.

As to the original letter: tl;dr.

I misspoke in my earlier post. I have no doubt that these actions will be put into practice, or that anything that these people communicate will happen, will eventually come to fruition. I'm just confused as to why people think the insiders have any power to change a decision, or even want to listen to us. So many times I see the advice to "PM UA insider" on here, about silly things like missing upgrades even. I just don't know what a corporate PR person has the power to do...usually it's not much. I don't think the insiders add much to the discusion here, other than delivering bad news that we would have figured out anyway.

What are the real intentions of the CO regime with respect to upgrades using GPUs, RPUs, and $/miles? Have the "glitches" been studied, triaged, and prioritized? If so, are they scheduled to be fixed? If so, when? What policy changes have been made in regards to TODs or HODs that we need to know about? Give us the information we need to understand what is going on in regard to upgrade processing, or lack thereof.I suspect the intention is to further monetize any aspect of the business, including the upgrade process. To that end, I suspect we're seeing more of a shift to the "what are you doing for me now" vis-a-vis "what have you done for me recently" and to be blunt: UA brass feels they can institute this change due to their perceived competitive advantage (read: route network.)

Time will tell if this viewpoint will be successful.

As to the glitches, steve64 had an excellent post from another thread and to quote a part of it:... it seems to me that all "new" things in the industry are done by CO in a batch mode. E-ticketing (the actual ticketing plus the "new" need to keep PNRs in sync with the ticket), Elite Upgrades and many other things were not around at the time Shares was sold out. To get the "new" functionality, it seems CO wrote outside jobs to process and the changes in Shares was simply to accept the updates from an every growing multitude of CO applications.

Thus ...In their "heyday" Sabre and Apollo became much more robust systems than Shares. Why ? Their respective airlines held onto them much longer than TIdbaCO did with Shares. IE: When the industry converted over to e-tickets, AA and UA developed the new functionality directly into the mainframe (read: realtime processing). CO elected to piecemeal everything themselves, leaving only minor changes to be done in (their partition of) Shares (read: batch processing)....and to that end UA itself might have a hard time articulating the *exact* upgrade hierarchy/logic especially if they're multiple sub-systems with differing priorities running in tandem with each other.

I put a lot more faith in what they say than in what some random anonymous handle here types out as a missive/rant/screed/post.The OP has more than 7 years on FT and made the effort to raise points s/he felt warranted concern. Of course one can choose to read and judge whatever they like, but "some random anonymous handle" might be too quick a judgment, especially if one did not even take the time to read the initial post. <shrug>

The OP has more than 7 years on FT and made the effort to raise points s/he felt warranted concern. Of course one can choose to read and judge whatever they like, but "some random anonymous handle" might be too quick a judgment, especially if one did not even take the time to read the initial post. <shrug>I didn't read sbm12's post as taking on the credibility of the OP, but rather contrasted his post (and others who post things worth reading) vs those that simply snipe & gripe.

The OP has more than 7 years on FT and made the effort to raise points s/he felt warranted concern. Of course one can choose to read and judge whatever they like, but "some random anonymous handle" might be too quick a judgment, especially if one did not even take the time to read the initial post. <shrug>
I have no problem with them raising a concern. But the duration of their membership as an anonymous member of an IBB doesn't outweigh personal interactions I've had over roughly that same time frame. Quite frankly, I'm not sure why you would suggest it should.

Even a coherent, solid letter would rate that from me. Doesn't mean I don't think the letter has merit, just that it is hard to put much faith in the stories told of an anonymous member here. After all,
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f8/Internet_dog.jpg

Since you have posited this as a credibility issue, are you saying that your long-term "personal interactions" with these UA employees influences your posts?

Clearly this recent change signals things are going in a different direction.

And it wasn't always like this at CO... four or five years ago, Scott had a close link with Uncle Larry and at that time Jeff listened too. Anyone who attended the CO DOs remembers the 10-point skit that Jeff and Larry peformed, scripted from the FT data Scott and others provided. And the CEO cellphone poll with the hundreds of OPE. The panels to discuss functionality at EWR with real decision makers at the table.

The conduits were open and effective and delivered some useful product (e.g. the all-singing CO SWU's in 2010).

The merged UA is a different animal and Shannon's role is different from Scott's. However, let's hope at least she can be more direct and honest than that brigand Jeff R over at DL. I hope she/they can provide a tool or interface that allows UA elites to see the respective inventory that helps guide their decisionmaking. Denying people this information erodes the quality of the product and contributes to their frustration.

But I don't think that UA have plumbed the DL depths yet. I hope it doesn't come to that...remember, UA still has a functioning award calendar and workable redemption. Unlike DL they do not yet demand 635k from PHL to FCO - not all of which is in J. Not to dismiss this current concern but let's ask for a better way, and hope UA MP management considers it.

It is not yet :-: best in class :-:

Clearly this recent change signals things are going in a different direction.

And it wasn't always like this at CO... four or five years ago, Scott had a close link with Uncle Larry and at that time Jeff listened too. Anyone who attended the CO DOs remembers the 10-point skit that Jeff and Larry peformed, scripted from the FT data Scott and others provided. And the CEO cellphone poll with the hundreds of OPE. The panels to discuss functionality at EWR with real decision makers at the table.

The conduits were open and effective and delivered some useful product (e.g. the all-singing CO SWU's in 2010).

The merged UA is a different animal and Shannon's role is different from Scott's. However, let's hope at least she can be more direct and honest than that brigand Jeff R over at DL. I hope she/they can provide a tool or interface that allows UA elites to see the respective inventory that helps guide their decisionmaking. Denying people this information erodes the quality of the product and contributes to their frustration.

But I don't think that UA have plumbed the DL depths yet. I hope it doesn't come to that...remember, UA still has a functioning award calendar and workable redemption. Unlike DL they do not yet demand 635k from PHL to FCO - not all of which is in J. Not to dismiss this current concern but let's ask for a better way, and hope UA MP management considers it.

It is not yet :-: best in class :-:

An excellent post with the right tone. Many thanks.

Is it really necessary to call out UA Insider every time there's a change we don't like? Or PM for every little problem we have? What do you expect UA Insider to do? Shannon/Carlos/whoever are not our personal concierge or personal help desk or whatever people think they are. And they're not going to tell us anything except what PR and/or the higher ups want to tell us. Maybe they'll gauge our response and forward that to others who can make a decision, but calling out UA Insider to respond isn't going to be productive.

I would not consider this a "little problem"

There is a very serious change in attitude in UA. I'm pretty sure Shannon doesn't have a choice in the matter. If the braintrust in charge wants it a particular way then that's the way it'll be, regardless of the insights Shannon may collect and relate from here.

Jeff $misek doesn't care about any of us. Doesn't care about your loyalty, doesn't care if you had a lousy experience. He cares that someone is going to spend more money than you the next day.

Clearly this recent change signals things are going in a different direction.

And it wasn't always like this at CO... four or five years ago, Scott had a close link with Uncle Larry and at that time Jeff listened too. Anyone who attended the CO DOs remembers the 10-point skit that Jeff and Larry peformed, scripted from the FT data Scott and others provided. And the CEO cellphone poll with the hundreds of OPE. The panels to discuss functionality at EWR with real decision makers at the table.

The conduits were open and effective and delivered some useful product (e.g. the all-singing CO SWU's in 2010).

The merged UA is a different animal and Shannon's role is different from Scott's. However, let's hope at least she can be more direct and honest than that brigand Jeff R over at DL. I hope she/they can provide a tool or interface that allows UA elites to see the respective inventory that helps guide their decisionmaking. Denying people this information erodes the quality of the product and contributes to their frustration.

But I don't think that UA have plumbed the DL depths yet. I hope it doesn't come to that...remember, UA still has a functioning award calendar and workable redemption. Unlike DL they do not yet demand 635k from PHL to FCO - not all of which is in J. Not to dismiss this current concern but let's ask for a better way, and hope UA MP management considers it.

It is not yet :-: best in class :-:

I think many of you are missing the real point. You believe there is a plan and you believe that the plan is not being honestly communicated. I don't believe there is a plan.

I've work with numerous management teams both as a member and as an advisor. The UA management I would categorize as an "operationally focused team"; most decisions are made on a pure operational basis, occasionally tactical but never strategic. I'm willing to bet that the move to Shares was not after deep analysis; I'm betting it was after a relatively small number executive management meetings where the cost advantages became clear. There was probabaly little thought to the more strategic implications and downstream effects; probably why the CO CIO quit, he stated the implications and was just not listened too.

The problem with these sorts of teams and individuals is they are not making decisions based upon analysis and the associated impacts, they are making their decisions based upon their native operational skills and who they are. They are not bad people, they are not trying to hurt you. You just aren't part of their thinking, it is just not something that they understand.

You can write a hundred letters to Shannon, PM her or post a thousand threads on FT; it will change nothing. It's not that they don't want to hear you, they can't hear you. You are not asking them to change their policies, you are asking them to fundamentally change who they are; people do not make these sorts of changes easily.

You are frustrated and angry because you can clearly see the startegic and personal impact of the changes and you can figure out why they just don't get it. The reality is they really just get it.

The only thing that creates the need for change in such individuals and teams is immediate stimulus. If loads drop (especially against the industry average), if revenue per seat drops or quarterly results are poor for two quarters in a row; they you will see real change, but not a minute before.

I believe Jeff bringing keeps bringing up the route network and 787, not because he's a jerk, but rather that's what he truely believes is important

You can write a hundred letters to Shannon, PM her or post a thousand threads on FT; it will change nothing. It's not that they don't want to hear you, they can't hear you. You are not asking them to change their policies, you are asking them to fundamentally change who they are; people do not make these sorts of changes easily.



Agree! That's why I said why bother to OP.

OP should read United cares about you (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileageplus-consolidated/1385862-united-cares-about-you-customer-name.html).
At least someone replies this "joke" to the customer and I am wondering will OP hear anything from UA Insider?

I suspect the intention is to further monetize any aspect of the business, including the upgrade process. To that end, I suspect we're seeing more of a shift to the "what are you doing for me now" vis-a-vis "what have you done for me recently" and to be blunt: UA brass feels they can institute this change due to their perceived competitive advantage (read: route network.)

Time will tell if this viewpoint will be successful.

As to the glitches, steve64 had an excellent post from another thread and to quote a part of it:...and to that end UA itself might have a hard time articulating the *exact* upgrade hierarchy/logic especially if they're multiple sub-systems with differing priorities running in tandem with each other.

The OP has more than 7 years on FT and made the effort to raise points s/he felt warranted concern. Of course one can choose to read and judge whatever they like, but "some random anonymous handle" might be too quick a judgment, especially if one did not even take the time to read the initial post. <shrug>

Pretty much agreed with most of the points in the OP's letter & definitely agree with every aspect of your post. Thank you both.

This is a terrible letter.

Mostly because many of us have actually seen the actions they speak of put into practice. And many have met them in person.

I put a lot more faith in what they say than in what some random anonymous handle here types out as a missive/rant/screed/post.

As to the original letter: tl;dr.

It goes without saying that participating in an online forum requires one to be cognizant of the "official spin" being sailed down the line by both official and unofficial agents close to the company - not sure how that is relevant though.

As for the FT account in question - I've never personally understood the fawning that some engage in over said user. Yes, they may be friendly people at a PR event like MegaDo (would they have been anything but?), and there may have even been some (cosmetic) changes enacted on behalf of the FF community, but the account name doesn't seem to square away with what is presented. Not exactly breaking news, though!

Clearly this recent change signals things are going in a different direction.

And it wasn't always like this at CO... four or five years ago, Scott had a close link with Uncle Larry and at that time Jeff listened too. Anyone who attended the CO DOs remembers the 10-point skit that Jeff and Larry peformed, scripted from the FT data Scott and others provided. And the CEO cellphone poll with the hundreds of OPE. The panels to discuss functionality at EWR with real decision makers at the table.

The conduits were open and effective and delivered some useful product (e.g. the all-singing CO SWU's in 2010).

The merged UA is a different animal and Shannon's role is different from Scott's. However, let's hope at least she can be more direct and honest than that brigand Jeff R over at DL. I hope she/they can provide a tool or interface that allows UA elites to see the respective inventory that helps guide their decisionmaking. Denying people this information erodes the quality of the product and contributes to their frustration.

But I don't think that UA have plumbed the DL depths yet. I hope it doesn't come to that...remember, UA still has a functioning award calendar and workable redemption. Unlike DL they do not yet demand 635k from PHL to FCO - not all of which is in J. Not to dismiss this current concern but let's ask for a better way, and hope UA MP management considers it.

It is not yet :-: best in class :-:

As a CO dba UA refugee now very happily flying DL, I have to disagree with the gist of this post.

Yes, DL is not perfect, but in nearly three years of flying DL I have yet to see any of the horror stories repeated here on FT.

In 2010, one week out, I was able to acquire a J award JFK-SIN for 90,000 miles. And I am constantly acquiring award tickets at (or near) the lowest redemption levels.

As a lowly DL silver medallion, my upgrade rate so far in 2012 has been in excess of 50%, including, amazingly, on LGA-ATL and JFK-LAS. In my last period as a CO Gold, I went 0 for 25 on upgrades.

Even during major weather events, I have never waited more than five minutes on hold (unlike CO dba UA, where the 800 number simply hangs up on you for days on end during these incidents).

The upgrade process at DL is thankfully free of the obfuscated and circuitous drama that is at the very core of the CO dba UA upgrade protocol.

Virtually the entire fleet is equipped with WiFi, which is a terrific productivity tool. Also, most of their RJ's are equipped with FC, and they are even reducing the percentage of RJ's in their fleet.

DL's people are friendly and professional.

On the occasion when a mistake is made, instead of the stonewalling and blame that one, unfortunately, too often receives with CO dba UA, DL's people are apologetic and pro-active.

Aside from the horrendous terminals at JFK, the biggest problem with DL is that SkyTeam is a pale shadow of *A.

But if CO dba UA could be even a quarter as customer-friendly as DL, it would be a vast improvement.

The problem with these sorts of teams and individuals is they are not making decisions based upon analysis and the associated impacts, they are making their decisions based upon their native operational skills and who they are. They are not bad people, they are not trying to hurt you. You just aren't part of their thinking, it is just not something that they understand.


^^ I work in a part of the federal government where we are a 700-strong unit. We have a front office of about 20 people who have what I call the "Queen Elizabeth" syndrome - you know, that saying about the Queen that she believes all rooms smell of fresh paint. Well, in our case, the FO has no idea about how the other 680 people live and work. They don't have desks where the drawers fall apart when you try to use them. They don't have printers and copiers that jam on a routine basis. Their Outlook and H drive almost never go down, and on the rare day they do, they are the first to be back on line. Their personal HR paperwork never gets screwed up because they have the best and most robust secretarial support.

And they wonder why they get no sympathy or support from the line employees. :rolleyes:

...I believe Jeff bringing keeps bringing up the route network and 787, not because he's a jerk, but rather that's what he truely believes is important

Very well summarized. It is so sad to see the train wreck in slow motion. I have spent the last three months on other carriers and that might not have a impact to UA alone but to other * Alliance members also. Why would I hazard a mis-connect with SA in IAD/JFK just because UA's connect from DEN-IAD is unreliable?

While I appreiate the effort and emotion, I am with others who suggestd not to expect answers to OPs satisfaction. I think it may me more due to "company policy" not to share their internal drivers/reasons than Shannon not wanting to do the same.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Remember that Shannon is an employee of the company and it is her responsibility to disseminate the news she is given. Just because she says something doesn't mean she believes it or agrees with how it's being handled.

She's a smart and talented woman. For all we know, she may be hoping for an imminent regime change just like many of us over-entitled customers are hoping for.

Keep in mind this is the company that has demonstrated that if you speak your mind against the flow, you're shown the door. We've seen this with the CIO, and I've heard of various stories at lower levels as well.

Nothing will change until the machine is broken.

Why bother to write such a long letter?
They don't care and you know that.
I am so happy with DL and AA now.
Vote with your money.
COdbaUA=pmCO=One Voice=Borg

DITTO! UA is at the bottom of the bucket - if you are still around UA knows they have you and there is no reason to bother reading or listening to long rants. It doesn't matter. You will continue to spend your money regardless if they take the time to make improvements or not.

I learned this a few months ago and I've moved my business and quite happy for it.

After all,
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f8/Internet_dog.jpg

but, on the other hand ...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7JK0Ja4CQvI/THVFgF2sYeI/AAAAAAAAAGw/ZPUOYqi4dA0/s1600/cartoon+dog+blog.gif

That would be like trying to change everybody's mind about something in the forum while at the same time insulting them.

For whatever reason, people are having an emotional reaction to this. You can't stop that. There's a reason for it.

-David

I have very mixed feelings about everything that has gone on since the merger and with most of the comments posted throughout FT. The bottom line is that each individual flyer has a different experience based on many variables. I am not a GS or 1K or even a Silver. (That should change this year). I've been a CO Silver and a DL Silver in the past (mid-2000's) so I understand what being an "elite level flyer" is all about. I am frustrated as well, in large part with myself for focusing ALL of my flying in 2011 & 2012 on UA.

That being said, I feel like UA is like a girlfriend or boyfriend that does really stupid or hurtful things but you just keep ignoring those things because you really want to like him or her and think (hope) they will change.

Unfortunatley, I don't think this change is coming for the good. My business mind tells me that the writing is on the wall and many posters who have articulated better than I can have laid out the the reasons why.

Going back to my relationship analogy, I think we are at the point where if you continue to be in that relationship then it's really nobody's fault but your own.

I am not advocating anyone make a change necessarily, but just pointing out the reality of the what we are all experiencing.

It goes without saying that participating in an online forum requires one to be cognizant of the "official spin" being sailed down the line by both official and unofficial agents close to the company - not sure how that is relevant though.

As for the FT account in question - I've never personally understood the fawning that some engage in over said user. Yes, they may be friendly people at a PR event like MegaDo (would they have been anything but?), and there may have even been some (cosmetic) changes enacted on behalf of the FF community, but the account name doesn't seem to square away with what is presented. Not exactly breaking news, though!

I agree....I would rather be able to communicate with the company directly through a system like 1K Voice or another way then have some corporate crumbs dropped on FT by someone who supposedly is a COdbaUA Insider (yawn). There never was a UA Insider on the PMUA boards because PMUA COMMUNICATED openly and honestly with it's customers.....:cool:

Don't shoot the messenger.

Remember that Shannon is an employee of the company and it is her responsibility to disseminate the news she is given. Just because she says something doesn't mean she believes it or agrees with how it's being handled.

She's a smart and talented woman.

^^ to the above.

What a waste.

If the letter had actually focused on the issue, and did not bash UA and PMCO instead I would think it a good letter. But the way it is, it is just an overly long post one would find on FT. A waste.

The only thing that creates the need for change in such individuals and teams is immediate stimulus. If loads drop (especially against the industry average), if revenue per seat drops or quarterly results are poor for two quarters in a row; they you will see real change, but not a minute before.

Exactly right. The OP's heartfelt letter is a waste of time.

... I feel like UA is like a girlfriend or boyfriend that does really stupid or hurtful things but you just keep ignoring those things because you really want to like him or her and think (hope) they will change.

Or, more to the point, I stay in the relationship because the sex is good, despite the cluelessness and abusiveness of the partner (UA). Erm, well, I don't have sex with UA, but UA does shower me with miles I can use to start and end my vacations with long premium cabin flights. That's the plane-nut's version of sex.

For many on FT, the sex isn't so much the miles, but the free upgrades. Hence all the squeals of anger (including the OP) when one gets passed over for a casual acquaintance with a few dollars in his pocket.

UA has made it a lot easier for me to view my relationship to it as a transactional one, rather than one based on mutual loyalty. While I'm disappointed, the analogy to girlfriend/boyfriend only goes so far. I don't understand why the OP put so much heartfelt effort into his letter because I really just don't care that much about UA anymore.

The OP seemed like a whole bunch of work just to point out the obvious.

Personally I wish FlyerTalk had some kind of alert/warning sign on thread topics when an "Insider" (aka UA Insider) posts in a thread. Otherwise, this thread is a total waste of time reading all of you bickering back & forth about the letter the OP wrote.

-RM

Personally I wish FlyerTalk had some kind of alert/warning sign on thread topics when an "Insider" (aka UA Insider) posts in a thread. ...this might help you -- http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileageplus-consolidated/1320862-ua-insider-posts-responses-system-integration-issues-read-only.html

Personally I wish FlyerTalk had some kind of alert/warning sign on thread topics when an "Insider" (aka UA Insider) posts in a thread. Otherwise, this thread is a total waste of time reading all of you bickering back & forth about the letter the OP wrote.

-RM

You can also look at UAInsider's FT profile and see all of their posts.

Shannon:

Don't you dare remove TOD upgrades. We the 99% love them!

RNE, the Titan of TODs!

I doubt you will get a response. All UA Insider posts now seem to be carefully orchestrated... not like it used to be when CO Insider (Scott) actually tried to answer the high priority questions / concerns. I doubt that this is Shannon's fault as she is probably just doing as she is told.

There is an old saying that offers a close analogy to what the new United flyers are having to put up with... "Don't piss on my leg and then tell me its raining". The deception and lack of transparency are astounding.

I enjoyed and agreed with the letter. Until there's a bit more transparency, I'm holding off on booking any more United flights. Sad to say that, but I don't feel like my loyalty is appreciated.

Personally I wish FlyerTalk had some kind of alert/warning sign on thread topics when an "Insider" (aka UA Insider) posts in a thread. Otherwise, this thread is a total waste of time reading all of you bickering back & forth about the letter the OP wrote.

-RM

We keep this thread up-to-date: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileageplus-consolidated/1185275-consolidated-official-co-ua-merger-related-announcements-ua-insider-thread.html

Post 1 lists the threads started by UA Insider and Post 2 lists the threads started by others in which UA Insider has posted significant information. Members can subscribe to the above-linked thread and will be notified when there is an update (Post 4). Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator.

Personally I wish FlyerTalk had some kind of alert/warning sign on thread topics when an "Insider" (aka UA Insider) posts in a thread. Otherwise, this thread is a total waste of time reading all of you bickering back & forth about the letter the OP wrote.

-RM

Absolutely.

...so much bickering...

Why bother to write such a long letter?
They don't care and you know that.
I am so happy with DL and AA now.
Vote with your money.
COdbaUA=pmCO=One Voice=Borg

Unfortunately I tend to agree though I appreciate OP's effort.

The problem is that some of us don't have a choice, we are locked into UA by a fortress hub (SFO) or corporate contracts. So we can vote with our $$ as best we can but we are stuck with UA on some routes. And thus the preferable solution would be for UA to provide what has been promised rather than to continue seeing our few remaining perks slowly flushed.

Unfortunately I tend to agree though I appreciate OP's effort.

The problem is that some of us don't have a choice, we are locked into UA by a fortress hub (SFO) or corporate contracts. So we can vote with our $$ as best we can but we are stuck with UA on some routes. And thus the preferable solution would be for UA to provide what has been promised rather than to continue seeing our few remaining perks slowly flushed.

$$MI/J already told us at every opportunity:

Route Network. Route Network. Route Network. Route Network. Route Network. Route Network. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

He thinks that you have no choice. Just like poor folks at IAH CLE EWR in the old CO days.

There is a very serious change in attitude in UA. I'm pretty sure Shannon doesn't have a choice in the matter. If the braintrust in charge wants it a particular way then that's the way it'll be, regardless of the insights Shannon may collect and relate from here.

Jeff $misek doesn't care about any of us. Doesn't care about your loyalty, doesn't care if you had a lousy experience. He cares that someone is going to spend more money than you the next day.

This is a great summary of the reality high in the company ranks.
The question is: How long can a company survive without loyal following?Every other company around relies on repeat customers and loyalty but UA is slowly but surely killing that loyalty.

but, on the other hand ...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7JK0Ja4CQvI/THVFgF2sYeI/AAAAAAAAAGw/ZPUOYqi4dA0/s1600/cartoon+dog+blog.gif

That would be like trying to change everybody's mind about something in the forum while at the same time insulting them.

For whatever reason, people are having an emotional reaction to this. You can't stop that. There's a reason for it.

-David

Thanks David - love the dogs! :D

Unfortunately I tend to agree though I appreciate OP's effort.

The problem is that some of us don't have a choice, we are locked into UA by a fortress hub (SFO) or corporate contracts. So we can vote with our $$ as best we can but we are stuck with UA on some routes. And thus the preferable solution would be for UA to provide what has been promised rather than to continue seeing our few remaining perks slowly flushed.

I'm SFO too & while UA routes are usually more convenient, I'm really enjoying Alaska out of OAK for West Coast & HI routes, AA for domestic & INTL, & filling in with various other airlines for both domestic & INTL. Yes, UA is still getting some of my business, but certainly not all & I'd love it if UA dramatically improved every aspect of their performance...but not counting on it.