I had no idea that other US carriers were so far behind on this. According to the article, UA is at 95% (which should be 100% in April when the 772s are finished), with DL coming in second at a horrifying 46%. Though I should add that the 5% unconverted are barcaloungers that aren't too bad for sleeping.
UA's IT and management problems are one thing, but most of my travel is international and I find it absolutely impossible to sleep on those slanty things. You win this round, United.
I had no idea that other US carriers were so far behind on this. According to the article, UA is at 95% (which should be 100% in April when the 772s are finished), with DL coming in second at a horrifying 46%. Though I should add that the 5% unconverted are barcaloungers that aren't too bad for sleeping.
UA's IT and management problems are one thing, but most of my travel is international and I find it absolutely impossible to sleep on those slanty things. You win this round, United.
Interesting. Maybe that's why it's so easy to UG on AA?
Worth noting that all the lay-flat beds we're enjoying today were installed by the pre-Smisek regime.
Does sCO equipment also have lay flat beds? Curious how they compare to the sUA lay flat beds.
Programs: United 1K, Starwood Gold, Avis Preferred, CBP Global Entry, United Club
Posts: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchmu
Interesting. Maybe that's why it's so easy to UG on AA?
Worth noting that all the lay-flat beds we're enjoying today were installed by the pre-Smisek regime.
Does sCO equipment also have lay flat beds? Curious how they compare to the sUA lay flat beds.
They do and there have been a few threads here and there on them. Not surprisingly, PMUA and PMCO pax prefer their respective carrier's seats. I can't say I'm partial to either, except that sCO footwells are surprisingly tight. But they also never tried to cram 8-abreast, so there's that.
Programs: UA 1K 1MM; DL Plat; SPG Gold; Hilton Silver; Marriott Silver; Hertz 5-Star; Avis Pres Club
Posts: 29,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by glasnost7
Not surprisingly, PMUA and PMCO pax prefer their respective carrier's seats.
That probably means that PMUA's are the winner. If CO's stuff were truly better, most PMUA FTers would admit as much. However, if PMUA's stuff is truly better, a lot of PMCO FTers would likely not admit it.
__________________ The world's leading airline should have the world's leading change fee.
Programs: UA 1k, CO Plat, NW Plat, Priority Gold, Hilton Gold, Marriott Silver
Posts: 3,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by channa
That probably means that PMUA's are the winner. If CO's stuff were truly better, most PMUA FTers would admit as much. However, if PMUA's stuff is truly better, a lot of PMCO FTers would likely not admit it.
I prefer CO's 767 C seat over UAs 747 C seat, and I'm one of the people who thinks it's all United now.
Don't have much experience with C seats outside those two.
__________________
2011 Arrival at Destination Success: 100%
I had no idea that other US carriers were so far behind on this. According to the article, UA is at 95% (which should be 100% in April when the 772s are finished), with DL coming in second at a horrifying 46%. Though I should add that the 5% unconverted are barcaloungers that aren't too bad for sleeping.
UA's IT and management problems are one thing, but most of my travel is international and I find it absolutely impossible to sleep on those slanty things. You win this round, United.
This really is a win for United flyers and not having to play the seat roulette too often anymore is great. Now just the GPU roulette to get into those seats.
Programs: Formerly over-entitled UA 1K, now under-entitled UA PP.
Posts: 3,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by channa
That probably means that PMUA's are the winner. If CO's stuff were truly better, most PMUA FTers would admit as much. However, if PMUA's stuff is truly better, a lot of PMCO FTers would likely not admit it.
That's the truth!
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHLyer82
This really is a win for United flyers and not having to play the seat roulette too often anymore is great. Now just the GPU roulette to get into those seats.
Charging a premium for a better product is a valid business strategy. It's the reckless and dishonest way they go about it that is so off-putting.
Last edited by iluv2fly; Dec 6, 12 at 3:59 pm..
Reason: merge
Programs: United 1K, Starwood Gold, Avis Preferred, CBP Global Entry, United Club
Posts: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by channa
That probably means that PMUA's are the winner. If CO's stuff were truly better, most PMUA FTers would admit as much. However, if PMUA's stuff is truly better, a lot of PMCO FTers would likely not admit it.
Haha, channa, you may have a point after the whole meal order prioritization debacle. Who scoffs at a benefit they didn't have before because it came from somewhere else?
That probably means that PMUA's are the winner. If CO's stuff were truly better, most PMUA FTers would admit as much. However, if PMUA's stuff is truly better, a lot of PMCO FTers would likely not admit it.
What if you prefer things from both?
Love the Global First seat first and foremost, but if I'm in Business, I usually prefer the sCO seat. It has a tad bit more privacy and space. The IPTE Business seat isn't bad if you're not in the center section of a 777 or 747. I will say this though - the sUA AVOD interface is much, much better. It is a shame Tilton kind of cheaped out on the refurbs (which is partly my fault for noticing things 99% of most pax don't even care about).
mitchmu, you really didn't know much about CO, did you?
It's easy to feel like you've found a winner when you're comparing US-based airlines to each other.
Well, in this case, the US carriers (UA, DL) aren't doing too bad when you consider the following international carriers:
JL = ZERO
AF = ZERO
KL = ZERO
LH = fewer than 10 planes
TG = fewer than 15 planes
The only carriers in the world that have 100% J flat-beds on their international fleet are BA, VS, LX, and maybe SQ (can't recall if they are still flying 772s with angled flats on long-hauls). Even carriers like NH, OZ, EK, QR, NZ (they use 767s on some long-hauls) are not at 100% yet....
Programs: Formerly over-entitled UA 1K, now under-entitled UA PP.
Posts: 3,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by raehl311
Would you support GPU copays for fares lower than W?
I would, although I worry about the slippery slope.
I have two issues with what Smisek has done.
First, it's become a lot harder to clear GPUs. In my view, 1K only has significant marginal value over lower tiers if GPUs can be used. So, copays for fares lower than W is only a conversation worth having if it's also true that enough R space is made available and that GPUs will clear into it reliably.
If one must waitlist with a GPU, then I think it makes a lot more sense to waitlist at lowest fare, with a copay to bring the cost to W level, assuming you get both the GPU and the copay back if you don't clear. This W fare lottery never bothered me under sUA because I almost always cleared. Now, it's not a game worth playing.
