Altaflyer

Just wondering where this all stands? Read some of the comments regarding plastic cups in F, no service at all in Y on short flights, declines in trans-atlantic service and the doomsday thread re: SW and PHL. It would seem to me that Star would be best off delaying or cancelling US's membership in the alliance. Any thoughts on this? Obviously, if you have US miles you would want the alliance but objectively, is US worthy?

GadgetFreak

Interesting question. But I think the more important question is whether US in Star will generate more revenue for Star carriers such as LH. I think the answer to that is a definate yes. That is more important than some abstract evaluation of "worthy".

Altaflyer

Why is the answer a definite YES? Does LH need US? What cities does LH get access to with US that it does not have with UA? Perhaps there are a few in the northeast and along the coast but I would think that most places would be accessible with their existing network. I suppose LH may get some US traffic onto its European network but is this significant?

notam

Here's the original news release from US regarding their joining *A:

http://www.usairways.com/about/press/nw_03_0531a.htm

According to the news release, the addition of US to *A will increase the number of airports served by *A from 700 to 771, while the number of countries served will grow to 133 from 128. Considering the large population in the northeast USA, I think that US joining *A will be very beneficial to *A.

As for who needs who more....I think it's obvious that US needs *A more than *A needs US. US could really use all the *A feeder traffic and *A FF'ers who will buy US tickets in order to gain status on their own airlines. However, even with all this doomsday talk, if US joined *A today, they'd be the only North American carrier to not be under bankruptcy protection. Making money...that's another story...

GadgetFreak

I didnt say they needed US, I said they would add to their revenue. US has adds to UAs coverage all along the east coast. PHL and CLT in paticular are very limited by UA. CLT is a major banking center now and PHL is a very large market. US also adds considerable flexibility in NY, Washington and Boston. This will make it a lot easier for businessmen from Germany with business in say NY and Washington to keep everything together on one ticket, use lounges, etc. For instance fly into JFK, business in the city then LGA-DCA is a lot better than any option UA has to offer. Is it a major benefit? Not sure, but I think it adds to options. It also will feed people from US into LH within Europe in much the same way.

To be perfectly honest, I have serious doubts that the management at either UA or US can find their asses with both hands in the dark. I dont think that about LH, so I have some confidence that if LH thought it made sense, they have some marketing information to support that.




[This message has been edited by GadgetFreak (edited Nov 29, 2003).]

USFlyerUS

Look, US really isn't all that bad. I've flown UA in both First and Coach over the last few months, and it's really not much different. We got plastic in First on my flight Wednesday evening. The planes were just as clean/dirty as US. There was no meal service in Coach. Etc. Etc.

US really is quite good in the whole grand scheme of things. Sure, there's room for improvement, but I see no reason to delay entry into Star.

Also, as for LH "needing" US, of course not. However, having connections with both UA and US just increases the market presence of all three carriers and helps steal more traffic away from competing carriers/alliances. It's a win all around. Also, bear in mind US entering Star results in a net increase of about 75 new cities to the alliance! So, clearly US brings something to the table.

GadgetFreak

I basically agree that US isnt that bad, but I dont agree about the comparisons. I have recently (this year) flown AA, UA and US first (domestic), AA coach domestic, UA and US business (international). I have to say that US first doesnt compare well to either of the other two. Moreover, US international business has deteriorated from very good to being really inferior to UA in my opinion. I have a few more US flights in domestic first and international business (hopefully) and I will be interested to compare.

N674UW

US also has a good Caribbean route structure which is a gaping hole in *A's route map...

N674UW

aw

There is no argument that US J product has drastically declined, but I don't think that it is inferior to UA. If we were to compare UA and US Transatlantic service, I find that US A330 is a much more comfortable ride compared to UA's 777 or 767. I love US Envoy seats and although they do not provide back massager like UA, they are pretty spacious pitch wise and the J cabin is less crowded (2-2-2 vs 2-3-2 UA 777 config). In addition, US Passport Entertainment system is the best out there IMHO. The flexibility and freedom to choose when and what you want to see/hear is great. The only area that UA Business is marginally better than US is perhaps in catering. With UA, the appetizer/salad course is more generous, there is a choice of dessert in a cart(pre-plated cheese w/grapes and packaged crackers OR Eli's cheesecake) and the second meal service like breakfast is a bit more substantial with a choice of a hot entree. But, I think the number of people eating a big breakfast is very low. Besides, one can always stop by the Arrival Club to have something to nibble if not satisfied.

gnaget

UA apparently has plastic food and beverage service on its ex-Shuttle aircraft. I was horrified to find this last week and thought it was the start of a trend -- FA told me that it was the aircraft. The original 733 had been replaced by a Shuttle 735.

On ORD-DCA (621 miles) yesterday I had a nice salmon dinner with a nice bread selection, fruit salad and heated chocolate chip cookie. Proper china, flatware and glasses, of course.

You have to be kidding me if you find UA's aircraft to be as dirty as US's.

hscottm

Some of the original knocks against US above were inspired by declines in F/J service. While I am always willing to bemoan this, I wonder how good/bad the service is on some of the other small *A carriers.

I ask this out of ignorance as I am always flying US - Are bmi , spanair, or LOT alot better?

FlyerAl

Hey if Air Canada can be worthy of Star Alliance, then US has nothing to worry about!

GadgetFreak

I agree about the US Envoy seats and entertainment systems. I find the onboard service to be really cheesy however. The individual amenity items is a new low in tacky.

Altaflyer

AC, Lot, Bmi and Spanair are all in the alliance now, US is not. Bmi manages to serve you some kind of a sandwich and offers complimentary alcohol on nearly all flights. Of course their intra-Europe C seating is the conventional European 2x3 convertible seat product.

AC has many faults, however they do not use plastic cups in J and offer a decent front cabin product in North America. Their Int'l J product lacks in entertainment and the seats can use upgrading. Service is always unpredictable.

Have not flown Spanair and LOT was a long time ago.

FlyerAl

In spite of the cutbacks, I still think US' service is more professional and reliable than AC's.