Originally Posted by
mahasamatman
On the contrary - it's a huge win financially. Better product and less availability generally means more profit. Yes, it makes it harder to upgrade, but it makes business sense.
How do you or anyone KNOW it is any kind of "
huge win"? Have some load figures to share with us?
Doesn't make
ANY business sense if those extra coach seats stay unsold at the same % rate.
Plenty of UA 747s fly half full in coach right now.
FACT - It takes about 75% as much avgas to fly an
empty 747 to oz as a full one.
I for one will not keep flying UA if upgrades stop occuring as 1KS, and we take a LOT of $2000-$2500+ RTs a year. Losing $25,000 a year does not sound like a huge "win" scenario to me.
There are a lot of ozstamps fliers out there.
Just 100 of them jumping ship is a cool 2½ million bucks a year on one route.
Virgin now are flying OZ-USA, and so will SQ pretty soon - bet your house on that.
If anyone here thinks
any sane businessman with airline choice at his discretion will fly UA long haul C of F over Virgin or SQ etc, for the same or less money they are smoking something illegal.
THOSE are the guys UA can't lose or thier oz route is a goner.
Glen
.