Originally Posted by
me4yankees
If that is the case, why did US management allow the product to decline so badly during 2006-2008? Common sense dictates that they would not have allowed this to happen to begin with. It makes no financial sense to have a good product, ruin it, run off their best customers, build it back up to standards again, then try to win back those they ran off.
Well, perhaps they have some data now which shows that pax are willing to pay for these "enhancements," where before they believed they were not. Perhaps its a realization that some of their moves were wrong. Experimentation is not without risks (but also not without rewards: the new fees, for example, will net US $500 million a year).
I just don't think they're improving their product here because the Star Alliance told them to do so. Of course, a more consistent product DOES make it easier to partner. Delta, for example, restored free wine and beer on transatlantic flights when they partnered with Air France this year.