Originally Posted by
channa
Agreed.
The bigger the operation, the less a "one-size-fits-all" model makes sense.
Present UA is probably carrying around some deadweight with F in markets that don't justify it. Meanwhile, present CO is probably leaving money on the table by not having F in markets that could support it.
Agreed. I think F class will largely remain across the Pacific where F still seems to be viable. LHR/FRA jump out as candidates in Europe.
Originally Posted by
reinballe
The new UA Business Class is a amazingly dense.
Take a 777 where both UA and CO has 3-3-3 seating in Economy.
In UA's new business configuration you sit 8 across (2-4-2) whereas CO has 6 across 2-2-2. That is a big difference.
CO's new BF is therefore superior to UA's new business configuration IMO... but UA's new C is still a great product.
While I generally prefer CO's BF configuration, it technically is more dense than UA's product, in the sense that CO can actually fit more seats in a given space on an aircraft than UA can. There is more 'crossover' with the CO design (at 60" pitch) than the UA (at 78" pitch). The middle seats on UA's 777 and 747 are less desirable, though.
Originally Posted by
UAL awesome
LOL, this is hilarious. UA's widebodies are suddenly "old" clunkers? UA's widebodies are roughly the same age as CO's, with the newest widebodies delivered in 2002, which right up to when CO was taking 764s and 777s, excluding the last 2 they received.
UA's average widebody fleet age is 13.5 years, while CO's is 9.4 years. They are by no means 'clunkers' and are very well-maintained, but CO's fleet is certainly newer.
Not to mention you can't be the comfort of a widebody on ALL United international flights while the majority of CO's are flown on 757s.
Common misconception, but the majority, as you say, of CO longhaul flights are on widebodies. If speaking strictly international then yes, but that would have to include CO's large Central American and Caribbean network, by actual departures. In terms of ASMs, it's widebodies by a long shot.
Originally Posted by
entropy
There is certainly a SMALL market of people who DO PAY for F. Some people (the sort who waste money buy Rolls Royces and Astons) would rather pay $5k extra for a 'marginally' better seat than not be the king of the hill and have to sit in business with the riff-raff.
Right, and I don't see UA abandoning this segment of the market. However, a right-sizing may occur to limit the number of F seats flying around empty. While limiting the number of different configurations seems like a decidedly CO-esque tactic, United did a lot of "one-size-fits-all" with their international fleet.