Originally Posted by
Unterwegs
For me this would be an easy decision. CX F is light years above UA F.
Just consider the amount of space and privacy: In the 747 CX has 9 seats where UA has 14. In my view UA F is more like a good business class, but not even close to what most non-US carriers offer in F.
I would credit the miles to AA, not CX. AA still has a fairly good availability for premium class award tickets a few days before the flights.
I agree with this.
I was a GS since UA started the program up until this year. I decided with the new seats on airlines like CX and SQ were better in C than UA's new F seats (and that C seat on UA is an embarrassment) why pay more (UA is notoriously higher priced to Asia than its competitors in premium cabins, unless you fly restricted fares, i.e. Z fares) for an inferior product?
I am now 1K on UA and EXP with AA and I have no regrets now about not being a GS at UA anymore. As others have posted, there is no guarantee that you will get GS status and UA doesn't publish the requirements. Loyalty is a 2 way street and I think Smisek doesn't get it....YMMV...
UA is starting to "tweak" some of its Asia routes, in Particular, SIN/SGN destinations with two cabin domestic F products between HKG and SIN/SGN. Where will it end? Will HKG become a 2-cabin BF like CO? Don't know.
The biggest advantage I see with GS at UA was converting award tickets from upgrade space, which makes it easier to travel in F with two people. On OW however, getting 2 F award tickets on say CX for example is easier than on *A (just ask the success rate of UA fliers getting premium award tickets on SQ).