Originally Posted by
LarkSFO
Those that can afford it (and they are not billionaires), who are not beholden to a legacy US carriers FF program, will buy a seat on the foreign carrier that flies from their US origin to their foreign destination.
How many companies out there still allow GF (or any Int'l F) purchasing?
Perhaps some GS's will direct their F purchase towards UA to make sure their spend is high enough to qualify? And, because they value hard product over soft?
You aren't incorrect. But you and so many others seem to be missing the point I was trying to make. FOR USA carriers, UA wins in offering F. PERIOD.
Why and how don't matter: the FACT is that UA offers F on FAR more routes on FAR more flights than does AA...and of course DL doesn't at all offer F. Not every paying F passenger in a day is going to be able to get F on the seats on CX or SQ to HKG, after all. Some wanting to get to HKG will end up on UA because the inventory for ALL F on all carriers has greatly diminished. Even those amazing foreign carriers have shrunk their F cabins, and that actually helps UA in competing for those F dollars.
We don't need to know why UA or AA or DL flies which route so many times a day or why one might have more cancellations or delays or complaints--the fact is that they have what they have. People speculate endlessly herein on the possibilities more than the 24 hour news channels do on news topics! But the fact is that UA NOW and for the foreseeable future offers F in a way that AA and DL do not and will not. That is a competitive edge for UA in those markets over AA and DL.
No American airline carrier is ever going to offer the SERVICE quality of Singapore, Cathay, Lufthansa, Emirates, Etihad, Qatar, etc. American carriers don't offer it because the paying American public for the most part couldn't tell the difference and doesn't think it as important as customers from other countries overall. That's why DL without ANY F still managed to have the highest profits of ANY airline in the world.
The apple to oranges comparisons and contrasts drawn herein (not necessarily by you to whom I am now responding) really amuse me. Everyone so often compares the best SERVICE/SOFT PRODUCT carriers (SQ, CX, EK, etc) as if they fly all the routes that our US carriers fly--and they don't. They compare UA to competition from abroad, when their real competition is AA and DL more than ever in this consolidated industry. SQ and CX are both amazing--but they can't get anyone from the USA to Europe nonstop. LH and EK are both amazing--but they can't get anyone from the USA to Asia nonstop.
Some people seem to think paying business travelers want to fly in the most luxury--and maybe that's true. But more often than I think people herein want to admit, paying business travelers want to get from point A to point B as quickly as possible, too...and that means nonstop whenever possible. UA, DL, and AA serve that need from the USA FAR BETTER and with more volume than everyone seems to recognize, and that is why they can profit far more than ANY other airline in the world.
UA may be hurting COMPARED TO AA AND DL right now, but its Q2 profit doesn't suggest it's hurting as badly as some would like to paint the picture. UA's Q2 profit was substantially larger than any of those amazing world carriers from abroad that everyone here loves to laud, after all.