Originally Posted by
EWR764
I certainly understand this perspective, but I am of the opinion that if there were more ("enough") of this type of traveler flying United, there would be a clear business case to retain a three-cabin product... and there's not.
Correct. This is indeed the narrative being pushed by the sCO management that has long favored a 2-cabin product and traditionally had smaller base of HVFs in its two captive hubs.
Originally Posted by
cerealmarketer
Here's my guess of a profile.
- Middle level at a big corporate
- Gets paid J on long haul, maybe F on ultra long haul
- Gets F if it's less than alternative J
- At a company with a big United contract
- Has to do lots of domestic schlepping, but has to buy coach for non transcon flights, so GS upgrade priority is the stickiness
- Travel budget is 20% or more of annual salary or larger - so being top dog at a US airline feels 'big' and 'important'
Not exactly the prototypical global Emirates paid F top dollar flier.
And iced out of F as US carriers continue to phase it out.
GS is the only reason I stay with UA. GS makes it worth it to pay for J (for work and personal travel) on UA if F exists, but its just not worth it in a 2-cabin world. There are a number of folks with this profile that could (and do) easily fly EK F. After all, its the same price as UA minus the domestic and award benefits of GS.
Originally Posted by
why fly
Nope new seats coming. Just wait for the announcement. You will be pleasantly surprised.
I struggle to see how a 60 seat J cabin will not retain the assembly line feel of the current J cabin. Match that with the horrible 'premium' ground experience at airports like EWR and IAH and you can say I'm a more than bit skeptical that the new J will be worth paying a premium for.