Kirby is just mouthing the words.

Yes, he is 100% correct that brand reputation helps the results. That has been SWA's gig for years, and now DAL Is benefiting in the same way. And as jsloan says above, this is not a balance sheet issue, but rather it is more akin to metrics like NPS (net promoter score; the percentage of customers who will discuss their experience positively with others and as such recommend the brand to others). SWA gets repeat business and has a far fewer number who are turned off by the experience so they don't come back/don't recommend. Again, same with Delta, and before the AS take over VX.

But nothing Kirby is doing (and 10x on the 777, more CRJ-200s, J/F soft product cuts, is antithetical to what he is talking about) goes in the direction that he suggests is needed. The key telling phrase is that " we have a core belief that it does matter in the long term and that it’s tables stakes now to change the perception." https://skift.com/2018/08/27/united-...nto-believers/ What the hell is he talking about? It is almost like he thinks that he can gas-light his passengers about the cuts to product quality (other than the new J seat) if he can just get his staff to smile some-more. SWA has done well by (a) having happy, well paid staff, (b) not nickle and diming people, and trying e.g. to charge extra is you want a seat reservation in the front 2/3 of economy, (c) flying larger planes into secondary markets where the network carriers mostly fly cramped barbie jets; and (d) having a very rewarding mileage program for those who can get a companion pass and want to go places domestically.

I found this exchange to be telling:

Skift: At a conference in May, you said United needed to have a competitive product with other airlines. You called it, “keeping up with the Joneses.” Is that enough? Do you not need the best product?
Kirby: I mean that we need to have a quality competitive product, particularly with our primary competitors. I mean essentially I don’t think our government is going to give us $50 billion like the Middle East carriers, so we can’t lose money and create a product that uses government subsidies. But for all of our competitors that have to compete without government subsidies, we’re going to have a quality product. I think particularly the Polaris product — it’s not rolled out everywhere yet, but where it is rolled out — is the best in class. Flying across the Atlantic, flying to South America, flying in most Asian markets, it’s a best in class product.

The truth is that to win back high value customers UA has to offer a better combination of product and service. Kirby just does not get that, and thinks that Polaris - which is clearly inferior to DL's new hard product (which is fine in certain seats on the 77W where the seats are 6'6" long and 23" wide, are sucky for really cramped on the 763 where they are only 6'3" long (and not actually that long) and 20.6" wide). And of course, he appears not to think any product quality issues matter outside of Polaris.