Originally Posted by TomBascom

1) Something about the way you type "high yield" leads me to believe that you still think it isn't worth it unless it nets a 1000% premium over discount coach. Which suggests that you're actually an airline executive in disguise -- I'm guessing you work for DL. Your suggested agenda sounds strangely familiar

2) The value of the F seat should not be viewed in isolation. "FC on leisure routes" is bullspit. No route that US flies is purely "leisure".

3) Nor are "leisure" and "first class" mutually exclusive -- nor should they be. This is a huge potential differentiator that the numbskulls "marketing" the legacy airlines just don't get -- as a VFF I don't want to sit in back on my vacation any more than I do on a business trip. In fact I want to be up front with the Mrs et al and I want them to enjoy it. Can I get that on SWA? No I can't. Does having that capability give US an advantage? It certainly could... Does the F service to MCO or AUA need to be just like the F service to LAX? No. In fact there might be interesting ways to adapt it to the market... "But you aren't paying for it!" Bull. I paid for it when I earned the miles. And it doesn't cost nearly what they'd have you delude yourself into thinking anyway.

4) Those aircraft perform many functions other than simply flying back and forth from CLT to MCO or PHL and LAS. They fly between the hubs and to spokes too. It is, for instance, just plain stupid from a (business) customer relations POV to be flying a 757 with an F8 configuration between PIT & PHL on a Monday morning. Again -- you have to look at the total picture. Not just the isolated and largely anecdotal evidence about isolated routes.