Originally Posted by
BearX220
A decade ago the tulip stood for many very negative associations with the flying public -- labor disputes, militant employees, marathon bankruptcy, the SFH, terrible service / performance metrics. But the Continental name had much less equity in offshore markets. Hence the weird shotgun marriage: keep the United name, slap it onto the Continental livery.
I make no bones about having been a very happy Continental customer. To be frank, aside from E+, the merger has brought my world very little tangible benefit.
Now, that said ... every time I saw a tulip - pre-merger - all I could think of was “old, tired, are they really still a thing?”
I can’t speak for international destinations, as that’s not my segment ... but domestically, Continental by all appearances was the much more “refreshed” airline. The fleet was uniform, freshly painted and standardized. Terminals and gates were clean and refreshed.
The tulip was just ... Worn. It’s not the tulip itself that’s the problem - of course it’s beautiful and iconic. But the number of gates with some worn out half-a-tulip, the peeling paint planes in a mix of liveries, the old signage... just projected neglect. It was prudent, of course - Signage and such is plenty functional, no matter how old... but seeing faded signs from the 70s just didn’t portray a great look in the late 2000s.
The right thing to do would’ve been a Big Bang - start over, new logo, new future. But given the climate at the time, if I had to pick A or B, (globe or tulip) - I would’ve picked A too.