<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by moondog:
Plenty of airlines have lower yields based on market dynamics (Asia is generally cheaper than Europe, for example), but still manage to provide good service.</font>
Their costs are much lower than US/Europe based airlines (ask their pilots how much they make) so the comparison is moot.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">that CO, with empty seats and employees up front, gets better yields than UA or AA (this point could be verified, but I lack references)</font>
Overall, CO is doing better financially than UA or AA. I have seen about the same occupancy in Business class for UA or CO. Given how impossible it is to get upgrades/awards on CO, they muct have a larger proportion of paying customers than UA. Anecdotal, I know.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">that CO's business class is better than UA's or AA's; </font>
That has been my experience having flown UA and CO business class right up to the amenities kit, attention from FAs that UA can only match in a fraction of the flights, availability of functional empower outlets, food selection, etc.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Clearly, UA c-class has declined over the past year or so, but I doubt there is a strong correlation between this decline and the upgrade culture because the current upgrade system predates the notorious service cuts that are often spoken of here.
</font>
The current climate is what makes the yields nad the proposals in this thread extremely important. It is a consequence of a downturn in travel and an increasing number of overhang in miles and elite statuses in all the airlines that they cannot continue to support as if they meant nothing.