Originally Posted by
DimSum
Far be it for me to disagree with a SVP at UA, but I think this would be a rookie mistake (trying to be too many things to too many people vs. picking one thing and trying to excel at that one thing). As an example, SQ has great premium cabins, but you pay for that, and their frequent flier program sucks.
My suggestion for UA is that they go try and excel at middle-of-the-pack and pick (self-serving suggestion follows
the strategy of being the "frequent flier airline". Have the best frequent flier program of anyone (that is one area UA seems to excel in already) and don't even try to have the best C/F product.
I don't know if E+ has been successful from a P/L standpoint, but that was certainly a move in that (cater to frequent fliers) direction, and I suspect I am not the only person who continues to fly UA primarily because of E+ (with or without VOD).
For that matter, I wouldn't try to compete on low cost either. No more Ted! (Another self-serving suggestion, heh!)
United has a long way to go to compete with the best of class. So I agree with Dim Sum that they should focus on keeping their base by doing well enough. Service is much harder to improve than hardware, and without service UA will never be above middle of the pack. But any effort to improve must come from top management, so having a SVP express desire to be better is a good start. US has fallen considerably because new corporate management has not valued service and that attitude has permeated the airline.
Middle of the pack domestically is one thing since the standard is low, but middle of the pack internationally is a much higher level. I fly UA C for TransPac only because of *A.
E+ is a good product. It is the only reason why I would even consider switching to UA and start from half way down.