+1^

Here is a nice article I read a while back talking about airlines adding more seats. They mention a new seat that slides forward giving the feelings of having the feeling of more room when there isn't. If Alaska decides to get these, let's hope they add seat power.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124407469840583393.html

I don't love UA's product so much. I'd rather fly AS for all sorts of reasons (service, attitude, home team, nonstops), but the lack of upgrades / lack of E+ issue is going to wear me down.

Here's how much I'd rather fly AS: if, on AS transcons, I could count on being upgraded to F at least 50 percent of the time, and to F or to exit row non-middle seating at least 80 percent of the time, and never end up in non-exit row middle, I'd completely switch away from UA except when flying SEA-RDU (most of my trips are SEA-IAD/DCA and SEA-MCO). I'd give up 1K status and the SWUs that go with it. I'd drop down to 2P or even 1P. That's another 50K BIS miles to AS, minimum -- maybe 75K.

If I had to choose between UA E- and AS Y, I'd head straight for AS. But then that's not the choice I have.

Generally speaking, yeah, U space on AS West Coast flights is MUCH more plentiful than on transcon ones. That should be apparent just looking at the frequencies and seeing how many F seats go to EWR/BOS/DCA compared to LAX/SFO. So I'd say that's a legitimate problem, and UA is much better on that score.

OP- does AA or DL/NW not work for you? That would seem to have the advantage of being able to put EQMs where you needed to (both AS for north/south travel out of SEA) and the east-west angle. It sounds like you could possibly get the mileage necessary to get EXP/PM plus MVPG...

Good question there. I'm an AA G for life (million miler); another 500K miles and I'm AA P for life. But no E+ there, so if I don't get upgraded, and don't get exit row seating, I'm back in the same boat as with AS. And I'd much rather fly AS than AA.

When I knew I was moving from RDU to SEA, and that I'd be traveling more than ever before, I took a long look at the situation and ended up saying to myself that I'd fly UA for transcons, making 1K easily, and AS for West Coast flights, probably being lucky to make MVP. But then I did more traveling than expected on AS, and did a lot on DL on the East Coast, and found myself unexpectedly making MVPG. So here I am with 1K (which, after DEQMs post, I've almost requalified for already) and thinking that I'd like to keep my MVPG status. Plus those transcons are convenient to DCA (closer to some of my meetings than IAD) and MCO (no stop in IAD or ORD, and no TED). So it has been tempting.

It's funny: not one person here besides me has thought it would be a good idea for AS to introduce an E+ like feature. So if the elites don't like it, it's a reasonable bet that AS management doesn't think it's a good idea, either.

I think where I'll end up is a modified version of my original strategy:

1. For West Coast flights, AS. Upgrades are plentiful and they're short flights if not.
2. For transcons where AS has nonstops, trying making plans earlier. Check AS first to see if upgrades and/or exit rows are available. If so, book AS. If not, go UA.

I'm flying about 150-160K BIS miles/year these days, so if I play things just right, I could still end up with not only 1K but MVPG and no bad seats. But it all depends on my ability to plan trips farther in advance, which is difficult.

Don't forget to keep in mind bulkhead in Y on AS transcons (Row 6 on the -800s). No wall, and a lot of extra legroom.

Before I had status, I'd also chummy up to the GAs and ask if any Golds got upgraded at the gate, could I have their exit row aisle? That worked surprisingly often.

I think AA proved a couple years ago that taking seats out for more legroom does not work. They only let that go for a year or 2 before they realized they were throwing money out the window.

In a perfect world I'd like to think that people will pay for E+ but I doubt they really do. Even if they do, it's not that much of a fare premium. Just randomly looking at SEA-IAD in 2 weeks on UA puts you at $899 round trip. For E+ they only want $49 more each way. There is no way they are making more money by having E+ instead of putting in an extra 2-3 rows.

Air New Zealand has been quite successful with their premium economy but that is purely on their longhaul flights. I think people are willing to pay more on a 12-14 hour flight than they are on a 5-6 hr one.

I don't know anyone who will pay for E+ and plenty of them have been offered the upsell. I paid for a year when I knew I'd fly enough to move from GM to 2P but I imagine I'm the exception rather than the rule.

As an elite, I like it. But my guess is that it isn't making much if anything off E+ upsells. The vast majority of the American flying public flat won't pay for comfort. They're after the cheapest fares, period.

I seem to recall having the E+ discussion before... might have been in a general thread or something...

But I do look at flight loads prior to booking (the seat maps feature is very helpful in finding decent seats when logged in as MVP/G to find the elusive seats)...

Also, isn't one row of Exit Row blocked out until T-24 on the 738's? So that could be an option...

Several years ago, AS did focus groups in Tukwila, WA, where they showed mockups of various alterations to the First Class cabin. One of the options was, essentially, replacing it with E+ like seating. Another was doing something similar to what BA does on intra-European flights, having regular coach seats with the middle seat blocked.

Ultimately, AS went with the newer FC seats in the -800s but kept the FC cabin. The response, overall, to making major changes was very negative.

It's not an extra 2-3 rows. On the Airbii, it's 1 row.

6 seats lost, even at today's 85% load factors, are seats that likely would not have been filled anyway. You need like a 95% load factor before you start infringing on any of those 6 lost seats. And then when you do, the assumption is revenue management made sure the lost revenue was of the lower fare buckets.

So, assume 10% of the time, you're running at a >95% load and will have a loss of revenue due to E+. Somewhere between 1 and 6 seats on the Airbus. For the sake of argument, let's call it 3 seats lost 10% of the time. SEA-IAD is $100 each way on an L fare, making it $300 lost for every 10 flights, or $30 a flight in lost revenue.

Obviously we don't know the distribution, but even if 10% is off, and it's more like 20%, that's still only $60 a flight.

All it would take is one or two E+ upsells per flight to recoup that lost revenue. And we're not even taking into account the saved weight from the missing seats, lost pax and other pax handling costs.

Remember the E+ buyup offer is not marketed towards the road warrior (who already has status). Though US/OAL Elites have acknowledged buying it.

I've seen mostly leisure travellers buy-up to E+. UA's method of protecting E+ until the last minute encourages it. Many non-status passengers end up without pre-assigned seats. That in turn makes them more receptive to an E+ upgrade offer. I've seen it time and time again -- not just at the kiosk, but also at the gate. I even flew next to some kid on SFO-LAX, "It was only $25, this is much nicer." It's an impulse buy for a nominal amount. As frequent flyers, we don't see it. We're thinking $50 x 50 segments a year = $2,500, who's gonna pay that. But to the person who takes 1 trip a year, paid $500 for his ticket, what's an extra $100 for a better seat on the once-a-year trip to see granny?

On top of that, you have the loyalty factor (this very thread for example). How many people stick with UA, or pay more to fly UA, simply because of E+? That's difficult to quantify, but there's revenue there which is attributable to E+.

So I have a hard time believing that E+ does not make them money. UA says it makes them money, and perhaps when it was first rolled out it didn't, but now with all the upsells, annual subscriptions, etc., I can't see how they're not at least covering their costs.

Are you sure giving passengers without pre-assigned seats E+ encourages future upgrades? I don't have (and never will) have status on UA. I occasionally have to fly them because of a corporate contract and have learned to never pre-select a seat. If I don't get E+ at the kiosk, I'll ask for a seat farther forward at that gate. I haven't been missed E+ yet on the 6 flights I've taken this year.

Thank you, channa. It's great to have someone who understands the inner workings of E+ explain the theory behind it and why it works for UA. The question is, could it work similarly for AS? I believe it could, but then that's probably just because I want more legroom for myself.