preview new cabin configurations in September
#16
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Programs: Bar Alliance Gold
Posts: 16,271
Originally Posted by deelmakur
(There was a) 2 + 3 arrangement, but the seats are wider, thanks to the removal of one.
Lastly, there was a 3 and 3, where the middle seat back folds down, and they leave it open, only using the window and aisle (this is pretty much what European carriers do at home).
It would also bad news for AA, too, as those folks who fly AS along the West Coast and credit to AA for transcons and international will also move to UA (since you can't fly AA along the coast).
Originally Posted by deelmakur
It appears to me that, especially in the transcon markets, with a little promotion at the other end, they could fairly easily become the dominant carrier.
But that doesn't mean they should abandon the field, which they essentially would if they went all-Economy or "European Business Class".
Last edited by SEA_Tigger; Sep 14, 2004 at 3:13 pm
#17
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Seattle, WA
Programs: Alaska 100K - MM, defender of shoes on the carpeted bulkhead 4ever, AA LT PLT, Hyatt Glob, HH Dia
Posts: 7,432
Getting home at 11 pm last night from London did not make for a wide awake lala today so I missed the seat preview.
As a victim of eurobusiness on BA, I would run screaming to UA for some of west coast travel if UA would fly nonstop to SAN. Would AS care if I left after 10 plus years of 20-50K BIS miles, probably not.
lala
As a victim of eurobusiness on BA, I would run screaming to UA for some of west coast travel if UA would fly nonstop to SAN. Would AS care if I left after 10 plus years of 20-50K BIS miles, probably not.
lala
#18
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: CT (NYC Suburbs), Gulf Stream, FL
Programs: United Premier 1K, American AAdvantage Gold
Posts: 3,089
I was a few minutes late myself, and as I was apologizing, the nice lady said not to worry, and showed me the appointment schedule, which had checks next to the names of those who made it. In my group, over half didn't show.
#19
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: CT (NYC Suburbs), Gulf Stream, FL
Programs: United Premier 1K, American AAdvantage Gold
Posts: 3,089
Tigger, I was referring to Newark and Miami, specifically. They have the exclusive in Miami, so it's a no brainer, but at Newark, one more nonstop, and they are equal to CO.United has never had more than a couple a day, with at least one coming from JFK. I have commuted between those points for over 10 years, and a lot of the nonstop service is seasonal. AS loads seem pretty good, and I must tell you, I do not think I have ever seen a promotional ad for the Alaska service, even when it first began. IAD, with its UA hub, is a different story, but Seattle nonstops are not a big thing from large east coast cities. A second or third frequency in those markets (BOS/EWR/MCO) would likely tip the scale. Likewise, additional future destinations. It all depends on whether these have been money makers thus far. Anybody know how the transcons have performed?
#20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Programs: Bar Alliance Gold
Posts: 16,271
Originally Posted by deelmakur
Anybody know how the transcons have performed?
#21
Join Date: Feb 2001
Programs: UA 1k, AA Plt, MR Lifetime Plat & Amb
Posts: 1,829
lalala, Our time is this week. The PM I sent you was done so mistakenly as I thought it was last week. We should still be on for Thursday if you can make it and I will try and take pictures if they allow it.
I got the email inviting me to the extended 2 - 3 hour preview at 5 tonight at Noon today but couldn't work it in with the short notice. I wonder if so many people are no-showing that they feel needed to email a bunch more of us.
I got the email inviting me to the extended 2 - 3 hour preview at 5 tonight at Noon today but couldn't work it in with the short notice. I wonder if so many people are no-showing that they feel needed to email a bunch more of us.
#22
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Programs: DL Plat
Posts: 234
FC going away: Firsthand report
I (MVP-G for 9 or 10 years straight -- not sure which) attended the seating configuration study this morning. Here's my report, including some subtleties I'm not sure everyone picked up on:
1. First Class is going away on all routes, even transcons - this was stated by the AS manager as pretty much a done deal. What AS is trying to determine is what "premium economy" cabin configuration would replace FC "without degrading the product too much" ... his exact words.
2. The premium economy cabin options we were shown and asked to evaluate (to replace the FC cabin):
a. Concept "A":
- seating is 5 seats per row (in a 2 and 3 config), with 5 rows total; ie, 25 premium economy seats
- seat pitch is 36" (standard economy pitch will remain 32")
- seat width is 19" (standard economy width will remain 17")
- seats will be new as 19" width seats not currently on AS fleet
b. Concept "B"
- seating is 6 seats per row (in a 3 and 3 config), with 5 rows total; ie, 30 premium economy seats
- seat pitch is 36" (standard economy pitch will remain 32")
- seat width is 17" (standard economy width will remain 17")
- seats will be identical to the economy seats, either current seats or the eventual fleetwide replacement economy seats (eventually all leather)
3. For the transcons only, and only if Concept B is adopted (ie 6 across 17" wide seats), then the middle seats will be guaranteed not occupied ("blocked") nor even sold. In fact, the AS manager demonstrated that the middle seat would be physically blocked prior to boarding (not just computer inventory blocked): this would be accomplished by installing something akin to the slide-in shelf of a toddler's highchair into the middle seat. This results in both preventing someone from moving into that seat, and also provides a very wide and useful flat surface to be shared by the premium aisle and window passengers; also, the seat arms can be raised resulting in now a 19" wide seat, rather than the original 17" wide seat.
4. After trying out the configs, the elites in my group discussed this; the near unanimous preference was for Concept "A" (5 across 19" width) (except for me -- I withheld judgment as I still had some reservations and questions). I asked the AS manager to confirm that for the transcons middle seat blocking would take place only if Concept B (6 across premium) was implemented -- he confirmed this to be true. That is if "A" (5 across, 2 and 3) is adopted, the middle seat will not be blocked, and AS "will actively attempt to sell that middle seat" ... his own words.
5. In filling out the evaluation, I felt the questions were not well constructed. In particular, the first question asked the user to rate 3 options (existing FC, and Concepts "A" and "B") for comfort on a long-haul flight, assuming any adjacent middle seat was not occupied (scale of 1 to 10); but this is rather contradictory: I'm sure many elites jumped to the conclusion that for a transcon, "A" with a blocked middle seat would be the best of A vs B, but as I stated above, the only way the middle seat will be empty in "A" is if you just get lucky -- AS will not be blocking middle seats for Concept "A", only for Concept "B".
The remaining questions were of the sort: "...given that Concept "B" provides far more premium seats than existing FC, and thus a much greater chance of securing an "upgrade", wouldn't you be much happier with Concept "B" ?"
6. In summary:
a. AS is discontinuing FC, and replacing it with an all economy airplane with a UA-inspired Economy+ cabin in front for elites/full fare Y/ and mileage or dollar upgrades (think UA's Ted)
b. It appears AS has already chosen Concept "A" (5 across, 2 and 3), and is just seeking validation from it's elites that the elites "want" this Economy+ configuration (in place of FC)
1. First Class is going away on all routes, even transcons - this was stated by the AS manager as pretty much a done deal. What AS is trying to determine is what "premium economy" cabin configuration would replace FC "without degrading the product too much" ... his exact words.
2. The premium economy cabin options we were shown and asked to evaluate (to replace the FC cabin):
a. Concept "A":
- seating is 5 seats per row (in a 2 and 3 config), with 5 rows total; ie, 25 premium economy seats
- seat pitch is 36" (standard economy pitch will remain 32")
- seat width is 19" (standard economy width will remain 17")
- seats will be new as 19" width seats not currently on AS fleet
b. Concept "B"
- seating is 6 seats per row (in a 3 and 3 config), with 5 rows total; ie, 30 premium economy seats
- seat pitch is 36" (standard economy pitch will remain 32")
- seat width is 17" (standard economy width will remain 17")
- seats will be identical to the economy seats, either current seats or the eventual fleetwide replacement economy seats (eventually all leather)
3. For the transcons only, and only if Concept B is adopted (ie 6 across 17" wide seats), then the middle seats will be guaranteed not occupied ("blocked") nor even sold. In fact, the AS manager demonstrated that the middle seat would be physically blocked prior to boarding (not just computer inventory blocked): this would be accomplished by installing something akin to the slide-in shelf of a toddler's highchair into the middle seat. This results in both preventing someone from moving into that seat, and also provides a very wide and useful flat surface to be shared by the premium aisle and window passengers; also, the seat arms can be raised resulting in now a 19" wide seat, rather than the original 17" wide seat.
4. After trying out the configs, the elites in my group discussed this; the near unanimous preference was for Concept "A" (5 across 19" width) (except for me -- I withheld judgment as I still had some reservations and questions). I asked the AS manager to confirm that for the transcons middle seat blocking would take place only if Concept B (6 across premium) was implemented -- he confirmed this to be true. That is if "A" (5 across, 2 and 3) is adopted, the middle seat will not be blocked, and AS "will actively attempt to sell that middle seat" ... his own words.
5. In filling out the evaluation, I felt the questions were not well constructed. In particular, the first question asked the user to rate 3 options (existing FC, and Concepts "A" and "B") for comfort on a long-haul flight, assuming any adjacent middle seat was not occupied (scale of 1 to 10); but this is rather contradictory: I'm sure many elites jumped to the conclusion that for a transcon, "A" with a blocked middle seat would be the best of A vs B, but as I stated above, the only way the middle seat will be empty in "A" is if you just get lucky -- AS will not be blocking middle seats for Concept "A", only for Concept "B".
The remaining questions were of the sort: "...given that Concept "B" provides far more premium seats than existing FC, and thus a much greater chance of securing an "upgrade", wouldn't you be much happier with Concept "B" ?"
6. In summary:
a. AS is discontinuing FC, and replacing it with an all economy airplane with a UA-inspired Economy+ cabin in front for elites/full fare Y/ and mileage or dollar upgrades (think UA's Ted)
b. It appears AS has already chosen Concept "A" (5 across, 2 and 3), and is just seeking validation from it's elites that the elites "want" this Economy+ configuration (in place of FC)
#23
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland
Posts: 11,569
Originally Posted by hsmythe
6. In summary:
a. AS is discontinuing FC, and replacing it with an all economy airplane with a UA-inspired Economy+ cabin in front for elites/full fare Y/ and mileage or dollar upgrades (think UA's Ted)
b. It appears AS has already chosen Concept "A" (5 across, 2 and 3), and is just seeking validation from it's elites that the elites "want" this Economy+ configuration (in place of FC)
a. AS is discontinuing FC, and replacing it with an all economy airplane with a UA-inspired Economy+ cabin in front for elites/full fare Y/ and mileage or dollar upgrades (think UA's Ted)
b. It appears AS has already chosen Concept "A" (5 across, 2 and 3), and is just seeking validation from it's elites that the elites "want" this Economy+ configuration (in place of FC)
Was there any mention of better food and/or free drinks in the premium section?
#24
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,819
I wonder if this means the first class sales aren't all they're reported to be, or if they're just not able to adequately reward their elites. With 12 or 16 seats in the current FC configuration, AS obviously doesn't have enough "premium" seats to meet the upgrade demand from their elites, particularily on the transcons. The 3-3 with the middle seat vacant sounds better for the transcons than getting stuck on the 3 side in a middle seat. But for west coast travel, the 2-3 option is oviously better. Once again, AS finds itself challenged by having 2 airlines (transcon and west coast) with disparate needs. The bean counters have obviously been busy.
I am going to make sure I requalify for AA platinum this year before I try to get the 50K bonus for hitting 75K miles. Time to keep all options open given the uncertainty at AAG.
I am going to make sure I requalify for AA platinum this year before I try to get the 50K bonus for hitting 75K miles. Time to keep all options open given the uncertainty at AAG.
#25
formerly ASTechGuy
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Milton, WA USA
Posts: 229
Did they give you any idea when a final decision would be made? Also, did they speak at all about changes to the inflight service from the current first class product?
Thanks by the way - excellent report!
Thanks by the way - excellent report!
#27
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 701
I can't find the info, but going back around ten years, Air Transport World featured company offering a "variable geometry seat" that enabled carriers to alternate between a coach and Business/First Class product.
The row of three standard coach seats was constructed much like existing seats, with armrests separating each seat.
The armrests of the center seat were collapsible, and could be folded downwards while the center paneling of the middle seat's "back" was folded forward and down - creating two wide, First Class seats from that same row of three coach ones!
There was even an option for a floating railing system (attached to the overhead compartments) that could enable the carrier to create "bulkheads" separating the main cabin from the variable "First Class."
I think this would have been a much better solution, as it affords the flexibility to tailor the number of premium seats offered by market and flight.
The row of three standard coach seats was constructed much like existing seats, with armrests separating each seat.
The armrests of the center seat were collapsible, and could be folded downwards while the center paneling of the middle seat's "back" was folded forward and down - creating two wide, First Class seats from that same row of three coach ones!
There was even an option for a floating railing system (attached to the overhead compartments) that could enable the carrier to create "bulkheads" separating the main cabin from the variable "First Class."
I think this would have been a much better solution, as it affords the flexibility to tailor the number of premium seats offered by market and flight.
#28
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,819
Originally Posted by Snowdevil
I can't find the info, but going back around ten years, Air Transport World featured company offering a "variable geometry seat" that enabled carriers to alternate between a coach and Business/First Class product.
The row of three standard coach seats was constructed much like existing seats, with armrests separating each seat.
The armrests of the center seat were collapsible, and could be folded downwards while the center paneling of the middle seat's "back" was folded forward and down - creating two wide, First Class seats from that same row of three coach ones!
There was even an option for a floating railing system (attached to the overhead compartments) that could enable the carrier to create "bulkheads" separating the main cabin from the variable "First Class."
I think this would have been a much better solution, as it affords the flexibility to tailor the number of premium seats offered by market and flight.
The row of three standard coach seats was constructed much like existing seats, with armrests separating each seat.
The armrests of the center seat were collapsible, and could be folded downwards while the center paneling of the middle seat's "back" was folded forward and down - creating two wide, First Class seats from that same row of three coach ones!
There was even an option for a floating railing system (attached to the overhead compartments) that could enable the carrier to create "bulkheads" separating the main cabin from the variable "First Class."
I think this would have been a much better solution, as it affords the flexibility to tailor the number of premium seats offered by market and flight.
#29
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sea-Tac, WA
Posts: 854
Originally Posted by deelmakur
My continuing comment was that they could do anything they like, but that absent retention of the classic 2 and 2 F class seating, they would not be competitive in the transcon market.
The legacy carrier model is broken, US-Bankrupt, UA-Bankrupt, DL-nearly bankrupt. JetBlue and Southwest-Profitable. If we can create a product that is a real cut above the latter, we're a step ahead.
So would we really be any less competitive then today?
#30
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland
Posts: 11,569
Originally Posted by RASMguy
Not competitive? Don't forget that Southwest and JetBlue operate Transcons from Seattle and Indy Air is planning on serving SEA too. When our fares and traffic mix reflect the leisure market, we truly compete with the low cost carrier market. So an enhanced Biz class is very attractive when you look at who we compete with. Besides, many people comment here already that they have elite status on other carriers and fly on them Transcon; mainly due to the lack of comp upgrades.
The legacy carrier model is broken, US-Bankrupt, UA-Bankrupt, DL-nearly bankrupt. JetBlue and Southwest-Profitable. If we can create a product that is a real cut above the latter, we're a step ahead.
So would we really be any less competitive then today?
The legacy carrier model is broken, US-Bankrupt, UA-Bankrupt, DL-nearly bankrupt. JetBlue and Southwest-Profitable. If we can create a product that is a real cut above the latter, we're a step ahead.
So would we really be any less competitive then today?