Moving to SFO... Bye Bye AMR :(

 
Old Mar 27, 07, 10:29 am
  #16  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SFO
Programs: AA EXP, UA Premier
Posts: 280
Not trying to convince the OP to stay, since it sounds like a decision has already been reached based on sound reasoning.

Given the fact that AA does not have any nonstop/non-codeshare international departures from the Bay Area, it might be easy to dismiss it as a viable option, but I too have found flying AA out of the Bay Area to be extremely manageable:
1. Good coverage to Asia/Australia on AA partners (Cathay, JAL, & Qantas)
2. Doing a connection in ORD, JFK, or even DFW for flights to Western Europe yields decent coverage to the major cities. And I prefer to connect in the good ol' USA instead of Europe (and LHR in particular).
3. Alaska/Horizon do a great job for flying up and down the west coast.
4. AA security line waits at SFO are almost non-existent
5. I feel that there seems to be lower percentage of elites on AA than UA making upgrades easier. This is not hard fact - just a soft conclusion based on an anecdotal evidence arising from conversations with colleagues.
6. AA routinely beats out UA on pricing for my itineraries which makes the bean counters happy.
7. And of course an AC with a great staff. Size doesn't matter. Or so I've been told.

The major gaps I've found have been SFO-DEN (mentioned by the OP), SFO-PHX, and SFO-SLC. If I needed to fly any one of those routes on a regular basis, I would seriously consider switching. I would be crazy (FT MR translation: quite sane) to want to connect on those journeys.

To the OP - good luck, but you wouldn't be alone if you decided to come back to AA .
RatherBeSailing is offline  
Old Mar 27, 07, 10:31 am
  #17  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Programs: AA PLAT; Hilton Gold; Hertz #1 Gold
Posts: 252
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post
Is EWR that much more convenient for you than JFK or LGA? Those options are available on AA.

Of course, if it looks like a permanent move and you're looking for the most convenience, UA makes sense. If you really don't want to give up AA, then you can still do OK from SFO.
EWR is 15 minutes from my parents house... not to mention I'll save $30 in tolls roundtrip too.
n5177c is offline  
Old Mar 27, 07, 10:52 am
  #18  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,360
Originally Posted by n5177c View Post
EWR is 15 minutes from my parents house... not to mention I'll save $30 in tolls roundtrip too.
Sounds like the decision's easy, then. Good luck with UA.

And if you have any leftover AAdvantage miles you can't use, I'd be happy to take them off your hands......
jragosta is offline  
Old Mar 27, 07, 12:34 pm
  #19  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 17,769
Originally Posted by n5177c View Post
I got a new job in San Francisco starting May 1st so it looks like I'll be leaving American Airlines for United - already sent them my AA statement to get my statues comped. Will be mostly flying SFO-NRT, SFO-EWR, and SFO-DEN so it makes no sense to stick with AA.

Thanks to the AA board and all the great people at AMR over the years who always treated me great!
Actually it can be good to be top-tier elite in the hub of another airline.
BenjaminNYC is offline  
Old Mar 27, 07, 1:16 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA & UK -- AA EXP 3.5MM, Hyatt Diamond, SPG Plat, Avis President's Club
Posts: 6,412
When I moved to the Bay Area in 1998, I contacted UA in order to transfer my DL and/or AA status. They basically told me to start over, ride in the back for a year, and earn status like everyone else. Therefore I stayed with DL and AA (and eventually moved almost all my flying to AA). UA coulda had my business: they refused it.
CloudCoder is offline  
Old Mar 27, 07, 1:23 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,360
Originally Posted by SquareDanceGuy View Post
When I moved to the Bay Area in 1998, I contacted UA in order to transfer my DL and/or AA status. They basically told me to start over, ride in the back for a year, and earn status like everyone else. Therefore I stayed with DL and AA (and eventually moved almost all my flying to AA). UA coulda had my business: they refused it.
That's changing - as near as I can tell matching FF status is pretty routine now (although usually not to the highest status level).
jragosta is offline  
Old Mar 27, 07, 4:25 pm
  #22  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,595
Originally Posted by SquareDanceGuy View Post
When I moved to the Bay Area in 1998, I contacted UA in order to transfer my DL and/or AA status. They basically told me to start over, ride in the back for a year, and earn status like everyone else. Therefore I stayed with DL and AA (and eventually moved almost all my flying to AA). UA coulda had my business: they refused it.
1998 was I think the most profitable year in UA's history...they could do no wrong. If I recall it was 1.5 billion in profits. There was not a need to give unproven favors to others, when those already loyal to UA wer givinhg record load factors and fares.

The next 2 years, labor issues arose (evebody wanted their share due to the ESOP sacrifices,) and then between bad service (labor/mgmt) terrorism, and slow economy, UA is now doing status matches.

It is best to negotiate when you are in a relative position of power (i.e. bad years for airlines) than from a period when they are in power.

I am sure that UA now would give you your status match!
fastair is offline  
Old Mar 27, 07, 5:24 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 610
I moved to the Bay rea recently, and I haven't had to deal with UA yet. Of course, this means I deal with DFW and ORD a lot more than I'd like to...

As for UA in 1998, I heard they were able to profit the most from the dot com bubble. When times are good you can be choosier with your customers.
runnerwallah is offline  
Old Mar 27, 07, 5:57 pm
  #24  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: NYC/BOS/MSY/AUH
Programs: AA EXP, 5MM; BA GLD
Posts: 15,489
Originally Posted by SquareDanceGuy View Post
When I moved to the Bay Area in 1998, I contacted UA in order to transfer my DL and/or AA status. They basically told me to start over, ride in the back for a year, and earn status like everyone else. Therefore I stayed with DL and AA (and eventually moved almost all my flying to AA). UA coulda had my business: they refused it.
It must've been you, cause in 1998 UA matched my AA (then PLT) status. A year later my employer was acquired, I was kicked out, and I ran as fast as I could back to AA!
Blumie is offline  
Old Mar 28, 07, 7:47 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ATL
Programs: AA, AGR, DL, MR, WoH, UA
Posts: 954
Originally Posted by brp View Post
As a Bay Arean as well, I concur. Being out of SJC makes it an easy choice, even with the cutbacks. I can get my transcons out of SFO
I have to jump on this bandwagon.

I only fly UA to (of all places) IAH. There's a direct flight and, sometimes, it's cheaper than AA.
sechs is offline  
Old Mar 28, 07, 11:11 pm
  #26  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 610
Originally Posted by sechs View Post
I have to jump on this bandwagon.

I only fly UA to (of all places) IAH. There's a direct flight and, sometimes, it's cheaper than AA.
Having just booked an SFO-IAH ticket, I did pass up a more expensive and longer AA flight. But I still wasn't stuck with United - I picked Continental :-)
runnerwallah is offline  
Old Mar 28, 07, 11:23 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bay Area, Calif
Programs: AA-EXP 2MM
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by brp View Post
As a Bay Arean as well, I concur. Being out of SJC makes it an easy choice, even with the cutbacks. I can get my transcons out of SFO, and the rest (including the WN flights where the AA schedules and/or equipment suck). Works very well for me. Just seemed that the OP had already made up his/her mind, so I was all for wishing her/him well

Cheers.
As one also based in the Bay Area I find that between SFO and SJC I can stick with AA to get almost anywhere when I need to and still maintain a reasonable flight schedule (reasonable to the bean-counters, shockingly-short to the FT community).

I only wish they had not gotten rid of the SJC-NRT flight.
sj-flyer is offline  
Old Mar 29, 07, 11:31 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SJC/SFO & ORD
Programs: AA Platinum/LT Gold(1.3MM current method/1.51MM old method)/BA Executive Club/AS MP/Marriott
Posts: 1,627
Originally Posted by san2yul View Post
Just my 2 cents: I grew up in Bay Area and use to fly a lot out of SFO and OAK (sometime SJC) and never had to deal with UA. Matter of fact, I've taken just 1 round trip in my life on UA. The best option for me was AA on longer trips and WN for short hops...
Originally Posted by brp View Post
As a Bay Arean as well, I concur. Being out of SJC makes it an easy choice, even with the cutbacks. I can get my transcons out of SFO, and the rest (including the WN flights where the AA schedules and/or equipment suck). Works very well for me. Just seemed that the OP had already made up his/her mind, so I was all for wishing her/him well

Cheers.
Originally Posted by SquareDanceGuy View Post
When I moved to the Bay Area in 1998, I contacted UA in order to transfer my DL and/or AA status. They basically told me to start over, ride in the back for a year, and earn status like everyone else. Therefore I stayed with DL and AA (and eventually moved almost all my flying to AA). UA coulda had my business: they refused it.
I moved to SFO 4-5 years ago....when I lived in SFO proper (Marina District), I flew with UA only twice (I fly to ORD every month) and AA rest of the time......even if I flew internationally, I would fly SFO-ORD-LHR or SFO-LAX-LHR on AA.

Now I live in the SJC Area (10 minutes away)...I still use AA to ORD and if I need to fly to LHR, I fly SJC-LAX-LHR...nothing really too difficult (except for the fact I have to check in one of my carry on's on those jungle jets).....

AA gives me all the flexibility at great prices..I'm glad I didn't switch back to UA...
Jacobin777 is offline  
Old Mar 29, 07, 11:50 pm
  #29  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Austin TX USA
Programs: UA life 1K, 2MM; AA Life Pt 3mm; DL nada now!; AS nada now; BA, FD, CX, LH, DD, Amex Pt, Diners
Posts: 942
Bmi

Now that is an interesting suggestion. On the other hand being destined to travel in coach to NRT without an Obento meal in the upper deck of a 747 seems like a tradeoff that only the most ardent lover of RCCs would go for. And if you are 1K you get to go in them anyway when going international. My advice to anyone is never touch a European carrier or its mileage plan. They are mean. The are inflexible. They are stuffy. The hardly have any flights when things go wrong. And they won't ever let you standby for other flights. It's a cultural thing. Trust me. I was brought up there.
UAAAPeter is offline  
Old Mar 29, 07, 11:57 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Austin TX USA
Programs: UA life 1K, 2MM; AA Life Pt 3mm; DL nada now!; AS nada now; BA, FD, CX, LH, DD, Amex Pt, Diners
Posts: 942
Matching

UA matched me in 1999 straight to premiere executive and I did them the favor of making it to 1k that year and have been ever since. As Thatcher said - never ever give up! AA and UA are very different. I am getting a little tired of not getting upgrades on UA domestically of late by the way. On the other hand I am getting really tired of AA not having food after 9pm in first out of DFW. AA give you more free international upgrades than UA. It's nice to have both - who knows how long that will last. They are both pretty good to tell the truth. Far far better than BA for example. I am sure my arteries must be hardening from all the alpha particles at 30,000 feet.
UAAAPeter is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread