It's not another cabin. It's the same cabin as economy. It's just a section of economy where there is just a little more space between the rows. It's no more a different cabin than the exit rows are a different cabin now. Economy Plus on UA is exactly the same service as the rest of economy, just with a little extra leg room.

And while I'll withhold any speculation about whether CO is adding Economy Plus or not, it's certainly possible that the changes made to fit an extra row of seats on the 738s and 739s would make it somewhat easier to implement Economy Plus on those aircraft, as the reduction of a row or two of seats would just return the plane back to its original seating capacity.

It would be a cabin with-in a cabin and one that would require monitoring. CO is not going to give it away for free and therefore if someone see's an empty seat, they are going to want to take it. B6 runs into this problem often.

I sincerely doubt CO will reduce seating on any of our Jet's. The aircraft are comfortable the way they are. If I can deadhead to California and Europe without a problem and sleep from EWR. I don't see where these so called torture chamber cabins are found.

31 inches for someone who is 6'2" is torture. You have to contort your body to fit, and for flight in excess of 2 1/2 hours you start to get leg cramping/spasms, and then the pressure on the hip joint from the squeezed position starts to cause pain. Then the problem is often exacerbated by the person sitting next to you overlapping into your seat. After a point it becomes a health issue.

I hate to say this, but there should be minimum health standards for seat width and pitch.

Well no one forces you to fly in coach. If you want that level of comfort then buy First, if you want cheap you fly coach. If they start going into health standards and so on then the cost needs to be passed to the passenger. Although I feel it should be up to the airline and the people paying to fly the airline what product is offered. I'm not even 2 inches shorter then you and on a 6+ hour flight have yet to have half the problems most complain about.

This is, of course, nonsense. If rows 7, 9, and 11 were removed on a plane, would rows 8, 10, and 12 require additional monitoring, just because they now have extra leg room? No.

This misses the point entirely. It's not about what's physiclly possible. If you're comfortable flying in coach, they why does CO offer first class at all? I'm just a shade over 6', and I have happily flown coach to Australia. Yes, it's obviously physically possible.

The question is a marketing one, and it is this: Will CO offer E+ in an attempt to generate additional revenue both by selling it and offering it to elites to create/maintain loyalty?

But, what if CO offered something at a price point in-between economy and first? Maybe some people would like to buy that. More $ per seat for CO, and more happy customers.


If E+ isn't likely to be a winning proposition for CO financially, then they shouldn't do it, but it's not an additional cabin, and whether or not current coach seats are physically adequate is largely irrelevant to the decision.

Well, good for you if you don't have a problem with current conditions in coach, but you've seen dozens of posts on this thread alone from "people paying to fly the airline," saying they'd much prefer a few more inches of legroom. Many other aspects of how UA operates likely undercut its profitability, but AFAIK E+ helps insure customer loyalty, reportedly generates substantial direct revenues (from non-elites paying to fly in E+) and certainly increases many customers' comfort and satisfaction. I would think that last item would be a matter that an FA would view quite favorably, rather than taking a lump it or leave it attitude and discounting the notion of a third option for passengers.

No I go to an airline where I get at least a 32 inch pitch or 31 inches but the entire row so I can use the three seats as a bed. The one inch makes the difference and that is a reason I don't fly CO a lot now even though I am a CO Million MIler. If I don't get my 32 inches I go to book a confirmed exit row on another airline or where the plane is half full.

Or fly someone else.

As a long-time UA FF (15+ yrs living in Chicago) and a recently new NJ resident. I can't tell you how many times I have chosen a UA flight (which normally requires a connection!) in coach over CO. and yes, I have the same chances of upgrades on both being UA 1K and CO Plat. I got Plat on CO this year because of my international travel to europe last year bc my company buys Business. If they did not do that then I would have flown through IAD on UA (which I did anyway and yes it was a destination CO flies non-stop from ewr and UA was MORE money than CO).

And yes, I have flown coach to Asia and Australia so it is not a matter of can. It is a matter of comfort and E+ on UA has created at least one very loyal flier from my pov. There are many things about UA that are not fun, but this makes many of those insignificant to me. This is just my opinion and everyone is entitled to that.

I would be very happy to see CO get E+, but from a customer perspective I would prefer to have more mainline from EWR. Offer E+ on mainline does nothing for me when I board an erj for a 3hr flight to MSP! IF they go this route they have to consider an ExPlus option as well.

"Compare and contrast"
 

But USAir doesn't agree with this statement. I wonder why they don't. They've always been in the room, so to speak, as UA's other "partner". The question becomes more relevant as Mr. Petersen twitters that he expects a UA-US merger.

In fact, I wonder why US appears to be doing nothing to alter its practices that would facilitate a merger, not least E+.

(I hope CO adds its version of E+.)

And just how tall are you? Or maybe I should ask, what is the inseam in your pants, since height may be more from the torso and not the legs? My 36" inseam legs don't fit in less than 32-33" seat pitch without being up against the seat in front of me.

Sorry, but I don't find my knees jammed into the back of the seat in front of me in such a way I can't move because the rows of seats are so close together comfortable.

And how strange...I see 1K in your profile. :cool:

But I guess that's the life-cycle of the high-mileage CO forum poster: start off on CO, say as a silver, get to Plat and realize the upgrades loose their sheen and IIROPs needs work, look elsewhere - even to *gasp* UA, fly a few flights off CO, realize UA's not that bad, make top tier and so on.

Haha, well, I'm not really flying UA that much these days. But I certainly don't mind flying them, and all of my mainline UA flights last year were rather enjoyable. I even flew transcon and transatlantic on UA quite a few times last year in E+ and was pretty comfortable on each flight. My last non-exit row CO economy flight was just IAH-ATL and I was absolutely miserable in that seat with the metal bar inside the top of the seatback pocket leaving a dent in my knees for the two hours I was on that plane.

As far as upgrades go, well, CO still upgrades me greater than 90% of the time. And CO F still trumps UA E+ in overall comfort.

<Seats<Pax<Work<Whining.

Everyone wins.

Monitiring the cabin is no big deal.

The reasons behind the two mergers would be different.

With UA's unit revenues up, and the economy beginning to improve, UA is not in such a dire situation as it was just a year or two ago. In fact, CO and UA have very similar market caps now (this was not the case a year ago). So at the moment, CO-UA would probably have to be a consensual merger of equals, and it's no longer clear which management team would lead. They may have to work together.

With UA-US, it would probably be an acquisition due to some impending financial issue at US, so UA would be calling the shots, while US would be out.

So in that regard, it doesn't matter as much what US does or does not offer. UA would be taking over, repainting and reconfiguring planes as they see fit.