Narfil

farecompare.com fare quote but it is similar if you use Fll Ewr
UA costs more

Steph3n

Are you telling me you really fly UA, and don't see all the downtime on some of those planes? I don't even fly on UA and I see it.

mcgahat

I spent a year on CO as a Plat. Didnt think it was all that great. Good but nothing that made me think it was miles ahead of UA. I saw some bad apples on CO also.

How long till I have to listen to the person sitting next to me telling me how fantasticly wonderful glorious it was back on the old CO? You remember, the airline that had the nicest, kindest and sweetest FA's that usually gave you neck massages when they were not squeezing the oranges for your morning juice or grinding fresh sausage for your breakfast.

Seriously, bottom line for me is that if my systemwides are gone as a UA flyer then I am not flying the new or old UA.

I wish the new management luck and hope they make positive changes but it is clear not everyone will be happy no matter what happens.

CO_1mm

You posted that while I was composing the above and doing other things.

channa

Ok, FLL, another market UA doesn't serve. UA doesn't fly to FLL, so another great comparison again.

Now pick some markets where CO doesn't serve:

LAX-KOA, CO is $350 more than UA
SBA-DEN, CO is $430 more than UA
etc.

Oh look, now CO is more. Not surprising, they're not exactly going to be on top of fares for markets they don't even fly to.

If you want to be fair, why not pick markets that they both serve with their metal? Here are some nonstops:

EWR-ORD, UA and CO are identical to the dollar.
ORD-IAH, again identical to the dollar.
SFO-IAH, again identical to the dollar.


And some connections:
SMF-ATL, UA and CO are identical
ONT-MKE, identical again
STL-PWM, identical again


I don't think you're going to find an across the board correlation where one carrier is more expensive than the other, at least not on a fare publishing basis.

ContinentalFan

My thought too. I only see upside.

Wings900-Michael

I have good wishes for the merger though there are two things I dear God hope that they don't incorporate from the UA side

1. Starnet blocking for rewards was the biggest deterrent and pain in the rear out of any airline rewards program I've had to deal to deal with, especially on international travel. I would've never been able to score 2x Saver Biz class PHL-DPS thanks to StarNet. For someone that racks up nearly 20-30k a month on credit cards plus another 100k a year on travels...having to deal with StarNet is no bueno.

2. The ICC . I want to talk to someone that speaks basic American English that isn't reading off a teleprompter with "Johnny" as his supervisor that is also just as clueless....there was also this time I was no joke listening to Rhapsody In Blue for 5 hours and 32 minutes before I got ahold of someone on the line....

With that said if they incorporate the best of both cultures then they can truly be one of the greats, if not God help us all.

bniu

what you'll be missing is actually Texas Air. The original Continental was quite crappy and only when Texas Air took over them and became the new Continental did CO improve drastically. Now, the "Texas Air" will re-brand itself as United Airlines. In the end, it'll be the "Texas Air" on the inside under the brand name...

just wait till next week when AA announces they will absorb DL and become the world's largest airline again! And then, watch as the new UA then buys up US Air to become the largest again! Then, AA buys up Southwest and becomes the largest again! Then, UA buys up JetBlue and becomes the biggest again! Then, AA bribes the british to let them buy up BA to become the biggest again! Then, UA buys up Air Canada and becomes bigger again! Then finally, AA just buys up UA and we become one big happy family! Just Kidding...

BearX220

+1

The merger will obliterate CO, not just ruin it. And overseas, the United brand is the object of full-blown derison. It's a laughingstock. CO is by far the more respected brand.

This is like P.F. Chang's merging with Taco Bell, and making Taco Bell the surviving brand.

Weean

Asking from a position of ignorance:

Is UA any better at policing carry-on than CO? If yes, then I'm happy.

And speaking as someone who is actually "International", I think a lot of people are over-estimating Co's perceived superiority. Perhaps very frequent and pointy-end flyers can spot it, but for the twice-a-year flyers, United's superior name-recognition makes it a no-brainer.

schley

United, Continental merger set for takeoff
Airlines' boards to vote on all-stock deal today and Sunday, sources say
Comments

April 30, 2010
BY LEWIS LAZARE Media & Market Columnist

United Airlines and Continental have an agreement to merge and an announcement is expected Monday, the Wall Street Journal and Crain's Chicago Business reported Thursday evening citing unnamed sources. But the deal still requires board approval, which is not certain.

United's board of directors was expected to review the proposed merger deal and vote on it today, and Continental's board was scheduled to do the same Sunday. United spokeswoman Jean Medina said late Thursday the airline does not comment on rumor.

United Airlines and Continental have an agreement to merge, but the deal still requires board approval, which is not certain.

Two years ago, Continental's board voted down a similar plan to merge with United. But observers believe the Continental board is more likely to green-light the deal now because its intended merger partner is in much stronger shape -- financially and operationally -- than it was as recently as two years ago when a sharp economic downtown was starting to wreak havoc on the entire airline industry.

If United and Continental do merge, it could prove a huge boost for Chicago and its status on the world business front. The newly merged carrier would be called United and would become the world's largest. It would be based in Chicago, where United has in the past several years invested in a significant amount of Loop office space at 77 W. Wacker and in the Willis Tower. United CEO Glenn Tilton, who has for some time been aggressively pushing for more airline consolidation, would become chairman of the new airline and Continental CEO Jeff Smisek would become the new airline's CEO.

The new airline's customers in Chicago and around the world would benefit from the creation of an airline route system second to none. Domestically, United's route strength in the Midwest and West meshes well with Continental's strong presence in the Northeast and South. Internationally, Continental has strong European and South American routes, while United is a dominant player on trans-Pacific routes and in Asia, which is expected to only grow more important as a business hub in years to come.

It's unclear just how smoothly labor relations will go as United and Continental start to work out particulars of joining the two carriers' large and largely unionized work forces. Tilton and his management team have angered many of the carrier's rank-and-file employees as he has cut pay and implemented new work rules in recent years to turn around United's fortunes.

But the all-important United pilots union is on board as supporting a United-Continental merger. "I think it's a step in the right direction," said one United Boeing 767 captain late Thursday, when he was informed that United and Continental had agreed on the details of a merger deal.

http://www.suntimes.com/business/221...rger30.article

TWA Fan 1

Your Continental history is a little off.

The original Continental, run by Bob Six, was one of the true class acts of the airline business. In the 70's, their DC-10 even featured a lounge with drinks and snacks (sort of like channeling Richard Branson with day-glo orange bell bottom pants).

Mr. Six personally oversaw the wonderful customer service manual that had the phrase "Nothing in this manual supersedes common sense" written on every page.

Like all legacy airlines, the era of deregulation was very tough for CO, and this is when airline raider and predator Frank Lorenzo acquired it. The new CO (aka Texas International) completely ripped the guts out of Bob Six's CO. Not only was all of the Continental uniqueness gone, but the employee morale was at an all-time low.

Then a former Navy mechanic named Gordon Bethune stepped into the picture and the rest, of course, is history...

PhillyPhlyer40

Actually, UA has "right sized" bins on the domestic narrowbodies. They did not have the tiny little ones that CO had installed (probably to save a buck or so) on the 737 fleet put on their ships. If you look, on UA, 99% of the bags are stowed wheels in, while on CO 70% are stowed sideways.

And, the UA fa's actually police the FC overheads! Something that is "free for all" on CO.

One last point, never will you see silvers, golds, PE, Prem, etc boarding when it is on the red carpet. Just another "policing" that CO never seems to get right!

PhillyPhlyer40

We should also all hope that UA doesnt incorporate the "never have saver awards" from CO management. I never found *net to be a problem, but ALWAYS have issues tatl with CO.

UnitedEF

UA's market cap is larger than CO's, and UA is starting to see better yields. I don't see how CO could just buy UA and sell off what is not needed. UA's fleet age average is only 2 years older than CO. The only airline that is going to go bankrupt is US. I hope they keep E+ and MP sans the *net blocking. Love the new one way awards as it adds so much flexibility. Nonepass is not as good in comparison. I don't understand the so-called need to merge with CO. The only airline that needs to merge is US.