TWA Fan 1

I'm just curious, with your unreasonable dislike of United, are you planning for today your last day ever flying Continental, since the merger occurs tomorrow and technically you will be flying United from that point on?

gawhite411

Actually you just did dismiss the point thereby implying that the diaper was acceptable. And yes a soiled diaper makes a plane per se filthy.

Steph3n

Even the planes will rapidly say United....

Get over it people.
you've posted on my thread at the United forums so I know you've read it.

We need to work together to ensure that we will see what is right with each airline happen in the merger. We are not alone, the employee groups will be doing the same.

gawhite411

What unreasonable dislike of UA? I merely make the point that just because everyone from the UA board is deluded into thinking that UA is a better airline than CO, that does not make it the case.

Steph3n

That is correct, but you can sometimes take it a bit to the extreme, I have some examples of the same but done tongue in cheek in direct reply to the statement before.

not attempting to single you out here, there are others, and sometimes myself.

I am going to try to change on that, because it is just petty. We are United now, we need to deal with it, and move forward.

TWA Fan 1

I will repeat it: It's not acceptable. And, of course, it's filthy...it's a soiled diaper.

But it's one incident...just one incident.

If every time you had an unacceptable circumstance on an airline you went crazy, you would never be flying again...no airline is completely perfect, it's not possible and to expect it is an unreasonable stance.

The bottom line is that United's fleet is generally well maintained.

TWA Fan 1

Steph3n is right.

It's all one big happy family now.

And, by the way, I am not a United guy, just a CO guy who has flown United a fair amount in the past five years and has never had anything to complain about.

How about instead of being so theatrically and emotionally negative, looking at the potential upside of a merger?

First, the positive impact United has already had on CO:

1. SWU's
2. ELR

And what CO fliers might have to look forward to:

1. E+: Wouldn't you rather seat in E+ than Continental's miserable coach section?
2. Three-class international service
3. United PS transcon (I noticed you list your location as Manhattan)
4. Better customer service resolution
5. 2 more SWU's than CO currently has
6. Domestic wide bodies (763 & 772)

None of this may in fact come to pass, but, if it did, it would be a tangible way in which the merger with UA improved the experience of flying CO...

channa

Don't forget the massive realignment of CO policies last year. The OnePass program was grossly uncompetitive until the UA partnership. Many of the Kellner-era polices were changed as a result of the UA partnership:

3. SDC fee waivers for Plats
4. Close-in fee waivers for Plats
5. 100% EQM regardless of booking channel


And of course, impact CO has had on UA:

1. UDU

Steph3n

2: I am sure it will be a mixed based on market, CO will not refit all 2 class into 3, some markets have no need of F.
3: Some in Manhattan like EWR...
4: While being a bit more responsive would be good, I've seen CO go much slower on flight credit irregularities this year, throwing money and vouchers for every gripe is hardly a resolution, that will be one major culture issue that has to be addressed.
5: good, but with fare restrictions or not? I like 4 with none.
6: I'd rather have narrowbodies with more frequency and destinations. Widebodies domestic are a bit of an ego thing, or logistical repositioning purpose, they are better serving more INTL dest I do not care for a 777 overall. I much prefer a 737, personal air controls, less people etc.


I am not saying any of these are 'deal breakers', my only other real choice is AA and I can't stAAnd them after their dismal treatment of me and others with the maddog FAA issues, and continual Eagle MX issues.

TWA Fan 1

Who said PS would stay at JFK?
Frankly, I think there is a place for both. There are routes, given the distance and the demand, which could use wide bodies. And this gets down to a question of basic principle...CO likes to keep things operationally simple by having the simplest possible fleet (domestic mainline is primarily 737). But there are times when adding a little operational complexity (having a domestic wide body) can make the company more money by better meeting the demand...

While it's clearly a matter of personal preference, I much prefer a transcon in a wide body than in a 737...

channa

Depends what's done with the information. The voucher is to assuage the customer and encourage repeat business, not to solve the problem. That's done behind the scenes.


I'm not sure I understand that comment. Hawaii aside, look at the domestic widebody routes. Those are already on high-volume, high-frequency routes like SFO-ORD or IAD-SFO.

As for whether they're appropriate or not, it depends. If you have a large customer base in a city that needs to connect, putting an int'l plane on it may make sense if you're selling premium int'l fares. Not only does an int'l plane give you more premium seats to sell, it gives a better product for those premium passengers from whom you want to encourage business.

But if there are just lots of people without the int'l connection traffic, perhaps a domestic widebody configuration makes sense as they are for the high-volume routes. It may be something the new UA needs to consider keeping. After all, they're a large airline, and once you get to a certain size it makes sense (e.g., AA and DL do it too).

CO was somewhat optimized for its niche and size. However CO's fixations with standards and a cookie-cutter approach only works to a point. Even WN had to deviate from its traditional business model years ago (and even moreso with the Airtran merger). It's just like any company -- keeping things simple works to a point and has its efficiencies. But after a certain point, you're losing more business than the savings is worth. So the challenge becomes managing the complexity vs. forcing a standard. That's the spot CO is in today.

scruffair

HA!!!! In my experience with CO, you're lucky to get a widebody on INTL flights! I have chosen other airlines many times from NY solely because CO runs 757's on a lot of European routes. When I fly overseas, part of the experience for me is flying on a widebody. I sincerely hope UA doesn't start running 757's on its current widebody INTL routes, even if it would increase frequency.

tuolumne

You know what? If I had to wager money on this, I'd say your creating narratives in your mind. That's right, I just called you out - I think you're lying.

gawhite411

2. ELR is not a new benefit for Elites. It's a new charge for non elites. Besides, I fly almost exclusively F.

1. I don't fly coach so E+ doesn't matter to me.
2. Three-class international service -- um no, because UA F is not nearly as good as three class F on other international carriers. As I do not spend cash for three class F, and can just as easily redeem miles for F on a foreign carrier, the existence of three cabin F on UA means nothing to me. They one time I was forced to fly three cabin F on UA, it was full of employees. Not exactly a first-class experience.
3. If I want to fly PS transcon, I can do so now. I don't need the merger for that. Frankly I prefer VX.
5. SWU's that are heavily restricted versus ones that aren't. No thanks.
6. I wouldn't bother with those dirty bird 763s. Wide body or not doesn't really matter. For the transcons, I can either find a 752 or fly VX.

optimusflyimus

For those who havent seen it elsewhere

One
Two