Simple.

On the average CO plane there are 4 good ELR seats. You don't need a lot of kettles to buy up to those 4 seats.

On UA, the difference is the sheer inventory of E+ seats. On mainlne, it's a minimum of 36 seats, all the way up to 104 seats.

When you have that many seats with good to excellent leg room, a few kettles buying up is a non-issue.

If CO had ~1/3 of the Y cabin to upsell as E+, then I don't think too many of us would have serious issues with it. Those few Exit row seats are the only stab at decent room in Y for plats and golds that are increasingly finding their butts in Y.

I too think its a big deal, but also the tip of the iceberg. UA's changes were always designed to provide some extra value for the infrequent traveler who wanted an improved experience. E+ & premier line offered some value to non-elites and generally didn't impact the availability of E+ to elites, and it also justified the lower seat count with higher revenue per seat (lately, E+ is becoming a little too full especially on peak flights).

^ to Boca for organizing this movement....keep us informed! :-:

Another conflict of interest person trying to tell us we should just sit back and take it so they can go back to their handlers and spout about what they are attempting to avert.

Come on man...You read the same threads I read. How about you go back 3 years, educate yourself on not so slow and very steady dilution of the OP FF program....then come back and add something intelligent.

You think this is about a single issue or the OCLI process? Give me a break.:rolleyes:

Aside from the fact that there are more E+ seats on UA than there are ELR seats on CO, on UA the exit row seats are not available at booking for the general populace. You have to be a Premier Executive or above to pre-reserve exit row seats. So CO elites are getting the double whammy.

/agreed. Let's look at it from another perspective. As a UA employee, I used to get NRSA F if it wasn't bought or paid for with cash, the finite miles, or finite certs earned at a rate that ensured people would use them judiciously. I heard no cry's of "Hey, UDU isn't fair to the truly LOYAL employees of UA who have not dedicated only some of their flying to UA, but their entire career. Why should UA give infinite upgrades to frequent flyers in exchange for the loyalty that they had before and nothing more, at the expense of their employees?"

Not once did I hear that. I did hear some sympathy, but no one felt it was wrong for UA to coax some potential incremental revenue from ticket sales over the loaylty of employees who are, almost by definition, more loyal to their career than a silver/gold flyer is to any particular airline.

But alas, they sold the loyalty you all tout (of the employees) out in exchange for potential revenue, and that, is OK and fine. Now CO does the same thing to you LOYAL flyers, selling out your free premium seats for some potential incremental revenue, and it isn't fair!

I smell a little hypocrisy in those that think potential revenue > loyalty on one hand, but when they are on the short end of that equation, feel that loyalty > potential revenue. Here is the cake, and here is a fork to eat it. Choose one, but one doesn't get to have the cake and eat it too all the time.

Cash is king, anyone in business knows that. Cash is real $$, "loyalty" is potential money, and it may still be there, but new cash in the pocket is always an instant boost to the bottom line.
Perhaps everyone will defect from NW and DL. Perhaps eveyone will defect from CO/UA. Perhaps AA's labor costs and inefficient fleet will be replaced and AA's stock performance may get somewhere near even the worst of the other carriers with all the DL/NW/UA/CO defectors. Perhaps not. Perhaps the schedule of flying by the new mega-carriers is enough to win the $$ of the corporate travel dept, as they care about getting you to your meeting more than they care about your perks. Convenience to them is cost savings to them. Your exit row to them is not near as important as their bottom line when paying for your time. Perhaps with scheduling options a price is to be paid, and that price is the profitability of the carrier that wins out on the scheduling game, which is UA/CO and DL/NW, not AA.

It's an interesting comparison and I agree that it's a very similar situation. A couple of thoughts/questions:

- do you think UA's UDU change was fair for employees? Are employees in general okay with it, or are they taking this change into consideration in their next round of contract negotiations?

- FTers (representing mostly elite members of loyalty programs) are a group similar like employee groups. We are primarily interested in our own benefits. Selfish, sure, but do pilots give up salary/benefits for the sake of improving the contract of FAs?

Glad to see you here, fastair! Always enjoy your posts over in the UA forum.

You're missing much of the issue here. CO has sold ELR seats, including exit rows, from day one of the ELR program. We never had a big problem with it because those seats were held for Elites until OLCI, then available to anyone who wanted to buy them. The only people affected by this process were SDC/re-routes or very last minute buyers.

What CO is saying now is loyalty revenue is worth less than a few extra dollars from a low-value, unloyal Kettle who books a discount ticket way out and adds an extra $40-80 to their ticket in order to grab a seat with more legroom. Come on, even UA holds exit row seats for Elites! We're talking about an average of 4 really premium and 4 somewhat premium (non-reclining exit) seats across the entire domestic fleet!

So along comes Mr/Mrs Platinum (or worse - a $30K+ Plat) who flies on business and is booking a transcon inside of a week and grabs a fairly expensive K, V, or U fare, which is $100-300 more than the Kettle who spent $200 (+$60) for their ticket - now the Plat is left with a no legroom seat, while the Kettle is hootin' it up in the exit row. How is this good business sense??

That Plat has this experience a few times and then decides to middle-finger CO and starts booking away on a competitor, eventually moving all of their revenue over - and evangelizes their experience and decision to others, who look at doing the same.

How does CO come out a winner here?

It's a stupid business decision from my point of view. I can't think of anything to justify it....except to say to CO's Elite customers - "hey, you can still book ELR seats for free - but if you can find any! Hahaha".

I see the situations as somewhat parallel, though with different channels for remedy.

It's not hypocrisy, rather it's different interests being represented. The customer isn't necessarily as vested in the employee perks/benefits side of things, and since this board is mostly made up of customers, it's the customer's voice that you primarily hear. It's really not my place as a customer to worry about (or even know about) what employees are getting paid, what perks they get, or whatever. That's between them and their employer, and if there's a problem, they need to work it out or leave.

When UDU came out, airline employee discussions were probably along the lines of what you said -- this is a perk/benefit of employment, and it's being eroded away. But it's up to the airline employees to negotiate that with their employer. In fact, you have professional representation to do just that. Next go-around with a contract, I'm sure it will be something that will be taken into consideration. If there were anything legal they could have done immediately, I'm sure the unions would have done that. You pay them to look for these things on your behalf.

As for customers, it's a bit easier for us to vote with our wallet and leave, but we also don't have professional representation, nor a contract to deal with. We have one-sided T&Cs that are sent from the airline to us, and we have to accept, deal, respond, and/or react.

At the same time, shame on you (and the union) for not negotiating ahead of time how the F cabin was to be protected if that was an important perk to you. UDU-style upgrades have been around for well over a decade at other airlines, so it's not like UA did anything revolutionary here. UA employees had even been posting here for years about how they had it so good compared to the CO's and DL's with UDU-style upgrades, and how UA crews ride more in F than their OAL counterparts. If that was so important, it could have been addressed years ago, well before UA even started UDU.

Well, the AFA called it a "kick in the teeth" to the FAs and other employees:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...-upgrades.html

fastair -- if I look through that thread, there are some FTers who expressed sympathy and understanding towards the employee position. Do you still have that asbestos suit around that you put on for this post in that thread? Because you might need it here. I am very tempted to re-write that post, replacing employees with elite customers etc. to see how it would fit into this thread :D

Back to channa -- very good post that I agree with completely.

See the logic you use on ELR sals is the same logic I apply to the upgrade issue. Except, I am pretty sure the upgrade issue is far more problematic for CO in the long run and will cost them far more business.

I sort of understand your equation of crew travel with and without UDU, and how it parallels what is happening to Elites.

There are a couple of pretty big differences though between the two populations. For one thing, crew used to not pay for any travel on UA, including the coveted F seats, right? Elites on the other hand pay for even the lousy Y seat. And if they have paid for enough Y seats, their spend is what makes your job possible.

Also, unlike us Elites, you guys have representation and you have a contract that is negotiated. Don't like something? Negotiate it or strike if negotiations fail. We elites have nothing of this sort. It is truly take it or leave it.

What Boca is doing is honorable and shows he's out for more than just his self-interest. If he does this effort correctly, he will never be repaid (even if this organization is successful) for the countless hours he spent dealing with this mess. More power to him. I can't say I have the same enthusiasm for CO anymore. Two years ago, maybe. But the last two years have been mired in problems at CO IMO. And at no point did the current management make so much as an attempt to have a conversation with us. They effectively have been shooting us the proverbial bird, and I for my part, will see to it that I or anyone I know will not reward the arrogant and short-term focused attitude of the Smisek team. These guys truly deserve to fail epically and I'll do my best to assist.

Kettles, almost by definition, do NOT pay for extra legroom, upgrades to First, etc. However, lower level elites as well as general business travelers often will. These are cash cow, if not golden goose, customers, who can add a significant additional revenue stream for CO over time. This, really, is only a "movement" on behalf of the top tier elites who stand to loose the most with these new options. As a result, I doubt that it will gain much traction with either CO or most regular flyers.

Lower-level Elites already get access to ELR seats for free. The only ancillary revenue from lower-level Elites is the F buy-up, which is (suppose to be) just a fare difference minus a change fee.

I don't have data on DTV or food purchase by Elites vs non-Elites in Y, but both parties are on even footing when it comes to those items.

I disagree with this assessment. I've run into numerous non-status leisure travellers who buy E+ and such. Even some for better Y seats towards the front (e.g., US choice seats) with no extra legroom.

For people who travel a couple times a year, these fees are nothing to them. They are an important part of the market.