Why? It is extremely difficult to use miles to upgrade CO flights. It is almost impossible, especially on the LAX/SFO/SEA-EWR flights.

My question is:
What is my chance for getting an upgrade on the morning EWR-LAX nonstop flight on a Wednesday and on the noon LAX-EWR flight on a Wednesday as well. I want to confirm in advance, but it is apparently impossible.

Thanks,
Carfield

Had a case like this for an upcoming EWR-SEA flight. You realy have to keep an eye on ITN to check if they release some F seats on a hourly/daily basis. In my case, 10 days prior to the flight they did release 2 seats to F and I got one of them. Later in the day it showed A9D9F0 again.

why is it so difficult? Continental Airlines is trying to sell the seats so they hold them back from upgrades.

[This message has been edited by fly co to see the yanks (edited 02-25-2003).]

And that little strategy has LOST Continental tons and tons of sales, as I and others buy tickets on airlines that allow their loyal customers to upgrade in advance as promised.

That's the intention, njdavid, of the "little strategy." I'm glad to see that it's effective and that you've figured it out.

Losing 10 coach upgrade sales to gain one A or Y fare ticket is a winning plan. It works, too, which explains why people complain about golds and plats having trouble getting elite upgrades on transcons.

Although this is obvious to lots of you, it probably needs to be said for some folks. Eecutives of continental (and all companies) have a fiduciary duty to do whatever it takes to make money. It's only secondary that making people happy is sometimes required to complete that task. If you can upset 10 people to make one person happy and still make money on the operation, it's a success.

The problem with this scenario is that the Y/F buyers are a finite number. If you upset them on their "low fare" purchases, (eg. family vacations, personal trips, etc) they may not come back to buy the full fare tickets. Thats what happened with this former CO Plat.

We've had this debate before, But I'm happy to go another round if you are.

Yes, CO lost my domestic coach transcon business - on $300 - $500 fares - because of my maltretment at their hands. But they also lost my transatlantic and transpacific full fare business class tickets because of that tretment as well. And they lost the similar business of many other formerly loyal frequent flyers. In fact, the only time I'll fly CO now is when I know I'm getting a deal and they'll make no money off of me.

Any business strategy that intends to pi$$-off customers at the expense of other, supposedly "better" customers will ultimately fail as it always has and always will. You increase business by improving customer service and the customer experience, regardless of what he is buying today, because he may buy a whole lot more tomorrow.

I don't know who would ever pay full fare to fly CO transcon. $2500 to sit in a TINY 737 with a tiny first class cabin without even leg rests. I'd much rather give that money to be on a 767 or up and have reclining seats with footrests.
Upgrades are another story.

You know it's bad when you hear non frequent travelers say "I just got back from LA and CO put us on the smallest plane for 6 hours! I will never fly them again..."

When they used to do the 767's test runs on the transcons the flights were always full. I wish they would bring them back.

I dunno about the 737s -- living in AUS and IAH, I don't really have to deal with them so much on long flights. 777s and 767s to LAX, EWR, and all transpac/transatlantic destinations. 757s to lots of destinations, and I've got no complaints.

Like I said, I don't have much experience with the 73s on long flights, but I find the next gen 737s to be very nice. The furthest that I've taken a 73 is a 737-800 to LAS, which is about half the distance of LAX-EWR.

it is amazing the tiny pieces of s*i* they fly transcon. i can't stand 'em. at least do a 757, c'mon.

a FA told me that they are now flying the "extended range" 737s and that should make all the difference. i just laughed.

Bew hew.

Every airline goes through this. People quit flying UA and NW because they have service problems. They quit DL and CO for FF benefit reductions. AA for reductions in in-flight service. U for schedule reductions.

People quit flying so many airlines, they end up back at their original carrier, forgetting why they got pissed in the first place. It's entirely circular. The "tons and tons of sales" that leave CO are immediately regained from ex-UA, DL and U passengers. Read untied.com. 90% of the people who post there are the "I'm never flying UA again" type. They gotta go somewhere.

As a NY-based full F passenger on CO, I felt that the airline did a good job addressing my needs. It's the best domestic FC out of New York, with the most non-stop destinations. Nothing they could do on the Onepass side would change that.

Singapore doesn't upgrade many people so must be a bad airline - according to your theory. It's just the US loss-leaders that hold on to this type of strategy.

Didn't she mean "extended range" ERJs?

British Airways, too.

The reality is that njdavid doesn't really have an actual theory. It's just that any airline has to bend over backwards, do whatever makes him happy, and beg for his business (even at the cost of more lucrative business or taking losses for him) or they suck.

If his amount of complaining to continental is proportional to his flyertalk complaining, they probably wrote him off a long time ago.

Also, there are no extended range 737 products. Maybe she meant next generation.