|
Originally Posted by J.Edward
(Post 9225187)
It will be interesting to see what happens with international F...my guess is that the consolidated entity would retain/add F on the routes where paid demand justified it, and remove it on routes where demand is non-existent.
It will be interesting to see how the reconciliation between UA's 3 (or really 4) tier class structure and CO's 2 tier one occurs. - F will go - E+ will turn into a real PE class for international flights - No more advertised E+ on domestics, but all longhauls/widebodies will still have those extra legroom rows, and will just be the "premium" seats like they are now on co.com to keep the elites happy. Don't know what they'll do with the transcon products. p.s. service on the 739ERs, which will only do JFK/EWR-SFO/LAX? [Not sure if 25 planes is enough, but ConU can order more from Boeing.] |
Originally Posted by rw2841
(Post 9225342)
Selling out F for real money rather than filling it with Plat upgrades makes better business sense than keeping seats empty with high F fares, even if it creates angst among the Plats who were spoiled by almost clockwork upgrades. I could rely on an upgrade almost 100% of the time before CO dropped F fares. Now I'm lucky to score 50-60% of the time, but am not complaining becuse the airplanes are still clean, the staff more accomodating, and the airline is making money.
Right now, CO has such tight inventory on prime routes that customers who want to pay for F can't fly them. In fact, customers who want to fly TATL J can't fly them because SFO/LAX/SNA/SAN-EWR are full. All that revenue goes to someone else. Charging higher prices would open up that inventory so CO could generate more sales, and even if they don't sell as many seats, selling fewer seats at a higher price point will bring in more money (not to mention leave unsold space open for Elites who can upgrade). |
Originally Posted by pbarnette
(Post 9225144)
There are plenty of *A aircraft without Int'l F. Lot, OS, SK, BMI, TAP, AC, US, NZ, and SAA, I think all top out at J. I think the bigger reason that UACO would keep Int'l F would be that there may be more of a market for it in places like Asia and OZ, where CO just doesn't compete at the same level, right now. |
A New BusinessWeek Article on Airline Mergers
Dated 9 February 2008, it discusses the likely DL-NWA merger announcement for next week, the probable CO-United combo that would probably follow, and the nature of combinations. Some of it has already been out there.
Here’s the link: http://www.businessweek.com/ap/finan.../D8UMOR402.htm |
Originally Posted by Renard
(Post 9219667)
Most of this sounds good to me....although I am a DEN fan. If there could only be a merger and the result looked something like this, I would be happy. Especially: "Mileage Plus management, rules, and benefits take over Onepass. "
I only hope you're right wannaflyforless....but it would be so good, I am afraid to hope for too much as I fear that the worst things about CO will permeate the new airline. |
Originally Posted by From NYC
(Post 9226740)
Dated 9 February 2008, it discusses the likely DL-NWA merger announcement for next week, the probable CO-United combo that would probably follow, and the nature of combinations. Some of it has already been out there.
Here’s the link: http://www.businessweek.com/ap/finan.../D8UMOR402.htm Even a Delta-Northwest curtain-raiser could draw competing offers -- some analysts think American's parent, AMR Corp., might bid for Northwest. There is speculation that US Airways Group Inc. could bid for Continental or United, although it might need a partner who can bring cash to the table. |
All I can say is that if this stuff does end up happening, two things are going to happen to my flying:
1) airline loyalty is going down the drain for me. I live in RDU. We have (or will at the end of March!) an RDU-LHR flight on AA. I will fly this for most of my Europe connections. After that, I will fly whatever is convenient. For Asia, it will be UA/CO or DL/NW (honestly, it will probably be more the latter b/c DL has way more flights to RDU than UA and CO combined, and I will probably have a modicum of loyalty). The loyalty I've had towards AA is going to be gone. 2) DL/NW and/or CO/UA are going to become more logical and probably turn out to be preferred, so long as they have the few domestic flights I need (which is mostly RDU-LGA - meaning DL would have the benefit there). I won't have a lot of loyalty, but when I do, the large carrier with global reach is going to have it. That being said, it would be nice if AA would get in on the action (I'd LOVE to see AA become powerful internationally. Although I can route on them through NRT/LHR, I really would like to see their metal going to Asia and more places in Europe). |
Originally Posted by giggy
(Post 9226905)
I agree, I think CO is quite proud of it's worst-to-first mentality and like the Nonepass model. Hopeing or wishing for the best of MP is just that. Remember CO is buying UA, and they are going to manage it. UAs management will get their golden parachutes at top dollar, plus $$$$ consulting fees during the transition. The new name may end up being United but its gonna be Continental.
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 9226989)
I think 99% agree that such an attempt would be met with chants of 'over my dead body' by customers, stockholders and employees.
|
They'll get rid of all the good stuff on UA....E+ and the good aspects of MP...and use the merger as an excuse to jettison all they stuff they've always wanted to from OnePass but didn't feel they could.
I think that everyone is going overboard on this subject. Whatever happens with a merger, I suspect that nothing is going to change over a period of months to years (more likely the latter than the former). We also presume that programs will be merged or that there is even going to be one airline. I suspect that there will be 2 airlines (a la KLM/AF) with one set of executives. Whatever it is, it is going to take quite a while for things to develop. |
Originally Posted by rkkwan
(Post 9225587)
My bet, based on what CO's management had done and said in the past and more recently...
|
Originally Posted by joshua-bwi
(Post 9229110)
You statement is based upon the assumption that CO management will be the "ruling" management and UA will be stepping aside... IMHO I hope your assumption is right... but in this world of airline craziness... who really knows...
But things are different now. UA simply has been trying to sell itself for the past many months. So, it's clear that it's either CO's management running the new company or there won't be any talk either. |
Originally Posted by rkkwan
(Post 9229180)
There won't be a deal if it's not the current management running the new company. There are a lot of news reports in the last few days about the talks between CO and UA 2 years ago. Of course, there's the NW golden share issue, but at that time, UA's Tilton is clear that they will be the one in charge, and the talks went nowhere.
But things are different now. UA simply has been trying to sell itself for the past many months. So, it's clear that it's either CO's management running the new company or there won't be any talk either. And my thanks to Bocastephen - I’d meant, but forgot, to note the scary bit in the article about US hovering in the wings should UA and CO not combine. Yech! |
And my thanks to Bocastephen - I’d meant, but forgot, to note the scary bit in the article about US hovering in the wings should UA and CO not combine. Yech! Of course, there could be a three way deal, in which most of UA goes to US but CO gets some bits and pieces (e.g. part of the west coast operation/hub) and some routes/slots. |
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 9226989)
I think 99% agree that such an attempt would be met with chants of 'over my dead body' by customers, stockholders and employees.
|
Originally Posted by channa
(Post 9226215)
Not really. Filling it part of the way with higher fares, while leaving space open for last-minute buyers, all while having some space for Elite upgraders satisfies everyone (and is closer to what UA is doing).
Right now, CO has such tight inventory on prime routes that customers who want to pay for F can't fly them. In fact, customers who want to fly TATL J can't fly them because SFO/LAX/SNA/SAN-EWR are full. All that revenue goes to someone else. Charging higher prices would open up that inventory so CO could generate more sales, and even if they don't sell as many seats, selling fewer seats at a higher price point will bring in more money (not to mention leave unsold space open for Elites who can upgrade). I love upgrades, but I also prefer an airline that can kick $150M into its employee profit sharing plan. If F fares hadn't come down, most of the paying folks' employers would have them in Y and all of those empty F seats would be filled with EUAs. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:04 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.