FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Continental OnePass (Pre-Merger) (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/continental-onepass-pre-merger-488/)
-   -   Continental Pre/Post Merger Speculation Discussion Thread (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/continental-onepass-pre-merger/813075-continental-pre-post-merger-speculation-discussion-thread.html)

CO 1E Feb 13, 2008 9:38 am

Am I a sinner for beginning to resign myself to a CO/UA merger? UA actually has some positive elements to bring to the table . . . .

pbarnette Feb 13, 2008 9:59 am


Originally Posted by CO 1E (Post 9244227)
Am I a sinner for beginning to resign myself to a CO/UA merger? UA actually has some positive elements to bring to the table . . . .

No. You are just being rational. If this is coming, it is coming.

And, honestly, who would folks really prefer to be CO's dancing partner? AA? DL? NW? The only thing I know is I don't want AS or US, which bring nothing more than a couple more single-aisle planes connecting me from one domestic destination to another, funneling me through EWR and a 757 to get to Europe. At least UA brings over 100 widebodies (and the destinations those can serve) to the table.

A greatly expanded network. A shot at *A membership. An outside shot at easier upgrades and redemptions. A West Coast presence. The possibility of real legroom in Y. Maybe even PS service for transcons. I honestly don't understand why more folks aren't at least cautiously optimistic.

COFan Feb 13, 2008 10:08 am


Originally Posted by pbarnette (Post 9244387)
No. You are just being rational. If this is coming, it is coming.

And, honestly, who would folks really prefer to be CO's dancing partner? AA? DL? NW? The only thing I know is I don't want AS or US, which bring nothing more than a couple more single-aisle planes connecting me from one domestic destination to another, funneling me through EWR and a 757 to get to Europe. At least UA brings over 100 widebodies (and the destinations those can serve) to the table.

A greatly expanded network. A shot at *A membership. An outside shot at easier upgrades and redemptions. A West Coast presence. The possibility of real legroom in Y. Maybe even PS service for transcons. I honestly don't understand why more folks aren't at least cautiously optimistic.

And not to forget the great trans-pac food and manual seats ;) I think xyzzy would back me up here :D

No, I would actually agree that if there has to be a merger (I would hope not) then I too would preffer UA over Delta or AA. I am big fan of widebodies. Especially if UA ever gets around to actually putting in there new J-product

CO 1E Feb 13, 2008 10:13 am


Originally Posted by pbarnette (Post 9244387)
No. You are just being rational. If this is coming, it is coming.

And, honestly, who would folks really prefer to be CO's dancing partner? AA? DL? NW? The only thing I know is I don't want AS or US, which bring nothing more than a couple more single-aisle planes connecting me from one domestic destination to another, funneling me through EWR and a 757 to get to Europe. At least UA brings over 100 widebodies (and the destinations those can serve) to the table.

A greatly expanded network. A shot at *A membership. An outside shot at easier upgrades and redemptions. A West Coast presence. The possibility of real legroom in Y. Maybe even PS service for transcons. I honestly don't understand why more folks aren't at least cautiously optimistic.

Actually, I would prefer NW simply because I am of the opinion that integrating CO and NW would be much easier than integrating CO and UA. In addition, I think that more CO-style operational and customer service elements would survive a CO/NW merger.

With respect to upgrades on a merged CO/UA - do you really think they will be easier with the hoardes of UA 1K's out there? I would be surprised if a CO/UA combination did not move to instrument supported upgrades only. With CO/UA, I would expect the worst of both worlds - instrument supported upgrades plus CO level mediocre upgrade percentages for top-tier elites.

CO 1E Feb 13, 2008 10:15 am


Originally Posted by pbarnette (Post 9244387)
No. You are just being rational. If this is coming, it is coming.

And, honestly, who would folks really prefer to be CO's dancing partner? AA? DL? NW? The only thing I know is I don't want AS or US, which bring nothing more than a couple more single-aisle planes connecting me from one domestic destination to another, funneling me through EWR and a 757 to get to Europe. At least UA brings over 100 widebodies (and the destinations those can serve) to the table.

A greatly expanded network. A shot at *A membership. An outside shot at easier upgrades and redemptions. A West Coast presence. The possibility of real legroom in Y. Maybe even PS service for transcons. I honestly don't understand why more folks aren't at least cautiously optimistic.

Also, do you really think that in the long run, E+ will survive a CO/UA merger?

pbarnette Feb 13, 2008 10:27 am


Originally Posted by CO 1E (Post 9244489)
With respect to upgrades on a merged CO/UA - do you really think they will be easier with the hoardes of UA 1K's out there? I would be surprised if a CO/UA combination did not move to instrument supported upgrades only. With CO/UA, I would expect the worst of both worlds - instrument supported upgrades plus CO level mediocre upgrade percentages for top-tier elites.

I was talking about international upgrades, sorry.


Originally Posted by CO 1E (Post 9244509)
Also, do you really think that in the long run, E+ will survive a CO/UA merger?

Don't know if it will, but the likelihood is higher than the likelihood of CO introducing it. So, I'll take that 1% chance over no chance.

CO 1E Feb 13, 2008 10:49 am


Originally Posted by pbarnette (Post 9244603)
Don't know if it will, but the likelihood is higher than the likelihood of CO introducing it. So, I'll take that 1% chance over no chance.

I would be happy if E+ survived a merged CO/UA, but in my (armchair airline executive's) opinion, domestic E+ is not financially viable in the long term. International E+ or Premium Economy is another matter.

ctownflyer Feb 13, 2008 11:58 am

Is there any chance that CLE would survive as a hub in a merger?
For some reason I highly doubt it... :(

Hartmann Feb 13, 2008 12:10 pm


Originally Posted by ctownflyer (Post 9245199)
Is there any chance that CLE would survive as a hub in a merger?
For some reason I highly doubt it... :(

In a UA/CO merger I think CLE would be reduced to maybe a maintenance/reliever airport and DEN would have a major reduction in international and hub-like traffic.

J.Edward Feb 13, 2008 12:20 pm


Originally Posted by ctownflyer (Post 9245199)
Is there any chance that CLE would survive as a hub in a merger?
For some reason I highly doubt it... :(

My (uneducated) guess would be yes.

channa Feb 13, 2008 12:36 pm


Originally Posted by CO 1E (Post 9244745)
I would be happy if E+ survived a merged CO/UA, but in my (armchair airline executive's) opinion, domestic E+ is not financially viable in the long term. International E+ or Premium Economy is another matter.

I believe E+ has been overall profitable for UA (at least in recent years). With E+ buyups, E+ Access sales, and incremental ticket sales on UA because of it, not to mention lower pax handling costs with fewer pax on planes, I think it's a winning proposition even domestically.

The UA kiosks are very aggressive about offering E+ non-Elites for a fee, and I have seen many people buy up to it. Even for short hops like SFO-LAX, people have no problem parting with $29, it's chump change. Given the load factors and the chance those seats would have been sold anyway (had there been no E+ and more seats), they really don't have to sell that many buy-ups to make up for it overall.

CO 1E Feb 13, 2008 1:04 pm


Originally Posted by channa (Post 9245505)
I believe E+ has been overall profitable for UA (at least in recent years). With E+ buyups, E+ Access sales, and incremental ticket sales on UA because of it, not to mention lower pax handling costs with fewer pax on planes, I think it's a winning proposition even domestically.

The UA kiosks are very aggressive about offering E+ non-Elites for a fee, and I have seen many people buy up to it. Even for short hops like SFO-LAX, people have no problem parting with $29, it's chump change. Given the load factors and the chance those seats would have been sold anyway (had there been no E+ and more seats), they really don't have to sell that many buy-ups to make up for it overall.

Perhaps domestic E+ would be profitable (or more profitable, if it already is profitable for UA) with the cost savings, fleet reduction, and greater economies of scale that would result from a merged CO/UA. Or, perhaps the merged entity could continue domestic E+ but reduce the number of E+ rows if necessary.

supermasterphil Feb 13, 2008 1:05 pm

I would even rate DEN over CLE.

CO 1E Feb 13, 2008 1:10 pm


Originally Posted by ctownflyer (Post 9245199)
Is there any chance that CLE would survive as a hub in a merger?
For some reason I highly doubt it... :(

CLE generates more traffic on its own than many people believe. At worst, it would remain a strong focus city.

entropy Feb 13, 2008 1:31 pm

I dont see CLE disappearing as a hub. Both EWR and ORD and packed to the gills, so moving some connection traffic over CLE.

As for E+, perhaps the merger will give CO the "oomph" to go ahead and admit that its a good idea.

I don't know about upgrades... in some ways the UA system is better: by making people request upgrades, the people that couldn't care less about their upgrades don't get them and make space for the 2P that would be thrilled for an upgrade SFO-SEA.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 1:33 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.