Partly. And partly with the certificate-based program, some people don't want the upgrade on certain routes and/or don't manage their upgrades and/or forget to request them, etc.

Very nice (The interactive graphic on Bloomberg)

When I was clicking on the link it was taking me to a continental.com press release page. Now it seems to work.

747? You must have mistyped a number there. Or else I agree, the imaginary CO 747's in-plane home entertainment theater is very good.

[QUOTE=bocastephen;9575452]We've beaten this dog to death already - United won't be the name. It's brand is equated with subpar service and product. Everyone I know in Asia who flies to the US dreads taking UA, and only selects it when the price difference is too hard to pass up, like SIN-JFK below $600r/t.

More doesn't mean better - quite often, more means worse. Holiday Inn has 'more' hotels than Westin, but if Starwood bought the HI brand from IC, would it think of renaming the Westin brand Holiday Inn?

CO and UA are two different products - CO is the brand with better quality recognition, far more industry awards, and a better opportunity to grow its brand name while leveraging United's routes and infrastructure. It goes without saying, CO also has the more profitable, leaner, and stable operation and a better management team.

Having sold inbound travel to the USA from Europe, he has a very valid point.
My European clients would always recommend and choose CO over united hands down. While all US carriers were viewed as questionable service wise, CO was the number one choice for service and reliability.

My favorite United irrops experience actually belongs to my mother (no status) from 2 years ago. Her connecting flight IAD-AUS was cancelled and there was one more flight on Friday night, but it only had seats in F available. UA stated that they could only put her in Y unless she paid the $500+ fare difference, and since there was no Y available and since she was unwilling to pay for F, they could not accommodate her until Saturday morning.

Rather than bumping someone up without making them use an upgrade cert, the plane flew presumably with an empty F seat... meanwhile my mother collected her hotel and meal vouchers and headed to the hotel.

Yes, I've been platinum for 6-7 years now, with one year at gold mixed in there, but depending on how a merged FF program is structured, I -- and other regional flyers like me -- could be moving on down. In CY2007 I got my plat status for this year via 90 EQP on just 47 flight segments and only 36k EQM. Therefore I have a vested interest in how irrops are handled at all levels.

Sorry, the CO IFE beat's UA's 747 IFE. The CO IFE is comparable to UA's 777 int'l IFE.

Well, it is using PHP instead of that silly ASP garbage... :D

Slight technicality, but this is exactly what UA would have done if she had gone standby on the flight. While UA could not confirm her on the flight with no Y space open, they could have put her on the standby list.

UA would then have noticed that she is on a distressed passenger standby list, and if there were F seats open, bumped up a non-Elite to accommodate her. They do this all the time when there are delays (especially in situations when ORD gets backed up -- bump up people for free to get as many people onto the plane as they can).

I believe the comparison is CO 777 vs. UA 747

Delta Sets Up New Website - www.newglobalairline.com
 

Check out the new website Delta’s set up - http://www.newglobalairline.com/

Copied from the OP on the Delta Forum Thread - “Dear Delta Supporter - just got the following email”.

“Dear Delta Supporter:
Over the last few years you've been one of Delta's most active supporters. From our efforts to reject a hostile takeover attempt in 2006 to our bid to gain rights to serve China in 2007, you've been there.
Now, we're writing to let you know about Delta's plans to merge with our SkyTeam partner Northwest Airlines to create America's premier global airline.
The Delta-Northwest combination creates a new paradigm for consolidation within the airline industry with benefits in sharp contrast to other mergers that have been proposed. This merger is based on addition, not subtraction, and combines end-to-end networks that open a world of opportunities for our customers and employees.
In fact, the merged airline will combine the individual strengths and complementary service networks of both airlines, which today focus on different parts of the country and the world. This will enable us to:
Offer continued access to more than 390 worldwide destinations in 67 countries with no hub closures.


Improve global connectivity from our hubs in Atlanta, Cincinnati, Detroit, Memphis, Minneapolis/St. Paul, New York, Salt Lake City, Amsterdam and Tokyo-Narita.


Accelerate the upgrading of existing international aircraft with lie-flat seats and personal on-demand entertainment.


Improve customers' travel experience through new products and services, including enhanced self-service tools, better bag-tracking technology, new seats and refurbished cabin interiors.


Build a stronger airline for our employees - the new airline will provide employees with greater job security, an equity stake in the combined airline, and a more stable platform for future growth in the face of significant economic pressures from rising fuel costs and intense competition.
You can learn more about why this merger is good for employees, customers and the communities we serve by visiting us at www.newglobalairline.com. At the Web site, you can also make your voice heard on why you believe Delta's plan to create America's premier global airline is one that's in best interest of airline customers.
Thank you in advance for your support.“

I really hope UA/CO doesn't happen, UA is a mess, same as AA.

What WOULD be good for both airlines I tihnk would be CO/Alaska Air, they have similar fleets, lots of new planes in the pipeline, and Alaska is well managed and woudl give a good Western market that CO needs, in addition they could through good management easily aquire the needed equipment to run more non stop longhauls from the west, and the east. Alaska was the launch partner for the 737-900 series, has a good amount of 737-800's with many more on the way(first in line status as well, call them the elite of the waiting)

I know some of you won't like CO/Alaska due to international lacks, but there would still be global partners as well as GOOD management, lack of huge debts, and ability to grow their international nonstop market to Asia due to a good west coast operation.

I am sorry if I offended you and I am glad you realize that what you believe isn't cold hard truth or fact. Some people on here post as if it is a "definite" whichever way the name is going.

"United is bigger, they have more planes"

"Continental is a more respected airline, so they win"

I'm just sick of these thoughts based on such irrational thinking, from both sides. Nobody knows until an actual trusted source writes about it, read: AP/Reuters.

I agree that it would be a mess if there is an outright merger with either AA or UA. However, UA has some very lucrative routes and authorities that would fit perfectly with CO's growth pattern and stated future ambitions (transpac, LHR, etc). Alaska would be more of a seamless merger for all of the reasons that you stated, but it is my impression that additional domestic routes are not high on CO's list as they make much less money than international destinations, both in cargo and pax revenue.

Regardless, I think this consolidation is going to be messy for all involved.

I understand, but at the same time revenues without profits due to bad labor environment won't go over well, with the unions, or the management, and in the end the customers.
I don't know that CO wants to be the 'largest' I don't know that anyone can fix the mess that is UA/AA or moreso US, they have major problems now or on the near horizon that will take a lot of will and very active management that hasn't been seen yet.