Lurch

I was lucky enough to get a first class reward ticket LAX-SYD for this summer. My only wish is that UA's international first was comparable to foreign airlines international first. http://travel.nytimes.com/2012/02/12...for-19000.html

radonc1

So I guess the question is
"Would I rather get a first class seat on UA as a reward for my other UA related activities (regular flying, using the CC, partner miles etc)" or..
"Would I rather pay somewhere between $15K and 20K to fly on the other airlines mentioned in the NYT's article"??

Now I cannot tell you how you value your money. If you have so much of it that $15K is like $20, then the answer is obvious. But then why would you be flying UA and/or crediting your flying to UA when you could credit it to an international carrier and get awards on those airlines. If on the other hand you are like most of us, the chance to fly F on those other airlines is remote to say the least, but achievable on UA.

For me, I would rather accept the possible (getting a reward seat in F on UA) rather than strive for the highly unlikely (getting into F on one of those foreign carriers). And I will accept the lack of certain amenities for being able to achieve the possible.

tehiota

Or you can combine the two. Rack up as many MP miles you can through various avenues and try and find a *A Reward for your international trip. I did this in 2010. I transferred AMEX to CO and then booked LH F (not business) IAH-FRA-ATH. The diff btw CO's BF and LH F was only another 30k miles RT and well worth it to be on top of the 747.

Jorgen

Wah wah, I'm getting a free first-class flight, and I wish it was a slightly better free first-class flight!

Really, the economics of first class travel is a weird thing. In order to fill a first class cabin with paying customers, you need to have a lot of pointlessly rich (but not rich enough to take a private jet) folks sitting around wanting to take fancy holidays in faraway locations. The Middle East and certain parts of East Asia are full of these folks. The United States isn't -- there's a lot of rich people but they tend to be working most of the time, and when they do feel like spending some money pointlessly they tend to stay within the US rather than jetting halfway around the world.

Aloha1

+1^ And you now know how much LH F blows away ANY US domestic carrier F. Did you have a chance to hit the First Class terminal in FRA?

( For those of you who don't know, LH has a dedicated terminal for F flyers where they actually take you to your plane via Mercedes limo, serve JW Blue, have a white table cloth sit down restaurant, dorm rooms for sleeping, etc.)

Mistered

My compromise is that I fly UA paid domestic, where they are a B grade (only because of E+), and accept UDU when possible for the minor benefit. I use their credit card and club (currently C- to D+). For paid international business, I buy around UA whenever possible on *A carriers.

Even when the 777s are fully renovated, UA international business will be a cramped C+, up from D. Others have a better hard product (often much better), almost always superior soft product, quiet and dark cabin for sleeping, no F/A issues, and no single-aisle 757s for TATL.

People outside the country always ask me why we Americans tolerate UA and their domestic peers on international. I haven't for years and don't plan to start (Charles Darwin, call your office). The miles I accumulate are for upgrades and for my adult children.

Rpcfly

Lets just face facts here....and I think many will agree....UA First Class doesn't even compare with many of the Middle East or Asian Carriers.

Many on the FT board here, including myself, have enjoyed a "real" F product on numerous carriers mainly because of FF miles we've redeemed. We've been able to get these tickets mainly because of the, IMHO, accumulation of miles via the UA MP program.

TG, NH, SQ(if you can ever get them) offer a pure premium product for MP redemption.

After sampling the UA, AA, BA, CX, MH, TG, SQ and other airlines F products, the US airlines are woefully lacking. If you are a regular Asian traveler (Intra Asia) UA and Delta are just bad....period. If you want a complementary upgrade on your way to Asia because you need to get there then the F product is acceptable. Most business travelers from the US either have to buy their tickets because of the schedule (me included), or are forced into taking US carriers abroad.

There are many people on FT who wonder why anyone would take a US carrier in F/C to Asia...given the bad seats/bad service/bad food/ etc etc etc....For most it's not a choice unfortunately...It just is how it is.

I certainly don't think that US carriers are going to change their focus any time soon on the product...and especially service...that they offer on their International flights because it makes up so little of the revenue pie. I have actually laughed with a GS agent on more than one occasion about taking the UA flight to BKK when the TG flight was available.......10 seconds in to the conversation they totally understood the "service" factor.

Maybe things may change......I'm not holding my breath though

floridastorm

Something that I have pondered for years is the terrible condition of American carriers as opposed to foreign carriers. Can the American airlines tell me why they cannot provide a product that is at least equal to the foreign carriers? Most, if not all, of the Asian carriers have outstanding seating and service. Even their older aircraft are immaculate. First and Business class is really first and business, not some upgraded economy pretender. Economy class, on Asian carriers, means a fairly comfortable seat with 34 inch pitch. On American carriers it's 31 to 32 inch pitch and older uncomfortable seats. The American carriers management can't be that stupid that they don't know what their competitors are doing. I refuse to fly any American carrier. Asian and some European carriers have a much better product and they really seem to care whether you fly their airline or not. Who in the world is running the American carriers these days? They can't be very concerned about their customers, I'm sure of that.

glennaa11

Of course a lot of the foreign carriers are at least partially state owned. So they can afford to have these lavish cabins even if they don't make money off them.

While UA F may not quite measure up to some of their foreign counterparts, frankly I find the new F suites to be quite nice from a hard product perspective. The food isn't as good I suppose but frankly I don't care all that much about the food on an airplane. I care about space and comfort. Service is hit or miss, but that is the case on plenty of foreign carriers too.

The NYT article missed the cheapest EK F suites experience. Less than $650 ow on the flight between BKK and HKG. Flight time is about 3 hours.

Lurch

I do not consider award tickets free. Nobody gave me the miles and I pay for all my tickets. Thanks for telling me what rich folks do.

eyuro

The NYT article missed the cheapest EK F suites experience. Less than $650 ow on the flight between BKK and HKG. Flight time is about 3 hours.[/QUOTE]

Took it! Wow! TG wanted $1,350 for the same route! They wanted more in C than EK took for F. I took pictures and showed them to other FF friends, their mouths were on the floor!

gfunkdave

Because American carriers don't compete with foreign ones. Can you fly Singapore Airlines from Chicago to Seattle? Can you fly Emirates from Miami to Detroit?

On the routes that they do compete, US flyers have voted with their wallets: they'd rather pay for Y and upgrade with miles than pay for the "real" first class experience.

This is also a point.

tehiota

I was connecting through FRA, so I didn't get to use the FCT; however, I did use the LH First Class lounge (upstairs from the Sen/Hon Lounge) and what a difference compared to the other FRA Lounges. Carving station with various meats, private areas to lay down in, better selection of food, wine, etc.. Super quiet, etc.

floridastorm

Most of the foreign carriers, I'm afraid, are not state owned or partially state owned. That used to be the way it was 20 years ago. Today, most foreign carriers are privately owned. However, they seem to actually manage their airlines efficiently. By the way, the American carriers are all subsidized by the American government in one way or another. In addition, just about every foreign carrier I have traveled with over the last few years has flown at almost 100% capacity. So, there are an awful lot of Americans that are flying these planes. I also don't see many foreign airlines going bankrupt like most of the US carriers have.

Mistered

"State owned" and "state subsidized" are two sides of the same coin. U.S. govt. employees and contractors are forced to fly U.S. carriers, and foreign carriers are barred from flying between U.S. cities. Both policies distort the free market. Air Canada knows it competes with the Asian and Middle East carriers, hence its product on those routes is far better than any U.S. carrier. United believes Delta is the competition and has the product to prove it.