uastarflyer

That's not really the goal however, is it? Matching SQ isn't realistic. Being competent and reasonably competitive is probably good enough. Which is why I was surprised to hear talk of using domestic to feed international. The first time I've heard something that is NOT smallball Colgan RJ speak.

How he expects to build up international capability when he's wasting Cap Ex on domestic upgrades is TBD.

Slashing MP won't help this out either.

sxf24

What capex is being wasted on domestic upgrades? 737 E+ installation and A320 bin expansion is peanuts compared to flat beds.

Actually, frequent flyer programs are not particularly effective at generating loyalty for international routes.

exibanker

Agree that upgrading domestic should be second in line to updating long haul international. Just to keep up with the competition. Lay-flat beds take up an enormous amount of revenue producing seats.., so I can certainly understand why it has been such a painful pill to swallow. Personally, I am just as comfortable for 5-8 hours in an 'almost' flat seat like on AA's First/Business Class. I am 6'4" so I do not fit in the beds anyway.

HeathrowGuy

[QUOTE=Brasila;17108334]Right, and your Lufthansa example falls flat the instant we begin to compare Business Class products, as the UA and CO flat beds blow Lufthansa out of the water.

The early generation flat bed seats -- like the ones installed by Virgin Atlantic and Singapore Airlines -- did indeed take up alot of space. But those who smartly waited a bit for designs that are much more space-efficient -- such as United and Continental -- ae now installing seats that result in comparatively small capacity reductions.

I'm 6'4", and while its a tight but good fit in the United Flat Bed, I'm more than comfy in CO's Flat Bed, which is 6'6" long.

entropy

Uhh, no. FFPs were the ONLY reason for many UA FF's to fly UA TPAC C/F over SQ and NH. UA's counting of BIS for CR1 and MM drove customers to choose loyalty over an overall better experience.
really? CO said they did the lie flat conversion because they finally got a seat that wouldn't take up more space. Try again.

boolean64

[QUOTE=Brasila;17108334]Having just flown LH F last weekend, I can say that if sleeping and IFE were the two most important criteria for me, I would take UA over LH F (on an A340) all the time. LH blew UA away on everything else, but the UA bed and IFE were without question superior. And 11 hours on a good bed with more than one movie that I actually wanted to watch would be worth much more than 10 minutes in a mercedes.

Honestly, pajamas and better wines would make UA very competitive with LH in the air.

channa

The UA/CO C/J seat is currently competitive, but it will soon fall flat (pun intended!) with true next-generation products which have a staggered layout and nobody immediately next to you (a la NH or LX).


Have they announced the sunset of the BusinessFirst branding? If so, I missed that announcement. For all we know they could keep BusinessFirst and add another brand for First (FirstFirst or RealFirst?).


Remember, CO wasn't terribly good at using its FFP to generate loyalty internationally. CO's FFP was generous to domestic flyers, but very weak and uncompetitive for international or very frequent flyers. I can see how someone with a colistic background may not see the possibility.


It's really a matter of the design of the frequent flyer program.

There are also other factors such as route network. If you have a stronghold at your hub with a relatively captive customer base, they're going to fly you anyway.

There are also different types of rewards -- if an airline gives absolutely no reward outside of bonus miles to its top tiers flying internationally, then that program is likely skewed towards domestic flyers and against international flyers.

CO's policies were even more extreme at the time -- with 50% EQM on partners (many more int'l itineraries require partner travel), and a pricing structure that was hostile towards codeshares.

In that case, THAT FFP would fail to generate loyalty among int'l travellers.


It's not really about "smartly" waiting -- many who waited around lost business to those who had better products. Was the delay worth it? Who knows?

The fact of the matter is this is a constantly evolving item, and airlines need to re-invest in upgrades as quickly as they can. Many U.S. carriers missed on the angle-flat revolution because they didn't update as frequently, while others replaced their barcaloungers 10+ years ago with angle-flats.

The next one looks like it's the staggered model. Who knows what's after that. Once the integration is complete, maybe UA/CO will have the cash it takes to stay up to date with this stuff (that's in addition to leading the world as the world's leading airline).

exibanker

nah.., all I require are two cocktails and by Bose earphones

sxf24

Again, regardless of the current branding, 'BusinessFirst' is a C/J class product, not a F class product. UA's F class is not particularly competitive with the airlines you list, but its C/J is.

Perhaps I should say FFP are not particularly effective at driving profitable loyalty for international routes.

Or DL

They haven't announced it will continue.


International premium ticket purchase decisions are made almost entirely based on network and product. FFP programs have very little influence on paid premium international traffic.

SFOtoORD

There was a thread quite a while ago with some pictures of printed materials that only showed First and Business, but nothing definitive. I think there is no way they can keep BF. Otherwise it would be completely confusing.

tuolumne

While the CO side will continue to (and has for years) argue that intl 3-cabin F is a "waste of time" and that there is no need to offer the product (as you have personally done on multiple occasions), the truth is that pmUA's intl. route network fully supports F inventory. If what you say is true, UA wouldn't have made a strategic decision to invest in a brand new F suite for ever one of their nearly 100 intl. widebody aircraft (and upgrade them into the 763).

Saying things like F won't be focused on because more C seats are sold is generally not supported by reality. in fact, look for Smisek to unveil an upgraded soft product for United First. [Unduly personalized comment deleted by moderator.]

HeathrowGuy

This is doubtful, at best. The competitive dynamics of NH and LX's home markets allow them to get away (at least, for now) with installing premium cabin products with a rather low seating density. The other major USA and European legacies would plunge themselves into financial ruin on many routes if they attempted to mimic those layouts.

What are you talking about? The introduction of First Class onto some PMCO routes is long overdue and will be warmly welcomed by those who have been waiting some time for an International First Class offering. That being said, I fully expect the introduction of F on PMCO flying to be the result of continued switcheroos with PMUA aircraft and NOT by adding F to PMCO's longhaul fleet (a move that, with the possible exception of the PMCO 777 fleet, makes little financial sense).

sxf24

I've never personally said 3-cabin F is a waste of time. Perhaps your confusing me with someone else...

I will say that there is no need to offer 3-cabin F on many routes because it won't sell. If you're going to mostly use a premium class for upgrades, you'll never be able to afford to keep the product competitive. Since the demand for C/J is much larger and widespread, it makes sense for UA to continue focusing its investment here. Maintaining 3-cabin F on certain routes where you can sell it also makes sense.

However, while C/J is competitive, lets not fool ourselves and pretend that UA's F is remotely competitive with any first-tier airline.

The reality is that UA sells more C seats that international F seats. That doesn't mean you should ignore F completely. UA has been consistently clear (including at the DB conference) that it will be prudent with its capital expenditures, a fact reflected in its decision to prioritize flat beds in C over other product enhancements.

eponymous_coward

That's not the relevant comparison. It's whether you'd take LH C over UA/CO C.

There's also the rather major point that most of our experience with longhaul F is as aspirational award travel, or as upgrade from C, unless you are truly shelling out 5 figures for your flights, in which case, congratulations, and I might ask this: why are you bothering with UA loyalty instead of simply whatever carrier will give you luxurious experiences in F?

And because aspirational awards are an important part of UA's program, I'll point out that while LH has much nicer lounges and soft product than UA, LH Miles and More is a horrible program for upgrades compared to UA/CO, and their award chart's much, MUCH worse in mileage requirements than UA/CO's.

Aren't you one of the ones complaining about how $mi$ek is ruining M+? How do you think most 1Ks would like 210K F awards from North America to SYD to go along with a hypothetical SFO First Class Terminal and caviar on the plane? 2 SWUS/CR-1s per qualifying year as a 1K to go along with Mercedes rides? Do let me know what you think about that one.

As the 747/A380/revamped A340/A330 hard products roll out, though, LH comes out well ahead. (I also don't have problems sleeping in LH F or mind smallish screens, so LH superior soft product will win my mileage redemption business... as puny as that is. )

The other thing UA would need to work on would be the premium experience on the ground to come closer to LH's. Right now, LH has better facilities in NYC (JFK lounge) than UA/CO does at EWR. If they're serious about their F product, I'd think they would want to invest in premium ground experience at EWR/SFO/ORD. Doesn't have to be a Mercedes, but refreshing the lounges... well, I'd argue that the VS lounge at SFO beats the UA IFL there.

boolean64

Oh, I slept just fine on the old LH seat...but I've slept better in the new UA suite. I didn't mind the small screen either since I just used my own IFE. But I definitely have friends who care about the IFE above everything else and would gladly drink Nicholas Feuillatte and Glenlivet in exchange.

UA could definitely pull off the LH ground experience at SFO if it was willing to spend the money and try. The IFL is nice enough, just need to add a hot menu and upgrade the buffet...perhaps buy better booze (although I was impressed to see woodford reserve), and do the car service, especially collecting domestic connections from T3.

But I'll believe it when I see it. In the meantime, I'll earn on UA and burn elsewhere.