Jeff's speech at Deutsche Bank Aviation and Transportation Conference
#16
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 57,960
This is Jeff from Texas talking not some international leader in airline culture. 


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.
#17
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SEA
Posts: 12,485
Actually, frequent flyer programs are not particularly effective at generating loyalty for international routes.
#18
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5
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.
#19
Suspended
Join Date: Jun 2005
Programs: Continental Gold Elite, United Premier Executive
Posts: 6,766
[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.
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.
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.
Last edited by iluv2fly; Sep 14, 11 at 3:40 pm Reason: merge
#20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco/Tel Aviv/YYZ
Programs: CO 1K-MM
Posts: 10,629
Actually, frequent flyer programs are not particularly effective at generating loyalty for international routes.
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.
#21
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 1,348
[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.
Honestly, pajamas and better wines would make UA very competitive with LH in the air.
#22
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,056
UA has made investing in its premium product a priority. Since most demand is for C/J tickets, rather than F, this is where most of the focus is. UA's next generation C/J product on both 2- and 3-class aircraft is very competitive with C/J products most of its competitors.
Getting hung up on legacy branding for a subsidiary that is going to disappear in the next 6 months seems a bit shortsighted and petty. Let's focus on the hard and soft product being rolled out and wait to see how UA brands its C/J cabin on 2- and 3-class aircraft once the integration of the two carriers is complete.
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.
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).
#24
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SEA
Posts: 12,485
I will take LH FC any day over COUA LCC's B/F.
For any COUA LCC apologists to really believe their airline will be comparable in an international competitive market is fool hardy.
I know of know one who would take COUA B/F over true international carriers FC such as LH, EK, TG, SQ, MH, QR, CX, KE, etc...is pure wishful and denial thinking....




For any COUA LCC apologists to really believe their airline will be comparable in an international competitive market is fool hardy.
I know of know one who would take COUA B/F over true international carriers FC such as LH, EK, TG, SQ, MH, QR, CX, KE, etc...is pure wishful and denial thinking....






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.
Last edited by iluv2fly; Sep 14, 11 at 3:41 pm Reason: merge
#25
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,686
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.
#26
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,324
I don't know about you, but I heard Jeff speak and feel like I can comment on the topic at hand.
UA has made investing in its premium product a priority. Since most demand is for C/J tickets, rather than F, this is where most of the focus is. UA's next generation C/J product on both 2- and 3-class aircraft is very competitive with C/J products most of its competitors.
UA has made investing in its premium product a priority. Since most demand is for C/J tickets, rather than F, this is where most of the focus is. UA's next generation C/J product on both 2- and 3-class aircraft is very competitive with C/J products most of its competitors.
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.]
Last edited by Ocn Vw 1K; Sep 14, 11 at 3:13 pm Reason: See last line above.
#27
Suspended
Join Date: Jun 2005
Programs: Continental Gold Elite, United Premier Executive
Posts: 6,766
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).
Last edited by iluv2fly; Sep 14, 11 at 3:41 pm Reason: merge
#28
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SEA
Posts: 12,485
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).
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.
#29
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: OneSky Alliance Elite+ with Zirconium and oak leaf cluster, Braniff Unobtainium
Posts: 19,462
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.

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.
#30
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 1,348
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.
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.