|
Originally Posted by channa
(Post 18758618)
It's possible. But none of these data show DL being 2x the next lowest rate, which is what we've seen from UA over the past two month. If this is a trend, that's really bad.
|
Originally Posted by sxf24
(Post 18758644)
Are you trying to say that the rate of complaints doesn't matter, only the difference between the next lowest ranking?
The rate is important, and the comparison to others gives perspective. |
Originally Posted by channa
(Post 18758618)
It's possible. But none of these data show DL being 2x the next lowest rate, which is what we've seen from UA over the past two month. If this is a trend, that's really bad.
|
Originally Posted by sxf24
(Post 18758644)
Are you trying to say that the rate of complaints doesn't matter, only the difference between the next lowest ranking?
I understand your personal opinion and situation may be different. |
Originally Posted by channa
(Post 18758705)
I think they both matter.
The rate is important, and the comparison to others gives perspective. |
Originally Posted by UA-NYC
(Post 18758998)
Those us with a background and experience in statistics would say that, while the absolute rates are all low, the real interest lies in statistically significant differences, as has been shown with traditionally high PMCO (now COdbaUA) IDB rates.
Whether I've got a 1:10,000 or 2:10,000 chance of an IDB the odds still say that it is never going to happen to me, even if I fly 100 segments a year over 40 years, right? |
Originally Posted by EWR764
(Post 18758501)
Incidentally, there is not one period in the last four years where pre-merger UA registered fewer DOT complaints than Continental. I guess CO really had everyone brainwashed... ;)
August 2011, United 2.54, Continental 2.65 January 2011, United 1.58, Continental 2.11 |
Originally Posted by EWR764
(Post 18758991)
I agree, and I'm not trying to downplay these piss-poor results. However, there is evidence (based on the last mega-merger) that the results improve as the integration progresses. We'll see if UA holds true to that.
|
Originally Posted by cordelli
(Post 18759103)
October 2011, United 1.84 complaints per 100,000 enplanements, Continental 1.92
August 2011, United 2.54, Continental 2.65 January 2011, United 1.58, Continental 2.11
Originally Posted by iquitos
(Post 18759107)
Like US AIR? Judging from what I have seen so far there is an equally good chance they will not pull out of it anytime soon. They made a big blunder with the decision to go with the cheaper IT option Smisek Mr. Nice guy videos are a joke and the "new" coffee sucks not to mention the CFO comment on elites.
|
Originally Posted by fastair
(Post 18758534)
Sykes is correct. Airlines don't get to submit certain data and exclude wx/atc. If that was the case airlines with hubs in ewr/JFK/lga would have HA like ontime numbers. They all count. Heck, even ord, with the Obama related atc issues doesn't get to exclude delays that are caused by presidential fundraising/campaigning trips or weekends home. They all count.
|
Originally Posted by sbm12
(Post 18759065)
Whether I've got a 1:10,000 or 2:10,000 chance of an IDB the odds still say that it is never going to happen to me, even if I fly 100 segments a year over 40 years, right?
With 4,000 plays and 1:10,000 odds, odds are it won't happen to you (40% chance). With 4,000 plays and 2:10,000 ddds, odds are it will happen to you (80% chance). |
Originally Posted by channa
(Post 18759490)
Actually, 100 segments a year x 40 years = 4,000 segments.
With 4,000 plays and 1:10,000 odds, odds are it won't happen to you (40% chance). With 4,000 plays and 2:10,000 ddds, odds are it will happen to you (80% chance). If you look at it on an annual basis, your odds on an IDB are small under either scenario. |
Originally Posted by sxf24
(Post 18761462)
Yes, an 80% chance you will be involuntary denied boarding over a 40 year time period, assuming the IDB rates never change.
If you look at it on an annual basis, your odds on an IDB are small under either scenario. Well if you dig into it, theoretically if you fly that much, you'll have status, so a better opportunity to having a pre-assigned seat, so a lower chance of being IDBed. So the IDB rates for non-status flyers are probably higher. |
Originally Posted by aacharya
(Post 18756929)
April 2012 reflects the fallout from the 3/3 debacle, and it is not surprising UA is this low. Let's wait until June or July data, when things have gone back to normal. |
Originally Posted by channa
(Post 18761553)
Well if you dig into it, theoretically if you fly that much, you'll have status, so a better opportunity to having a pre-assigned seat, so a lower chance of being IDBed.
So the IDB rates for non-status flyers are probably higher. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 6:33 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.