No, I think you're missing the point completely. "Business practices" for the new airline barely exist yet. They have cobbled together a mixture of processes from the two merged companies and are working under those at the moment. A medium and long term strategy includes revisiting those processes after the dust has settled and look at their efficiency, areas for improvement, etc. Are you suggesting that has already happened? It certainly doesn't seem to have.

A great example is the announcement a few days ago about the revised strategy for aircraft retirement and the maintenance tweaks to improve reliability. You can't address items like that while you're in the integration process - you go with what you have, and then afterwards take a step back and look at what you want as a longer term strategy.

I think the only area where we have a different opinion is that I don't believe much of that type of decision has been made, or announced yet, whereas you're looking at the placeholder business processes and determining that you don't like what you see.

The very fact that you call it COdbaUA indicates that you've made a judgement on what you see the airline operating as, and are assuming that's what you're stuck with.

Good point. The merger closed 10/1/2010, so 6 months would have been 4/1/2011. They've had plenty of time to "keep the lights on" so to speak.


Well said. We're well beyond fine-tuning at this point.

They need a massive mindshift change to even attempt to regain the customers they lost.

Will some aspects get tweaked and cause grounds for improvement (i.e., FastSHARES)? Sure. However, I would argue there's a guiding philosophy to this leadership team that is already well in place, and save for a change in leadership, doubt much is going to change.

You don't think a more forward-looking leadership team might have thought of that before heading into a summer of reduced capacity, record high load factors, possible labor issues, cross-fleeting at airports w/limited resources, continuing integration issues, etc? Reactive vs. proactive. It's not something they should be praised over.

We'll agree to disagree - I would wager the UA of 1 year from now doesn't look all that different from what we see now. Maybe they'll be on their 8th or 9th boarding process change though.

Incorrect - I call it that as I see mainly CO business practices taking root at the airline, not surprising though when 2/3 of the leadership team is ex-PMCO, and the rate is increasing. You wouldn't have seen PMUA leadership calling it's most loyal flyers "over-entitled".

Translation - "no matter what does change for the better I've made up my mind that I don't like the leadership team so I'm going to deem it a failure".

If you know of a better way to do it I'm sure you could be snapped up by any one of the firms around the world that specialise in this type of transaction ;)

Get the basics right first, then optimise. Trying to merge while optimising on any large scale at the same time is a recipe for disaster. How do you know it wasn't thought of a year ago by the way? Do you have access to data that I don't? All I know about is the date is was announced to the public but yet you know enough to deem it reactive?

Actually I don't think we did see any of the leadership team calling its most loyal flyers anything. I did see a vast amount of people jumping to conclusions without a shred of evidence because it fit their agenda. It's quite clear from your tone that your mind is made up - regardless of what improvements are made - because you've decided you don't like the management team - I think we all get that.

Now you're just being disingenous. There will be improvements - how can there not be given all the ill will they've created in the past four months, a potentially damaging Q2 PRASM figure being released soon, etc. They just can't go down the same path. IF they start backtracking on many of the short-sighted decisions they've made to date, I'll happily give them credit. But I'm not seeing much of it yet.

I don't have access to inside data, nope. However, call me an armchair quarterback, but I'd think maybe this of all years you might have wanted a couple spare a/c in the rotation, extra maintenance hours, etc.

If they had announced it on 3/3 or thereabouts (or heck, a year ago or whenever the cross-fleeting actually started), that would have seemed nicely proactive to me. Something like "we know this may be a challenging time during our integration, so here are some steps we're going to take to 'grease the wheels', so to speak". Instead, it's in the middle of the busy summer travel season, after they've taken 4 months of beatings.

Huh - it's in there in writing/recording, it's clear he's referring to 25K+ flyers (who, generally speaking, overindex on revenues/profits I would imagine), and it caused such a firestorm that the UAI had to resurface to try and downplay the comments. Maybe if his comment seemed like an outlier response to more positive actions, it would have been brushed off - but it was perfectly emblematic of what many of us have observed the past 6-12 months.

I think we all get that you support the management team. I'd say most of "us" don't. Maybe we should start a poll.

:confused: I certainly don't. I think the communication has been terrible and the training that has been provided to the vast numbers of PMUA agents to date has been woefully inadequate. That affects me as a customer. Pointing out that somebody has a naive or incorrect view of what is realistic does not equate to supporting anyone. You can start any sort of poll you like but be careful, as always of making blanket (incorrect) judgements.

I have zero idea what you believe suggests that how things are being done re systems/policies are "place holders" no one has said that at all, certainly not anyone from UAL.

the "merger" was finalized on 10/1/10 when the boards voted to merge. Planning was well under way before that vote. So we are now legally ONE YEAR AND 9 MONTHS into this baby...

The MP program that was announced was not some "interim" measure, its final. The systems switch over on 3/3 is not some "interim" measure, its the system.

The two subsidiaries are operating as one, with one set of policies and proceedures. As others have noted other than Union contracts the airline is one airline, with one set of polices. Hell, have you not listened to Jeff's videos? :D Did you block them out? :confused: He says it every time... :o

This is UA moving forward, like it or leave it. What we have now is what the current management team WANTED. No one imposed them on them. Management is certainly not say "oh sorry, mistake, this is not what we intended, some clerk changed the policies and procedures and we just figured it out."

What you are now seeing is some backtracking and adjustments. The announced changes to cross fleeting are a RESPONSE to it not working that well and a huge problem. They are not some new policy, cross fleeting as been going on for OVER A YEAR!

Hey, I know you defend PMCO, that is your right. But you can't sluff this off as a period of "interim integration."

Let's be clear: UA has already announced monthly PRASM performance for 2Q. Alleging that there will be "potentially damaging" information released soon is either ignorant or an intentional attempt to undermine the credibility of material financial information that has already been disclosed to investors.

Yes. They have been reporting PRASM performance that is lagging its competitors by miles. Clearly that's a good thing. Oh wait...

I do not dispute that PRASM growth lagged competitors in 2Q. That is a fact that has been disclosed by the company to investors.

I am taking issue with a poster further alleging that management UA is withholding material financial information from investors.

Agreed. I don't think they are holding back anything. But I am not sure that's what the original poster of the comment meant.

Coming to you from Seat 6A on American
 

This thread has been a very interesting read, particularly considering I'm reading it from seat 6A on my upgraded Wi-Fi equipped AA flight.

And to think I would have never experienced AA first class had it not been for the indifference shown me by the crack management team at UA (and of course thanks to the status match provided by AA).

Speaking of insults! Don't throw that in our face.:cool::D;)

I don't think anyone is suggesting that the releases have been inaccurate (keeping in mind that they are estimates, and get corrected by the next release), I think that what is suggesting (at least what I am suggesting) is that how this all effects UAL's bottom line will not become apparent until we see the total revenue/total cost picture mid month with the Q2 results. The market responds to this bottom line, most investors (and many analysts) have no idea what PRASM is.

But I do appreciate your admission that the PRASM figures are not exactly a vote of confidence by customers in the course that UAL has taken post 3/3. Time will tell.

I'm sure UA management benchmarked the bumps of US-HP, NW-DL, AA-TW, DL-PA Atlantic, etc long ago. They probably more than a year ago presented the data to the board to be out in front of it and make sure the BoD was aware despite management's best efforts, these things never going as smoothly as management would hope. Even look at BA T5 in LHR or UA and the opening in BA. The recent internal memo about reserve aircraft, more time blocked for flights will improve performance. Like DL, perhaps UA should have waited to impose some of the less popular changes until after they got through the bumpy part of the road, but then again, maybe they saw DL didn't see any mass exodus despite its changes to SM, etc. As long as the profits keep coming, this will be a bump in the road for Smi/J.