FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   United Airlines | MileagePlus (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-airlines-mileageplus-681/)
-   -   United CEO says it doesn’t want to be world’s largest airline, but size still matters (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-airlines-mileageplus/1445892-united-ceo-says-doesn-t-want-world-s-largest-airline-but-size-still-matters.html)

channa Mar 9, 2013 8:04 am


Originally Posted by IflyfromABE (Post 20387484)
but, gee there are a lot of us who really miss the airline that was number one in awards as far as frequent flier programs went for like a decade

I miss that, too. But I don't blame UA or Jeff Smisek for it. That CO was long gone over a decade ago.

CO used to take home Freddies regularly in the late 1990's and early 2000's.

The last time I see CO winning a single Freddie was in 2002. I think 2003 was the year they instated 50% EQM, which might have had an impact.

http://www.freddieawards.com/winners.php?id=18

NiceLanding Mar 9, 2013 9:37 am


Originally Posted by Indelaware (Post 20387793)
Indeed. This Platinum misses CO quite a bit. Yes, we are learning to live with the merger, and there are, I suppose some plusses. And there are negatives. And there are many trivial changes that don't count to much. But, the one thing that really disturbs me about the new airline is the UA mentality (both in management and in my fellow travellers) that the non-elite customer doesn't matter. Screw the secret handshake mentality: I want an airline that respects all customers -- and fellow passengers who realize that they are no better than the occasional traveller.

There's one thing I've long wondered about. In years of following discussions on the PMUA forum here, I never noticed the word "kettle" until I started visiting the PMCO forum, where it was commonly used in a disdainful tone to refer to those same non-elite customers that you think were treated with respect. Is it conceivable that the wide-spread reference to "kettles" reflected the real PMCO attitude, rather than the official party-line?

hobo13 Mar 9, 2013 10:07 am


Originally Posted by Indelaware (Post 20387793)
Indeed. This Platinum misses CO quite a bit. Yes, we are learning to live with the merger, and there are, I suppose some plusses. And there are negatives. And there are many trivial changes that don't count to much. But, the one thing that really disturbs me about the new airline is the UA mentality (both in management and in my fellow travellers) that the non-elite customer doesn't matter. Screw the secret handshake mentality: I want an airline that respects all customers -- and fellow passengers who realize that they are no better than the occasional traveller.

This makes no sense. On one hand you say you are a Plat who misses CO. On the other, you are disturbed that UA doesn't care about non-elites.

So which is it? Or let me guess, you want everyone to be treated like a Plat all the time. EVERYONE should sit up front. EVERYONE should board first. EVERYONE should have a special call line.

Newsflash: When everyone is elite, no one is elite. And indeed, that's where we're headed.


Originally Posted by IflyfromABE (Post 20387484)
and their top level elites never had to fly coach (hint: that airline was not pmUA).

I don't dispute this at all. But I will say this, my CPU percentage plunged from say 95% to about 40%. Same fares, same flight patterns. And that happened on 3/3/12. @:-)

I'll acknowledge that the CPU concept came to United from CO -- without the merger, we probably would never have had it. I was skeptical about it at first, just like many of us. But man, I came to LOVE it. At 95%, who wouldn't?

But just as quickly as CO brought it to us, they essentially ripped it away with their ToD's. Jeffy Jefff would have been better off if the PMUA 1K's had never known just how nice CPU's could be. Had the transition been from e-500's to crappy CPU's in a ToD world, there would have been much less uproar, because frankly, our UG % probably would have been similar.

halls120 Mar 9, 2013 10:27 am


Originally Posted by hobo13 (Post 20389778)
But just as quickly as CO brought it to us, they essentially ripped it away with their ToD's. Jeffy Jefff would have been better off if the PMUA 1K's had never known just how nice CPU's could be. Had the transition been from e-500's to crappy CPU's in a ToD world, there would have been much less uproar, because frankly, our UG % probably would have been similar.

I still wish they would get rid of the CPU and go back to the e500 certs.

hobo13 Mar 9, 2013 11:04 am


Originally Posted by halls120 (Post 20389834)
I still wish they would get rid of the CPU and go back to the e500 certs.

1.5 years ago, I would say I like CPU's better. Today, I'm ambivalent.

And I definitely think that Golds / Silvers (maybe Plats) would for sure be better with e-500's.

entropy Mar 9, 2013 11:37 am


1.5 years ago, I would say I like CPU's better. Today, I'm ambivalent.

And I definitely think that Golds / Silvers (maybe Plats) would for sure be better with e-500's.
it is interesting... I think a lot of people would rather know they have a reasonable shot at an upgrade, even as a gold. Rationing out upgrades (As they used to) is a good thing. Setting up everyone for the expectation that they're going to get an upgrade leads to despair 'dammit #39 on the upgrade list?!'.

channa Mar 9, 2013 12:03 pm


Originally Posted by hobo13 (Post 20389749)
But just as quickly as CO brought it to us, they essentially ripped it away with their ToD's.

TODs is part of it, but Y/B-Ups is also a huge part of it.

A Silver on a B fare now trumps a 1K on an E fare. That didn't happen before 3/3 on the UA side.

Combined with the fare structure revisions that push several shorter stay trips to higher fares (CO had this previously, and we've seen more of it across the blended network, where B is sometimes the lowest fare for one-ways or < 3 day stays), we're probably seeing more B fares sold, and as a result, more instant-ups.

So I'm sure there is a certain subset of customers that is now happy -- Gold/Silver Y/B customers. But the question is, are those the customers to be rewarding?

If the fare structure pushed them to Y/B, and they bought the ticket because of the schedule, they're just buying the ticket because it was the cheapest available, and upgrading because the little Upgrade link showed up. Meanwhile, the 100,000-mile mixed fare flyer like the one above who saw their upgrade rate tank to half or less takes note and moves all of his business away.

So that raises the question of what is the more profitable move. Sure, the Y/B fare Silver is a good, profitable customer. But what is his flight risk vs. higher-volume, mixed fare flyers? If the Silver B is buying the flight because of schedule, and paying the fare because that's the fare offered, then he's far more likely to do it anyway, irrespective of the instant-upgrade perk, no?

Or it could be a combination of the Y/B policy combined with a flawed fare structure. If people are ever in a situation where Y/B is the cheapest, then that means they are not realizing even $1 of extra revenue for the F cabin from an Elite. Take the example above, where the Silver buys the cheapest fare he can find, a B fare, and change that to an E fare, but offer a B fare for marginally more. THEN, the Silver would be consciously paying more for the F cabin rather than utilizing the finite resource with no positive effect on revenue.

andrewwm Mar 9, 2013 12:34 pm


Originally Posted by Brasila (Post 20390062)
True.....I never heard the word "kettles" either until I saw it used by CO flyers....do kettles have a secret handshake....

:rolleyes: You must not have been around the old UA forum much. I remember dozens of threads in the old UA forum about how UA was a terrible airline for GMs but great if you were an elite, plus countless hundreds/thousands more that used the term kettle derogatively.

halls120 Mar 9, 2013 2:58 pm


Originally Posted by entropy (Post 20390118)
it is interesting... I think a lot of people would rather know they have a reasonable shot at an upgrade, even as a gold. Rationing out upgrades (As they used to) is a good thing. Setting up everyone for the expectation that they're going to get an upgrade leads to despair 'dammit #39 on the upgrade list?!'.

The gate monitors with 45 people on the UG list when there are 24 F seats available is laughable, and as you note, creates disappointment, not anticipation.


Originally Posted by channa (Post 20390256)
So I'm sure there is a certain subset of customers that is now happy -- Gold/Silver Y/B customers. But the question is, are those the customers to be rewarding?

If the fare structure pushed them to Y/B, and they bought the ticket because of the schedule, they're just buying the ticket because it was the cheapest available, and upgrading because the little Upgrade link showed up. Meanwhile, the 100,000-mile mixed fare flyer like the one above who saw their upgrade rate tank to half or less takes note and moves all of his business away.

So that raises the question of what is the more profitable move. Sure, the Y/B fare Silver is a good, profitable customer. But what is his flight risk vs. higher-volume, mixed fare flyers? If the Silver B is buying the flight because of schedule, and paying the fare because that's the fare offered, then he's far more likely to do it anyway, irrespective of the instant-upgrade perk, no?

The only time in my life I've paid for a B fare on a leisure trip is when my Dad passed away. I've had to do it occasionally for business, but those are situation few and far between. This is one of the reasons I'm flying UA less and the competition more.

UA-NYC Mar 9, 2013 3:06 pm


Originally Posted by halls120 (Post 20391040)
The gate monitors with 45 people on the UG list when there are 24 F seats available is laughable, and as you note, creates disappointment, not anticipation.

Esp since at the gate there are maybe only 1-2 tops available for those 45 ;)

I_Can_Fly_US_Airways Mar 9, 2013 10:03 pm

Not Exactly...
 

Originally Posted by craz (Post 20383883)
Although I dont care for Jeff & Co, something tells me you dont follow the stock mkt

1. I follow the stock market more closely than 99.9% of most people on the planet.
2. I was not questioning the value of stock of UA. I was simply stating that Jeff's pitch was based upon SCREAMING THE FACT THAT HE created the World's Biggest Airline & ALL the advantages all is worth.
3. Now that HE will no longer be #1, what does he do??? Trashes that theory & says, "No, being #1 ain't that important".

Nothing chaps my A$$ more than hypocrisy!!!

burlax Mar 9, 2013 10:31 pm


Originally Posted by I_Can_Fly_US_Airways (Post 20392608)
1. I follow the stock market more closely than 99.9% of most people on the planet. . .

TBF, "changes we'll like" are not going to be reflected in the stock price immediately. First, people will get really upset. Second, they'll move their business to competitors. Third, UA financials will be impacted, at which point the analysts will take notice and THEN the price will be adjusted. But that may as well take a year. Also, it's quite uncertain whether UA would be able to extract more money from kettles via ToDs or from FFs via CPU and repeat business. We shall see.

Indelaware Mar 9, 2013 10:33 pm


Originally Posted by halls120 (Post 20388596)
I think most pmUA customers would disagree strongly with your characterization that at pmUA, the non-elite customer didn't matter. They did. But pmUA wasn't bashful about the better treatment afforded to their elites, and as a result, many of us flew UA even when it cost us more to do so, and was less convenient.

One should always fly the lowest priced (safe) carrier. FF benefits should only come into play when fares are the same. When I am treated better by the person next to me, I feel embarrassed. I always use OLCI so I don't need the Elite Access line at the airport (those few times I do need to go to the counter, I stand in the general line) and I always board last (just like I did long before there was such a thing as a FF plan). And when I get the upgrade, I generally swap seats with someone from the back of the plane, preferably an elderly member of the working-poor. The seats in back are just fine.

We clearly think differently.


Originally Posted by UA-NYC (Post 20388999)
How can the non-elite customer not matter when they get the best (read: cheapest) upgrade offers, bypassing elites on the WL?

How can they not matter when, if they get a $95 credit card, they're treated the same as a Million Mile Flyer?

There's that attitude again - we deserve upgrades. Upgrades are, IMHO, of trivial value. If UA can find a sucker to pay a few bucks for them, that's great for the airline and no skin off me. Frankly, it amazes me both that some people pay to sit up front and others rush to sit up there for free. Ah, but if mergers continue to happen, when one airline ends up with 60%+ of the market, they will move to single cabin aircraft on all domestic routes -- just as the other large remaining carrier, WN, will have.

Clearly we think differently.


Originally Posted by hobo13 (Post 20389749)
This makes no sense. On one hand you say you are a Plat who misses CO. On the other, you are disturbed that UA doesn't care about non-elites.

So which is it? Or let me guess, you want everyone to be treated like a Plat all the time. EVERYONE should sit up front. EVERYONE should board first. EVERYONE should have a special call line.

Newsflash: When everyone is elite, no one is elite. And indeed, that's where we're headed.

I couldn't care less who gets to sit up front, who gets to board first, and having a special line. The only benefit of benefit to this elite is extra miles as they mean free flights. Upgrades, etc., are to my mind only a means by the airline from giving away what really is of value, space on the plane.

I don't need a special line at the airport or on the phone. I want an airline that has well trained staff treating each customer the same.

Clearly we think differently.


Originally Posted by andrewwm (Post 20390404)
:rolleyes: You must not have been around the old UA forum much. I remember dozens of threads in the old UA forum about how UA was a terrible airline for GMs but great if you were an elite, plus countless hundreds/thousands more that used the term kettle derogatively.

The derogative term may have been on the CO forum, but I don't remember it there. I came to see it - and see it often - on the UA forum.

burlax Mar 9, 2013 10:37 pm


Originally Posted by Indelaware (Post 20392698)
. . . Upgrades are, IMHO, of trivial value. . .

Upgrades may be of trivial value to you, and if so, I'm glad you are enjoying your white crow status. However, for many people, upgrades are not of trivial value, since many people actually pay premium for the seat in the premium cabin.

craz Mar 9, 2013 11:38 pm


Originally Posted by channa (Post 20389231)
I miss that, too. But I don't blame UA or Jeff Smisek for it. That CO was long gone over a decade ago.

CO used to take home Freddies regularly in the late 1990's and early 2000's.

The last time I see CO winning a single Freddie was in 2002. I think 2003 was the year they instated 50% EQM, which might have had an impact.

http://www.freddieawards.com/winners.php?id=18

Lets be Fair UA won the awards since it was Giving everything away for a song . And on very low fares folks would have a PNR with 10 segments to it

The more a company gave things away the more awards they won, but that doesnt mean its being Runned properly


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:54 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.