5khours

This is one of the markets that has the biggest potential demand for GF. Why isn't it offered?

rkkwan

Because it's already being offered on NH.

TT-Jones

Please provide actual evidence for this claim, otherwise the discussion is pointless, I guess.

Or in other words:
Is this "biggest potential demand" part of your imagination, or are there hard facts for this (apart from the fact that "potential demand" is per definition "no actual demand" ).

chinatraderjmr

Because they offer it on flights like IAD-DXB and IAD-KWI that have NO USE FOR IT whatsoever!!!!

My theory is UA has completely given up on GF. They wont market it, dont care if they sell it, and just ignore it. If it wasnt so expensive to change the planes to all 2 cabin now, they would do that in a heartbeat but for now, they are happy using it as a carrot to get some full C/D fares back from business travelers

I came to this conclusion a few weeks ago when purchasing a one way DOH-JFK ticket in F. UA was double the cost of EK & Etihad and $4000 more then LH/BA/AF. The only was something like this could happen is they just don't care. they certainly are not selling any F seats @ $4-6,000 more then EVERYONE else.

Its a shame. I can remember when I started flying UA in 1993. I had to commute twice a month between LAX-HKG and used UA. They had a first class hard product as good as anyone else, even SQ and a soft product that was not the best but not the worst either. Basically UA F was as good as LH F or SQ F. These geniuses running the airline have no experience providing a luxury service. They Scoff at other airlines that do well with F and blame evryone except themselves...........

Oh, NRT-EWR??? Fat chance

EWR764

I think it has to do with integration issues too. The JFKFO is not a 777 domicile, so the flights would have to be staffed from another base as part of a W trip or deadhead, resulting in long times away from base, and a corresponding 777 trip would likely need to be scheduled with a sCO airplane and crew from a sUA base just to ensure adequate coverage for flying already in the system. With 500 or so pilot retirements coming on the UA side alone this year, the 777 fleet will be impacted disproportionately so it makes sense to simplify the operation, especially this summer before the new hire classes are out.

The other concern is maintenance, as the sUA 777s are quite different from their sCO counterparts. With the initial international cross-fleeting, there were some issues with parts stores at EWR when UA airplanes went tech. Until UA/CO crews are flying together, I don't think we'll see much homogenization of the 777 operation, and it's clear that the 744s will be staying in the legacy UAL system.

star_world

This appears to be almost certain, from what I've seen - not just since the merger, but for the last 5-6 years. It's not just UA though - their biggest direct competitor (DL) has expressed zero interest in public in creating an F product, and it remains to be seen whether AA will maintain an F product (either at all or just on a select few routes). I'm sure that UA would much rather eliminate the heavy, space-consuming product and drop a few more flat J seats there.

You're right that there was a real opportunity for UA to maintain a competitive product but it appears that there are other uses for that money that they believe can generate a greater return.

hughw

Also, this is a PMCO flight. PMCO did not have 3 class aircraft.

5khours

That's what I usually fly. Or sometimes through FRA on LH. That said, I often find I can't get a seat on NH.

Ever heard of Wall St.? Plus it's about the only *A route where F is routinely full.


I tend to agree. I think this is a PMCO route so they can't change the plane. Also, the market is pretty competitive and I think they might have a hard time filling Y with an additional flight.


I tend to agree. I actually think UA still has a decent hard product at least in terms of seat comfort. What really frustrates me, is that UA could really improve GF without spending hardly any money (curtains at the front/back of cabins, board GF first, greet you when you get on the plane, serve food individually rather than off a trolley, decent headphones, etc.). If they wanted to go hog wild, they could make some minor mods to the seat to add movable privacy screens to the aisle sides of the seats. The other thing they could do is OPUP customers and put non-revs in C instead of F.

BTW - They do sell some seats at the higher prices....CEO kettles who only fly international occasionally or on routes where UA is the only F product (e.g. NRT<>SEA).

1kBill

It's very simple: CO doesn't do int'l F.

star_world

It's not really that simple - CO doesn't exist, and UA does have aircraft with a GF cabin that they could deploy on this route if they really wanted to (see above for some of the crew-related limitations).

The real issue is whether UA sees any real future in the GF product - it appears not. It's unlikely they will make real efforts to market it on new routes.

1kBill

My bad.

It's very simple: COdbaUA doesn't do int'l F.

They do not have the mind set for the product, pure and simple. It exists presently only because it is already installed and it would cost too much to rip it out. Once that equation changes, say Buh-bye to int'l F on UA.

star_world

We're talking about UA - not sure what you're referring to.

UA doesn't appear to have had any real interest in intl. F for the last 5-6 years. This is nothing new and it has nothing to do with any merger, other than to say that the merger doesn't seem to have changed their mind. In fact, the existence of intl. F is probably a hindrance to them on routes where they compete against DL for example, as they can sell less J seats.

5khours

I'm afraid you're right. I think there are three things that might change the calculus.

1. Stronger US economy.

2. Increased affluence in Asia raising the demand for F.

3. Increased competition from foreign carriers. (I actually think this is having an impact already....I know a lot of people who no longer fly UA/AA/DL because of the better premium offering on NH,SQ, LH, CX, etc.)

They're not filling J as it is. Also there are more total seats on PMUA (3 class) than on PMCO (2 class). They'll sell more J seats if they can offer UGs to F than if all they have is J. UA is being stupid not rationale.

Often1

The real question is hard + soft product, not the marketing gimmick name. Given that the numbers are proprietary, nobody on FT knows, but rather than speculating about just how profitable 3 vs 2-class are on this route, I wonder what UA's projections really are.

Even many Fortune 500's are only flying their top people in the first step up from Y. So, on a 2-class, you get BF. On a 2-class, it's C. Needless to say, the market for F does exist and is still very much the vogue for senior people flying from overseas to the USA. Those folks, I doubt, fly UA.

EWR764

I must say I had an outstanding GF flight the other day NRT-IAD. Expectations were admittedly low, but I was very impressed with the service. It's not SQ or even LH First, but it has the 'guts' of a quality product. I'd love to see a few more dollars spent to differentiate it from BF.