Why does everybody hate on the UA BF product?
#17
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: body: A stone's throw from SFO, mind: SE Asia
Programs: Some of this 'n some of that
Posts: 17,263
Why does everybody hate on the UA BF product?
Because the whole BF name is ludicrous. It's a business class seat and there's no need for any reference to First in there.
#18
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
I think both seats have their merits. Both have provided me a good night's rest on many occasions, though I prefer the sUA seat if I have to choose.
Where they missed the mark was by not configuring the cabin like BA did on the wide bodies. The alternating forward and rear seating means that everyone has aisle access and there are only 6 pairs of seats that face the same direction.
All of the other big carriers are accommodating aisle access in their biz cabins with their updates, while still avoiding a waste of real estate. One thing both sUA and sCO biz cabins have in common: stepping over your neighbor to get out.
Where they missed the mark was by not configuring the cabin like BA did on the wide bodies. The alternating forward and rear seating means that everyone has aisle access and there are only 6 pairs of seats that face the same direction.
All of the other big carriers are accommodating aisle access in their biz cabins with their updates, while still avoiding a waste of real estate. One thing both sUA and sCO biz cabins have in common: stepping over your neighbor to get out.
#19
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: 1P, AA EXP, SPG Gold
Posts: 1,491
FWIW, I rather like the BF seats. I also don't know what all of the fuss is about with aisle access. Yes -- I'd rather not have to step over someone, but that certainly beats some of the truly awful layuts and seats I've experienced (witness AC). Besides, when flying with someone it is nice to have the opportunity to sit next to my travelling companion. That could be done with no climb-over in a 1-2-1 layout, but on most aircraft that does not seem practical for the airlines from an operational perspective.
#20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Between AUS, EWR, and YTO In a little twisty maze of airline seats, all alike...
Programs: CO, NW, & UA forum moderator emeritus
Posts: 35,339
Why? Because the whole open/close the screen dance was irritating. The fact I couldn't really access the window and that it was nwhere near as comfortable as the UA seat. That's just the start. At least the on-board service was good.
#21
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NYC, FLL
Programs: UA PP 1MM, Marriott Bonvoy LTTE, BA Bronze
Posts: 6,260
pmCO BF is great, and pmUA biz seats are decent for a night's sleep. For those appalled at having to climb over someone to get out - really? Have you taken the subway before? You'll probably get up 2-3 times in the flight and your seatmate completely understands, so just climb over and calm down. All is ok
I agree that the food menus could do with a revamp but the seats themselves are solid and a far cry from non lie-flat products like the old UA seats, AA's current seats (not on the rare 77W), etc.
I agree that the food menus could do with a revamp but the seats themselves are solid and a far cry from non lie-flat products like the old UA seats, AA's current seats (not on the rare 77W), etc.
#22
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,120
Why does everybody hate on the UA BF product?
For paid C you expect more than what COdbaUA gives you.
For paid Y + GPU it is just smack talk. Sure SQ is better but they are more difficult to access from Y.
For paid Y + GPU it is just smack talk. Sure SQ is better but they are more difficult to access from Y.
#23
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
If you are just looking at the seats, I think it comes down to body type. the sCO seats (especially on the retrofit 763 2-class) are too short with the small footwell, and the shoulder is narrow. I have big feet, wide shoulders and am 6'2" and can't sleep in them. I will not book them. The sUA seats are too narrow, but at least I can sleep on my back in them. Someone who is smaller may like the sCO seat better.
But if you want to pay for Y, get C, then UA or AA are your options.
I might also add that UA is in a low point with many of its elites (and the yeild and revenue numbers clearly show this). While neither seat are horrible (they are both better than the old DL or AA seats that are being pulled now) and the fleet is all lie flat, the decline in soft product and poor treatment in IRROPS and generally of elites impacts peoples percetion of the product overall. This comes at a time when both DL and AA (not to mention other airlines) are working to improve their product. Hard to see any improvement coming at UAL, its a race to the bottom. In every survey that is published UA (and US) are at the bottom and that is reflective of the reality of UAL today.
Last edited by FlyinHawaiian; Aug 25, 2013 at 11:41 am Reason: mind your language, please
#24
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NYC, FLL
Programs: UA PP 1MM, Marriott Bonvoy LTTE, BA Bronze
Posts: 6,260
What do you call the J/C refurb over the last few years? AA's product improvements will take a while and many will be rolling the dice on whether they get a fully flat seat or not. On UA, they're ahead of the other (US) carrier, IMO.
#25
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
I don't give management credit for these anymore than I given them credit for having ordered the 787 first (Kellner did that, and for reasons having nothing to do with how the airline is now run). UAL is standing still at this point, its competition is not.
Also I don't know how "hit or miss" it is. DL has retrofitted entirely several of their fleets with a far far better hard product, and DL has better soft product. Since I know the routes that this is on, if I am buying J on those routes, I would prefer to take DL. Ditto the AA 77W routes.
But overall, the ONLY thing that UA has going for it is (1) more lie flats (an advantage that is wasting away, and any advantage that they have in (2) network or (3) MP. Its is hard to see the inflight package on UAL (either sCO or sUA) being particularly enticing if you are paying for F/C unless you are focused on getting GS.
#26
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,228
DL currently offers all aisle access on its 747, 777, most of their 767, and some of their A330s. Unless you enjoy having to step over your seatmate when he/she is sleeping, that configuration is clearly better than the current UA configuration sCO or sUA. Yes, AA is lagging on updating their C product, but they are shifting to all-aisle access as well. When DL and AA are complete, UA will not have a competitive C product by comparison.
Last edited by iluv2fly; Aug 25, 2013 at 1:58 pm Reason: merge
#27
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,916
The name dates from the 90s when CO did away with F. At the time the lounger they put in Business (with 55 inches pitch) was in the same ballpark as what most airlines were offering in international First (55-62 inch pitch loungers). Additionally the service from the cart appetizers and desert was more akin to the standard of First Class international at that time, hence CO named the service BusinessFirst.
#28
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: ORD
Programs: UA GS 4MM
Posts: 583
pmCO BF is great, and pmUA biz seats are decent for a night's sleep. For those appalled at having to climb over someone to get out - really? Have you taken the subway before? You'll probably get up 2-3 times in the flight and your seatmate completely understands, so just climb over and calm down. All is ok
I agree that the food menus could do with a revamp but the seats themselves are solid and a far cry from non lie-flat products like the old UA seats, AA's current seats (not on the rare 77W), etc.
I agree that the food menus could do with a revamp but the seats themselves are solid and a far cry from non lie-flat products like the old UA seats, AA's current seats (not on the rare 77W), etc.
As for the topic at hand, put me firmly in the pmCO camp. In addition to the other pmUA beefs (4 across, really? flying backwards?), there really is NO storage room, which is problematic when you need to work on a computer with access to papers, etc. Not much with the pmCO seats, but at least there's some.
#29
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.75MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,165
The name dates from the 90s when CO did away with F. At the time the lounger they put in Business (with 55 inches pitch) was in the same ballpark as what most airlines were offering in international First (55-62 inch pitch loungers). Additionally the service from the cart appetizers and desert was more akin to the standard of First Class international at that time, hence CO named the service BusinessFirst.
#30
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: NYC / MIA / AMS
Programs: UA 1k
Posts: 496
BusinessFirst is a far more appropriate moniker than the domestic First product. But i understand that it takes time and investment to change the branding of something, and for now imo there are other areas united could be focusing investment.