COA777

By the way, the author brings up an interesting point about the omelet "made of God knows what." Perhaps customers should ask UA to lead the way in transparency and begin to publicly disclose the ingredients in their food items on their website.

DaviddesJ

Yeah, I guess that's a mistake on united.com. There are 9 planes with DirectTV and power, and 12 planes with overhead video and no power. See the United Fleet Website, which I believe has the correct information (and I've recently been on several 757-300's with no power, so I know the page you reference on united.com is wrong).

COA777

I stand corrected. Thanks for pointing this out.

DaviddesJ

I suspect it's just an editing error on the website. If you look up flight status on united.com for a 757-300 flight, it seems to have correct information on which planes have power.

Kacee

That's right, all 753s are pmCO.

The ex-ATA birds are the evil ones with no nothing anywhere, F or Y. Something like 9 of 16 (and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong )

ps - "personal device" entertainment is UA code for "presently dark."

DaviddesJ

There are 12 757-300's without power, out of 21. And yes, I think they are all ex-ATA, now that you mention it. But Boeing did refurbish them when ATA turned them over, presumably to PMCO's specifications, so some part of the result is their decision.

channa

Going into the merger, every PMUA aircraft had a minimum of overhead IFE and audio at each seat.

Dark airplanes and Pay TVs are a result of post-merger (CO) leadership, as they had both of these pre-merger.

It's also worth noting that many customers do not look up the actual age of the aircraft. Rather, they infer the age of the aircraft from the appearance and amenities.

To that end, I could see how a customer (or reporter) could fly on a 2-year old dark CO plane with its dark wall panels, no IFE, and no Internet, circa 1991 cloth seat pattern, etc., and believe it's an old plane. This, while a 20-year-old DL 757 with refreshed interior, leather seats, free satellite TV, and WiFi may be perceived to be a newer more, modern aircraft.

DaviddesJ

I wonder if more than half of passengers would rather have no IFE or audio, than have overhead IFE and audio?

channa

Good point. Though, I bet some customers would rather have a free overhead movie than a TV you have to pay to turn on.

The audio, however, is non-intrusive. I can't see people having a problem with it. If you don't want to listen, don't plug in.

Mike Jacoubowsky

Channel 9 was one of those few things that UA offered exclusively, and some of us actually looked forward to it. Jeff had a decision to make... one of many having to do with legacy UA product and services... keep Channel 9 a UA feature, or let it fade away. Jeff decided not just to keep it, but to continue to promote it. In short, he's created unmet expectations.

What passengers want is relevant, but creating unmet expectations is one of the worst things you can do for your clients.

United needs to decide to do something, and make it happen. We used to make jokes about their infatuation with on-time arrival, but they did make it happen. Since then, what have they said they were going to do and executed?

CO_Nonrev_elite

I think people on here that complain about lack of wifi are slightly misguided about it as a business proposition. At present, the actual up-take of paying customers to inflight wifi hovers around 6% across the country. Let's repeat that, of all the planes that have wifi available, only 6% of passengers actually pay to use it. That is the stat across all US carriers.

While I love having it, and I do get it, if I were the CEO, I think it's not a clear cut winning choice at the moment. Those who fly a lot and like it shout louder than the wallets of the other 94% who don't care enough to purchase it.

channa

I thought Channel 9 was coming on the streaming media. It's just not here yet.

So at least on the UA planes, there won't be a loss of anything if they get this off the ground.

As for the CO planes, I don't see them putting Channel 9 on, since CO doesn't use ATC to begin with. As they have the most professional men and women in the industry, their pilots are so good, they don't need some dude in a tower telling them where to fly.

Mike Jacoubowsky

Then don't tell us it's coming, and then after an appropriate time, that it's here. Decide and do. Or find a way to completely back out. But don't use the excuse of not many people using it as the reason it isn't being implemented as promoted.
Ah, makes perfect sense. That's why I come to FT. For the real scoop! ^

sriegert

clearly author doesn't fly alot.

i'm not a UA or $MI/J apologist but i wouldn't consider this (or most of the huffpost content) nuanced or informed. oh well, at least his abhorrent performance is getting publicity.

when will the shareholder suits commence?

Mike Jacoubowsky

Management's #1 issue is a complete disconnect between what they say they're going to do and what they're able to do with the tools at hand. If management has employee issues that make promises impossible to keep, then don't make such promises. If not making promises for what most think a top-quality airline should have makes you look bad... well then you'd better be willing to accept that you've got a severe deficiency somewhere in the system, because others are doing things that you aren't.

Does UA have to hit some sort of bottom to get everyone on the same page? I would say yes. Management should define that metric, what it takes to declare a bottom, and use it as a motivational tool. Never waste a good crisis.

Management isn't restricted to the stockholding side of the business. The employee unions should be looking at ways to help get the company righted. Look for win-win possibilities, where achieving various goals for the company equals money for the employees.

Wishful thinking? Well, yeah. I wish UA could pull themselves out of this tailspin.