CCIE_Flyer

I'm thinking that it's an extremely technical interpretation of what constitutes a "cut." Sure, there's an initial outlay to install additional seats. But nowhere would the old adage having to do with needing to spend money to make money more directly apply. At the end of the day, it's a degradation of service (i.e. a cut) to enhance the bottom line at the expense of paying passengers. I'm not sure if there was an intent to be humorous or what? Regardless, the argument ignores that they are eliminating popular items (e.g garlic bread). As to the cost of one drink vs. another, I don't claim to know because I drink neither but it stands to reason that UA probably negotiated a better deal. Retail prices in the grocery store are not at all an indication of what can be negotiated on a macro scale. Note that they didn't even attempt to claim that any of these "adjustments" (cuts) were in direct response to customer demand; they were characterized as having to do with competitive stance, which directly identifies them as cuts.

JOSECONLSCREW28

Lol true

LASUA1K

I still don't think the screens fit in slim seats.

WIRunner

Most airlines pay next to nothing (if anything) to the beverage companies. The volume combined with the advertising that the beverage companies get makes it worth it for them to offer a smaller cost to the airlines. If this was not the case you would surely see 2 litres of Shasta (or United Brand Cola, and Diet Smizek Compare it to Sprite Zero) or just generic random cans of soda.

Delta has Fresca, which combined with vodka makes for a tasty combination. If you're not used to sparkling water, it is pretty gross, and not a substitution for Sprite Zero. I don't mind sparkling water, but the lime flavour is just not very good in the Dasani. But United can say that limes are back... they just won't identify in what form.

rzsionak

Considering the majority of passengers purchasing E- are buying on price alone, its a good strategy to jam as many seats as possible into E-. However cutting space in E+ is where UA needs to be careful. Those are generally more product sensitive customers who will take their money elsewhere if the product gets degraded.

CCIE_Flyer

Indeed. Think of it as something akin to product placement. Well not exactly. Captive audience. Perhaps a Pepsi drinker tries a Coke because that's all that's on offer and reconsiders preference going forward. I don't know how often that actually happens in real life but that's no doubt the thinking behind those exclusive agreements. UA got a better deal. Plain and simple.

And we still have Dewars White Label in int'l C & F. I think an industry leader like Glenmorangie could really open up a whole new market for themselves by giving their stuff away to airlines. Esp if they also sold in the Sky Mall or whatever it is that they call it these days. I almost *never* hear anyone ordering scotch in C/F these days. I know I don't.

rzsionak

There are slim line seats with screens in them. UA simply needs to buy them. I think AA put screens in their new slim line seats.

RobotDoctor

In typical fashion, Jeff Smisek and his team of followers, continue to devaluate United Airlines. The people at Delta must be loving Smisek. The only way for UA to remain competitive is to release Jeff Smisek and his team and replace I with someone who actually understands how to run a customer service company.

united4

Death by 1000 cuts, and we are only at 14.

CCIE_Flyer

No direct use of the term "slim-line" but it reads that way to me. And obviously a very, very different approach to addressing competition:

http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2014/0...tcmp=obnetwork

"Economy’s new thinner and lighter seats give fliers an extra inch of legroom, while reducing up to 1,000 pounds on each plane -- saving the carrier on fuel costs. Each seat comes with a nine-inch personal flat-screen TV and an electrical socket for charging personal devices."

1353513636

AC has them on their slimline 787s.

fly18725

Adding seats costs money. Flying more weight around and maintaing more seats costs money. The point: these changes don't do anything to save $2 billion.

What they do is provide more opportunity to increase revenue and spread fixed costs over more passenger (lower CASM).

I'm not defending the changes, simply pointing out that parroting the party line exhibits a complete lack of logic.

I think Delta fits more passengers on their 737-900ER. Not sure what their 737-800 will be reconfigured to.

Michael El

I'm planning on flying DL for my next trip to GUM.

username

Seriously, I hope they make the faucets in the new lavs more usable - either like the 787, airbus or the red/blue ones on the 737s. The all silver kind makes it nearly impossible to thoroughly wash your hands without touching the basin and that defeats the purpose.

CCIE_Flyer

Wow, you really weren't trying to be funny! Huh. See upthread for a more "logical" dissection of what constitutes a "cut." Do you really suppose that the direction was "don't do anything to increase revenue or profitability - the goal here is purely cuts in the most technical sense of the word!" ??

Pretty sure that you have yet to point out much of anything out that withstands even casual scrutiny and you seem to have a party line of your own.