Originally Posted by spin88

+1 [Have your dad fly VX, he will be really impressed ] Here is my salad, mid-con flight on DL from a few days ago:



Portion was bigger, and it had a lot of Quinoa (the UAL folks would probably say "Keen-what?") which made it filling. Of note, Delta gives you a double size container of dressing - twice what UAL gives you (see its bigger and taller) - so its enough to actually cover the salad - which again is bigger to start with. Even for the small UA salads, the dressing is never enough. My guess is Delta has to spend another 5-6 cents for that dressing...

And the Cheese was good, and the grapes were fresh and taste, not partially rotten on the bottom with the skin turning white like UA serves.

And the red-wine was actually drinkable: A good probably $12-13 retail bottle, and the coffee is SBC, which is two billion times better than freshbrew.

Originally Posted by JVPhoto

Wow...it's come down to elitism and snooty comments about grains?

Originally Posted by JVPhoto

I think the square plate adds to the presentation. I didn't reply to the point because it is moot.
Does it taste good? Does it look good?
I like the look of the DL salad you posted but I have absolutely 0 right to compare it against the UA one that I actually ate.

I can only weigh in on like 1 or 2 non-p.s. domestic flights a year.

In every single post flight survey on UA I've mentioned the need to change/update breakfast and/or only serve it at a time it may be relevant to where you are landing...aka I don't want that breakfast landing in HKG at 8pm.

Originally Posted by spin88

No, an entire lack of creativity, combined with utter cheapness and to the bone cost cutting, in UA catering. In fairness, the lack of creativity may be simply lack of ability to spend money to buy e.g. quality greens, or better ingredients.

Originally Posted by nikolastojsin

I agree - but the issue here is not only that UA breakfast stuff (refuse to call it food) is bad/cheap/dull, but also that it has been the SAME since forever. IMHO, cheapness would be easier to take if some variety were thrown in. And, seriously, a breakfast choice of sugar-on-sugar cereal or cardboard-tasting-heart-attack-in-a-box?

It is the lack of effort that bothers here the most.

Originally Posted by CO_Nonrev_elite

My first two United flights of the year were dinner time flights EWR-IAH (777) and IAH-LGA (738). While we were given meals, it was the same crap we've been getting for years. Service on the 777 was decent, service on the 738 was VERY hit and miss. One lovely FA and two absolutely terrible ones. Arguments in the galley as two wanted to skip the pre-departure drinks, and the other argued correctly that we still had 15 min prior to push, and it's policy. They did reluctantly do the service. Right before doors closed, there were 3 empty first seats and again, the two didn't want to get the agent to do the upgrades, but the other again fought to have them do their jobs.

No wifi, but did have direct tv and did watch the AFC / NFC championships

Both flights on-time. CPU X 2 on IAH-LGA and cleared two expiring RPU on the EWR-IAH

Originally Posted by spin88

I find the timing to be very interesting. They announce improvements in August, 2014, but it appeared rushed, had a LONG time line, few details. Then they (nearly 6 months later) announce some actual good things. Were I not already gone from UA, I would see this in a very positive light (coffee and booze still need fixing, but this helps the food).

But, and this is the key, there is no reason - if this was actually the plan - not to have put this out earlier. They have to know catering is a big issue, and I'm sure it has a major impact on the NPS. Even UAL defenders complaint about the food.

So if they were going to do this, why not put out the details earlier (or actually make changes earlier) prevent further brand damage? Certainly, with lots of FFers leaving at year end, you would want this to go out in October/November at the latest.

My guess is that there is a further drop (as we saw last year in the 1Q) in FF traffic, and that, along with outsized profits, has finally forced their hand. The uncompetitive nature of the product is so glaring that something had to be done.

So I actually think this is far more than they ever intended to do back in August, it is an actual plan, and a bigger plan.

But hey, as all of the "savvy" folks know, people buy on schedule and price, and nothing that United does or does not offer in soft product will change buying decisions.

Originally Posted by Longboater

There was speculation in the thread this was done and rushed to meet American's 9/1 downgrade of meals. Come February 1, United will have the lowest threshold for meal times among the big three, save for the exception markets on American. Compared to the slop they are serving now, these changes next month will easily eclipse American's tv dinner style meals.

Originally Posted by spin88

Well United has heavily cut catering, and even more so quality post 3/12. Some on this board say that catering quality does not matter, people buy on price and N/S or are locked into corporate contracts/hubs. I think their view reflects UA (and maybe UA) Upper Management's view.

If so - and there is a long history to support this. Its not like people have not been complaining about catering since Jeff took over, and the survey responses are just terrible. So I don't think they suddenly changed their stripes and said "oh, now lets spends some $$$, leap AA, gain a bunch of customers"

Nor do I think they suddenly woke up to the fact people were unhappy. Rather, it is January, if they decided to do this in in September, they announce in December (or November) as people decide what to do for next year.

That it is done in January says to me that UAL is getting bad signs on sales, either problems with corporate accounts, or a new round of defections (like this time last year) as they look at the numbers of high spending GS/1Ks, and someone was able to draw a line, force a partial reversal in policy.