bhrubin

Telling customers what they already know (and what you've likely already seen in your revenue stream) isn't dumb. Trying to not lie to customers who are smart enough to know better is what they teach in B school these days. These are intelligent, high-revenue passengers we're discussing--they weren't confused before the comments, and they aren't confused after the comments.

An airline representative is making a very honest, forthright statement in sharing information/perspective that is known already to everyone for whom it would matter.

Wow, an airline lies and obfuscates and everyone herein slams the airline; and when the airline tells the truth and is forthright everyone herein slams the airline, as well.

People like you unintentionally incite airlines and businesses to lie. I'd rather encourage honest and forthright news from businesses.

halls120

It is while you're trying to sell those seats for more than you're selling BF seats.

Once UA gets rid of GF, his explanation would be entirely rational and appropriate.

Timing matters.

bhrubin

In your opinion, which counts for nothing in the UA executive discussion, timing matters and seems inappropriate for his comments. In my opinion and his, the timing is irrelevant since everyone already recognizes that the differences between UA GF and BF are small in terms of soft product. The big difference is with hard product, and there are better hard products out there. I know, he knows it, the entire UA senior team knows it, and you know it.

His saying so doesn't change anything...regardless of his timing. You're just unhappy that he said it for some strange reason.

If UA wanted to improve its chances to sell GF over BF, it already would have upgraded the soft product further. But it hasn't...because it has obviously decided to no longer invest in that class of service on most (if not all) routes.

You are criticizing his comment as if his comment makes a bit of difference, and it doesn't AT ALL.

halls120

In your opinion, of course.

bhrubin

Absolutely. Obviously, my opinion is shared by the UA CFO and the UA senior team--or the UA CFO would never have discussed it publicly, let alone echo the same comments already publicly stated by the CEOs of Lufthansa (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-1...cious-pas.html) and publicly stated by American (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/...35280680475986), and previously echoed by the elimination of First by Virgin Atlantic and Delta.

That UA GF is a very minor soft product enhancement over UA BF is an opinion shared by everyone in the travel industry and by all knowledgeable travelers, including you.

halls120

Really? Where have I posted that I consider GF to be a "minor soft product enhancement?" Oh, that's right, I didn't.

I consider to GF to be a significantly better hard product enhancement over BF, especially on the sUA 777.

rzsionak

An executive doesn't need to lie, but pointing out flaws in your product is generally not a good marketing campaign. Applebees knows it isn't providing Michelin Star restaurant quality food, but the CEO or CFO isn't out saying the food is "essentially the same as frozen meals from your grocer". They're out there touting the great things about Applebees.

UA executives needs to do the same thing with GF. They need to be talking up all the positive features and why it stands out from their competitors, not making gaffes on TV. That's Sales 101.

bhrubin

The entire point of the UA CFO comments is that GF is but a minor enhancement of BF--especially in the soft product (service, meals, drinks, etc.) You are now ducking the fact that his comments don't share anything that we didn't already know and now simply are trying to parse my comments for any means you can find to not be wrong. I'll leave it at that.

The CFO hasn't said anything that everyone doesn't already know. Period. Again, those who think he is giving something away or hurting UA's chances for selling more GF seats are out to lunch.

halls120

I'm not ducking anything. You're the one who erroneously claimed I considered GF to be a "minor soft product enhancement," not me.

I disagree with Rainey's assertion that GF is a minor enhancement - especially on the sUA 777.

bhrubin

You're entitled to your opinion. But the FACT that UA is moving away from offering GF and has no plans to add GF to any of its new equipment is there for all to see. The FACT that UA's GF product isn't selling enough to warrant it for UA is obvious for all to see, just as LH's F product wasn't selling enough to warrant it for LH, which is why even LH, with its superior F product, is reducing F availability on most of its routes.

UA executives can market and say all the positives they want about UA GF, and STILL it won't be selling any more or less F seats--not with even better products like LH F doing the same thing and in the face of superior competition from Asian/Gulf carriers. UA executives can market and say all the positives they want about UA GF, and STILL it won't be selling any more or less F seats--not with its chief domestic competition in AA similarly giving up on F (and DL already having given up on F).

You guys are out to lunch IMO. UA isn't getting any more paying customers for GF no matter WHAT it spins or markets. The high paying F customer base has chosen to send its F business and money elsewhere, and so UA is responding in kind--just as Lufthansa, Delta, and American have done. UA can say whatever it wants and that doesn't change the facts. You might not like the facts, but your whining about the CFO comments as somehow being problematic or hurtful to UA and its GF service is LAUGHABLE to me.

I wish UA would keep GF (since I love to upgrade or get it on awards), but I can't help but see the obvious writing on the wall. UA doesn't make money on GF because not enough people PAY for it and too many people upgrade or use mile awards to get it. For the same reasons LH and AA are reducing F service, so is UA--recognizing the fact that the new C/J service is better than F service from 10 years ago and the fact that C/J service is from where the majority of future revenue will be coming. The CFO said as much. There is a reason why AA, DL, and UA are the most profitable airlines in the world that don't get state subsidies or are not state-owned enterprises like so many of the Gulf/Asian carriers. They see the paying market is moving in a direction and they're responding in kind. That's business, folks.

kevanyalowitz

It wasn't honest - it was misinformed. GF is not the same as BF. GF provides considerably more personal space and privacy than BF. There is no debating that. As long as GF exists, its value is additional space. No exec should be saying anything different publicly.

Soft product is another [less important] issue...

Spot on.

Tell us more about upgrading to GF. If GF is gone, will you continue to buy upgradeable J fares or will you buy the lowest available fare?

bhrubin

I'll continue to do whatever I can to pay as little as possible to get to where I need to go as directly as possible in a true lay-flat international seat. Whether that be to buy the lowest possible fare or to use miles to upgrade or get an award seat.

I actually agree with all that you've said. I'm a big fan of upgrading to or using mileage awards for UA GF. But I'd never pay for it. I've paid for EK F and CX F when I've gotten a great deal, though.

On this we disagree. IMO it was quite honest and informed--the difference for the paying customer between BF and GF is a marginally bigger and more private seat but for over twice as much in price, and that for the paying customer in UA's markets the difference has never been worth it when compared with the F available with UA's competition on most routes.

To each, their own. As I've stated, I have no problem whatsoever with the CFO's comments.

manstein58

Once UA gets rid of GF, it can kiss my business goodbye. Business class on UA lags-badly- DAL. AA's business is also better. UA BF- 4 across- issteerage

rzsionak

The fact is that UA still has GF on over 60% of its long haul aircraft, and while it's still there, they need to be hawking and selling it as hard as they can as every sale counts. The big problem is that the attitude of the executive suite cascades down to the front line and undermines sales and service of GF. If your a sales agent, why push hard for sales of GF when the attitude of your leadership is "it's essentially the same as BF".

I think the only reason this gaffe isn't a huge deal is that GF is a small customer segment of the airlines which most people don't buy. If the President of Lexus came out and publicly said their cars were essentially the same as Toyota, it would be national news, Lexus dealers would be infuriated, and that person would probably be reassigned or shown the door.

bhrubin

And this is why I believe that UA, while not increasing GF on any new equipment, hasn't yet actually removed GF on its current equipment that already is configured for it. For the time being, the planes that have GF offer a competitive advantage for the business paying passengers when considering the choice between UA vs AA vs DL--whether it be paying for F (rarely, I'd assume) or paying for J and upgrading to GF or simply being a paying J customer on domestic routes and using awards for international F.

You think AA business class is better, and there are obviously many who think DL BE is better, but I personally have most often preferred the hard product and service on UA BF for international travel compared to AA and DL. That being said, I'd take international F on awards on partner airlines whenever I have the chance over anything by UA, AA, or DL. But I'll continue to be happy with UA GF for as long as it is offered.