pinniped

Is there a newer new WN seat than the "evolve" seats that are our there everywhere now? My guess is that when most people talk about "new" WN seats, they're talking about "evolve". I tend to notice pitch more than anything else about the seat.

Although I've read a lot on FT about how uncomfortable the seat itself is (the cushion, seatback, or whatever...), I've never given this one thought inflight. The old one wasn't great enough or the "evolve" one isn't bad enough - or both - for me to notice. I just notice whether my legs are wedged uncomfortably or wedged less uncomfortably. (They're *always* wedged somewhere in coach.)

Kacee

Yes, that's kind of the point of this thread

My experience is really different. I've had the two seats (Evolve and regular seat) on consecutive flights, and the difference is dramatic. The Evolve is harder, with a shorter cushion, and noticeably less pitch. It's like sitting on a particularly uncomfortable park bench.

JVPhoto

I think the way LCCs are able to market their fares play into consumer psyche and perception.
I had 5 people on Facebook post in the past week a link about Norwegian saying $69 flights to Europe are coming.
They fail to see the extreme nickel & diming or $200 check bag fees.
Just like the MegaBus or whatever company it is that has $1* tickets to Boston/DC plastered over the side of their bus.

FWIW I won't fly and LCC and in fact I'm paying a premium to fly BA LHR-BUD. In the past year I've taken other carriers in lieu of Pegasus and Whiz. Of the 3 LCC avoidance flights only one could credit to my MP account.

minnyfly

I'm wondering how slimline seats, less pitch, slim lavs, and 10 more people in the same size tube (less room everywhere) can be considered an improvement. If you think UA's are bad now, it's a good thing they didn't go that far. I'm not going to be fooled into thinking it's a better experience by the fancy AVOD screen trick. That's just the bone they threw me.

Source? I'd certainly like see the evidence for it, since, you know, nearly the entire industry has been going in the same direction (even WN). It can't just be UA that's wrong.

spin88

I am interested in how UA is going to compete moving forward, it strongly impacts the employees, and as I chose a carrier to fly with (hopefully) benefits for many years in doing so, where the airline is going impacts me short and long term. As more people have bad experiences they want to fly UA less, UA has to discount more, that hurts the bottom line as we continue to see at UA. As I have been suggesting (and Seth discusses further in his post, very interesting) the world is moving to selling tickets with more disclosure. United having product that is listed as '30" +W' with no power and a comfort score of 7.5 (vs. 8.4 on VX and 8.2 for most AS flights) will as this information becomes more available have a real impact.

Once an airline cements its self as the worst of the worst, well it does impact purchases at the bottom end - just ask Doug Parker how that worked for him at US. Alas more information on product - which is clearly coming to third party sites - will impact the buying decision even more.

+1. And to give a personal story, Monday I had to get a ticket for Wed for SFO-SNA-SFO. SW wanted $520 for Business Select, UA wanted $540 for Y. Normally I would have done UA for the FF credit, BUT UA was a CRJ-700, and on one leg the now VERY SMALL E+ cabin was full, so it would have been a horrible slim line w/ no pitch. WN got my $$$$.

I might further add that United having made MP far less rewarding to me (less availability, far higher charges for partner J, no upgrades, no special handling) makes me entirely unwilling to put up with inferiority in the product or service. United used to get these type of fares, even when WN might objectively be slightly better (or cheaper) and they got $50-60K from me overall. But then I would use my stash of miles for an overseas trip on UA/partner airlines in J or F. Take that away and my interest in a slimmed CRJ700 or A320/319 or 739ER is zero.

(1) your count is ignoring that DL has extra exit row seats that are not branded as EC. So leg room wise, its much closer than what you are counting. You need to add from 8 to 12 to the EC counts on DL to get a head to head.

(2) Delta does not do TODs, nor does it have so many cheap corporate rates that fill up FC with discount sales. As a result upgrades actually happen on DL. I have (until monday when I will be PLT on DL) equal status at this point on DL and UA - gold on both. Never gotten an upgrade on UA, but I get them on DL. Now these are shorter flights (over 3 hours I just buy FC) but I am 100% either getting upgraded or getting EC on DL. I'm 0% on getting upgraded on UA, and less than 100% in E+ on UA. Delta wins hands down, at least for this gold on both....

(3) add in a woodford reserve and a snack, and its no contest. DL gets my $$$$.

(1) I see no evidence that the 787 is doing better than the A350. The 787 had a lead in orders, and a three year lead in deliveries, but today, there are more orders for the A350 than the 787. (Airbus has orders for 777, Boeing for 768). Once the A350 proves itself (if it does) expect more sales. And given that the Boeing allows more seats to be crammed in, while the Airbus does not, well that the Airbus continues to sell well, and I would argue better, suggest that some airlines do care.

(2) the 739max has not sold well, and the A321neo has been a stand out. Given that the narrower size of the 737 saves weight, and as a result will always have slightly lower operating costs, if the extra comfort did not matter, why is the 320, 321, and 320/321neo selling so well? the neo has 4307 orders, and the max has 2722 orders. Most of the Boeing orders are from existing discounter users of the 737. I can think of a few operators that bought the neo who before used 737s, I can't think of an airline Boeing picked up with the max. I could be wrong on this, and there are many factors in AC purchases, but I would bet that more farsighted operators know that as more information is coming to search sites that the 737 will be at a disadvantage in selling tickets.

That 6.7" makes a big difference as it allows 18" seats vs. 17" seats, and a slightly wider aisle. And it will be notable over time as web-sites make this information more available.

Very interesting. I'm sure that this information will be made more and more available as its a way to attract buyers. Do you want to look on a site that tells you what you are buying (good or bad) so you get a better flight? or one that treats all flights as a commodity? What you get you find out later.

BTB, I did find the ratings to be rather odd in places. How AS got a 8.2 for a plane with no in seat IFE with a 31" pitch and a 17" seat, while VX got a 8.4 for 32" pitch and a wider 18" seat, with IFE, makes little sense to me. Perhaps part of the roll out issue is that the data being supplied does not (as with this e.g.) make much sense.

sbm12

The new Meridian seat was announced in April. Southwest finally let some media types see a prototype Thursday at the company's annual Media Day.

Meridian should be better for legroom than Evolve based on the underlying architecture being very similar to the Pinnacle seat from B/E Aerospace, the same as what UA has on the 737s, 787s and others.

I'm probably one of the only people on FlyerTalk who has sat in the Meridian seat. And even then it was without a row in front to really know what the squeeze will be, though the commitment to not add an extra row suggests that pitch will remain comfy. But the claims that the seats are going to be wider are very, very questionable IMO.

n.b. The link above is to my blog or to one which I am a regular contributor. FT rules require that I disclose that in the post.n.b. The link above is to my blog or to one which I am a regular contributor. FT rules require that I disclose that in the post.

LASUA1K

The CURRENT seat.... The current WN seat is bad but the new UA seat is worse..

sbm12

Still many fewer than UA has. And on the widebody aircraft the disparity is even more pronounced.

Delta has been spectacularly aggressive at FCM and now is selling more than half of its F seats and aims to increase that to 80%. The GAP fares may not be ToD but the upsell during the purchase channel is strong and many are going that way. I would not bet long on high upgrade rates on DL.
What route/date? I know a few folks and might be able to get an answer on how/why the ratings came up the way they do.

Ahh...but that's not what this thread is about. Hence my confusion. :-:

spin88

I also tend to discount that the seat is much wider for the same reasons you do, the cabin width is fixed. Although playing with the armrest some, by getting the seat closer to the wall on the window seats, can free up a little space.

Since pitch is fixed, and is a constant measure in seats, I am taking your comment about the architecture of the new seat being better, to suggest that if pitch stays the same, the new seat will make the leg room about 1" greater than it now is with the current WN seats?

fly18725

If someon doesn't choose United today (e.g. this hypothetical person flies other carriers), I struggle to accept a hypothesis that the positive attributes of other carriers are promoted, often in isolation of the full experience, out of selfless desire for United to improve itself.

Getting back to the facts at hand, there is no evidence to support that marginally wider seats generate revenue premiums or customer loyalty. Some of the most lauded airlines in the world offer narrower seats in Y. Customers place a greater value on pitch and United will continue to retain an advantage among its network peers by offering more Y+ seats domestically with better pitch than others Y+. Most of us are elites and this makes a big difference. I'm sure there are those whose body type makes wider seats with less pitch more attractive.

You're looking at outstanding orders. The 787 has 1,097 orders total with 329 deliveries. The A350 has 783 orders with 6 deliveries.

AS has 32" pitch.

Mama

No. UA and WN have two different marketing targets.
WN still allows 2 checked bags for free, even to this day!!
WN also allows free cancellation (no penalty, funds can be used for future booking). No fees on changing booking, even to this day!!
UA charges fees for everything.
Would UA possibly follows WN? What do you say?

Eastbay1K

Lest you also forget that if WN added a couple of rows, it would create 4 FAs per flight for most of their fleet. So, the economics on the -700 and other aircraft of similar size change dramatically once the 4th FA threshold hits.

spin88

Wide body Yes, UA has more E+ seats, but on new Aircraft (787) those seats are horrible 17" wide slimlines. Sorry, I'll take DL in Y over UA internationally, anyday of the week.

But domestically, its a mixed bag, and I don't think UA has an advantage. DL has more FC seats (on its RJs and on the Airbus fleet), and its EC is better than E+. UA does have more E+ on most planes.

Delta has done well at selling its product. But it does not do TODs, and on routes served by the larger RJs or the B717/MD-90s it has a very favorable FC ratio, and hence gives out more upgrades. I'm not saying as a Gold I am going to get an upgrade SFO-ATL or SFO-DTW on a M/Th/F, but my experience jives with what people on this board have repeatedly posted: upgrades still exist on DL (and for EXPs on AA) but they don't on UA.

I was looking at SFO-SEA. WN does not show up, but I used it since four other airlines fly it.

Perhaps seat comfort plays a roll, but just on the objective factors (pitch, seat width, IFE, power, streaming) AS was a little high, and some UA flights were a little high as well.

transportprof

This thread is packed with great insights - FT at its best! ^

Of all the issues/challenges discussed above, the loyalty program is the easiest one to fine tune and compensate for the deficiencies noted in seating (and other service provision).

I'd book more flights on the 319/320 if I got more credit in Mileage Plus, pure and simple. 11 times the fare doesn't do much for loyalty when booking K and L buckets. How about 15 x?

That is something Mr. Munoz could announce next week (with proportional increases for all tiers) and put UA in an industry leading position for a change.

The only other quick fix that I can think of would be to put a pillow in every seat on every UA aircraft. I've purchased a camping pillow from my local outdoor equipment store and it makes all of the slimlines more tolerable. It's the best $20 I've spent on travel comfort this year.

I wonder which would cost UA more: an improvement in the mileage earning or a return of pillows to all seats on their aircraft?

MrTemporal

I flew on Alaska's new slim seat. It seems better than the older seats at least on flights less than four hours. There seemed to be a bit more knee room as my knees did not dig into the seat in front of me. Overall, not bad for a short flight. I am not sure I would want to fly 5+ hours in this seat or any regular economy seat. It's one of the many disadvantages of being over 6 feet.