WN Widens 737 Y Seats for More Comfort - Will UA Follow?
Oct 9, 2015, 11:31 am
#92
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
As for the SFO-SEA route, it looks to me like the high scoring AS flights are on the 738 or 739 which does have power and streaming IFE. I suspect the fact that it is all paid anyways hurts the VX score on that front. And I do not believe that there is an inherent bump up in score just for being on an A320, though the company does list roomier/wider seats differently so probably some difference there.
I don't see any AS with the 8.2, just an 8.05, but that could be date specific.
Oct 9, 2015, 11:38 am
#93
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 94
DL has only 126 A32Xs but 130 737s (the order book for NB is 45 Airbus 53 Boeing, so in the end still skew Boeing), so the chance of you riding in the narrow 737 is still higher.
Oct 9, 2015, 12:04 pm
#94
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,878
MODERATOR NOTE
Discuss the subject of this thread but not each other. If you have an issue with a fellow member, feel free to contact that member via PM but publicly commenting on another member is not permitted
goalie
UA Forum Co-Moderator
Discuss the subject of this thread but not each other. If you have an issue with a fellow member, feel free to contact that member via PM but publicly commenting on another member is not permitted
goalie
UA Forum Co-Moderator
Oct 9, 2015, 12:45 pm
#95
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2001
Programs: DL 1 million, AA 1 mil, HH lapsed Diamond, Marriott Plat
Posts: 28,190
If Southwest had announced a firm timeline on fixing the mess it has created on ~700 not MAX 737s it's flying today - the d(Evolve) seats - then maybe your thread headline would be worth something.
Oct 9, 2015, 8:28 pm
#96
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: IAH
Programs: DL DM, Hyatt Ist-iest, Stariott Platinum, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 12,792
Oct 9, 2015, 8:40 pm
#97
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,468
On the routes I typically fly (e.g., OAK-SNA), WN pax are quite experienced and the boarding process is way more efficient than UA.
If WN's pax were as lame as you suggest ("airline of kettles"), it would not have industry leading turn times. Watch UA try to turn a 737 in 30 minutes.
Oct 9, 2015, 8:45 pm
#98
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
That is not a typical WN experience. Was it a Saturday morning or something?
On the routes I typically fly (e.g., OAK-SNA), WN pax are quite experienced and the boarding process is way more efficient than UA.
If WN's pax were as lame as you suggest ("airline of kettles"), it would not have industry leading turn times. Watch UA try to turn a 737 in 30 minutes.
On the routes I typically fly (e.g., OAK-SNA), WN pax are quite experienced and the boarding process is way more efficient than UA.
If WN's pax were as lame as you suggest ("airline of kettles"), it would not have industry leading turn times. Watch UA try to turn a 737 in 30 minutes.
The 20 something woman who seated herself next to me was, ummm, interesting....
Oct 9, 2015, 10:51 pm
#99
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: California
Programs: AA EXP, lowly UA 1K; Hyatt Diamond, SPG Gold, Hilton Gold; National EC, Hertz PC
Posts: 2,215
That is not a typical WN experience. Was it a Saturday morning or something?
On the routes I typically fly (e.g., OAK-SNA), WN pax are quite experienced and the boarding process is way more efficient than UA.
If WN's pax were as lame as you suggest ("airline of kettles"), it would not have industry leading turn times. Watch UA try to turn a 737 in 30 minutes.
On the routes I typically fly (e.g., OAK-SNA), WN pax are quite experienced and the boarding process is way more efficient than UA.
If WN's pax were as lame as you suggest ("airline of kettles"), it would not have industry leading turn times. Watch UA try to turn a 737 in 30 minutes.
Oct 9, 2015, 11:03 pm
#100
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 38,644
Plenty of WN carry-on bags are checked. If you don't want yours checked, you pay $12.50 and get a guaranteed A spot. Very simple.
Oct 9, 2015, 11:49 pm
#101
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC: UA 1K, DL Platinum, AAirpass, Avis PC
Posts: 4,599
Even with the exit row Delta is woefully behind on E+: 30 vs 48 and they are behind across the board of aircraft.
And they have publicly stated they want to sell in cash 80%+ of first class seats - which is at the direct expense of elite upgrades.
No one has more cheap A and P fares in the market than Delta - I doubt UA is selling even 60 pct of overall first seats.
Today on EWR-SFO hub to hub every single flight this morning had over 10 upgrades.
And to get Delta from 70 today to 80 it's going to have to come via more discount options or fewer seats unless they start serving caviar on domestic flights.
Regardless - this thread is about the Southwest comparison.
The few wonks who look at a fraction of an inch of seat width when on a comparison site can't do that with Southwest because...
Southwest doesn't display its fares anywhere but Southwest.com.
They've done more to alienate pax with bad economy seats for more people than any other carrier.
And UAs revised slimline is the most well padded of the bad bunch all carriers are making standard.
And they have publicly stated they want to sell in cash 80%+ of first class seats - which is at the direct expense of elite upgrades.
No one has more cheap A and P fares in the market than Delta - I doubt UA is selling even 60 pct of overall first seats.
Today on EWR-SFO hub to hub every single flight this morning had over 10 upgrades.
And to get Delta from 70 today to 80 it's going to have to come via more discount options or fewer seats unless they start serving caviar on domestic flights.
Regardless - this thread is about the Southwest comparison.
The few wonks who look at a fraction of an inch of seat width when on a comparison site can't do that with Southwest because...
Southwest doesn't display its fares anywhere but Southwest.com.
They've done more to alienate pax with bad economy seats for more people than any other carrier.
And UAs revised slimline is the most well padded of the bad bunch all carriers are making standard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydneyair
UA mostly 42/48/54 seats, very few 18 seats (going away soon)
AA 30 or 48 seats
DL 18 seats
(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 $$$$.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydneyair
While Airbus is trying to be wider, the sales of 330neo/350 compared to 787 and 777X clearly shows that customers aren't paying a premium for seat width, and airlines are lowering their CASM with denser planes accordingly.
The poor sales of 739max compared to 321neo is largely due to the frame's performance and very little due to seat/cabin width.
The Airbus goal, while noble, isn't paying the bills. So far, there's no indication that Boeing is "pay[ing] for it".
(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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boo_Radley
Most customers have no idea what plane they're on when they're booking, once they've boarded, or once they find their seat uncomfortable. Once they do, they're quite a bit more likely to blame the airline than Boeing. Also, the difference between 737 and 320 width is only 17cm (6.7in, roughly the length of a dollar bill).
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbm12
Depends completely on the OTA and the underlying data source they use. And, FWIW, the good data sources use independent research rather than just believing what the airlines publish, so they know that the Y seats on an DL and UA A320 are actually the same width.
The main provider of that data today does offer a total score as well as component details such as power, pitch, width, wifi & IFE type. AFAIK none of the OTAs RouteHappy partners with use all of the data available from the company.
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.
Originally Posted by Sydneyair
UA mostly 42/48/54 seats, very few 18 seats (going away soon)
AA 30 or 48 seats
DL 18 seats
(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 $$$$.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydneyair
While Airbus is trying to be wider, the sales of 330neo/350 compared to 787 and 777X clearly shows that customers aren't paying a premium for seat width, and airlines are lowering their CASM with denser planes accordingly.
The poor sales of 739max compared to 321neo is largely due to the frame's performance and very little due to seat/cabin width.
The Airbus goal, while noble, isn't paying the bills. So far, there's no indication that Boeing is "pay[ing] for it".
(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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boo_Radley
Most customers have no idea what plane they're on when they're booking, once they've boarded, or once they find their seat uncomfortable. Once they do, they're quite a bit more likely to blame the airline than Boeing. Also, the difference between 737 and 320 width is only 17cm (6.7in, roughly the length of a dollar bill).
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbm12
Depends completely on the OTA and the underlying data source they use. And, FWIW, the good data sources use independent research rather than just believing what the airlines publish, so they know that the Y seats on an DL and UA A320 are actually the same width.
The main provider of that data today does offer a total score as well as component details such as power, pitch, width, wifi & IFE type. AFAIK none of the OTAs RouteHappy partners with use all of the data available from the company.
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.
Last edited by cerealmarketer; Oct 9, 2015 at 11:56 pm
Oct 10, 2015, 7:21 am
#102
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Boarding a plane is a mess in the USA because far too many people in the USA believe the rules apply to others, not to themselves. This is across the board and not limited to just one airline. When the airlines announce that they will enforce the rules this community goes full-tilt crazy, blaming everyone else for the problems and demanding that they be allowed to break the rules because it isn't their bag which is the problem or because they fly more so they know better or whatever other BS they come up with.
But it has nothing to do with which airline you're flying on and everything to do with the attitude of passengers in general. It is ugly.
Oct 10, 2015, 9:16 am
#103
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,613
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.
Oct 11, 2015, 12:41 am
#104
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Pitch isn't the be all and end all some here consider it to be. If you are under 6' as I am, seat width is frequently just as important - especially on long haul flights. I will continue to consider United as an option as long as they offer 767s and 777s with 9 across in E+. In the future, if their long haul fleet is nothing more than 788, 789, and 10 across E+ 777s, I'll fly airlines that operate the A330 and 777 with 9 across.
Oct 11, 2015, 1:08 am
#105
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: Free checked in bag on UA & DL. Free icecream at Marriott checkin.
Posts: 2,862
Some might call Southwest the airline for kettles, but for me it is the best airline for business passenger. There is no need to be an elite to get preferential service on WN. I book my "speculative" tickets in advance and cancel them without losing a sizable chunk of change if not required. This is like buying refundable tickets on all other carriers. What is there to not like that? Plus repricing them if the fare drops, makes this airline the most flexible of all carriers. Yes, booking less than 1-2 weeks in advance does not get you cheap fares; but one can always tamper their expectations by booking other carriers during that time.
In all the news of extra inches in the seat is again appreciated. I cannot imagine UA following that.
In all the news of extra inches in the seat is again appreciated. I cannot imagine UA following that.