Originally Posted by lhrsfo (Post 25125024)

I think this neatly encapsulates why airlines won't invest in the Y product. People always buy the cheapest fare, whether they like the product or not. They don't even do any research to find out if there's a significantly better product for only $1 more (UA has plenty of flights to Europe with the features the OP wants). They would not pay $5 more for significantly better food but will pay a multiple of that on BOB or airport fast food outlets. The message is clear.

Originally Posted by jamesinclair (Post 25125717)

I disagree.

First, 95%+ have no idea that the plane quality varies within the airline on the same route, and that theres any way in advance to know what it is. When you look up flights on Expedia, it is not like a hotel where it lists the amenities. When people see United at x, AA at x+$10 and Delta at x+$20, theres no differentiation at all on the booking screen aside from trip time.

Second, I know MANY people who will absolutely switch to Jetblue Or Virgin rather than flying United etc if the price is within a reasonable range (maybe $50 price dif for a 5 hour flight).

It helps that those airlines have very consistent products. You know youre getting free TV, and you know youre getting snacks and you know youre getting more room. Youre not gambling on plane type, per-merger, legacy, etc etc

Originally Posted by NewportGuy (Post 25125740)

Because people look for bargains is not a reason to create a crap product. Just look at what happened to K Mart and Target. K Mart took United's approach. Treat everyone like hillbillies, assume they don't care about dirty stores or poor merchandising. Then along comes Target, showing that you can provide a quality product AND show respect for customers without sacrificing the bottom line.

Where is K Mart today and where is Target?

Originally Posted by poisson (Post 25126211)

I generally fly with foreign airlines because the planes are in better shape and the service is better.

I only went with United because they were $200 cheaper than every other option. I don't fly enough to research every aspect of every airline.

Its interesting because the competition has better planes at around the same price (depending on dates).

Guess we'll see what my return flight is like.

Originally Posted by REPUBLIC757 (Post 25127344)

Agreed that the 2-class 763/764 absolutely do suck from a premium perspective. The footwells are reportedly smaller than even the 757 -- and I was never a fan of sCO pod seating from the start. In short, it's a subpar product but at least the 21 aircraft are not leaving the fleet.

Plus, if I'm not mistaken, didn't UA rip out some Y restrooms to get the J-class seating config they wanted to during the 2-class conversions?

Originally Posted by Kensterfly (Post 25125660)

We're looking at a trip to Paris and I see UA flies 757s CDG to EWR. Really? I can't imagine a TATL on a single aisle aircraft.

Originally Posted by Kensterfly (Post 25127390)

But does it beat being back in Coach?

Originally Posted by REPUBLIC757 (Post 25127325)

I'm telling you, AVOD did not exist on CO in 2006.

The 764s didn't even get AVOD installed until around the time of the merger. 777s were first in the 2008-2009 time frame, then the 757s which only had overhead before that.

ORD-OGG was a domestic 777 for sUA with overhead screens only. Now with the streaming content, they are officially dark.

sUA started the IPTE 777 refresh program in 2007, but they were slow and not all were completed until 2-3 years ago.

Originally Posted by Cargojon (Post 25127790)

Maybe my memory is a little fuzzy. Perhaps it wasn't true AVOD but a bunch of channels on the PTV's at the time w/the moving map. I think there were some games and such too.

Originally Posted by spin88 (Post 25127383)

The problem is that when that person sets foot on the plane (see our OP) the experience matters... It impacts their willingness to fly that airline again, and the brand reputation, and that in turn impacts what people will pay, regardless of the actual experience they will get. E.g. Y seats on the sUA 772 are not bad (soft product is another matter) but someone jammed into a sCO 787 slim line is not likely to want to repeat the experience. The average passenger does not pick and chose equipment, they just avoid the airline for all purchases. We see this day in and day out on the UA board where people say they avoid ANA. ANA has some of the best equipment and experience out there, but it also has some real dogs, but even many knowledgeable folks don't take the time to figure this out, they just don't book ANA. United runs this risk every day, with every passenger, when they run dark/old looking equipment, have sub-par food, and have industry leading cancellation and delay rates.



This is why e.g. Delta has a revenue premium over United, and why United's (which used to have this revenue premium) lost it. VX's revenue is growing. Overtime people are not stupid...



+1



and you are a perfect example of why United's decission is so short sighted. You booked United ONLY because they were $200 cheaper. If you figure that United had to similarly cut the ticket price by $200 for another 150 people on that flight (I am assuming they can sell a few tickets w/o such discounting) then United has left $30,000 on the table. That kind of money shows why shorting your product, and offering sub-part product is penny wise, but pound foolish.

Originally Posted by poisson (Post 25127842)

Maybe so, but every time I check flight prices it varies widely on who is the cheapest. For the dates I chose, UA was the cheapest. A week later, Canada Air was cheapest.

If I had known the plane would be so outdated, I would have gladly paid a little extra to have a more up to date plane.

Unfortunately it's rather difficult to determine what kind of amenities you are getting on board without doing research.

Originally Posted by Pi7473000 (Post 25125838)

Try flying the 2 class 777s or 787s. The Business class on those planes feels old and outdated as well! The economy seats feel much less comfortable than on the 3 class 767. They also don't even have GlobalFirst! I prefer the 3 class 767 over either of those planes for comfort in all classes.

Originally Posted by stopdiabetes (Post 25127985)

the up front product on the Dreamliner is anything but updated.

Originally Posted by Cargojon (Post 25127790)

Maybe my memory is a little fuzzy. Perhaps it wasn't true AVOD but a bunch of channels on the PTV's at the time w/the moving map. I think there were some games and such too.

Originally Posted by stopdiabetes (Post 25127985)

Hmm. 787s outdated? Don't think so, and the up front product on the Dreamliner is anything but updated. Our experience on the Dreamliner has been very positive.

Originally Posted by stopdiabetes (Post 25127985)

Hmm. 787s outdated? Don't think so, and the up front product on the Dreamliner is anything but updated. Our experience on the Dreamliner has been very positive.