spin88

Delta was 86.4% OT, with a 99.6% completion percentage. United was 69.6% OT (consolidated, not A14), and had a 97.2% completion factor.

Not head to head, but quite a difference. Only in a parallel universe would these figures be a "reason to book towards UA now."

bmwe92fan

I'm not sure what numbers you are looking at - but I would hardly call the past month / quarter a "good" one operationally - especially compared to UA's peers... IMO UA took a step backwards the past month - and I don't use the past as the comparator - I use their peers... To me it's like you are saying that that UA should be commended for the fact that "We suck a bit less than last year - so it's a step in the right direction - but, yes, we are still in last place..."

minnyfly

Not a significant difference when comparing apples to apples. You'll have to fly like a super elite to notice the cancellation rate difference when compensating for weather, and then if you did you would run into DL's long delays instead. Pick your poison. If you stick to mainline there's almost no difference. UA's ontime rates are as good or better as anybody now, and that's with the inherent disadvantage of congested airports. Both carriers are running very well operationally these days and should be booked for that reason. AA is now the laggard among the legacies. UA customers wanted improvement, and now they have it in spades. Let's acknowledge that.

February numbers were significantly better than January, but I believe the weather was much better as well. But UA is consistently among the best now. No spinning necessary.

bmwe92fan

Well the investment community and the flying public do not agree with your assessment - but to each their own... UA ranks dead last in so many metrics it's hard to take your observations seriously - but honestly, I hope you are right and that UA is on a new trajectory.... I watched a CNBC special report on UA this morning - it was even more brutal than I thought - the battle for the BOD and the consumer sentiment towards UA is way worse than I even thought....

sbm12

You're comparing different data sets here. Suggesting that one is better/worse than the other based on those stats is questionable.

ETA: I have no idea what the numbers look like when compared on a like-for-like basis; maybe DL is massively better than UA. But these reports do not demonstrate that.

goodeats21

Yes, exactly. That is what I was inferring by wondering about comparison...not easy to do now. The cynic inside me wonders if that is why United started reporting this way...

lhrsfo

This accords with my experience. What has changed in the last year or so is that UA is now more expensive than its competitors on the routes I fly (TATL), whereas it used to be cheaper. And it now seems to have noticeably emptier planes. But, of course, I don't know whether the competitors have fuller planes, or more or less revenue overall.

sbm12

Consolidated LF was at 77% for February, down from 79.5% for the same month in 2015. Do you really notice the ~3-5 fewer passengers on each flight TATL loads are noticeably light in February, just like last year; 10 fewer average pax/flight on those routes.

I don't see how a LF that high appears as "noticeably emptier" at any level.

jeedk

Before we engage in cheerleading or mudslinging, let�s start by actually comparing apples to apples

Global Mainline, Feb�16, using A14

AA 83.5% on-time, 1.3% CXL
DL 86.7% on-time, 0.5% CXL
UA 87.4% on-time, 1.0% CXL
WN 88.9% on-time, 1.6% CXL

Global Consolidated, Feb�16, using A14

AA 81.4% on-time, 3.2% CXL
DL 84.1% on-time, 1.9% CXL
UA 84.4% on-time, 3.0% CXL
WN 88.9% on-time, 1.6% CXL

sbm12

What is the source of this data? The DL numbers do not match with what the company reported.

jeedk

DL reports mainline perf only, so their 86.4 / 0.4 is very much in line with the 86.7 / 0.5 I've sourced.

The same source said in Jan'16, DL was 85.8 / 1.5. DL's own PR said 85.2 / 1.3.

It's not perfect, but certainly more useful than trying to compare mainline A14 to consolidated A00.

BearX220

Negative sentiment about UA has jumped the fireline... from small knots of elites griping about missed upgrades... to the broad middle of infrequent flyers trading UA horror stories at brunch.

Fundamental shift in consumer perceptions. Because perceptions lag reality, it will take many quarters of improved operational stats before the customer base notices, then starts to believe.

sbm12

Right, but if the company reports one mainline number and your source reports a different number for the same thing then trusting it is challenging. More so if you won't disclose what it is.

akonradi

It matches flightstats. I've never seen a reason for their data to not be trustworthy:

http://www.flightstats.com/company/m...orts/airlines/

FWAAA

As long as oil stays cheap, then sure. Good thing oil prices never go up and stay there for any length of time. ^