Austin787

I agree, DL is the most "premium" of the U.S. based airlines, but that isn't saying much. AA (or USdbaAA) is more focused on becoming the world's largest LCC. UA is somewhere in between.

UA is the first U.S. based airline to offer lie flats in business. Yes, those seats are outdated compared to newer seats but for several years UA had lie flats while its competitors were flying recliners and angled flats. And UA was the first to offer E+, eventually forcing DL and AA to follow suit.

fly747first

Yep exactly, DL being the most premium among US airlines isn't saying much, haha.

However, UA has had plenty of time to react to the competition. I personally think that the new UA 777-300ER Polaris seats are excellent, but UA needs to act fast and retrofit its 777-200 fleets.

emcampbe

wait...are you comparing DLs newest premium seats with UAs older seats? That seems a bit disingenuous.

If you're going to compare to DLs newest generation of premium seat, then you should compare it to the new Polaris seat. If you want to compare UA 2-4-2 in J, shouldn't you compare it to the older generation of DL seats. Don't know the latest details on fleet renewal plans for either, but something tells me that both UA older generation seats and DL older generation seats will both be flying regularly for quite sometime.

Is DL even all lie flat at this point?

tuolumne

Tilton stated his intention for UAL to be the most premium US airline circa 2005 when they were emerging from Ch. 11. He started p.s. a short time before that, and the new "IPP" was coming shortly (intl. premium product). When UAL launched what would then become known as IPTE in late 2006, it was immediately heralded as world-class. And it was, inarguably, a US carrier's first lie flat premium product.

The soft-product didn't really reflect the hard product and lovely Robert Redford upscale ad campaign, but at least UA had a resonate intention and message to be the leading premium business-airline in the US. And to that, they were largely successful - the most desired hub locations, Global Services ranks, a great wide body fleet, E+, etc.

The merger brought almost immediate inconsistency. The once lauded UA brand was trashed in favor of some Frankenstein approach. Robert Redford was replaced with Walmart level "work hard, fly right" atta-boy unrefined advertising. Cynthia Rowley was pushed out in favor of Cintas...etc. Starbucks for fresh brew...we all know the rest of the story. United, under the regime, launched the era of claw backs - clawing back compensation, engaged in cost-cutting at all levels. Now, for the first time in decades, UAL's customers (including myself), had no idea what United stood for.

Munoz has done a lot to bring the two disparate employee factions together, oversaw the Polaris rollout, but there's still a lot of work that needs to be done. Jettisoning the old livery, which is now an entirely tainted reminant of the Smisek/Dr. Dao era, will happen soon. But I hope when that time comes that Munoz outlines what exactly he wants UA to stand for. A premium business airline (a la Tilton's UAL Corp./ AMR Corp.), or something else.

Ber2dca

DL is all lie flat international long-haul as far as I can tell.

The main difference between DL and UA in J is that DL typically offers direct aise access and a lot of privacy with 1-2-1 being very common.

Anyone who booked UA J on a pretty high profile route like LHR-EWR and ends up in a PMUA 777 will wonder about the value they're getting for their money. It's one of the least 'premium' J products still out there.

bocastephen

Your assessment is the opposite of my experience across a half dozen segments in domestic F this year.

fly747first

Hmmm no. DL's entire widebody long-haul fleet already features 1x2x1 flat beds even before the launch of the new suites whilst UA is still having 2x2x2 or 2x4x2 on the vast majority of its flights. Same with AA... their entire widebody long-haul fleet will soon be all 1x2x1 as well.

BearX220

Do you know this to be in the works, or are you (reasonably) speculating? I too think current brandwork has far too many toxic associations. But the company has more fundamental things to fix first. And we have had energetic discussions on this board about branding / livery / etc. where some maintain it does not matter at all -- the aircraft might as well be unpainted for all they care.

I think they should change the livery after they improve reliability, consistency, and employee discipline / culture issues, not before. Otherwise the new paint will seem like one more failure to deliver.

entropy

I think in the 2000s, the examples you cite for development (the ad campaigns, IPTE, PS), United really aspired (and was trying) to be a premium airline for their premium passengers. If you were a 1P and up, they treated you like gold (and gave you gold boarding passes).

As you say, the continental merger brought its own attitude and approach. (which was to openly screw their FF's who weren't spending what they saw as premium enough amounts).

Lots of people here look at foreign airlines as a guide but if you look at the reality, the asian carriers are one thing , but the european carriers all have no short/mid-haul premium onboard product. euro-biz was meh before, but now with the back-breaking slimlines, its downright awful. I'd rather fly a US carrier on a north american midhaul/shorthaul and direct over a US hub than fly a European carrier over their hub and connect to an awful experience.

emcampbe

And even the Asian carriers have their flaws. Look at the complaints of NH economy seating - last time I flew them TPAC was their shell seats that slide forward to 'recline', which I won't do again - they are very cramped and uncomfortable, and now they are 3-4-3 in Y on 777 (and 3-3-3 on 787), so doubt that's any better, and at least equal to most other carriers - I'd rather be in UA in E+ anyway given the stats are similar.

EU are just a different level of non-premium. Even in long-haul Y. Payment required to select seats on long-hauls - not just on the lowest fares, but all the way up to W (and yes, bought a W fare end of last year, and yes, had to pay $35 because I wanted a seat in advance). IME, service isn't much different than than I've received on UA. Can't remember BA - can you even select seats at all on long-hauls in any non-full-fare Y?

And all these carriers, mileage earning isn't good on lower fares either. Implemented differently than the US 3, for sure, but in some ways, its worse (lower fares not only learn less RDM, but less PQM too, making status harder to earn (just wait until that comes to the US...flame suit on....I don't think its that far away)). Singapore you need to go to semi-flexi fares to earn miles at all outside of SQs program.

In that way, I'd take what the US carriers are offering - I can't afford to do a true premium economy anyway, so E+ works well for me. The mileage programs here, while less generous than before, are definitely still better than most of the foreign ones, IME.

fly747first

Very true. In the 2000s, UA even won awards for its unique "It's time to fly" campaign and overall, the airline was highly customer-driven with amazing attention to detail such as the golden boarding passes you mentioned.

minnyfly

I'm wondering the same thing. This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say DL only cares about the perception, so they can rip you off. Let's look at some facts.

You're giving credit to DL for a future product that we know a lot about, but aren't giving any credit to Polaris? DL's will have a door that could be a gimmick. It won't block anybody's view when walking down the aisle. Good business seats don't need a door for good privacy. It's a known seat (Vantage XL) that is only subjectively better than others and can only be used to it's full potential on the 777 and A350 - it gets progressively tighter on smaller types (and you won't see it on the 767--the majority of DL's widebody fleet). It's also with a carrier that is known to buy off-the-shelf seats with cheap furnishings and uncomfortable leather seat covers (no "premium" carrier would touch that).

Have you tried the Alessi stuff? Shiny, but less practical. Smaller sizes, sharp edges on the glasses, and tougher to keep food on the plates. More hype to get you to pay more for less.

UA is/has been a U.S. leader in:

Polaris business class experience (seats, lounges, and soft product)
lie-flat business seats
economy plus
international wifi
free onboard entertainment
best general first class meal windows
retaining high J/Y+ seat configurations
retaining the best award redemption (with a chart too)
retaining creature comforts like mid-cabin lavs on 739s
channel 9
-and many more


They are. Been that way for a couple years now, I believe, with the A330s being the last.

The Vantage seat on their 767s, which is the majority of their widebody fleet, is far from private. It's an all-aisle-access seat, but other than that is poor in every other regard. That seat isn't worth a high price.


Lucky you then. 1 to 1. Tie game.

Duke787

Actually I was pretty impressed with the Alessi stuff in TATL D1 last week. The wine and champagne glasses were designed with a low, heavy base so the center of gravity held the wine / champagne in even when there was mild turbulence.

And they also made the tray table magnetic so that your silverware sticks to it when you aren't using it and doesn't go flying into the aisle or onto the floor if you accidentally drop something or have it slip.

Both seemed like small, but smart, innovations to enhance the eating and drinking experience when in a metal tube that can experience bumps.

I'm not sure where you get the UA being a leader in free inflight entertainment either. Go fly a 738/739 with DirecTV in Y and tell me if it's free even though every single DL and AA plane offers free streaming and on almost all DL 737/757/A320/A321 + the longhaul fleet they have free AVOD built into the seats.

I have every interest in wanting UA to win this argument - UA was my first entry into the FF world and the airline I first became a top tier (1K) and made my first major mileage redemption on but on my recent travels, it's been very clear that DL is the leader in the pack and that was before United became a dirty word when talking to friends and family (what??? you fly United??? they beat people up; oh be careful on your United flight!, etc. etc.)

iapetus

What really gets me is that they want me to pay for the map! The friggin' map?!!? I don't really begrudge the airline for trying to make some $$$ off their DirecTV (although I have a hard time imagining that it's really much of a money maker), but I cannot for the life of me figure out why they can't/won't give me a flight map for free. I'm certainly not paying for that.

And that just reinforces the notion that they're trying to nickel and dime their way forward, which suggests a brand that I hope they're trying to avoid.

Ber2dca

If you fly from/to AMS you'll typically see the 330 (and in fact I've yet to be on a DL 767 though that will change next month). Comparing the 330 on DL vs anything UA offers currently is a clear DL win. I will see about the 767.

Now, even if the 767 isn't as good..you're doing what you accuse others of doing..you're comparing UA to the worst of DL's offering rather than the totality of it.

Let's ignore both the new Polaris and the "next gen" D1 for now and focus on what you would reasonably expect to get flying both airlines. I'd say in hard product DL is on average ahead and by some distance. Soft product I'll call it a tie. Both have their good and bad moments in that regard.

I'd also like to add that I've used both UA Economy Plus and Delta's Comfort Plus and I find the DL product to be better as well in that class.

I think UA isn't as bad as people say and that's why I will sometimes stick up for them, but DL is based on my experiences ahead by a bit. It's not a huge dramatic gap but there is a gap.

Now whether you would call either one of them premium given the less than stellar soft skills of a lot of the FAs on *all* U.S. carriers...that's a different debate.