Economy plus ad misleading ?

Old Jan 31, 18, 11:56 am
  #16  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: PHX, SEA
Programs: DL Silver, Avis President's Club, Hertz President's Circle, Global Entry (Former AA Plt/Gold)
Posts: 3,163
Originally Posted by emcampbe View Post
Well, if you want to go there, I think it’s a whole marketing issue everywhere, no? Has anyone ever seen a Big Mac in person that looks anything like the one on the menu board?
The difference is that while the Big Mac might be staged to look perfect, it's required to be the actual ingredients. UA isn't showing the actual E+. So I vote misleading although odds are some lawyer signed off on this since on the booking it lists the actual legroom in inches.
Gig103 is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 12:11 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London & Sonoma CA
Programs: UA 1K MM, Hertz PC, BAEC Silver
Posts: 7,954
This is clearly intentionally misleading. And it's quite different from a product which is shown in an unrealistically favorable light - this product is simply never like the image, and can never be like the image. And as to one poster's comments saying it's in the same category as whether UA provides a stemmed or unstemmed wine glass, that's completely different. The ONLY difference between E and E+ is legroom. That is all you are buying. And the image has been doctored to indicate you are buying significantly more legroom than you will actually receive.
COEWR2587 and sfo789 like this.
lhrsfo is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 12:21 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: RNO
Programs: AA/DL/WN/ex-UA elite
Posts: 5,589
The image would have more credibility if it were part of an ad saying "see, we've moved existing rows further apart so we can add more rows to the plane!"
Kevin AA is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 12:22 pm
  #19  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: ORF, RIC
Programs: UA 1K 2MM; Marriott Platinum; IHG Platinum
Posts: 3,077
Crj700 exit row

Originally Posted by COSPILOT View Post
Technically, the image was correct for the EMB 120 exit row seating. I miss that airplane.
The leg space of CRJ700 exit row is also enormous.
Kmxu is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 12:30 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: COS
Programs: UA Gold (.85 MM), HH Diamond, SPG Platinum (LT Gold), Hertz PC, National EE
Posts: 2,710
Matthew McConaughey makes it appear that driving a Lincoln is pure bliss, but its advertising and I know the difference. Cessna makes it appear that a new 182 is luxury travel, but having owned one, I know the difference. Advertising is always going to be different than reality, and what United is doing is no different. Should United offer a tired photo of me, in E+, after a long week of travel, having not scored an upgrade to F as their advertising photo? I hope not.
COSPILOT is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 12:43 pm
  #21  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 15,736
Originally Posted by milepig View Post
Or pretty much any photo of any UA meal.
Originally Posted by Dublin_rfk View Post
I'll take you up on that one. In many Asian take out places the food does actually look like the pictures. They take the time to properly assemble the food and then don't toss it around like a toy.
I meant any UA meal. My post updated.
milepig is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 3:21 pm
  #22  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Programs: UA Premier Silver
Posts: 311
It should be fairly obvious to any reader that that photograph is not a photo of a legitimate airplane interior. Upon realizing that, in my opinion it is the responsibility of the consumer to do their research and understand exactly what is being purchased. The photograph does its job of explaining to the reader the definition of "legroom" - the photo clarifies that it is the distance between two rows that is increased (not the height of the seat, not the width of the seat) - which is a point of a clarification for people who do not fly frequently.

The onus is on the consumer to understand what they're purchasing and in fact United makes it very easy to find this information before purchase. The photograph displayed on the view reservation screen is not misleading (it shows someone smiling so I guess you could argue that but), nor is the photo in the "Economy Plus" class benefits on the "seat selection" screen. I don't think an obviously unreal photograph should be considered "misleading" just because someone may interpret it as a real photo of what it looks like in a plane.

It's like the whole "always paint a small portion of the wall and let it dry before you paint the whole wall". You don't just go and assume the color will be the same as what it looks like on a completely different surface.
chermorg is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 5:45 pm
  #23  
Hilton Contributor BadgeMarriott Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: DCA
Programs: Marriott GLD; Hilton GLD; Free Agent (former AA PLT/US GLD)
Posts: 1,157
Originally Posted by COSPILOT View Post
Matthew McConaughey makes it appear that driving a Lincoln is pure bliss, but its advertising and I know the difference. Cessna makes it appear that a new 182 is luxury travel, but having owned one, I know the difference. Advertising is always going to be different than reality, and what United is doing is no different. Should United offer a tired photo of me, in E+, after a long week of travel, having not scored an upgrade to F as their advertising photo? I hope not.
Does the Lincoln commercial show an eight cylinder engine firing when the car only comes with 4 or 6 cylinder engines as a choice? Everyone knows that advertising portrays products in the best possible light. But despite all the inane examples you want to make, United is just lying about quantitative facts here.
Beltway2A is online now  
Old Jan 31, 18, 6:37 pm
  #24  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Navajo Nation, Northern Arizona
Programs: ex-Con *Gold (earned)
Posts: 8,879
Originally Posted by emcampbe View Post
Ever gotten the max fuel economy as it’s listed on car documentation?
Actually, yes. Even better in fact. Our 2016 Grand Caravan is rated 17 city / 25 hwy. I routinely get 27-28 MPG on the highway @ 75 mph.
kale73 is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 7:14 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Programs: WN, AA, UA, DL
Posts: 1,313
There are E+ seats that have pitch like that (the 2-class 763 comes to mind). Obviously not all, but some do. It's called advertising.
minnyfly is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 8:39 pm
  #26  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: RNO
Programs: AA/DL/WN/ex-UA elite
Posts: 5,589
Originally Posted by Kmxu View Post
The leg space of CRJ700 exit row is also enormous.
Yes but on those planes, the 3-across seating would seriously negate the benefits of that legroom.

Originally Posted by kale73 View Post
Actually, yes. Even better in fact. Our 2016 Grand Caravan is rated 17 city / 25 hwy. I routinely get 27-28 MPG on the highway @ 75 mph.
Correct, and as I recall, a few years ago the government made changes to the calculation of stated MPG because people were complaining that real driving didn't get as much.

Originally Posted by minnyfly View Post
There are E+ seats that have pitch like that (the 2-class 763 comes to mind). Obviously not all, but some do. It's called advertising.
That's even worse, because if that were the standard, then 99% of E+ boarding passes would violate truth in advertising.
Kevin AA is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 8:45 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Olympia, WA
Programs: United MM Alaska MP Cessna/Piper Captain
Posts: 244
Originally Posted by COSPILOT View Post
Matthew McConaughey makes it appear that driving a Lincoln is pure bliss, but its advertising and I know the difference. Cessna makes it appear that a new 182 is luxury travel, but having owned one, I know the difference. Advertising is always going to be different than reality, and what United is doing is no different. Should United offer a tired photo of me, in E+, after a long week of travel, having not scored an upgrade to F as their advertising photo? I hope not.
Yes, but a Cessna 182 is a lot more comfortable for a trip than a Cessna 172.
Ghery is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 8:47 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,384
Sure the pitch is misleading, but what about the duplicity of using Heaven (wide open saturated white space) as the backdrop for E+?
fumje is offline  
Old Jan 31, 18, 11:39 pm
  #29  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: KSFO/KSQL
Programs: UA Plat, 0.8MM; PPL
Posts: 664
Does UA's CoC have a mandatory arbitration provision yet? (Are common carriers allowed to do that?)

Otherwise, there's nothing stopping you from working with a plaintiff's firm to file a class action against UA on behalf of everyone who bought E+ with the mistaken expectation of getting ~40" pitch.
sincx is offline  
Old Feb 1, 18, 12:13 am
  #30  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: COS
Programs: UA Gold (.85 MM), HH Diamond, SPG Platinum (LT Gold), Hertz PC, National EE
Posts: 2,710
Found a screenshot from the old UA game that was around premerger. Leg room looks to be around 60" to 70", but nobody ever complained at the time that this was false advertising.
COSPILOT is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread