[Unconfirmed] UA Preparing to Sell E+ at Booking as Separate Cabin (like DL C+)
Nov 19, 2019, 9:31 am
#196
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Honolulu Harbor
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 14,993
The average American male adult (depending on source) weights 195-198 pounds. They "fit", but hardly in minimal comfort.
Nov 19, 2019, 9:38 am
#197
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
I think they are fine.
I prefer normal to average. America has an obesity epidemic, anf there's no reason why transport companies should have to supersize everything because of that.
The American male of 20 years or greater averages just over 5' 9" in height and 198 lbs in weight. I'm taller and lighter than those averages and the 10-across configuration borders on unacceptable (as many have opined on this message board).
More to the point... people talk about "normal" as if it's synonymous with "average". It's not. In fact, "normal" often implies everything that fits into the average plus and minus one standard deviation. So normal goes beyond 5'9"+ and 198 lbs.
More to the point... people talk about "normal" as if it's synonymous with "average". It's not. In fact, "normal" often implies everything that fits into the average plus and minus one standard deviation. So normal goes beyond 5'9"+ and 198 lbs.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Nov 19, 2019 at 5:51 pm Reason: merged consecutive posts by same member
Nov 19, 2019, 9:42 am
#198
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,103
No, the conversation hasn't been about "supersizing". It's been about resistance to downsizing. Not a single 777 was outfitted with 10-across seating when the aircraft first came out and people thought the standard 9-across was fine. It was only years later that airlines (many, not all) decided to cram 10 seats in and that's what people don't like.
Nov 19, 2019, 10:29 am
#199
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 14,878
No, the conversation hasn't been about "supersizing". It's been about resistance to downsizing. Not a single 777 was outfitted with 10-across seating when the aircraft first came out and people thought the standard 9-across was fine. It was only years later that airlines (many, not all) decided to cram 10 seats in and that's what people don't like.
Look at the 787, which was designed for 8 across, but is almost exclusively flown in a 9 across configuration. JAL I believe is the only exception. It’s tight, sure, but if you need to fly a route in a 787, that’s really the only choice.
The fact is, most travelers focus specifically on price. They only complain about things like seat size after they choose the cheapest price, and then sit in it. Then next time, they would do the same. It’s not everyone’s preference - but enough of a majority that that’s the way carriers are configuring their planes. If there was enough of a majority willing to pay $X extra for their flights to get a bigger seat, airlines would do it. And to and extent, they do. That’s why you can buy E+ (I realize that only legroom, not width), Premium Economy or Business. Or F on the carriers that still offer it. So the bigger seats are there for the minority that are willing to pay.
I don’t fly DL much (at least, right now), so don’t know the general E to C+ Price difference is, but IME, the E+ prices on UA seem like a lot to me. When I’ve seen it, it’s been about $24 on pretty short flights (something like ORD-YYZ, so about 1.5 hours) - which isn’t bad. But to see > $100 on mid-con routes (I’ve sent that on routes like IAH-SJC OR CVG-SFO, and even SFO-DEN at ~$95), seems like too much. If it came with the extras like on DL (free drinks, snack plates, etc.) I think it would be reasonable.
Nov 19, 2019, 10:35 am
#200
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,103
yes, people thought 9-across was fine. If it had been initially standardized at 8, and went to 9, you can bet people would be complaining just as much. Most carriers around the world have either already switched to 10 across in Y, or are doing it. DL Is an exception, but given it is such a small part of the fleet (what...17 or 18?), it probably isn’t much of an advantage unless you happen to be flying one of the handful of routes where DL flies it.
Look at the 787, which was designed for 8 across, but is almost exclusively flown in a 9 across configuration. JAL I believe is the only exception. It’s tight, sure, but if you need to fly a route in a 787, that’s really the only choice.
The fact is, most travelers focus specifically on price. They only complain about things like seat size after they choose the cheapest price, and then sit in it. Then next time, they would do the same. It’s not everyone’s preference - but enough of a majority that that’s the way carriers are configuring their planes. If there was enough of a majority willing to pay $X extra for their flights to get a bigger seat, airlines would do it. And to and extent, they do. That’s why you can buy E+ (I realize that only legroom, not width), Premium Economy or Business. Or F on the carriers that still offer it. So the bigger seats are there for the minority that are willing to pay.
I don’t fly DL much (at least, right now), so don’t know the general E to C+ Price difference is, but IME, the E+ prices on UA seem like a lot to me. When I’ve seen it, it’s been about $24 on pretty short flights (something like ORD-YYZ, so about 1.5 hours) - which isn’t bad. But to see > $100 on mid-con routes (I’ve sent that on routes like IAH-SJC OR CVG-SFO, and even SFO-DEN at ~$95), seems like too much. If it came with the extras like on DL (free drinks, snack plates, etc.) I think it would be reasonable.
Look at the 787, which was designed for 8 across, but is almost exclusively flown in a 9 across configuration. JAL I believe is the only exception. It’s tight, sure, but if you need to fly a route in a 787, that’s really the only choice.
The fact is, most travelers focus specifically on price. They only complain about things like seat size after they choose the cheapest price, and then sit in it. Then next time, they would do the same. It’s not everyone’s preference - but enough of a majority that that’s the way carriers are configuring their planes. If there was enough of a majority willing to pay $X extra for their flights to get a bigger seat, airlines would do it. And to and extent, they do. That’s why you can buy E+ (I realize that only legroom, not width), Premium Economy or Business. Or F on the carriers that still offer it. So the bigger seats are there for the minority that are willing to pay.
I don’t fly DL much (at least, right now), so don’t know the general E to C+ Price difference is, but IME, the E+ prices on UA seem like a lot to me. When I’ve seen it, it’s been about $24 on pretty short flights (something like ORD-YYZ, so about 1.5 hours) - which isn’t bad. But to see > $100 on mid-con routes (I’ve sent that on routes like IAH-SJC OR CVG-SFO, and even SFO-DEN at ~$95), seems like too much. If it came with the extras like on DL (free drinks, snack plates, etc.) I think it would be reasonable.
edit: A really quick look at just *A members flying 777s, these only configure with 9-across: Asiana, Air China, Singapore, Ethiopian, Thai, Turkish.
Last edited by JimInOhio; Nov 19, 2019 at 10:52 am Reason: added content
Nov 19, 2019, 10:44 am
#201
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton ♦ , Hyatt Carbonado, Wyndham ♦, Marriott PE, "Stinking Bum" elsewhere.
Posts: 4,986
It's absolutely the worst seat in the sky in the US. Rated 2 out of 10 for comfort. The seat pans are intolerably short and slope downward. Even Oscar Munoz said they're too small and uncomfortable in an interview with ABC News' reporter, David Kerley.
You must be the only customer who likes them.
And maybe they're unsafe:
https://viewfromthewing.com/faa-requ...onal-aircraft/
You must be the only customer who likes them.
And maybe they're unsafe:
https://viewfromthewing.com/faa-requ...onal-aircraft/
Last edited by zombietooth; Nov 19, 2019 at 1:26 pm
Nov 19, 2019, 11:01 am
#202
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: CT/NY
Programs: UA 1K/1MM, AA EXP, Marriott LT Titanium, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Plat Amb
Posts: 6,009
Commercial starts at 3:00
$163 for a middle E+ seat, as reported by my non-status friend.
Nov 19, 2019, 11:24 am
#203
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton ♦ , Hyatt Carbonado, Wyndham ♦, Marriott PE, "Stinking Bum" elsewhere.
Posts: 4,986
I'm glad someone remembered the commercial!
Commercial starts at 3:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSiibkSBTME
$163 for a middle E+ seat, as reported by my non-status friend.
Commercial starts at 3:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSiibkSBTME
$163 for a middle E+ seat, as reported by my non-status friend.
I think UA should add free "Banquet on a Bun" as a benefit for its GS and 1K passengers in Y.
Kirby-"I like it!"
Nov 19, 2019, 12:45 pm
#204
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
No, the conversation hasn't been about "supersizing". It's been about resistance to downsizing. Not a single 777 was outfitted with 10-across seating when the aircraft first came out and people thought the standard 9-across was fine. It was only years later that airlines (many, not all) decided to cram 10 seats in and that's what people don't like.
As I said, I am tall. Nonetheless, the airlines have every right to control costs by selling seats I can't fit in, such as Spirit's 28 inch pitch. It allows other passengers to save money, and as far as I am concerned that's great.
There's nothing wrong with 10 across 777's because plenty of passengers fit in the seats just fine. If you don't, avoid the plane or pay more, just as I avoid Spirit and pay more.
Nov 19, 2019, 12:57 pm
#205
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: where lions are led by donkeys...
Programs: Lifetime Gold, Global Entry, Hertz PC, and my wallet
Posts: 20,340
10 across is now industry standard. If it was really too tight, this couldn't have happened because passengers would have revolted against it.
As I said, I am tall. Nonetheless, the airlines have every right to control costs by selling seats I can't fit in, such as Spirit's 28 inch pitch. It allows other passengers to save money, and as far as I am concerned that's great.
There's nothing wrong with 10 across 777's because plenty of passengers fit in the seats just fine. If you don't, avoid the plane or pay more, just as I avoid Spirit and pay more.
As I said, I am tall. Nonetheless, the airlines have every right to control costs by selling seats I can't fit in, such as Spirit's 28 inch pitch. It allows other passengers to save money, and as far as I am concerned that's great.
There's nothing wrong with 10 across 777's because plenty of passengers fit in the seats just fine. If you don't, avoid the plane or pay more, just as I avoid Spirit and pay more.
Nov 19, 2019, 12:57 pm
#206
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,103
10 across is now industry standard. If it was really too tight, this couldn't have happened because passengers would have revolted against it.
As I said, I am tall. Nonetheless, the airlines have every right to control costs by selling seats I can't fit in, such as Spirit's 28 inch pitch. It allows other passengers to save money, and as far as I am concerned that's great.
There's nothing wrong with 10 across 777's because plenty of passengers fit in the seats just fine. If you don't, avoid the plane or pay more, just as I avoid Spirit and pay more.
As I said, I am tall. Nonetheless, the airlines have every right to control costs by selling seats I can't fit in, such as Spirit's 28 inch pitch. It allows other passengers to save money, and as far as I am concerned that's great.
There's nothing wrong with 10 across 777's because plenty of passengers fit in the seats just fine. If you don't, avoid the plane or pay more, just as I avoid Spirit and pay more.
Nov 19, 2019, 1:09 pm
#207
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
There is no industry standard. What there is is no other option in a lot of cases. You fit in it, we get that. But do us one massive favour banging on about how it should fit everyone else. It's not about saving money and if it is please share that data with us so we can make our own analysis. As far as I am concerned there is nothing wrong with me driving while under intoxicated as I have never crashed whilst drunk and I am a good driver. Geddit?
If you don't, there are plenty of options, from avoiding the plane, to paying for an extra seat, to Premium Economy and Business.
Not everything has to work FOR YOU. In addition to Spirit and Allegiant, I avoid Basic Economy, as well as American's micro-pitch seats. I also avoid $10,000 international first class, for the opposite reason. I am not outraged that airlines offer products that don't work for me. I buy what does.
Nov 27, 2019, 2:25 pm
#209
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, UA Gold, WN, Global Entry; +others wherever miles/points are found
Posts: 14,384
Looks like they were allowed to expire on 21-Nov and not replaced or updated yet. UA is probably evaluating the results of their "limited trial".
Nov 28, 2019, 1:43 am
#210
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: where lions are led by donkeys...
Programs: Lifetime Gold, Global Entry, Hertz PC, and my wallet
Posts: 20,340
