Originally Posted by dilanesp
(Post 33898087)
Every purveyor of everything says it is the best product. Consumers don't believe that stuff and it isn't fraud. It's called "puffery".
And the post I was referring to argued high service models were "business 101". They aren't. Business 101 is you do the thing that makes you the most money, which can be high service, medium service, or low service. |
Originally Posted by MatthewLAX
(Post 33897757)
The sad thing to me is also that UA has so much potential in terms of soft product and those who actually fly on UA regularly and have over the years see that UA can do great things when it tries, which is precisely what made us loyal. It wasn't simply network or price. Not for me, at least. And I know I'm not alone. It doesn't work because you'd have to raise prices as compared to your domestic competitors and that would 1) put your corporate contracts at risk because they are focused on the bottom line - and don't care you are drinking premium spirits and food on a business trip 2) Many leisure flyers book low price and and UA knows those leisure flyers are at high risk to book away 3) Just about every US business cuts expenses when they are losing money - not increase expenses and 4) Even if they did what is suggested and FT's rejoiced - the average flyer will never get the news. If US airlines domestically thought if they added $20 per premium passenger in costs - but they could correspondingly raise tickets by $40 and increase profits - certainly someone would do it. |
Originally Posted by HNLbasedFlyer
(Post 33898722)
And we know that model does not work domestically in the United States - or, someone would be providing that model except on very limited routes.
It doesn't work because you'd have to raise prices as compared to your domestic competitors and that would 1) put your corporate contracts at risk because they are focused on the bottom line - and don't care you are drinking premium spirits and food on a business trip 2) Many leisure flyers book low price and and UA knows those leisure flyers are at high risk to book away 3) Just about every US business cuts expenses when they are losing money - not increase expenses and 4) Even if they did what is suggested and FT's rejoiced - the average flyer will never get the news. If US airlines domestically thought if they added $20 per premium passenger in costs - but they could correspondingly raise tickets by $40 and increase profits - certainly someone would do it. |
Originally Posted by HNLbasedFlyer
(Post 33898722)
And we know that model does not work domestically in the United States - or, someone would be providing that model except on very limited routes.
It doesn't work because you'd have to raise prices as compared to your domestic competitors and that would 1) put your corporate contracts at risk because they are focused on the bottom line - and don't care you are drinking premium spirits and food on a business trip 2) Many leisure flyers book low price and and UA knows those leisure flyers are at high risk to book away 3) Just about every US business cuts expenses when they are losing money - not increase expenses and 4) Even if they did what is suggested and FT's rejoiced - the average flyer will never get the news. If US airlines domestically thought if they added $20 per premium passenger in costs - but they could correspondingly raise tickets by $40 and increase profits - certainly someone would do it. |
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 33898804)
JSX has been growing leaps and bounds - have you looked into them?
I can't even tell if they are financially viable. |
Originally Posted by Xyzzy
(Post 33896092)
The iPad is the new People magazine. And it does bother me when they stare at it the entire flight without c:(ming by to serve drinks even once.
|
Originally Posted by physioprof
(Post 33898913)
Whether the FAs are "reading People magazine" or "staring at their phones/iPads" or whatever else they might be doing is a total red herring. The issue that matters is whether they are or aren't providing the service that UA/UX advertises on their website in association with the sale of tickets.
|
Originally Posted by HNLbasedFlyer
(Post 33898950)
I've been flying UA since roughly the late 80's - and up until 2020 regularly logged 200-300K miles per year - and I've never had no service (well - unless I want to count the smoke in the cockpit incident where we raced back to SFO).
|
Originally Posted by HNLbasedFlyer
(Post 33898847)
I did just now. A 23 plane fleet with 30 seats - with from what I can tell no published financials isn't really a fair comparison - in my opinion.
I can't even tell if they are financially viable. |
Originally Posted by HNLbasedFlyer
(Post 33898950)
I've been flying UA since roughly the late 80's - and up until 2020 regularly logged 200-300K miles per year - and I've never had no service (well - unless I want to count the smoke in the cockpit incident where we raced back to SFO).
|
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 33898983)
They've been continually expanding and they are a very popular choice for the destinations they serve. The business model is "fly private for the price of coach" and it's pretty much what they deliver. Not finding financials is not an excuse to dismiss them, especially given their recent expansion - but the point is, there is a viable business model with demand for a premium product and service.
I think most of us would agree - most people aren't going to pay triple regardless of what JSX offers. |
Originally Posted by SPN Lifer
(Post 33896242)
Is the maximum Net Promoter Score (NPS) 10 or 100?
The edit suggests a maximum of 100. What is your source for the UA NPS of 4? Do you have a link? Perhaps we need a separate thread for discussion of the UA Net Promoter Score, as this is a very specialized field that most travellers without business management or market research experience would have little insight into or understanding of. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_promoter_score Arguments aside over what constitutes good service, the current levels are clearly not working if one ties Kirby's goals of being the world's leading airline to the NPS results. There are some good, service orientated employees at United, but there are also numerous jaded, tired, bitter employees who visibly just don't care. Tone at the Top and a corporate culture overhaul are needed for United to come anywhere close to being a good airline, never mind the world's best. Again, this is Kirby's stated goal. My confusion is in how he thinks they're going to meet this goal - personally I think it's all investor talk and marketing hype that has no foundation in reality. Probably buys him a couple more years in charge and some more compensation though. |
Originally Posted by Dyce
(Post 33899035)
My confusion is in how he thinks they're going to meet this goal - personally I think it's all investor talk and marketing hype that has no foundation in reality. Probably buys him a couple more years in charge and some more compensation though.
Kirby isn't going anywhere until he retires - some on FT may not like him - Wall Street loves him and that is all that really matters. |
Originally Posted by Dyce
(Post 33899035)
...
My confusion is in how he thinks they're going to meet this goal - personally I think it's all investor talk and marketing hype that has no foundation in reality. Probably buys him a couple more years in charge and some more compensation though. Now I will say that our UC offerings have definitely improved over the past few months, which defies logic when we see how terrible inflight offerings have become regardless of good/bad service. Some of the photos in this thread and the Let's Eat thread just defy any type of defense. I'm still reeling from that image of the two lonely egg white bites with their sad red sausage companions, haphazardly scattered on the plate. I've seen farmers arrange their animal feed to look more appealing. |
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 33898983)
They've been continually expanding and they are a very popular choice for the destinations they serve. The business model is "fly private for the price of coach" and it's pretty much what they deliver. Not finding financials is not an excuse to dismiss them, especially given their recent expansion - but the point is, there is a viable business model with demand for a premium product and service.
Out of curiosity I thought I would try to book a random dummy transcon trip, say from the NYC area to SF. OK, the closest they come is HPN-OAK, but that is OK and might even be more convenient for some people than EWR/JFK-SFO, so fine. But there is nothing even close to a nonstop. From the route map it looks like maybe I could go HPN-MIA-DAL-LAS-OAK? And you think that is comparable to what the majors offer? But I tried to book it anyway. Nope, the ONLY place I can go from HPN is MIA, and only ONE time per day, five times per week. And for about $800! I saw a reference to "business class service" somewhere on the website so I tried to find a picture of an OS-comparable meal or further description of the on-board dining experience so many here are pining for. Couldn't find anything except a reference to "snacks and drinks" and a picture of someone holding a beverage. Maybe there is more hidden that I didn't find in the couple of minutes I searched, but if not, I am left to conclude their "business class service" is basically a beverage and snack basket. And finally, that teeny plane! I have flown private jets before and they can be pretty cramped (though there are some more luxurious versions to be sure), and I am not that big. Tellingly, I couldn't find any pics of the interior of the plane, so I assume that is because it is one of the cramped layouts they would prefer people can't see too easily (although again maybe there are cabin pics hiding somewhere on the website that I could not find during my quick tour). So I would probably actually be more comfortable flying commercial. Give me F in a 737 (or even WN in my A-List aisle seat towards the front) nonstop in six hours any day, even with limited service. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:20 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.