mkrecek

I have good vision, but I am sitting at the airport as I type this and I am looking at the CO globe. Every time I look at it, the gold bands look blurry, but if I focus on them, they look like they are supposed to. Am I the only person with this problem

jmp

It's by design. It's supposed to give the impression of a spinning globe...
-JMP

Grace B

This is an absolute disgrace!

JetAway

What is this suppose to mean?

kenhawk

When UA's new livery was introduced, the company never announced that they would paint all planes at once. What they did say was that they would paint them during a certain maintenance check, to save money.

HeathrowGuy

This is correct, and we see the outcome of that decision 6 years later when barely over half the fleet has been repainted. To be sure, the mix of UA liveries would definitely not have helped United's "case" in keeping its colors post-merger.

sbm12

Well, when you MUST have 300 planes converted in a 2 day span sometimes a sticker is all you can muster. They are actually repainting them for real as they cycle through maintenance and the final ones look just fine.

Arbitration between whom? Are you suggesting that some disgruntled customers have the right to sue to have the carrier change the logo? Or that any union group is going to include the logo in their next contract negotiations cycle?

The companies have agreed on what it will be. There is nothing to arbitrate as there is no disagreement.

Actually, it does. The known name plus a rebranding effort of said name can result in a significant marketing win for the combined company.

:-:

Skiff

I was under the impression that this was done because while the airline carries the US Airways name, most of the management, pricing structure, etc, remained America West.

radonc1

Well...
If we were trying to be "punny", she should have said

"This is an absolute bgrace "

UAL awesome

Not sure, this is what I read on sites like Airliners.net, etc, but it does sound somewhat plausible to throw the HP guys a bone.

The decision was made by the two CEOs behind closed doors, with no help from marketing experts or anything of the sort. That's not how you run a company and this frankenstein plane is extremely disappointing and cheap. The only people proud of it are its parents, Glenn & Jeff.

SaveTheTulip

Despite the comments of both Tilton and Smisek that they have gotten to know each other well over the last two years, there is no evidence that at any point during the merger process anybody at either company consulted a marketing expert . Instead Tilton and Smisek acted like boys trading baseball cards. Tilton: "I'll give you the CEO position and let you keep your logo if the airline is still called United and United shareholders [me most importantly since I own the most] get a majority share in the merged company." Smisek: "Ok, as long as we keep the CO logo and the livery so we and all the passengers know who's really running the show."

I found a great AP Wirephoto image from 1974 when United introduced its tulip livery:

The caption reads: There was no extensive research study or analysis of liveries and logos in this merger. Instead two CEOs gave us a frankenplane. I'm not saying they don't know how to run their respective companies, but they don't know beans about brand loyalty.

I've read and heard from United employees that the merged United will use the CO livery and logo because "they [CO employees] have to get something." They're keeping Smisek who has been explicit in his comments to CO employees that United will be forced to become more like CO, Houston will become the largest hub of the world's largest airline, and CO employees will keep their jobs and their seniority. What more do they want?

Grace B

Well, they're both from Houston, aren't they?

Kurt

What a great photo; that's awesome you found it with the caption still attached. That livery looked even better when they dropped the stripes one "notch" and made the United logo bigger.

rjque

That's a funnny assumption. How do you know that? Were you part of the decision process?

steve64

The SOC you mention is the Operating Certificate for America West, thus the call sign of "Cactus" for all aircraft operating under that certificate.

The HP/US merger was different from most. One airline wasn't purchased by another. Both were purchased by a holding company.
The SEC had to designate a "surviving carrier" (I think for tax purposes). They determined the surviving carrier to be America West. The holding company was formed by HP management, using funds from investors rounded up by HP, to be based in Tempe AZ with HP Management at the helm.
HP elected to "sell" itself to this new holding company (LCC).
"Old" US had to sell themselves to LCC per the plan they had submitted to the Bankruptcy Court. At the time, this was the only plan they had to exit from bankruptcy.

"Cactus" and "AWE" were not bones thrown to HP employees, they are how the cookie crumbled. The cookie that crumbled being the "old/east" US.
If there were any bones thrown, then it would be LCC/HP deciding to market itself as US Airways. A very large bone indeed, but there are many more "east" employees to feed than "west".

This UA/CO merger is interesting. At least the way they're playing it to the public right now, from both a financial and marketing perspective, it looks as if the 2 companies are truly merging. If one has to be determined, I wonder who is the "surviving carrier" ?