Infinite1K

Just google the title of the article and follow the links.

notquiteaff

When I googled the headline of the story earlier today, I came across a link on the WSJ site that gave me the entire story. I would post it here, but it likely won't help you -- when I pasted it into another browser, it retrieved only the first few paragraphs and then asked to log in. Not sure how the WSJ decides when to show the full article and when to ask for subscriptions.

11800506

Airliners.net has a few images of the new ads:

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...ain/5075433/1/

HeathrowGuy

The most telling item of the article is here:

"Mr. McKenna said the two carriers won't mesh their websites until 2012, and the rebranding effort at its airports and on its fleet won't be completed until 2013. Workers will get new uniforms in mid-2012. The interim ad campaign will give way to a new one in March 2012, after the two companies hope to be fully integrated."

This suggests the integration schedule is running a bit behind the initial -- and perhaps optimistic -- projections.

zaken

This is a very complicated merger from the branding stand point. As a global branding professional, I can tell you that several mistakes are already being made.
The new United hasn't decided which are the most important groups to consider: Shareholders, Employees or Customers.
As long as they haven't made that decision, both employees and customers are suffering, while the shareholders are being sold a million stories on the new brand.
The advertising here is secondary, and the airplanes are being painted way too soon.
The staff of both airlines insist it is still a two company situation, but we are all being sold on the idea of creating the biggest and best airline in the world!
When, where, why, how, no one knows, and no one talks.
Leaving all of us in the dark is the worst they can do.
So we are paying the price, and they will lost customers without a doubt!

UA-NYC

Wow - that is truly pathetic. "We have low fares, come to our web site". How asiprational for the leading global carrier.

eeebee

I was watching the Angels/Dodgers spring training game today, and noticed a United ad on one of those rotating ad signs behind home plate. It was basically just the name/logo that you see at the bottom of the above ads... the United name in all caps with the CO globe in a square to the right of it.

jss

Another missed opportunity--just like the livery--bland and boring. Any yes I know it is just advertising (and the livery is just paint) but you gotta wonder who is making such poor choices.

UA-NYC

I think the true creative force behind this campaign is none other than (drumroll please)...SMI/J! Just like the "new livery" and "custom font logo".

"Directive #1 - focus on price! and our web site!"

flaii

Hmm, yeah, I wish the ads would make a stronger statement of "who is the new United" and "what does it stand for." Getting the lowest price on the website seems to be a category norm. Here's hoping there's more to this campaign!

UA1K4EVER

Gershwin without the 'quirky' graphic art would be less 'impressionistic' and a bit dissonant, but I am please that good ol' George will survive!

BayAreaPilot

Great, more crappy CO branding. Will we be able to "Ask Alex™ for help" on the new united.com?

ZenFlyer

If only that were true, LOL! The only thing they are advertising in this case is the fact that the website -- versus other travel websites -- is the place to get the lowest United fare.

vandalby

I think it's actually:

CLEAN.
SAFE.
RELIABLE.

Because, you know, cleanliness is more important than a safety culture.

greg99

Did I not notice it previously, or is it new that one of the 4 rotating "ads" (the RCC one time pass "ad") on the .bomb homepage now comes with a CO gold color scheme elsewhere on the page?

It was so jarring to me that I immediately came here to see if anyone else was talking about it.

Greg