I agree with nerd but the this thread is discussing the pax density in each cabin, not where UA can or can't place seats

Cheers

I definitely do think it increases pax density in E- or E. Whatever you want to call it. I've been on 777 flights where as mentioned, E+ was a third full. When going to the bathroom, you couldn't find an empty seat in E-.

If they chose any other airline, they'd be sitting in waht would be a United E- seat anyways. Yes, you could argue that if the whole coach section was E-, the pax would be more spread out, but rarely do I see flights where the pax density from E- to E+ varies much. I think it may have been more of an anomoly on your particular flight.

Passenger density is doubly increased in E-.....there are more pax/sq ft and the average intellegence is less. :p :D [ducks]

Well E+ works UA hooked me with those seats... I quickly went to 1K... and now 4 more in our office did the same...
It does help that AC's plans are falling apart ;)

That's where you lost me, right there. I haven't flown on a UA plane less than 80% full in three years.

I don't think UA's business model should be built on the 4 or 5 flights a week that might possibly go out at 60% capacity.

I was founding the example on the OPs statements. I rarely fly UA.

I fly on a lot of E170s from IND-ORD and the E- is usually always full and the E+ is about half filled. I have heard some ppl in E- complain to the flight attendants about why they can't move up. Usually some pax get moved up from E- to 1st or E+ because of baggage space or weight and balance.

On a domestic flight it's a rarety to find more than a handful of empty middle seats. But, if there are to be empty middle seats, they should be in E+. I firmly believe that unless you're an elite or pay for E+, you should not get a seat there unless every single seat in E- is filled up, and filled up first.

Yes, it often increases pax density in E-.

Yes, it therefore slightly devalues the E- product.

Yes, it is a good idea.

Unfortunately, the reality is that regular economy cabins of any airlines are expected to be packed like sardines. This is why premium cabins are offered for those willing to pay for a more comfortable experience.

E+ seats are provided as a perk, an added benefit for UA's best and frequent customers.

A lot of this assumes that non-elites don't get to sit in E+. On most flights I'm on, plenty of non-elites sit in E+. They don't get to pre-reserve it but the gate agent moves people around as he/she sees fit.

On SAS this has become an issue without offering more pitch for premium passengers intra-europe where the difference is food and drink. A typical MD-80 will have 4 rows of business and rows 5-14 as Economy Extra. On a recent flight there were 5-6 of us in 9 rows of Eco Extra while regular economy was quite full with only a handful of empty seats. But when regular economy fills up the eco extra cabin gets compressed to only a few rows. The extreme is one single empty row that I observed on BUD-CPH, which is presumably mostly a leisure route.

I suppose it it reasonable that the premium passengers get the extra space. However, on SAS elite status will not get you into the Eco Extra zone. Only a full fare ticket. You can in theory pay $600-$700 for ARN-LHR and still not get into the Eco Extra zone. The practice of denying water and guaranteeing sardine seating for pax who pay decent money is what is infurating.

UA's model is a bit more reasonable even though M fares can be quite expensive in some markets. In the winter season you can get M fares in the $600 range for IAD-LHR, which is not unreasonable.

What you say is correct, that is that "E+ seats are provided as a perk, an added benefit for UA's best and frequent customers." What you neglect to say, however, is that E+ seats are available not just to "UA's best and frequent customers" but also to those who while they may not be want to fork over the substantial premium to sit in first or business are willing to pay the supplement to promote from E- to E+. It's not so much elitism as economics.

True. My focus certainly ignored the latest UA moves in terms of opening up the availability of these seats to wider types of passengers attempting to increase revenues from these seats.

However, elitism, I believe is one of the most important components of UA's economics.