Are E+ seats devaluing E- customers' value?
#16



Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Programs: AA Platinum Pro, AC *S, Marriott Gold Elite, Hyatt Explorist
Posts: 9,791
Originally Posted by JS
Sorry, but everyone is wrong. 
The #1 reason why UA cannot take the extra space of E+ and spread it across the entire cabin is because of the fixed location of the overwing exits.
AA's now defunct MRTC was essentially an E+ in front of the exit row and another E+ behind the exit row. UA is E+ only in front of the exit row and not behind the exit row.
You can't remove half a row in front of the exit row and another half a row behind it. Rows are integral.
I don't remember if the large planes such as a 747 had more than one row removed for E+, but this is certainly the case with the narrowbody planes.

The #1 reason why UA cannot take the extra space of E+ and spread it across the entire cabin is because of the fixed location of the overwing exits.
AA's now defunct MRTC was essentially an E+ in front of the exit row and another E+ behind the exit row. UA is E+ only in front of the exit row and not behind the exit row.
You can't remove half a row in front of the exit row and another half a row behind it. Rows are integral.

I don't remember if the large planes such as a 747 had more than one row removed for E+, but this is certainly the case with the narrowbody planes.
Cheers
#17


Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: HNLICNSFO
Posts: 681
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-.
#18

Join Date: May 2005
Location: PIT/CNX
Programs: UA dirt... and btw, THE innovator of the phrase 'gate lice'. Yeah, that's right.
Posts: 2,874
Originally Posted by Miles Heighway
So, I was traveling on UA, JFK-NRT-SIN, last month. The outgoing flight was a bit empty (since it was smacked on the Lunar new year, so presumably most East Asians usually present on these routes were at home instead of flying). As an elite, I was seated in the E+ section of the 777, and it was less than quarter filled. Indeed, I got the entire 5 seater in the middle to myself (which was all the better since at that time I was nursing a bad cold and needed to lie down). However, I noted that the E- section was pretty jam packed like sardines.
On the return flight, the E+ section was about 3 quarters filled, but again the E- section was packed with almost no free seats left.
So I was thinking that since having E+ actually reduces the number of "regular" E- seats, this increase the pax density in the non-elite section, and thus "devaluing" (ok, UA didn't promise you low density seating) their seats. I mean, if there is no E+ and just regular E all the way, the pax distribution will be more evenly spreaded out.
What do you all think? Are the regular GM getting shafted?
On the return flight, the E+ section was about 3 quarters filled, but again the E- section was packed with almost no free seats left.
So I was thinking that since having E+ actually reduces the number of "regular" E- seats, this increase the pax density in the non-elite section, and thus "devaluing" (ok, UA didn't promise you low density seating) their seats. I mean, if there is no E+ and just regular E all the way, the pax distribution will be more evenly spreaded out.
What do you all think? Are the regular GM getting shafted?
#19
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SAN
Programs: UA GS/1K/MM, VA Gold, DL Gold
Posts: 5,581
Originally Posted by vprp
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-.
[ducks]
#20
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto YYZ UA-1K 1MM,QFgold
Programs: Royal Ambassador/ SPG Platinum 75/Marriott gold
Posts: 14,283
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
It does help that AC's plans are falling apart
#21
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 28,758
Originally Posted by sadiqhassan
I kind of agree with the OP. Suppose you were flying route AAA-BBB and both AA and UA fly the route. UA has 10 rows of E+ and 10 rows of E-. AA has 22 rows of E. Both flights are about 60% full.
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.
#22



Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Programs: AA Platinum Pro, AC *S, Marriott Gold Elite, Hyatt Explorist
Posts: 9,791
Originally Posted by DenverBrian
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 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.
#23
Join Date: Feb 2006
Programs: UA 2P
Posts: 17
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.
#24




Join Date: May 2005
Location: Dulles, VA
Programs: United Airlines 1 MM, Marriott Life Titanium
Posts: 2,777
Originally Posted by DenverBrian
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 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.
#25




Join Date: May 2005
Programs: UA MM, AS Titanium, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 2,251
Yes, it often increases pax density in E-.
Yes, it therefore slightly devalues the E- product.
Yes, it is a good idea.
Yes, it therefore slightly devalues the E- product.
Yes, it is a good idea.
#26




Join Date: May 2004
Location: Portland, Oregon
Programs: AA EXP UA 2KMM AMB
Posts: 2,415
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.
E+ seats are provided as a perk, an added benefit for UA's best and frequent customers.
#27
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: SEA
Programs: UA 1P
Posts: 1,191
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.
#28


Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SUV
Programs: UA *G MM
Posts: 7,216
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.
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.
#29
Join Date: Jun 2004
Programs: united airlines
Posts: 4,967
Originally Posted by jef7
...E+ seats are provided as a perk, an added benefit for UA's best and frequent customers.
#30




Join Date: May 2004
Location: Portland, Oregon
Programs: AA EXP UA 2KMM AMB
Posts: 2,415
Originally Posted by itsme
It's not so much elitism as economics.
However, elitism, I believe is one of the most important components of UA's economics.

