Same here. I'm afraid that after this "test", "in response to customer feedback" it will be expanded systemwide.

Then again, maybe this is a "test" to see if other carriers follow and if none do, the Y meals will be reinstated.

Carrying the logic forward - the key is to fly UA only to get the status level you need and then fly OTHER carriers! Do NOT fly UA or you will be punishing yourself in the future for years!

Is that legal or possible. I though the whole point of "legal tender" currency is that it *must* be accepted for payments.

Exactly - a point I have made a couple of times in this thread. However, nobody seems to get it or care that it is really the key issue to all this.

We get it. It's been rebutted multiple times. See the posts regarding Forrester Research saying this is the stupidest move UA could have made - especially since *no other airline has matched this* the less price sensitve and more lucrative corporate flyer will go elsewhere. Save 50 bucks loose 200 bucks. I didn't realize this was rocket science. I'm not trying intentionally to be harsh, but your comment seems to mirror UA's thinking which is insane. Have you seen the number of posts and views this thread has received in less than a day or two! 1 percent agree, 99 would tell UA to go to heck.

Yes it is both legal and possible. The wording is: "Legal tender for all debts, public and private." If the service/product has already been rendered and you are repaying a debt, then cash must be accepted. However, in the case of a BOB, there has been no transaction prior to the money/product exchange, so there is no debt.

It's the exact same as gas stations saying they don't accept $100 bills. If there is a sign posted on the pump declaring the restrictions on payment types, then you paying with bills smaller than $100 is a condition of the sale. If, however, there is no sign and you pump your gas and then go inside to pay when the cashier says "oh, we don't take $100's," then that is wrong. Only after there has been a debt created is all cash legal tender. Prior to the creation of that debt, the seller is free to place any restrictions they want on the form of payment accepted.

None of the details have been communicated. If I can serve a drink and 3 refills ORD-GRR, I don't see why there can't be refills on these flights too. ^

I call damage control on the "test". Nothing has been presented as a test to us. However, I hope it is a test and goes away quickly.

Plenty of airlines don't accept any cash.

Co
 

Funny how in the CO forum they are only complaining about the number of hot meals they will be served. Read for yourself. My thought is accumulate CO and burn UA miles now.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=857336

Has this PR gem from USA Today been posted yet, complete with references to this very thread? I tried a cursory check of the thread but it's easy to get lost:

Fliers fume over United's new meal fees

By Ben Mutzabaugh, USA TODAY

United's decision to end free meals on certain flights – including on some trans-Atlantic routes – appears to have struck a chord with frequent-fliers.

United sent a memo to its workers Monday detailing the changes, which included the elimination of free meals for coach-class customers flying between United's Washington Dulles hub and Europe. Also eliminated: complimentary meal service in domestic business class. The changes will come in phases starting this fall.

By early Tuesday morning, the memo was posted in its entirety on the forums of several aviation-related websites – and readers were quick to weigh in with their thoughts on the changes.

"Statistically speaking, it's one of the – if not the hottest – topics in many years," says frequent-flier guru Randy Petersen, publisher of InsideFlyer magazine. "In a single day nearly 35,000 frequent fliers read about this topic and nearly 600 have added comments. That's a lot of buzz for a single topic."

http://tinyurl.com/66z74d

Now up to 685 replies and 45,499 views ;)

GOD BLESS RANDY!!!

The point being - UA your huge honkin' sophsticated customer base is [profanity removed] OUTRAGED. Good luck shareholders. I hope you feel comfy!

At the end of the year, United will evaluate the results of the trial and determine next steps.

Wow! Thanks United. That's a great idea. Guess what? I'm doing that too! As a trial, I'm moving all of my business over to CO (and some NW and DL) for the rest of the year and will evaluate *my* results and determine next steps.

Two way street, baby... two way street.

The USA Today article appears quite fair IMHO, although I note the writer didn't (or couldn't?) get a quote from a UA rep. I can hardly wait for their PR offensive. :p

I'm guessing there are one or two FTers being quoted, right? :)

The writer was obviously on deadline, which must be why he used "struck a chord" when he obviously meant "struck a nerve." Picky but I'm the father of a copy editor... ;)

Great thoughts as usual from our own illustrious RP. ^ ^

OK, I guess I can understand switching for TATL. Although I still will take E+ over any European carrier in Y.

But I don't understand the switch to CO. CO is a fine airline. But the only domestic change on UA is for domestic C. CO doesn't even offer domestic C. And with the difficulty in upgrading on CO, you will most likely be sitting in a cramped Y seat, albeit with a (free) cold sandwich. Switching to AA over this I can understand, but not any other domestic carrier.

I don't understand. Being in LA, this shouldn't affect you at all, unless you fly LAX-ORD. How will OW be better?

I would think that it's a little early to determine that no other airline has matched this move.

The lucrative corporate flyer will not go elsewhere because they will have little choice under their lucrative corporate contracts.

My father experienced this on his IAD-FRA flight last night. His comment was "United quit serving meals in coach!" followed by, "Can you upgrade me on my return flight" (note that I didn't know his flight info so couldn't upgrade him on the outbound). The interesting part is he equated BOB with not serving a meal (which is technically correct). Just a data point.

Correction: My father was behind the times and was actually complaining about paying for alcohol. My apologies.

Ummmm, they haven't made the change yet.