It's the BOB product in domestic C, but provided at no cost to C passengers.

I agree - this was more than a little spooky given that I didn't send an email or write a letter to UA. Anybody have a clue about this? Seriously.

Hurray for UA for listening to, AND RESPONDING TO, feedback! ^

My wife (1P) got the e-mail. I (1K) didn't.

Neither of us contacted United regarding their stupid 'enhancement'. I've b****ed enough lately about 'enhancements' and didn't want to get red-flagged about something that doesn't affect me much.

I'm guessing it's simply a hastily drafted letter, perhaps originally designed to respond to the complainers and then some genius said "let's send it to everybody," although your thought also crossed Mrs. Fredd's mind.

It's just a mass email folks. To elites for sure, but probably others as well.

Not only codeshare, but TATL *revenue-sharing* partner LH probably *freaked* at the potential losses that UA would bring upon itself! :p

There was BOB on an trans-atlantic flight
 

In mid August, I was on a UA flight from LHR-SFO. Fortunately I was in C. The F/A announced for those passengers in Economy there would be a hot meal service and a light snack toward the end of the flight. For passengers in Y who would like a mid-flight meal, there was BOB that included both fresh and the snack boxes. I was surprised. And this was before the announced of their plans to sell meals. Maybe it was a test run!

I agree. UAL has become SO bush league in everything they do. I am embarrassed for them!

Like many, I have lurked on this thread since the beginning. I found the issue, including some of the histrionics in this thread (be happy with E+/FFP v the end is near/I'm not going to take it anymore), almost soap-opera like.

Like every large organization, UA management mis-stepped in a policy, was slow in realizing it, and now has to back-track/amend. I believe the primary catalysts for the change was probably the bad publicity (spurred on by this thread) from the premature leaking of the company's internal memo (first found here on FT) and the failure of competitors to follow.

The larger issue is short-term expectations between shareholders (increased stock price), employees (better compensation), and customers (lower prices/better service) are completely different and many times, diametrically opposed to each other. Tying one's compensation to stock price as UA's upper management has squares the circle of shortsightedness and exacerbates this mis-alignment of interests, resulting in increasing friction between these groups.

Given these enduring qualities, more issues will arise and the long-term health of the company is at risk. I just hope future FT threads debating these issues are as entertaining as this one was. With that I will say "Good night and good luck."

Well Bravo United for listening!

If they tested higher quality hot meals as BOB I think it would have gone better.

I'm pretty sure the majority of C is still upgrades.

What do you mean? You weren't swayed by the pictures of sumptuous cuisine used in the survey?


:D

Too bad I can't attach files to posts or I'd publish the survey I got that started this whole thing (I made a pdf of the entire survey ;) )... you should see some of the prices they were thinking about charging for a coach meal!!!!