cesco.g

Re: Investors Relations.
Some FTs might have a link to folks holding large numbers of UA shares. Inform them about the madness of this decision against their best customer and ask these investors to put the pressure on UA.

NYC1

UAL's 5% or greater beneficial owners (from UAL's proxy) can be found here:

http://www.tenkwizard.com/filing.php...l=87&back=2&g=

and continue here:
http://www.tenkwizard.com/filing.php...nt=1&back=3&g=

cblaisd

I just made my phone call to customer relations. Hope everyone else has too!

Also, I posted thread to the Only Randy Petersen board asking if he would weigh in with this, but still no response. Any of you know if Randy's out of town or ???

767-322ETOPS

I'm trying to book a trip to Seoul (Inchon) but UACNXN only has Kimpo in its database. Does anyone know a if there is there a way around this?

------------------
Who is John Galt?
------------------

UALover7

I have Microsoft Frontpage (however, dont let me get started on that monopoly!) 2000, and would be happy to help and/or improve to looks and organazation at www.saveunitedconnection.com .

If you would like to see a sample of my work, please visit www.shuti.org , a website I created to protest early start times in high school (I could be a lawyer, eh?).

If you need or want my help, please contact me at [email protected] , but fast, I'm going out of town the 30th. I'll be happy to pitch in plenty of hours, no charge !

MBS MillionMiler

Not a problem, 767...Just use SEL. The problem is, the software itself doesn't recognize new airports like Inchon as it is transfered from the actual reservation system, so it displays it as blank...But rest assured your reservation will be to the right airport.

I have this same problem when I book to PVG (Shanghai)...It still only recognizes SHA.

If you are still leary, call reservations once you book the ticket and they will tell you that indeed your ticket is for INC (or whatever it is, sorry, I don't know the new code for Seoul)...And have them fax you a copy of it.

cblaisd

Another possible tack to take when communicating with UA our displeasure with this action: Along with some others on this thread, I would be willing to pay for the use of the UA Cxn software. And I think that there are a number of other of UA's best and most frequent customers who would do the same. UA could choose to market this as a "Premium" service. Their support costs could go down and their profits could go up. I suspect that lots of very experienced UA flyers would take them up on the offer; and these are likely the folks who need much less "support" because they understand the rules and practices. Now, I would prefer that the software remain both free and functional (even if it's never upgraded) but if there has to be some "give" UA could save face, maybe make a little money, and satisfy with this sort of compromise many/most of us who lament this loss.


[This message has been edited by cblaisd (edited 06-27-2001).]

EPS

I noticed a fare I was interested in had dropped ... both Travelocity and Expedia showed the "new" fare, but United's web site stubbornly refused to give it to me, and kept offering the old one. With UC 3.0, I had no problem getting the right price. I went over to a CTO to ticket it (no problems there), and also to get a itinerary card and receipt for another trip booked on the web site. The receipt didn't show the complete fare calculation!

Why is United's web site, er, ITN so f---ed up for bookings??? It's much, much worse than it was even a few months ago! I am getting soooooooo frustrated with it!!! It spazzes out all the time ... I get Oracle errors, occasional JavaScript errors ... I find myself having to call the web support number (which I never had to do in the past), only to be told "we're having temporary problems" or "we'll look into it" (of course, they never actually seem to).

Why is United trying so hard to drive away revenue customers? Are they trying to fail so US Airways will buy them out?


[This message has been edited by EPS (edited 06-27-2001).]

kokonutz

Since openeing the doors on Monday, there have been just over 100 Unique Visitors to www.saveunitedconnection.com

Anyone here active in rec.travel.air or any other travel forums who could spread the word, please do so!!!!

MBS MillionMiler

Matt,

Just wanted to offer my word of thanks for setting up this site and for everything else you've done...I too would be glad to contribute towards the $ you have fronted for your efforts. Please let me know if I can help in any way...In the mean time, I'm still writing/calling and doing whatever else I can, in a non-expenditure aspect.

Just hoping we can beat this!

Regards,

MBS PremExec

Dub

I was wondering if any of our UA friends who hang out on FT have any input on this issue? I have had three different form letter replys from UA, all of which fall into the category of "in order to serve you better, we are downgrading our service".

hobson

Well,
I'm not sure I can call it true "progress" because I don't detect any serious headway being made, but this reply I receivef from our buddy "Greg" at least makes it appear he read me e-mail.

I sent back a note and asked him whether any of this meant they are or would re-evaluate the decision.

Also, it sounds like Jane Costello from the WSJ expects to run her "story / column" on this topic in the next week or so.


Hello Steve,

Thank you for the follow-up.

Our senior management is currently aware of our passenger's frustrations
due to the discontinuation of the United Connections software. We are
tracking all of the responses sent to our attention which will be
compiled into a report that will be shared with the interested
individuals internally.

As you sent your earlier message to Mr. Goodwin, he is also aware of
your comments and dissatisfaction with our decision.

We continue to make improvements to our website on a daily basis. Great
strides have been made in the last couple of years in all areas of the
website and we're proud to be pioneers and innovators.

We appreciate the time you have taken to share your feedback with us on
this issue and hope to retain you as a valued customer within United
Airlines.

Regards,

Greg

cesco.g

After the e-mails, yesterday I followed up with regular mail letters to Goodwin, Dutta and Atkinson. I also sent a copy of the letters to the GM and to the Sales Manager(whom I know) of UA Germany asking for their support. Finally, I faxed a letter to UA WHQ investors relations.

Sofar, just received the canned reply from Milobsky.

The reply Hobson got from UA-Greg is encouraging, it seems the decision is up for review if a sufficient numbers of compaints are hitting their desks.!

Keep the good fight up!

[This message has been edited by cesco.g (edited 06-27-2001).]

UA1kMFR

Add my name to the list of ual flyers who got the form e-mail from Milobsky on this matter. Dosen't anyone have access to a UAL company phone book with the internal numbers so we can also telephone?

Milobsky said, as many of you know by now all the great features will be coming to ual.com. Yea right.

By mid July I'll be 1k again, the fastest ever. Remind me why?





------------------
UA1K, m/m AA/DL,
Hilton Diamond, Hyatt Plat., Starwood Gld.

mjm

I had a call from Rafer Guzman (sp?) at the WSJ last night and we chatted for a bit about this. He had a printout of the thread in hand and I encouraged him to contact some of you who use the software more for bookings than I do. He said he would talk to JAne Costello and either handle it himself or pass it over to her depending on their conversation. There is a possibility no story will occur of course, but if it does it will likely be out on 6 July. I urged him to beat the 20 July deadline and he seemed to indicate it would be possible if the decision to run the story were taken. He had gotten my number from Jesse Drucker so I think there is a bit of interest stirring.

Jesse Drucker also told me that a related article had appeared on Monday but I told him I did not have the text and would he post it to me. He did so and I am attching it at the end of this note. All and full credits due to the WSJ for the reposting of this text are acknowledged.

-----------------------------

06/25/2001
The Wall Street Journal
B1
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

Airlines want customers to book tickets on the Internet because it cuts
costs, but recent moves by carriers fly in the face of that goal.

Some airlines are eliminating the option of holding a reservation for 24
hours without paying for it when it is made online -- even while they offer
this option to telephone customers. Consumer advocates see this as a further
erosion of airline customer service, even as airline executives went before
Congress last week touting their joint customer-service plan.

By that plan, hatched in 1999 amid public outcry about declining airline
standards and threatened passenger-rights legislation, included a pledge to
give customers either a 24-hour hold or a refund on an otherwise
nonrefundable ticket purchase within 24 hours. But a spokeswoman for the Air
Transport Association, the largest U.S. airline trade group, says the
12-point plan doesn't apply to the Internet; instead, the plan specifically
states that the 24-hour promises apply to a "telephone reservation."

Northwest Airlines eliminated the option to hold reservations on its Web
site this spring. UAL Corp.'s United Airlines, Delta Air Lines and Southwest
Airlines already disallowed Internet holds.Other carriers have made some
fares available for instant-purchase only. And the new online travel agency
Orbitz LLC, which is owned by the nation's five largest carriers, opened for
business this month with no holds and no refunds.

Consumer advocates think that the airlines' explanation that the Internet
isn't covered in their pledge is splitting hairs. The 24-hour hold, they
say, permits a prospective passenger to shop around or check plans with
friends and relatives. These critics say that eliminating the hold for
Internet customers undermines, or even violates completely, the intent of
the airlines' customer-service pledge.

"It's talking out of both sides of their mouth," says Scott Reed, a
spokesman for the National Airline Passengers Coalition, which argues that
fares and rules should be the same whether consumers are using the phone or
Internet.

Joe Brancatelli, a consultant for online travel agency biztravel.com, is
equally scathing. "Are the airlines taking away your rights as they're
trying to claim they're giving you protections? Of course they are," he
says.

Some airlines that don't offer a 24-hour hold for Web customers -- United,
for one -- contend they are in compliance with their customer-service pledge
because they allow refunds within 24 hours of bookings. But a Delta
spokeswoman says that airline's Web site permits neither a hold nor a
refund.

Why would the airlines risk new brickbats from customers? The Northwest
situation is telling.

Northwest says it removed the ability to hold online reservations because of
the costs of holding seat inventory and paying transaction fees charged to
the carrier by computer-reservations systems that process bookings. "We . .
. have gone to all the online travel sites that offer Northwest tickets and
said, `You book on Northwest, you buy,'" says Northwest spokesman Al Lenza.

But Mr. Lenza also notes that only about 5% to 6% of customers took
advantage of the hold option when it was available. In fact, indications are
that the features are easy to do away with because they have never been a
No. 1 attraction for fliers.

Orbitz spokeswoman Carol Jouzaitis says Orbitz got off the ground without
allowing a 24-hour hold because prelaunch consumer feedback showed that
Internet customers had other priorities -- electronic alerts on flight
status, for example, and news updates with pertinent information about
airports and passengers' destinations. Ms. Jouzaitis adds, however, that
Orbitz is now considering offering the 24-hour-hold.

Some third-party travel Web sites such as Microsoft Corp.'s Expedia.com and
Sabre Holdings Corp.'s Travelocity.com do offer the option to hold tickets
for 24 hours, but that's at the carriers' discretion. "We have different
agreements with different carriers. But for most carriers, you can hold a
reservation for 24 hours on our site," says Christina Kozloff, a product
manager for Expedia.

The inconsistencies among carriers confuse even airline employees. When
first asked, a Delta spokesman said the airline gives passengers until
midnight the following day to hold tickets online, in sync with the
customer-service initiatives, he said. When that didn't appear to be the
case on the airline's Web site, he corrected himself: No online holds
allowed.

Notwithstanding the confusion, the Transportation Department's inspector
general, Kenneth Mead, told Congress last week that airlines were generally
meeting the passenger-service commitments they made in 1999 -- so far.

"The real issue now," he said, "is whether the commitment will have staying
power or is a temporary phenomenon, the viability of which is dependent on
continuous congressional pressure."
---------------------------------------------

Mike