UA introduces BOB in Y on TATL flights out of IAD [decision rescinded]

[TON_UK]

Should we pack our own pillow, and blanket? To reduced the cost.....The world is getting weird..

[sqforever]

One of the thing which I've always been bewildered about is the fact that why is it when Airlines like EasyJet and RyanAir can make profits out of their spectacular low fares, and none of the American Airlines could do so?

Whats exactly so special about the Americans exactly?

Please, don't mix up the American people with the business models of US airlines.

[up and away]

My dad nearly booked a flight with them for October 12, I only read this on upgradetraveller about two houers before he would have booked that flight (possibly on UA).

Luckily this finally convinced him that he won't save any money by flying UA and now LH will be getting his business


But I fear many people are going to go into their trap, especially here in Europe where this new level of hostility towards the customer wasn't even mentioned in the media!

[flyboy777]

Does that also cover their PS flights?

Yup

PS = Poor Sucker (paid for business and just get a better seat)

No! United are keeping full service in United First & United Business on their P.S. flights. All other 3 class domestic flights will feature complimentary drinks to UB with the UE BOB options. Hardly a big deal since domestic 3 class services are only the international widebodies flying positionals right?

Only change to P.S. flights is that the 2nd meal service will become a drinks service.

Effective Sept. 2

North America United Economy® (UE) -All Markets

• Expanding a la carte snacks for purchase to flights between 760 -1149
miles (approximately 2-3 hours in duration) as a result of successful testing
in select markets. Along with the expansion, we're removing complimentary
biscoff and pretzels as data from those tests confirmed that the a
la carte offering appeals to our customers and they are willing to pay for
snacks of higher value.

• Continuing test of a fresh Buy on Board offering along with the current
snack box on flights between 1440 - 2099 miles (approximately 3.5 - 5 hours
in duration). Testing limited to ORD-LAX-ORD and DEN-IAD-DEN.

Effective Oct. 1

Increasing Buy on Board Prices

• Shelf-stable items increase from $5 to $6.

• Fresh items increase from $7 to $9.

Offering Two-Class Service on North America Three-Class Airplanes

• United First® service remains the same.

• A combined BOB service will be offered in United Business® (UB) and
United Economy® (UE).

•Customers in UB will receive complimentary beverages and BOB offering.

• Staffing will be adjusted to FAA minimums.

Buy on Board Offered Out of IAD to Europe (except KWI)

• Replacing complimentary meals in UE with BOB fresh and snack box
offerings.

• Economy staffing breakpoints for all aircraft will be adjusted to current
North America BOB staffing guidelines.

Eliminate Second Service in p.s. Market

• Removing the pre-arrival snack service and replacing with a beverage service
in response to flight attendant and customer feedback.

[cawhite]

I’ve been following the thread on this subject on the UA forum on Flyertalk since it first started early last week. IMO, UA has really jumped to the lead position in the race to the bottom.

It isn't just international. UA 3-class domestic business will also be BOB

Those in 3-class domestic business will receive the following (per the internal memo & press release):

United Business: Domestic, United Business: Standard meal service will be replaced with a variety of complimentary offerings.

• On flights between two and three hours, customers will choose from candy, chips, cookies or nut mix.
  
• On flights between three and five hours, customers can choose from among four snack boxes.
  
• For flights longer than five hours, sandwiches, salads, breakfast, if applicable, and snack boxes will be available.

This is really beyond idiotic. The average incremental revenue from this must be somewhat less than $10 per pax, considering not pax will buy something. As a percentage of ticket revenue per TATL Y or intra-US J, this is miniscule. Why on earth not just raise fares or surcharges by $20 and save a whole lot of customer goodwill??

Absolutely. Since when did $20 made a difference in airfares anyway?

It’s a far bigger picture than an expected revenue increase from the sale of BoB (or even by raising fares by $20), but rather a reduction in costs. The cost reduction isn’t going to be just from the reduction in catering charges, it’s also going to be from the crew reductions...

… Oh, one of the things seems to be that they attract such sweeping generalizations from people?

Should we pack our own pillow, and blanket? To reduced the cost.....The world is getting weird..

That memo already came out w/r/t domestic flights in Y… I won't go near one of those blankets (or Y pillows) if I can avoid it, anyway. In a word...ick.

My dad nearly booked a flight with them for October 12, I only read this on upgradetraveller about two houers before he would have booked that flight (possibly on UA).

Luckily this finally convinced him that he won't save any money by flying UA and now LH will be getting his business

But I fear many people are going to go into their trap, especially here in Europe where this new level of hostility towards the customer wasn't even mentioned in the media!

There's a nifty feature of the booking portion which indicates meal service on a flight. For the affected flights, this now indicates "food for purchase" rather than dinner/breakfast or lunch/snack, etc. It's not as if the information isn't there to be found. It's also now on the UA website. The people I feel bad for are those who already booked their tickets thinking they'd have a meal provided similar to past experiences (although the "my itineraries" page is also showing the updates as well). As for relying on the media for information of this sort...

[inix]

Oh, one of the things seems to be that they attract such sweeping generalizations from people?

Check your facts. Southwest Airlines is a profitable airline, and guess what, it's an American airline -- the one whose business model was copied and adapted by Ryanair, by the way.

Thanks for the note. I guess idiotic me needed that. Perhaps I should add Major American Airlines sans Southwest.

[inix]

Please, don't mix up the American people with the business models of US airlines.

I meant American Airlines... Maybe I need to relearn my English.... Anyone willing to tutor me for free?

[jjpb3]

That memo already came out w/r/t domestic flights in Y… I won't go near one of those blankets (or Y pillows) if I can avoid it, anyway. In a word...ick.

My sentiments exactly.

[jjpb3]

Thanks for the note. I guess idiotic me needed that. Perhaps I should add Major American Airlines sans Southwest.

I think you mean legacy airlilnes.

I think it's disengenuous when you rant about US-based airlines to take away Southwest. Southwest is definitely a major American airline (you might want to use lower case on 'airlines' from now on, as upper case on the second word designates a specific carrier [American Airlines, or AA]). After all, WN has the highest market capitalization of the airlines based in the US.

If you want to dwell on the legacy airlines, you do have to recognize the fact that they inherited many things from their history of being around as the regulatory and competitive environment changed, as well as give a nod to the fact that there are differences in their business models (CO's decision not to offer First Class and to offer free Y meals, for example).

In short, critique the current decision of the airline in question, rather than trying to extrapolate way beyond what a thoughtful look at the data supports.

[inix]

I think you mean legacy airlilnes.

I think it's disengenuous when you rant about US-based airlines to take away Southwest. Southwest is definitely a major American airline (you might want to use lower case on 'airlines' from now on, as upper case on the second word designates a specific carrier [American Airlines, or AA]). After all, WN has the highest market capitalization of the airlines based in the US.

If you want to dwell on the legacy airlines, you do have to recognize the fact that they inherited many things from their history of being around as the regulatory and competitive environment changed, as well as give a nod to the fact that there are differences in their business models (CO's decision not to offer First Class and to offer free Y meals, for example).

In short, critique the current decision of the airline in question, rather than trying to extrapolate way beyond what a thoughtful look at the data supports.

Thanks for the English lesson, but did you mean disingenuous? I don't think there is anything wrong when we're talking about American airlines san's Southwest. Its like comparing AirAsia vis-a-vis MH. One makes profits year in year out. The other? Money getting dipped away into someone else's pockets. But both are Major Airlines. But I would think MH should be placed in the likes of TG, SQ, CX etc. The major legacy carrier, to put it in your words.

I continue to have my complete disgust about legacy American airlines in General anyway. The fact that they have a certain heritage does not reduce the fact that they have been seen as un-innovative, loud and offer poor service, especially over the past decade.

Besides, I think we can say that the Europeans arn't having it better when it comes to rules and I don't see that many of them going bankrupt yet. On a final note, American airlines isn't really cheap. Even prior to the hike in oil prices, I've never been able to find ticket prices (even with southwest) that is able to match intra-European hops, and I haven't even started talking about easyJet.

[Kiwi]

No! United are keeping full service in United First & United Business on their P.S. flights. All other 3 class domestic flights will feature complimentary drinks to UB with the UE BOB options. Hardly a big deal since domestic 3 class services are only the international widebodies flying positionals right?

Only change to P.S. flights is that the 2nd meal service will become a drinks service.

Thanks for correcting me.

But I disagree that it is not a big deal. Some of us hunt out those flights - seats are better than 2-class first, you get business class on a business class award from non-UA FFP instead of being downgraded to economy class, lower upgrade cost, etc.

[Kiwi]

The people I feel bad for are those who already booked their tickets thinking they'd have a meal provided similar to past experiences (although the "my itineraries" page is also showing the updates as well).

Me too. On other airlines this would be treated as an involuntary downgrade. Will UA be compensating these pax? (Just curious - fortunately I don't have any such flights booked more through good luck than anything else.)

[KeithMEL]

On other airlines this would be treated as an involuntary downgrade.

Are you sure? I thought it's only considered an invol when the actual class of travel is changed, not when the service in the same COS is altered.

[Kiwi]

Are you sure? I thought it's only considered an invol when the actual class of travel is changed, not when the service in the same COS is altered.

Hmmm now that I think of it the examples I was thinking of all had a change of cabin name (even if you kept the same seat).

[jjpb3]

Thanks for the English lesson

Why, you're welcome. I'm glad you were able to take an English lesson from my posts (notwithstanding my spelling error; thanks for the correction ), but actually, I was trying to offer you some business reasons for your original post:

One of the thing which I've always been bewildered about is the fact that why is it when Airlines like EasyJet and RyanAir can make profits out of their spectacular low fares, and none of the American Airlines could do so?

Whats exactly so special about the Americans exactly?

I took your question as one of genuine inquiry about the low profitability of US legacy carriers. My first suggestion was to make sure that you frame your question correctly, as having the wrong framing is one of the best ways to get to the incorrect answer. It isn't national origin that offers the relevant reason, which was what that post was implying.

Then you mysteriously locked on to size as the categorizing variable, when there was such a glaring counterexample.

Finally I thought you were beginning to see that it may have something to do with the inherited (hence, 'legacy'; note that it doesn't have the positive connotation of 'heritage') cost structures and business systems that grew from the common regulatory history and maintenance of a domestic-plus-international route network. But then came your bizarre riff on MH and AK, neither of which went through the kind of history that US legacy carriers did, and so cannot really provide a clue about why US legacy carriers have found it difficult to attain consistent profitability.

I now see my original error. The inquiry I thought I saw was really just an old-fashioned rant:

I continue to have my complete disgust about legacy American airlines in General anyway. The fact that they have a certain heritage does not reduce the fact that they have been seen as un-innovative, loud and offer poor service, especially over the past decade.

Loudness? Is that a driver of profitability? Oh wait, this wasn't a business question, just a rant.

I was first puzzled, but now am no longer surprised, by the dazzling* insight that prices haven't completely equalized in markets with different route lengths, densities and structural features:

On a final note, American airlines isn't really cheap. Even prior to the hike in oil prices, I've never been able to find ticket prices (even with southwest) that is able to match intra-European hops, and I haven't even started talking about easyJet.

*As dazzling as any blinding glimpses of the obvious that I've encountered in the past.



If you calm down enough from your rant and become more serious about your original inquiry, you might want to read through Flying Off Course by Doganis -- very thoughtful analysis of why the airline industry, particularly in the US, has the enigmatic quality of spectacular growth coupled with low profitability. It has a lot to do with cost, which UA is trying to strip out and for which, as cawhite pointed out, the BOB policy is serving as a smokescreen.