Why UA is not so bad IMHO

[shortfinals]

paffendorf
Founding SQTalker
Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Thread started on: Sep 8th, 2006, 6:54pm »

hi,
I'm not a great fan of US carriers, since i don't like their product neither their service.
But I have to say that UA is not so bad. Definitely a good experience!

The P.S. on the NYC-LAX is pretty nice, like the service and the product (especially if i consider that it's a domestic flight).

on my trip to and from MSY (Y upgraded with 500miles to F) i encountered 2 superb crews. I could say i've NEVER got a similar service in Europe when flying C/J shorthaul. I was impressed by the crew politeness: they were so attentive, professional and corteous... Catering needs probably to be improved (please, stop serving PASTA and RAVIOLI...).
All the flights were on time or in time!

Moreover, when i asked to take some pictures after landing in LAX (UA21 from NYC) and in MSY (UA278 from LAX), both the cockpit crews allowed me to do that. The UA21's captain gave me his personal business card and the UA "escutcheon" (is it right?) ... I had the possibility to ask him some things about 757 and he was so happy to answer me. Really impressive.

Luke.

jjpb3
Founding SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #1 on: Sep 8th, 2006, 7:54pm »

I agree with you, Luke. I've had very good flights with UA; I say they've been better than AA IME. I've enjoyed good crews, decent food, and smart decision about offering E+. I even had an FA keep my seat away from a E- seat poacher .

IFE needs improvement (but that goes for other transatlantic options such as BA and especially AA); the RCCs need a decent refreshment section; and they need to learn from AA on how to get better control of the gate lice . Finally, I wish they would reinstate flights between LHR and NYC.
« Last Edit: Sep 8th, 2006, 7:55pm by jjpb3 »


glam82
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #2 on: Sep 10th, 2006, 2:46pm »

I think the main problem with UA is the consistency. I have had excellent flight crews out of HNL, and terrible flight crews out of JFK. The whole experience of travel makes it a good airline or a bad one. I have always encountered rude check-in/gate agents in HNL and that sort of put me off flying with UA, especially since I have option to fly on NH. I have written in both complaint and complimentary letters to UA and it is good to know that they get back to me pretty fast, but if given the choice and if the difference in fares are not too great, I would prefer not to fly on UA. A plus though on UA is the upgrade to E+ and I think I read someone that that benefit is going soon.

jjpb3
Founding SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #3 on: Sep 10th, 2006, 4:19pm »
on Sep 10th, 2006, 2:46pm, glam82 wrote :A plus though on UA is the upgrade to E+ and I think I read someone that that benefit is going soon.

I read about that from someone who was referring to this post:

http://flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=599616

I hope your source is less reliable than the thread . Seems like a lot of speculation in the thread above, all based on one ill-informed phone agent.

KeithMEL1985
Founding SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #4 on: Sep 10th, 2006, 4:34pm »
on Sep 10th, 2006, 4:19pm, jjpb3 wrote :I read about that from someone who was referring to this post:

http://flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=599616

I hope your source is less reliable than the thread . Seems like a lot of speculation in the thread above, all based on one ill-informed phone agent.

Remember what happened to 'More Room Throughout Coach' on AA...

[shortfinals]

jjpb3
Founding SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #5 on: Sep 10th, 2006, 9:25pm »
on Sep 10th, 2006, 4:34pm, KeithMEL1985 wrote :Remember what happened to 'More Room Throughout Coach' on AA...

MRTC failed because it bet on leg space as the primary buying criteria for all Y passengers. AA found it could not sustain a price premium with such a non-segment-specific offer. The segment who buys primarily on price is just too big in the US domestic market.

E+, on the other hand, is aimed at either infrequent flyers who are willing to pay extra (thus the $299 E+ access fee) or at frequent flyers. It's a lot more targeted (and now that UA is increasingly enforcing the separation between E+ and E-, the execution is more consistent with the strategy), and has a better chance of earning a premium, either through the access fee or through FF loyalty.

I think it's not too unreasonable to contemplate that the privilege will remain at least for *G flyers. I do think E+ drives business towards UA. (Of course, I could very well be wrong.) On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if UA pulls the privilege from non-UA *S. I think E+ access would be one way to elicit some loyalty (through membership in Mileage Plus) from middle-tier *A flyers.
« Last Edit: Sep 10th, 2006, 9:25pm by jjpb3 »


KeithMEL1985
Founding SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #6 on: Sep 10th, 2006, 9:36pm »
on Sep 10th, 2006, 9:25pm, jjpb3 wrote :MRTC failed because it bet on leg space as the primary buying criteria for all Y passengers. AA found it could not sustain a price premium with such a non-segment-specific offer. The segment who buys primarily on price is just too big in the US domestic market.

E+, on the other hand, is aimed at either infrequent flyers who are willing to pay extra (thus the $299 E+ access fee) or at frequent flyers. It's a lot more targeted (and now that UA is increasingly enforcing the separation between E+ and E-, the execution is more consistent with the strategy), and has a better chance of earning a premium, either through the access fee or through FF loyalty.

I think it's not too unreasonable to contemplate that the privilege will remain at least for *G flyers. I do think E+ drives business towards UA. (Of course, I could very well be wrong.) On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if UA pulls the privilege from non-UA *S. I think E+ access would be one way to elicit some loyalty (through membership in Mileage Plus) from middle-tier *A flyers.

Ahh ok - yes the UA approach makes much more sense.
So how much bigger is the seat pitch in domestic E+ and A319s and 737s? Been allocated row 6 on both.

9V-JKL
SQTalk Elite Gold
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #7 on: Sep 11th, 2006, 1:37pm »
on Sep 10th, 2006, 9:36pm, KeithMEL1985 wrote :Ahh ok - yes the UA approach makes much more sense. So how much bigger is the seat pitch in domestic E+ and A319s and 737s? Been allocated row 6 on both.

Well it certainly isn't anywhere like SQ's row31. You can cross your legs comfortably. Some planes don't have the walled bulkhead and the F seats just back into you but its still OK

glam82
SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #8 on: Sep 11th, 2006, 2:22pm »
on Sep 10th, 2006, 4:19pm, jjpb3 wrote :I read about that from someone who was referring to this post:
http://flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=599616
I hope your source is less reliable than the thread . Seems like a lot of speculation in the thread above, all based on one ill-informed phone agent.

Oh man and I thought everything I read from that forum were facts... lol

jjpb3
Founding SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #9 on: Sep 14th, 2006, 12:22am »
on Sep 11th, 2006, 2:22pm, glam82 wrote :Oh man and I thought everything I read from that forum were facts... lol

Well, in this case, the speculation turned out to be true!
And the result is something that got rid of UA's status as my favored airline for travels to and within North America. Only SQ is really anchoring me to *A now.

glam82
SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #10 on: Sep 15th, 2006, 12:12pm »

I'm lucky then... I don't have anymore UA flights lined up. Only SQ and NH for the rest of the year.

[shortfinals]

CGK
Founding SQTalker
UA hit and miss
« Reply #11 on: Oct 2nd, 2006, 07:47am »

Well, as paffendorf posted, UA is not bad at all.
It's true. I still like UA even with its hit and miss. I am pretty sure it's still better than other US airlines.
Okay, here were the misses I had:

1. Flying UA F SFO-NRT, the FAs were all Asians. You would think they would have better inflight service. Nope. They were not the Asian-based FAs. In fact, the grandma service I had earlier this year were much better.

2. Flying YVR-SFO 7:30am on 737. Only fruit plate for breakfast. I missed the omelette.

3. At YVR yesterday, the gate agent had a big discussion at the door of the plane with the FAs. The flight attendants told a pax that he could move to certain seats, which happened to be the E+. The gate agent said nobody can not move, because in order to get E+ you have to pay for it (I think he said about CAD45).

4. UA meals department, please make the Asian food not too Americanized, which is bland and no taste at all... Just get the original recipe. If it's spicy, should be spicy.

The positive aspects:

1. Flyng UA F NRT-BKK, Asian based FAs. Mostly Thai. He kneeled down when taking my meal order. He did not do it for other pax though. He was great to everyone.

2. Indeed, PS Service is a great one. Took UA956 this morning, and the crew were fabulous. Even though there were more than a half were UA employees (crew tag on the carry-on), but the FAs took care paid pax first. And most importantly, a big change to have a Spacebed on this transcontinental flight. Better than the UA F on 75 7 or A319 or A320. Much much better. The big news is that the two FAs in F were kept saying I am the nicest pax they have encountered on UA flights in the past 6 months!

3. In F PS service, you will have a choice of DVD player. At least this helps with the IFE.


paffendorf
Founding SQTalker
Re: UA hit and miss
« Reply #12 on: Oct 2nd, 2006, 5:17pm »
on Oct 2nd, 2006, 07:47am, CGK wrote :1. Flyng UA F NRT-BKK, Asian based FAs. Mostly Thai. He kneeled down when taking my meal order. He did not do it for other pax though. He was great to everyone.

So do you consider positive this beacuse you're impressed by the professional and polite way he used to underline you are a short man!!!?

jjpb3
Founding SQTalker
Re: UA hit and miss
« Reply #13 on: Oct 2nd, 2006, 5:46pm »
on Oct 2nd, 2006, 5:17pm, paffendorf wrote :So do you consider positive this beacuse you're impressed by the professional and polite way he used to underline you are a short man!!!?

OUCH.
« Last Edit: Oct 2nd, 2006, 5:46pm by jjpb3 »

[shortfinals]

SingaporeAir
SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #14 on: Oct 2nd, 2006, 7:38pm »

I just flew UA836 SINHKG and UA835 HKGSIN.
It was very interesting.
Trip report soon!

Jubilee777
Founding SQTalker
Going Budget ???
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #15 on: Oct 2nd, 2006, 9:18pm »
on Oct 2nd, 2006, 7:38pm, SingaporeAir wrote :I just flew UA836 SINHKG and UA835 HKGSIN.
It was very interesting.
Trip report soon!


I can't wait to read it.... toilet test inclusive ?

SingaporeAir
SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #16 on: Oct 3rd, 2006, 08:40am »

Alas not the number 2 so to speak.
I have had stomach problems ever since coming back from HKG but on the flight I managed to hold it in until I got back to NUS.

cawhite
Founding SQTalker
Re: UA hit and miss
« Reply #17 on: Oct 5th, 2006, 04:18am »
on Oct 2nd, 2006, 07:47am, CGK wrote :... 2. Flying YVR-SFO 7:30am on 737. Only fruit plate for breakfast. I missed the omelette...

I'm guessing it was a 737 & had "Shuttle" painted on the outside of the plane? FYI for those who aren't already familiar with this... if you are flying UA w/in North America and you have a bit of flexibility in your scheduling, you may wish to avoid 737 flights on UA during UA's posted meal times (some routes have flights often enough it's easy enough to take the next flight earlier or later, others not so much). The ex-Shuttle planes don't have ovens in the galley, so there won't be warm or hot meals served, only a cold selection such as the fruit plate CGK had. Not all of the 737s are ex-Shuttle...but you just don't know until you get to the gate which one you're going to get.

MANflyer
Founding SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #18 on: Oct 5th, 2006, 05:37am »

Hello stranger.
I'm on the JFK-SFO PS service on Friday so I'll let y'all know how it goes.

cawhite
Founding SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #19 on: Oct 5th, 2006, 07:44am »
on Oct 5th, 2006, 05:37am, MANflyer wrote :Hello stranger.
I'm on the JFK-SFO PS service on Friday so I'll let y'all know how it goes.

As long as you're not calling me strange.
It won't be SQ, but as long as you're not in Y you'll be fine. Hopefully it will be a JFK-based crews as they typically have very good reputations. I look forward to hearing about it

[shortfinals]

CGK
Founding SQTalker
Bad news for UA pax ex-BKK
« Reply #20 on: Oct 5th, 2006, 4:04pm »

Just want to report, that UA pax ex-BKK, whether F pax, C pax, or UA*G status, can not access Thai Royal First or Silk Lounges. They only can go to Lois Tavern Lounge at the moment.

MANflyer
Founding SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #21 on: Oct 5th, 2006, 4:13pm »
on Oct 5th, 2006, 07:44am, cawhite wrote :As long as you're not calling me strange.
It won't be SQ, but as long as you're not in Y you'll be fine. Hopefully it will be a JFK-based crews as they typically have very good reputations. I look forward to hearing about it


I'm in J but can't get row 9 (or any window seat). Got 11B, which was the only one available apparently.

CGK
Founding SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #22 on: Oct 5th, 2006, 4:15pm »
on Oct 5th, 2006, 4:13pm, MANflyer wrote :I'm in J but can't get row 9 (or any window seat). Got 11B, which was the only one available apparently.

Did you get my message? If you want I can do sponsor upgrade for you to F. Send me your booking code on UA!

MANflyer
Founding SQTalker
Re: Why UA is not so bad IMHO.
« Reply #23 on: Oct 5th, 2006, 5:12pm »
on Oct 5th, 2006, 4:15pm, CGK wrote id you get my message? If you want I can do sponsor upgrade for you to F. Send me your booking code on UA!

Ooh, I didn't get your message. That's very kind of you Sir !!.
You have a PM.