8 Responses

  1. Greg
    Greg at |

    So basically matching the number of premium seats AA has on the 773.

    But without the 3-3-3- mini section.

    Guessing UA needs a larger E+ section overall than AA based on historic demand, so couldn’t justify making almost half the cabin 3-3-3-.

    I get the tradeoff, but disappointing.

  2. NB
    NB at |

    UA seems generally to have a significantly higher proportion of E+ seats to E- than AA. Assuming its proportion of Elite members to others is broadly similar, that would suggest UA has more E+ seats to sell to others than AA. I would imagine that they have a pretty good handle on what to charge for the E+ seat and it’s that number which will probably inform the decision as to whether to decrease capacity by 10% by going 3-3-3.

  3. Nick
    Nick at |

    I think they are missing a market segment not having a premium economy section at least for ultra long haul ( > 12 hours). There are business flyers who can expense an extra $1K-$3K for some extra comfort but can’t do an $8-$10k business ticket. I think they also lose some customers who absolutely won’t fly longhaul in 10 across, I’m one of them.

    1. gobluetwo
      gobluetwo at |

      And United would probably say that the extra capacity on the these flights more than makes up for the difference in revenue when modeling revenue with a 3-3-3 configuration (and maybe even a “true” premium economy section).

  4. Greg
    Greg at |

    I guess the other point is the 747s these ultimately replace have the same bad seat width, but fewer amenities. And I’ll bet the 787 scores are not bad.

  5. michael d
    michael d at |

    60 seats in BF. Any info on E;E+?