Tongue in cheek - I think the proof is in the pudding - CO brass have had 2 years to make a go of it...and haven't - it is time for the BOD to look at who promised what in the merger and to see if they are delivering. As far as CO v. UA rank and file - there are lots of good CO people out there, but not nearly at the level the PR machine built them to...I am just over the CO arrogance, once and for all...CO wasn't THAT great and is proving that they still aren't that great at making a profitable business of a truly global airline...btw....lots of world class airlines would argue with you on your assessment on on the A320...I would put a LH Technic guy up against a CO mechanic any day of the week....and they seem to have no problem with them.
Absolutely the proof is in the pudding. As many on the SubCAL side believe, subUAL has dragged subCAL down. I see it too in some ways but try every day to keep the planes flying without any 'games,' this is the new company I work for afterall. There had been 'games' by one group of pilots refusing perfectly good birds. We saw it down here in MCO
on a daily basis for a while. Ridiculous. There were awards won by subCAL that subUAL and it's 'elites' could only dream about. You have no answers for all those BILLION dollar quarterly losses the old United lost all by itself, do you ? And much more recently, United filed bankruptcy just over 10 years ago, Continental did it's last one over 23 years ago. Ancient history. Woo hoo, pulling a circuit breaker to repair a Airbus, wow, that fixed it. This time.
I too would put up a Boeing Aluminum salesman over some aluminum selling hack from Redondo Beach anyday too, Boeing seems to have no problem selling the 737.
Unbelievable that some are failing to realize that UA is heading in the wrong direction. It's a loss, and as said debt repayment has ZERO to do with profit/loss.
Only the continued broken record of things Continental/United is headed in the wrong direction. United is getting it's house in order, there are some stumbling blocks but United will get through them no matter what one believes. Keep on spouting this misinformation, someday it will come true, such as the CEO leaving. A naysayer will get it right someday. Promise. And last I looked, some special charges that made United lose money were shown to be debt repayments. But then again, the ill informed will come to their conclusions no matter what the figures show.
Or perhaps those billion dollar losses for CO under Lorenzo and the Texas Air Corporation? Or the fact that CO went through BK twice? Yet, somehow UA's post 9/11 BK was worse. That's a mystery as to why on this forum UA's early 2000's BK was worse than CO's previous two in the 90s. Perhaps some users have too much pride, short term memory, and/or IAH/EWR pride.
Continental never posted BILLION dolllar quarterly losses. Old United did. Then again, the ill informed spout this kind of garbage.
No actually UA was in a pretty darn good shape pre merger mode. As stated, quarters prior to the merger UA was operationally more profitable than CO. They had a sound hub system, relatively young fleet, and arguably the best loyalty network for big spender frequent flyers. They merged with CO for further network advantage and fleet flexibility. None of that has been achieved and CO's Smisek is pulling all the wrong moves. Losses every quarter, operational problems, paying through the nose for new planes, no strategy for ERJ retirements, no apologies for high volume FF's, the worst branding for an airline merger of all time, and toxic employee relations.
Bottom line, the Continentalization of United isn't working and it's finally official in 2013.
That is so clueless it's really laughable. They cut everything, there was nothing left. They should have made money. United was in horrible condition, we saw it first hand. The branding is well liked by far more than a few posters on a.net. You know what, someday it too will change, then the ill informed will be vindicated. Toxic employee relations, can tell about the horrible relations over at pre merger United and some of it afterwards. Never saw such behavior. Pilots not wanting to be addressed to by Techs. Pilots acting all uppity when we enter the cockpit to ask what's wrong with the plane. Yeah, sure, go on believing pre merger United was in good shape, they were a shadow of what they once were.
Why do you always bring this up? How can CO be the surviving corporation when they are operating on UA's MX certificate?
To the un or ill informed, there was a SEC filing in March 2013 that will explain it, Google could be a good friend. And there is a thread that has a link to the filing.
|Quoting AVENSAB727 (Reply 145):|
Dont agree. I heard that this New UA is actually improving bit by bit.
Yes, United is improving bit by bit. Taking a while, sure, but we have different problems at United than Delta had. Some Delta mechanics might be able to give more insight about this, but some former Delta Techs who now work for United say that Delta just combined everything(?) under Sceptre recently.
|Quoting Sulley (Reply 146):|
And you, Tommy, need to realize that you don't know as much as you think about either carrier.
He doesn't. Saw the after effects of the first bankruptcy and the trials of getting the airline back flying, lived under the Lorenzo years. Went through the second bankruptcy, lived it. Never thought back then that Continental would make it. Was going to ride Continental as long as she lasted. To the bitter end, then Mr. Bethune came along. We had many CEOs between Lorenzo and Mr. Bethune, but we were still the same Continental workforce. We were there in the bad and good years, the CEOs changed, the workforce didn't. Mr. Bethune made some great changes to Continental, and it worked, no matter what some believe.
|Quoting Sulley (Reply 146):|
CALTECH (and others) see these planes every day. He works on them. Now, I'm a bit more easy on the Airbii since they're a comfortable ride when non-revving (even in the middle seat as it seems to be the only thing we get these days), but they can be mx pigs.
What he says is spot on about the fleet.
CO wasn't perfect (and I've stated as such before and you've even quoted me in agreement), but neither was pre-merger United.
You are not the Don Quixote of this company. Just as in the novel, there are no ferocious windmills to battle and United is not your Dulcinea. Her honor does not need to be defended.
Obviously I'm not a mechanic, but I'm a knowledgeable passenger. I see how planes run from a cabin perspective. And when I say that I was on 2 A320 this year, and almost a dozen sUA 757 flights in the last 2 years with no mechanical issues -- I'm being truthful. I've witnessed no duct tape, which seems to be a fallacy on this forum.
Of course when a 739 gets pulled out of service it gets a pass on the forums. What makes UA aircraft so inefficient from a mechanical perspective? Please, enlighten me.
To the ill informed, it is/was a approved fix on subUnited birds to use duct tape, it was not for years on Continental birds.
The Airbus's are a great ride. And when it is a simple circuit breaker fix and it works, it's a good airplane. Some of the computer interfaces are nice, but my preference is the 737. Could just be because of the experience level.
Those pissed off passengers were there with legacyUnited from a long time ago. As we hear it from our legacyContinental Elites, they too are pissed that some of their flights had been on United since the merger. Lots of pissed off Continental Elites. My significant other who owns a Travel Agency, has stories and failures of the old United that are legendary.
More for the uninformed, the subUAL fleet usually runs about 2-1 over the subContinental fleet in out of service aircraft. Yeah, sure, no 737-900ER ever goes out of service.
Yes, we've had a few of these too. Had one recently.
Yep, they were like Continental was in the l;ate 80s and early 90s. Would make a good quarter show here and there.