Noticed that UA was operating a 77W on BOS - SFO today. Also found it interesting that UA seems to gate their excess aircraft at the E terminal overnight .... wondering why others don't or can't.

Have a nice pic ... if only I could figure out how to upload to the thread (sorry, I'm a rookie).

Seems to be a 77w at random. Seen it a few times.

I've seen mostly every airline at BOS overnight an airplane at E. Of course those with handsets/maintenance space are less likely to, but there's been a wide variety

With the slack in the 77W fleet right now they are regularly subbed in when a 772 is unavailable.

Yeah, there's a fair amount of slack right now with the 774s still around and enough 77Ws that they have been regularly subbed in on 772 routes all over the system. They've showed up in LHR, BRU, DEN, IAD, LAX, HNL, and lots of other unscheduled 77W destinations.

I guess moving their 77Ws around a bit has a small side benefit by allowing some groups of premium fliers to experience the Polaris seat and start some buzz (word of mouth and social media) about what is to come...one day!!!

VC10er wrote:

I guess moving their 77Ws around a bit has a small side benefit by allowing some groups of premium fliers to experience the Polaris seat and start some buzz (word of mouth and social media) about what is to come...one day!!!

Personally I find product inconsistency to be bad in any business but I'm not a premium flier so maybe I'm not their target audience
As an example, when you look are successful companies, what they all have in common is product consistency: McDonalds, Southwest Airlines, Coca-Cola, Samsung, Singapore Airlines, just to name a few.

airbazar wrote:

VC10er wrote:

I guess moving their 77Ws around a bit has a small side benefit by allowing some groups of premium fliers to experience the Polaris seat and start some buzz (word of mouth and social media) about what is to come...one day!!!

Personally I find product inconsistency to be bad in any business but I'm not a premium flier so maybe I'm not their target audience
As an example, when you look are successful companies, what they all have in common is product consistency: McDonalds, Southwest Airlines, Coca-Cola, Samsung, Singapore Airlines, just to name a few.

None of the companies you mention have complete product consistency...

To some extent coach is coach but Southwest has at least three different types of Y class seats.
Singapore has a couple of different types of J class seats (one is older than the other and is being phased out over time.)
A Big Mac is a Big Mac basically anywhere you go in the US however there are regional variations on the menu they serve, some franchisees don't offer everything that a corporate location would and some corporate locations have a "lite" menu. We are not even going to start to discuss how different McD's can be in other parts of the world.
Coke is relatively homogeneous here in the US however that's not always the case overseas.
Samsung tailors its products for the market they want to serve...

SFO-BOS is a P.S. (or whatever its being called these days route) and has a "lite" Polaris class product on it already. Putting a 77W on the route, while a nice change of pace, is not that much of a leap in J from the 772/752s that are on the route.

United1 wrote:

airbazar wrote:

VC10er wrote:

I guess moving their 77Ws around a bit has a small side benefit by allowing some groups of premium fliers to experience the Polaris seat and start some buzz (word of mouth and social media) about what is to come...one day!!!

Personally I find product inconsistency to be bad in any business but I'm not a premium flier so maybe I'm not their target audience
As an example, when you look are successful companies, what they all have in common is product consistency: McDonalds, Southwest Airlines, Coca-Cola, Samsung, Singapore Airlines, just to name a few.

None of the companies you mention have complete product consistency...

To some extent coach is coach but Southwest has at least three different types of Y class seats.
Singapore has a couple of different types of J class seats (one is older than the other and is being phased out over time.)
A Big Mac is a Big Mac basically anywhere you go in the US however there are regional variations on the menu they serve, some franchisees don't offer everything that a corporate location would and some corporate locations have a "lite" menu. We are not even going to start to discuss how different McD's can be in other parts of the world.
Coke is relatively homogeneous here in the US however that's not always the case overseas.
Samsung tailors its products for the market they want to serve...

SFO-BOS is a P.S. (or whatever its being called these days route) and has a "lite" Polaris class product on it already. Putting a 77W on the route, while a nice change of pace, is not that much of a leap in J from the 772/752s that are on the route.

I commend you for still trying to swim against the tide of 16 year old A-Net experts who think continually bashing United gives themselves some credibility as an industry expert vs those who actually work in the business every single day.

exunited wrote:

United1 wrote:

airbazar wrote:

Personally I find product inconsistency to be bad in any business but I'm not a premium flier so maybe I'm not their target audience
As an example, when you look are successful companies, what they all have in common is product consistency: McDonalds, Southwest Airlines, Coca-Cola, Samsung, Singapore Airlines, just to name a few.

None of the companies you mention have complete product consistency...

To some extent coach is coach but Southwest has at least three different types of Y class seats.
Singapore has a couple of different types of J class seats (one is older than the other and is being phased out over time.)
A Big Mac is a Big Mac basically anywhere you go in the US however there are regional variations on the menu they serve, some franchisees don't offer everything that a corporate location would and some corporate locations have a "lite" menu. We are not even going to start to discuss how different McD's can be in other parts of the world.
Coke is relatively homogeneous here in the US however that's not always the case overseas.
Samsung tailors its products for the market they want to serve...

SFO-BOS is a P.S. (or whatever its being called these days route) and has a "lite" Polaris class product on it already. Putting a 77W on the route, while a nice change of pace, is not that much of a leap in J from the 772/752s that are on the route.

I commend you for still trying to swim against the tide of 16 year old A-Net experts who think continually bashing United gives themselves some credibility as an industry expert vs those who actually work in the business every single day.

de nada

airbazar wrote:

VC10er wrote:

I guess moving their 77Ws around a bit has a small side benefit by allowing some groups of premium fliers to experience the Polaris seat and start some buzz (word of mouth and social media) about what is to come...one day!!!

Personally I find product inconsistency to be bad in any business but I'm not a premium flier so maybe I'm not their target audience
As an example, when you look are successful companies, what they all have in common is product consistency: McDonalds, Southwest Airlines, Coca-Cola, Samsung, Singapore Airlines, just to name a few.

Sure, it would be awesome for a company the size of United to get Jeannie to "blink" and convert the entire fleet to the new hard product, and new lounges in every city. Without Jeannie and her magic it would still take a very long time if they took the whole fleet off line and installed BILLIONS of dollars worth of seats. But this is something that has always been the norm of the airline industry: an airline introduces a far superior product than the one they currently have, and we (the fliers) wait with great anticipation to get onto a newly renovated plane over the course of a couple years. I think United is doing a decent job in business by upgrading everything else while the seats are yet to come. I can tell you right now the new Saks Fifth Ave blankets and pillows are amazing, even the new 'eye-mask" (as unimportant as eye masks are) are fantastic. I have been on the 77W in Polaris and I loved it. But I am a premium flier because of my job, I personally cannot afford to pay $8,000 every time I fly.

Do I wish it would go faster? sure. But when I think of a fleet of 88 (or something like that) 772's all parked together, could you even imagine how that HUGE a space that would be? Could you picture that? 8.5 rows of 10 777's or 11 rows of 8 777! Then add it the 767s and 787s. Imagine AA which is even bigger! And from what I hear they still have angled seats in the air.

I recall flying LH often for business when they went from the recliner then to the angled seat in business...and it took them a very long time. Well over a year after the intro of the angled flat seat, I would board a 747 and see the OLD recliner seat out of JFK and moan because it mean 2 Ambien. At least on United, if I am not going to get a 77W, I will get a FLAT comfortable bed seat guaranteed, old perhaps, but I am not a snob, I just need my sleep on a business trip.

exunited and United1: I think I'm one of the only ones here who's obsessed with United! How can I not be with 3 million BIS miles? So, I am basically locked in. But I don't mind, while it's not Singapore, I have always had a good experience except for a small handful of times. All the UA team I interact with are very nice. Never understood the grumpy, surly thing (except at merger time people were grumpy) good job!

United1 wrote:

None of the companies you mention have complete product consistency...

Their products and services are pretty consistent. When you buy it you know exactly what you're getting. Some companies do it better than others. I'm not talking about quality here. that's an entirely different subject.

United1 wrote:

SFO-BOS is a P.S. (or whatever its being called these days route) and has a "lite" Polaris class product on it already. Putting a 77W on the route, while a nice change of pace, is not that much of a leap in J from the 772/752s that are on the route.

Only very recently and it is a reaction to B6 introducing Mint. I'm a UA FF and BOS is where I fly from the most. Until B6 introduced Mint UA deployed a variety of equipment on the route but mostly 757's qnd 737s. Today only 2/7 dailies are 777's. The rest as 757's. It works great when you book a 757 and a 77W shows up at the gate. But it's bad news when the opposite happens. It's a double edge sword.

exunited wrote:

I commend you for still trying to swim against the tide of 16 year old A-Net experts who think continually bashing United gives themselves some credibility as an industry expert vs those who actually work in the business every single day.

Wow, if you think that was bashing united you have some problems. I never even hinted that UA's product or service was a problem. I simply stated that for me personally, product inconsistency in any industry can be bad. That is a well known fact in business administration. Just google it. Which is not to say that there other factors that outweigh such philosophy. Now if you think that is bashing, then I'm sorry for you buddy.

airbazar wrote:

United1 wrote:

None of the companies you mention have complete product consistency...

Their products and services are pretty consistent. When you buy it you know exactly what you're getting. Some companies do it better than others. I'm not talking about quality here. that's an entirely different subject.

United1 wrote:

SFO-BOS is a P.S. (or whatever its being called these days route) and has a "lite" Polaris class product on it already. Putting a 77W on the route, while a nice change of pace, is not that much of a leap in J from the 772/752s that are on the route.

Only very recently and it is a reaction to B6 introducing Mint. I'm a UA FF and BOS is where I fly from the most. Until B6 introduced Mint UA deployed a variety of equipment on the route but mostly 757's qnd 737s. Today only 2/7 dailies are 777's. The rest as 757's. It works great when you book a 757 and a 77W shows up at the gate. But it's bad news when the opposite happens. It's a double edge sword.
.

I'm not talking about quality either....I am talking about consistency.

The onboard product on the 77W and 752s are relatively consistent...both have nose to tail AVOD, both have WiFi, both have nose to tail power and both have lie flats in J. The 77W certainly is newer and has a better AVOD system than the 752 but it's still a comparable product. There are no more domestic 752s if that is what you are worried about getting subbed to...all of those were retired.

I'm not sure why what equipment UA used to use on the route is germane to this conversation...UA doesn't sub 737s or 320s on this route.

VC10er wrote:

exunited and United1: I think I'm one of the only ones here who's obsessed with United! How can I not be with 3 million BIS miles? So, I am basically locked in. But I don't mind, while it's not Singapore, I have always had a good experience except for a small handful of times. All the UA team I interact with are very nice. Never understood the grumpy, surly thing (except at merger time people were grumpy) good job!

Thank you for your loyalty first off ! Fortunately, the Smisek and Tilton days are gone and it does seem like people are generally happy with Oscar and Scott Kirby. I was in small group briefings with both of them almost a year ago and was very happy with their candid and sincere comments, which go a long way towards employee goodwill (aka not grumpy employees). No tip toe lawyer answers like Smisek or general disdain a la Tilton.

As far as Boston, UA has a good presence and is upping their service level again on the trans con routes. Using a variety of planes can creates some continuity issues but I don't think anyone will complain when a 777W show up.