Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
jetmatt777 wrote:Super80Fan wrote:As much as I love the tulip, no. They need a complete redesign of their livery/logos/brand separate from ex-CO and ex-UA.
I can't wait for the deathstar to go though. It represents everything wrong with UA and it needs to go.
It's not going anywhere.
Boeing778X wrote:Here's a good livery.
Cold, minimalist, monochromatic. Don't even need to change the text and font. LCC almost. AND NEW!And easy ID. Don't fly the airline with the blue tail!
jetmatt777 wrote:There is definitely something in the works but it doesn't involve the tulip.
UA777lover wrote:I'm a die hard lover of the tulip and would love to see it come back, but that ship has sailed.
Boeing778X wrote:Here's a good livery.
Cold, minimalist, monochromatic. Don't even need to change the text and font. LCC almost. AND NEW!
SurlyBonds wrote:UA777lover wrote:I'm a die hard lover of the tulip and would love to see it come back, but that ship has sailed.
I keep hearing the assertion that the "the tulip's ship has sailed,", but I've got to ask: why?
If JAL can bring back the crane, and Air Canada the rondel maple leaf (admittedly not wholly abandoned), and Aeroflot a damned *hammer and sickle*, why can't United bring back the tulip?
The tulip is an iconic logo that evokes memories of a time when the airline had a much better reputation. I agree that the rebrand should be the culmination of a broader revamp of customer service, but that process *is* underway with Polaris. There's also artwork out there that shows the tulip reimagined in a way that honors CO's heritage as well.
TheFlyingDisk wrote:United would be better of investing in its people & offerings rather than investing in rebranding.
dmstorm22 wrote:Boeing778X wrote:Here's a good livery.
Cold, minimalist, monochromatic. Don't even need to change the text and font. LCC almost. AND NEW!
Did you get this from somewhere? Honestly don't hate it. Not a huge fan of the tail.
I think United has a clear opportunity for a new image. They have a solid foundation with a nice shade of blue to work off of. The sky's the limit.
The ship has sailed on the tulip, and hopefully will sail soon on the globe as well. They botched the branding in the merger, and need to start fresh, but I would still keep the blue as the primary driver of the brand color.
AirAfreak wrote:Boeing778X wrote:Here's a good livery.
Cold, minimalist, monochromatic. Don't even need to change the text and font. LCC almost. AND NEW!
That's a great looking post-merger UA & jetBlue livery! Lol!!!
Serious note: I second the thought of the North Star (Polaris) as the new UA-livery. It truly shines!
PPBoeing778X wrote:TheFlyingDisk wrote:United would be better of investing in its people & offerings rather than investing in rebranding.
FlyHossD wrote:Boeing778X wrote:TheFlyingDisk wrote:United would be better of investing in its people & offerings rather than investing in rebranding.
To which Boeing778X wrote:
"Well, at the moment, they are doing neither."
Huh? Or just trolling?
UA just received 4 more 738s, has 161 737Maxes on order and is adding Polaris to it's long haul fleet. There's more, of course.
Jamake1 wrote:Boeing778X wrote:Well, at the moment, they are doing neither.
That is not at all the truth, but you wouldn't know because you don't fly United. For someone who really hates United...and who no longer flies United...you sure do spend alot of your time and energy thinking about an enterprise you hate.
dmstorm22 wrote:Boeing778X wrote:Here's a good livery.
Cold, minimalist, monochromatic. Don't even need to change the text and font. LCC almost. AND NEW!
Did you get this from somewhere? Honestly don't hate it. Not a huge fan of the tail.
I think United has a clear opportunity for a new image. They have a solid foundation with a nice shade of blue to work off of. The sky's the limit.
The ship has sailed on the tulip, and hopefully will sail soon on the globe as well. They botched the branding in the merger, and need to start fresh, but I would still keep the blue as the primary driver of the brand color.
Themotionman wrote:Does anybody think that United would be better off bringing back the tulip? After all that has happened to United in last few years with leggings-gate and the Dr Dao incident do you not think that the management should distance the brand from those bad PR moments. I think something similar to the 'rising blue' livery used before the merger. That would look much better than the 'bingo cage/death star' that screams Continental every time I see it. United needs to show to their customers that they are actually making a change, so a change in branding would compliment the "New Spirit of United" very well indeed. It would be interesting to know everyone's thoughts...
OA940 wrote:As someone in some show that I can't remember once said: That ship has sailed. And sank.
P.S. Is this becoming a monthly thread? I've seen it at least twice recently.
Boeing778X wrote:Well, at the moment, they are doing neither.
Boeing778X wrote:Jamake1 wrote:Boeing778X wrote:Well, at the moment, they are doing neither.
I like how you add "who no longer flies UA." Oh, you betcha I no longer fly them.
And trust me, I am 100% justified in hating them. Now that I am working for AA, it's also my business to make sure the service I give to my passengers is superior to anything UA (and the main competition in general) has to offer!
And it is. I am dead serious. There are very few airlines I hate more than UA
UA must rebrand, because keeping the Globe is an insult...to the ex-CO crowd.
Boeing778X wrote:Here's a good livery.
Cold, minimalist, monochromatic. Don't even need to change the text and font. LCC almost. AND NEW!
irelayer wrote:It's funny, the "exCO" "exUA" mentality is very much alive and well. I was not 4 weeks ago on a UA flight LAX-IAH and the DirectTV was spotty the whole flight. When this same thing happened on my GUM-HNL flight last year, I was given a URL to go to to get compensated. I asked an FA about it and she said "oh yeah, that's the way UA does it, we are a CO crew". Seriously 5+ years after a merger, and this stuff is still said indicates to me there is very little integration on the personal level.
-IR
rbavfan wrote:OA940 wrote:As someone in some show that I can't remember once said: That ship has sailed. And sank.
P.S. Is this becoming a monthly thread? I've seen it at least twice recently.
Yes the tulip is the new 757. It's going to be beat in the ground so badly that all the love will start fading away.
Boeing778X wrote:They need to rebrand. The livery they wear is of a better airline from a better time.
Bring back the Tulip. They need a livery to match the service. Exunited will only have to complain about ex-CO employees about how they don't conform to the culture of indignity and disrespect.
VC10er wrote:There is a distinction between a “brand” and “branding” that many here do not grasp- some do.
The United “brand” consists of the company’s behavior, services and hard product. The deliverables the experience for the consumer. Branding is just the visual representation of that. The important thing is that they are aligned. Right now United is being very smart. They are investing in the experience for their customers and it’s getting better day by day, month by month and year by year. A great new livery must be earned.
This year so far I have flown many international and domestic legs and everything was fine. The FAs have ALL been good to great, and when I get I have gotten the full effect: United Polaris on a 77W it’s been an exceptionally good experience. When I have flown domestically, every single flight was on time or early and everything went smoothly. When the thousands of people who have had good or great experiences with them becomes millions their old, bad reputation will become a distant memory IF they can keep it up. Old generations will pass and new generations of employees and customers will emerge and that is where their focus ought to be. They do not need a rebranding now, they just don’t. Keep the focus on improving the experience and people will come to appreciate United as they do Delta, maybe shoot for better- and then one day freshen up the livery.
To those here who work for United today: your good job is being felt, wether it’s on the phone, in the air on the app or in a new seat. Once the old boring interiors are updated that will be the best form of branding- not the dated globe on the tail.
I sure hope Oscar and Kirby don’t spend tens of millions of dollars on a new livery, instead spend it on the experience your fliers have. Spend it on your employees and on renovation and new aircraft and new routes. It seems like that’s what they are doing and if flying United from point A to Z is great, then they will reap the financial rewards.
Blankbarcode wrote:irelayer wrote:It's funny, the "exCO" "exUA" mentality is very much alive and well. I was not 4 weeks ago on a UA flight LAX-IAH and the DirectTV was spotty the whole flight. When this same thing happened on my GUM-HNL flight last year, I was given a URL to go to to get compensated. I asked an FA about it and she said "oh yeah, that's the way UA does it, we are a CO crew". Seriously 5+ years after a merger, and this stuff is still said indicates to me there is very little integration on the personal level.
-IR
This is especially noticeable and especially despicable thinking about how long it's been. Last time I flew United a technical issue with the IFE was blamed on the fact it was an ex-Continental airplane. Funny at the moment, but still weird to see so many years later.
Jamake1 wrote:Blankbarcode wrote:irelayer wrote:It's funny, the "exCO" "exUA" mentality is very much alive and well. I was not 4 weeks ago on a UA flight LAX-IAH and the DirectTV was spotty the whole flight. When this same thing happened on my GUM-HNL flight last year, I was given a URL to go to to get compensated. I asked an FA about it and she said "oh yeah, that's the way UA does it, we are a CO crew". Seriously 5+ years after a merger, and this stuff is still said indicates to me there is very little integration on the personal level.
-IR
This is especially noticeable and especially despicable thinking about how long it's been. Last time I flew United a technical issue with the IFE was blamed on the fact it was an ex-Continental airplane. Funny at the moment, but still weird to see so many years later.
You have to understand that within the Inflight Dividision at United, there has been no merger. It took six years to reach a joint contract. The contract was ratified (narrowly) based upon promises that the sCO/sUA F/A's would be fully integrated within 18 mos of date of signing. The company then postponed the integration date until October 2018.
Furthermore there is collective resentment that is very deep seeded. ULH routes that are being flown from sUA bases are being flown on CO metal. Very senior sUA F/A's at IAD, LAX, ORD, and SFO have been forced into domestic flying or worse...reserve...while very junior sCO F/A's are flying the company's most lucrative (for F/A pay purposes) routes such as SFO-TLV; SFO-SYD; and SFO-SIN. To be fair, the sCO F/A's in EWR & IAH have been dealt a similar fate, but the sUA side of Inflight has been disproportionately more impacted because the company opened 5 sCO crew bases at sUA hubs and just 2 sUA bases at sCO hubs. Also, the sUA group is much more senior relative to the sCO side. I'm not making excuses here...I'm merely trying to put a little color to why customers may feel a distinct divide with regard to the Inflight part of their experience.
Even so, we operate with the very same set of Policies & Procedures. Four weeks ago, the Inflight Division was just launching a new app for customer disservice issues, which now allows F/A's to handle service disruptions on the spot, in real time. The app may not have been up and running, however the F/A ought to have provided an inconvenience form or a URL address to resolve any IFE issues...regardless of which metal she was working on.
VC10er wrote:There is a distinction between a “brand” and “branding” that many here do not grasp- some do.
The United “brand” consists of the company’s behavior, services and hard product. The deliverables the experience for the consumer. Branding is just the visual representation of that. The important thing is that they are aligned. Right now United is being very smart. They are investing in the experience for their customers and it’s getting better day by day, month by month and year by year. A great new livery must be earned.
This year so far I have flown many international and domestic legs and everything was fine. The FAs have ALL been good to great, and when I get I have gotten the full effect: United Polaris on a 77W it’s been an exceptionally good experience. When I have flown domestically, every single flight was on time or early and everything went smoothly. When the thousands of people who have had good or great experiences with them becomes millions their old, bad reputation will become a distant memory IF they can keep it up. Old generations will pass and new generations of employees and customers will emerge and that is where their focus ought to be. They do not need a rebranding now, they just don’t. Keep the focus on improving the experience and people will come to appreciate United as they do Delta, maybe shoot for better- and then one day freshen up the livery.
To those here who work for United today: your good job is being felt, wether it’s on the phone, in the air on the app or in a new seat. Once the old boring interiors are updated that will be the best form of branding- not the dated globe on the tail.
I sure hope Oscar and Kirby don’t spend tens of millions of dollars on a new livery, instead spend it on the experience your fliers have. Spend it on your employees and on renovation and new aircraft and new routes. It seems like that’s what they are doing and if flying United from point A to Z is great, then they will reap the financial rewards.
exunited wrote:Boeing778X wrote:They need to rebrand. The livery they wear is of a better airline from a better time.
Bring back the Tulip. They need a livery to match the service. Exunited will only have to complain about ex-CO employees about how they don't conform to the culture of indignity and disrespect.
Did UA fire you and that's why you went to AA? Really, hating on your old employer show indignity and disrespect.
Just the thought of working for them makes me nauseous! A PR wreck! And if ever offered a job with UA or any subsidiary of theirs, I'd tell them they can go and pound dirt. Jamake1 wrote:Boeing778X wrote:Jamake1 wrote:
I like how you add "who no longer flies UA." Oh, you betcha I no longer fly them.
And trust me, I am 100% justified in hating them. Now that I am working for AA, it's also my business to make sure the service I give to my passengers is superior to anything UA (and the main competition in general) has to offer!
And it is. I am dead serious. There are very few airlines I hate more than UA
UA must rebrand, because keeping the Globe is an insult...to the ex-CO crowd.
Sounds like you have an axe to grind against your former employer. You're obviously still emotionally charged over it, but I do take offense when you make comments demonizing the many of us at UA that call the best from within each time we go to work. There are many excellent flight attendants and other employees at s-UA.
The service level that you described you provide at AA...I've been providing that level of service...with passion...at s-UA for more than twenty years. So when you come on social media and repeatedly hurl insults at and berate the s-UA folks, it's offensive. And when you say that keeping the globe on the tail is an insult to the s-CO crowd, you insult some of the excellent, empathetic, and very hard working men & women at UA...many of whom were hired AFTER the corporate merger.
Your personal upset with UA bleeds sideways into just about every posting you post here and it's not relevant to the discussion at hand. Nor is it productive. I am making a request request that you refrain from making any further counter productive postings with regard to this specific topic. Your unresolved anger isn't relevant to the discourse. Thank you.
Boeing778X wrote:exunited wrote:Boeing778X wrote:They need to rebrand. The livery they wear is of a better airline from a better time.
Bring back the Tulip. They need a livery to match the service. Exunited will only have to complain about ex-CO employees about how they don't conform to the culture of indignity and disrespect.
Did UA fire you and that's why you went to AA? Really, hating on your old employer show indignity and disrespect.
How did this "UA as my former employer" thing start? Hell no! Since when?! UA wishes I was a former employee
But back on topic. Does UA need a new livery? Yes...Yes they do. Desperately.Jamake1 wrote:Boeing778X wrote:
I like how you add "who no longer flies UA." Oh, you betcha I no longer fly them.
And trust me, I am 100% justified in hating them. Now that I am working for AA, it's also my business to make sure the service I give to my passengers is superior to anything UA (and the main competition in general) has to offer!
And it is. I am dead serious. There are very few airlines I hate more than UA
UA must rebrand, because keeping the Globe is an insult...to the ex-CO crowd.
Sounds like you have an axe to grind against your former employer. You're obviously still emotionally charged over it, but I do take offense when you make comments demonizing the many of us at UA that call the best from within each time we go to work. There are many excellent flight attendants and other employees at s-UA.
The service level that you described you provide at AA...I've been providing that level of service...with passion...at s-UA for more than twenty years. So when you come on social media and repeatedly hurl insults at and berate the s-UA folks, it's offensive. And when you say that keeping the globe on the tail is an insult to the s-CO crowd, you insult some of the excellent, empathetic, and very hard working men & women at UA...many of whom were hired AFTER the corporate merger.
Your personal upset with UA bleeds sideways into just about every posting you post here and it's not relevant to the discussion at hand. Nor is it productive. I am making a request request that you refrain from making any further counter productive postings with regard to this specific topic. Your unresolved anger isn't relevant to the discourse. Thank you.
The amount of damage UA has done to it's PR and image over the last several years is staggering, and I shouldn't dislike UA? No. I think I do. The culture is vastly split. Out on the line, I meet plenty of pmCO crews, mainline and Expressjet, with the same mindset as me. Why is it that CO crews are kind and fun to be around and UA crews are rude and snobby? Seems cultural, and I needn't look further than some of the pmUA crowd on here, how they constantly berate their peers.
UA embodies everything wrong with flying!
TWA772LR wrote:Boeing778X wrote:exunited wrote:
Did UA fire you and that's why you went to AA? Really, hating on your old employer show indignity and disrespect.
How did this "UA as my former employer" thing start? Hell no! Since when?! UA wishes I was a former employee
But back on topic. Does UA need a new livery? Yes...Yes they do. Desperately.Jamake1 wrote:
Sounds like you have an axe to grind against your former employer. You're obviously still emotionally charged over it, but I do take offense when you make comments demonizing the many of us at UA that call the best from within each time we go to work. There are many excellent flight attendants and other employees at s-UA.
The service level that you described you provide at AA...I've been providing that level of service...with passion...at s-UA for more than twenty years. So when you come on social media and repeatedly hurl insults at and berate the s-UA folks, it's offensive. And when you say that keeping the globe on the tail is an insult to the s-CO crowd, you insult some of the excellent, empathetic, and very hard working men & women at UA...many of whom were hired AFTER the corporate merger.
Your personal upset with UA bleeds sideways into just about every posting you post here and it's not relevant to the discussion at hand. Nor is it productive. I am making a request request that you refrain from making any further counter productive postings with regard to this specific topic. Your unresolved anger isn't relevant to the discourse. Thank you.
The amount of damage UA has done to it's PR and image over the last several years is staggering, and I shouldn't dislike UA? No. I think I do. The culture is vastly split. Out on the line, I meet plenty of pmCO crews, mainline and Expressjet, with the same mindset as me. Why is it that CO crews are kind and fun to be around and UA crews are rude and snobby? Seems cultural, and I needn't look further than some of the pmUA crowd on here, how they constantly berate their peers.
UA embodies everything wrong with flying!
What everyone, including myself, doesn't realize is your personal angst for United; which is more befuddling since you don't have a personal connection to them as you pointed out.
I've witnessed the UA merger and went through it. My parents are sCO. They are currently split not by divorce but by location because of UA. UA gave me my fiercest job interview ever. UA put both of my parents through psychological hell because of the limbo of my mom's job in the beginning of the merger and now where they will live because of my dad's job here on the tail end of the merger; all of that affects my future because as a college grad as of only 2 months ago I still rely on them because I don't know what I will do on December 9th, the day after my internship ends. I witnessed front line employees who became close family friends (some who were there 20+ years) call Jeff Smisek the "next Frank Lorenzo" during my first job at IAH. I saw the backlash over sUA employees losing the Tulip. In the past 7 years, where UA was and has come to today is nothing short of extremely impressive and a miracle. I noticed sUA and sCO crews and gate agents going from totally depressed/pissed off, to loving life again and every UA flight I've had in at least the past 3 years never didn't have a smiling crew member. I've witnessed the merger as a dependent, vendor, passenger, and through my parents eyes. Say what you want but every single United Airlines employee today has gone through loads of bullshit and the fact they still go to work with a smile on their face and (more recently) with pride in their jobs is one of the most beautiful things I've seen in my life so far.
As someone in the industry, it is an unwritten rule that you are supposed to maintain an underlying respect for everyone else in it. When the times are bad, you will all suffer together (9/11 for example). When times are great, you all bask in the glory (recent economic upturn and massive expansion post-merger).
Watch this video. It's a great one. I make my bed every morning as a result. If you don't to watch the whole thing, skip to 4:49 and pay particular attention to the phrase uttered at 5:14. Every United employee has felt the same sentiment you do now, about 5 years ago, and got over it. And they have a lot more staked in the company than you do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6OoCaGsz94&t=2s
The mic has been dropped and I'm out of this thread.
NYPECO wrote:Boeing778X wrote:Here's a good livery.
Cold, minimalist, monochromatic. Don't even need to change the text and font. LCC almost. AND NEW!
It seems repetitive to have "United" on the tail and the fuselage.
CarlosSi wrote:JAL and Frontier both brought back their... identities (more JAL than Frontier; I have always identified Frontier with the animals) after dropping them.
The tulip /could/ be brought back, but on the other hand (this goes towards JAL and Frontier) it seems like doing so would be living in the past, unless they /really/ modernized the logo to look less like it did in the 70-00s. It doesn't have to be the exact same logo. Maybe even a little bit of tweaking would suffice, or rather than a tulip, bring out a shield into the branding as a slight nod to the old logo.
I actually never did mind the Continental logo; I always thought of "globe" when I thought of "continents", it just fits the name. I eventually grew more sour on the post-merger branding however; the globe just doesn't say "united", and the branding on the planes is just a hodge-podge, temporary-looking livery that doesn't quite suggest the two brands ever merged into one, but remained as two separate entities under one name.
I made this myself awhile back. It still looks jumbled, but the globe is gone. I think a better livery would've been to work with the 2004 livery and add some gold on there.
Boeing778X wrote:CarlosSi wrote:JAL and Frontier both brought back their... identities (more JAL than Frontier; I have always identified Frontier with the animals) after dropping them.
The tulip /could/ be brought back, but on the other hand (this goes towards JAL and Frontier) it seems like doing so would be living in the past, unless they /really/ modernized the logo to look less like it did in the 70-00s. It doesn't have to be the exact same logo. Maybe even a little bit of tweaking would suffice, or rather than a tulip, bring out a shield into the branding as a slight nod to the old logo.
I actually never did mind the Continental logo; I always thought of "globe" when I thought of "continents", it just fits the name. I eventually grew more sour on the post-merger branding however; the globe just doesn't say "united", and the branding on the planes is just a hodge-podge, temporary-looking livery that doesn't quite suggest the two brands ever merged into one, but remained as two separate entities under one name.
I made this myself awhile back. It still looks jumbled, but the globe is gone. I think a better livery would've been to work with the 2004 livery and add some gold on there.
Looks like some thought went into it.
But obviously, the "Blue Rising" version is better. The UA tail and CO fuselage livery DO NOT mix well, I'm afraid.
CarlosSi wrote:Boeing778X wrote:CarlosSi wrote:JAL and Frontier both brought back their... identities (more JAL than Frontier; I have always identified Frontier with the animals) after dropping them.
The tulip /could/ be brought back, but on the other hand (this goes towards JAL and Frontier) it seems like doing so would be living in the past, unless they /really/ modernized the logo to look less like it did in the 70-00s. It doesn't have to be the exact same logo. Maybe even a little bit of tweaking would suffice, or rather than a tulip, bring out a shield into the branding as a slight nod to the old logo.
I actually never did mind the Continental logo; I always thought of "globe" when I thought of "continents", it just fits the name. I eventually grew more sour on the post-merger branding however; the globe just doesn't say "united", and the branding on the planes is just a hodge-podge, temporary-looking livery that doesn't quite suggest the two brands ever merged into one, but remained as two separate entities under one name.
I made this myself awhile back. It still looks jumbled, but the globe is gone. I think a better livery would've been to work with the 2004 livery and add some gold on there.
Looks like some thought went into it.
But obviously, the "Blue Rising" version is better. The UA tail and CO fuselage livery DO NOT mix well, I'm afraid.
I think it's the belly color; white goes well with everything, but the gray looks odd with the blue tail. I'll experiment with a blue belly and a thicker gold chest line. Not that United will consider using it
evank516 wrote:NYPECO wrote:Boeing778X wrote:Here's a good livery.
Cold, minimalist, monochromatic. Don't even need to change the text and font. LCC almost. AND NEW!
It seems repetitive to have "United" on the tail and the fuselage.
Why? Delta's old widget logo had it on the tail and fuselage.
