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...

I think that United missed the opportunity to unveil a new livery when they announced the "New spirit of United". I'm a die hard lover of the tulip and would love to see it come back, but that ship has sailed. A new livery, updated and with a nod to BOTH airlines that became the new United would have been better. I've flown a LOT on United and have had wonderful crews that come from both sides. I think the corporate need to eradicate anything tulip has and is causing some bad feelings. Pre merger Continental crew can have "excon" bag tags, but if a tulip is spotted on a sUA crew member, it's removed. The new spirit of United should have been met with excitment, but it's been met with blah because there is nothing to show that new spirit outside. Oscar has made great strides in bringing both sides together and that is great. There have been some missteps, but overall, he's doing an good job. Nothing like a new coat of paint to brighten your day and while a LOT of people say who cares what the plane looks like, there are some that strongly identify the planes exterior with the experience on the interior. Branding changes all the time, it's time that United made a brave new step into the new century and gave the flying public and their employess somthing EVERYONE can be proud of.

forget about it!! The Tulip is an Icon that would polarize the company. We're not ready for that yet. The time may come when we are? But it's Not right now..

Here we go again...

Whilst I loved the tulip, I echo what UA777lover has stated. That ship has sailed. The combined company needs to look forward and not back and if/when they do rebrand it needs to be something completely new or if not a brand that recognises both Continentals and United history in the brand. The last thing you want having taken huge strides over the last year or so is to hack off one part of the work force with only one companies former brand. I would like to think that in the not too distant future we see that new brand as the current one has run its time now IMHO. Onwards and upwards.

If they were to introduce a new logo, a polar star would be a perfect fit to match their Polaris branding.

UA777lover wrote:

I think that United missed the opportunity to unveil a new livery when they announced the "New spirit of United". I'm a die hard lover of the tulip and would love to see it come back, but that ship has sailed. A new livery, updated and with a nod to BOTH airlines that became the new United would have been better. I've flown a LOT on United and have had wonderful crews that come from both sides. I think the corporate need to eradicate anything tulip has and is causing some bad feelings. Pre merger Continental crew can have "excon" bag tags, but if a tulip is spotted on a sUA crew member, it's removed. The new spirit of United should have been met with excitment, but it's been met with blah because there is nothing to show that new spirit outside. Oscar has made great strides in bringing both sides together and that is great. There have been some missteps, but overall, he's doing an good job. Nothing like a new coat of paint to brighten your day and while a LOT of people say who cares what the plane looks like, there are some that strongly identify the planes exterior with the experience on the interior. Branding changes all the time, it's time that United made a brave new step into the new century and gave the flying public and their employess somthing EVERYONE can be proud of.

I agree with the overall sentiment of your post, but there are still plenty of LUAL people running around with tulip bag tags, just as there are plenty of "Excon" tags out there. On the surface most of the animosity between the two employee groups seem to be gone, but below the surface it's certainly still there. I came from the CAL side of the merger and I feel like I have no representation from ALPA unless it just happens to suit LUAL ALPA, who are now running the show. Bringing the tulip back would open up all those wounds again. If anything the tulip, and the globe, should go, and there should be something that celebrates both former carriers equally.

Ironically the same person, Saul Bass, who created the Tulip for United also created the meatball (officially called “jetstream” ) for Continental and other iconic logos;



100% agree with those who say new logo, the United airlines today is not the United airlines of the '80s and '90s. Nor is it CO, it's a new unique airline that needs unique branding.

I don't think we will see a logo change until 2020. 2020 is when we all get new uniforms.

I get the feeling Oscar Munoz needs to unite United fully before any rebranding measures are taken.

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.

Come on people, get over it. The "old" UA lost it's logo and CO lost their name. I don't understand why those threads are coming up again and again suggesting one of the two decisions should be reverted. As some people mentioned above, it won't help the employee morale at all.
Other airlines have shown that it is possible to make a turnaround (and I won't use the phrase "from worst to first" ) without changing the name and/or CI.

fraT wrote:

Come on people, get over it. The "old" UA lost it's logo and CO lost their name. I don't understand why those threads are coming up again and again suggesting one of the two decisions should be reverted. As some people mentioned above, it won't help the employee morale at all.
Other airlines have shown that it is possible to make a turnaround (and I won't use the phrase "from worst to first" ) without changing the name and/or CI.

While I'd like to see a rebranding effort, bringing back the Tulip for some would bring back bad memories - remember the UA 757s with paint flaking off so badly and the extended bankruptcy? Those are the first thoughts I have when someone suggests bringing back the Saul Bass Tulip.

What the airline wears on the outside doesn’t matter. Had UA decided to keep the tulip and dump the globe they would still have the same issues, and people would be calling for a return to the globe. UA has had and still continues to struggle with a consistent message to its employees. Are they going to be full service or cheap? Which passengers are entitled to what? Why are employees in a work group treated so differently from station to station? All of this is confusing and effects how people deliver the product. If UA really wants to move forward, management is going to have to put out a consistent message and stick to it.

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...

Really?? After all the threads we have had on this divisive topic you bring it up again.

First of all the leggings issue was almost immediately squashed once it was made public that the customers involved were not paying customers instead children of employees and UA has every right to dictate what people can where when you are traveling on employee passes. Also for the record that rule on leggings as far as I know still hasn't changed. As far as Dr Dao UA screwed up in the beginning by blaming Dr Dao but in the end stepped up to the plate and took full responsibility for the incident. UA has also implemented quite a few changes to make sure it never happens again the changes apply to mainline and also express so express carriers can no longer book crew members last minute on flights that are full. Dead head crew member must be booked at least 60 minutes prior to departure for both mainline and express. UA also has significantly reduce the number of overbookings. This pass summer (2017) UA recorded the lowest number of overbooking since the merger. In addition UA has greatly increase the amount of compensation a passenger receives if they are bumped off their scheduled flight. We have rolled out the bid system that will prompt passengers when checking-in on a oversold flight to input a price they would be willing to take if the airline needs their seat so in essence the passenger chooses their own compensation and should the oversold situation continue gate agents will choose passengers based on their compensation bid. UA has launched a creative solutions team that is designed to help front line employee come up with creative solutions to deal with problems on the ground. Should a problem arise in the air FA's now have the ability to offer compensation immediately using their hand held devises so customer no longer have to wait till the flight lands to call customer resolution center, the FA's can take care of the compensation in the air on the spot. There are a host of other changes that UA has made to address a lot of the bad PR moments some are public knowledge others are not. The final change that is public knowledge is police are not to be call to an aircraft except in situations where safety and/or security is threatened.

I said all of that to say this many UA employees both front line and those behind the scenes have worked really hard to move this airline past those events that you referenced. We work really hard to make sure all customers have a pleasant experience when traveling with us, our on-time performance is higher than it has ever been since the merger. Our mishandled bag per passenger ratio is at the lowest it has ever been in the history of both UA and CO, meaning meaning more bags are arriving at the final destination with the customer than ever before thanks to all the hard work our ramp service department does day in and day out. Our completion factor is up even with all the cancelations that Harvey, Irma and Maria have caused UA's completion factor is at its highest levels since the merger. It is changes like these that will help UA distance itself from the bad PR moments of its past. Going back to the tulip is a step in the wrong direction and this is coming from someone with 21 years with UA who was a sUA employee who disliked the globe for a time, but has since realized we are all one United family. The truth is customers don't care what logo is on the tail of the airplane they just want you to deliver a great customer experience from check-in to baggage claim. If we want customer to see the new spirit of United then we must show them it one day at at time, one flight at a time, one customer at a time. Leave the globe on the tail and lets continue to improve our customer experience it is the only way United can move forward.

strfyr51 wrote:

forget ab

out it!! The Tulip is an Icon that would polarize the company. We're not ready for that yet. The time may come when we are? But it's Not right now..

Polarize the company? You mean like the 'brillo pad' on the tail and the 'Smurf blue' uniforms employee's are given from the cartoons in the 1990's? But I degress, we can talk about the co management style of cheaper is best and their arogance of running off high yield business passengers to DL and AA, who now post record profits. And if course the co side doesnt want to mention the fact that 7+ years after the merger we still have employee groups working seprate contracts and that after their agreement it will take almost 18 months to merge the two because of 'computer programming.'

Now we can discuss polarization...

strfyr51 wrote:

forget ab

out it!! The Tulip is an Icon that would polarize the company. We're not ready for that yet. The time may come when we are? But it's Not right now..

Polarize the company? You mean like the 'brillo pad' on the tail and the 'Smurf blue' uniforms employee's are given from the cartoons in the 1990's? But I degress, we can talk about the co management style of cheaper is best and their arogance of running off high yield business passengers to DL and AA, who now post record profits. And if course the co side doesnt want to mention the fact that 7+ years after the merger we still have employee groups working seprate contracts and that after their agreement it will take almost 18 months to merge the two because of 'computer programming.'

Now we can discuss polarization...

Yes

End of thread

I realize that there is a significant amount of emotion on both sides of the irrepressible Globe v. Tulip debate. I don't have a horse in this race, so here's my (hopefully balanced) take:

I would argue that the current scheme has indeed contributed to polarization and conflict among the pmUA and pmCO. Instead of choosing one brand and moving forward with it, the then-management decided to bodge the two brands together in an unhappy compromise which satisfied neither party. United workers were upset about losing the Tulip, while Continental workers mourned the loss of "their airline". The net result was an airline with a severe identity crisis.

Instead of consigning Continental quietly to the history books with dignity, management allowed the ghost thereof to permeate the combined airline; which is why the United v. Continental internal civil war raged on for as long as it did. Of course, it wasn't helped by the fact that, rather than working to create a better airline, a lot of people simply took to moaning about how great things were before the merger - conveniently forgetting that both airlines were, in fact, mediocre at best. Too many people ended up stuck in the past instead of working together to make a better future.

United should have followed Delta's lead in terms of integration. While Delta went above and beyond to make ex-Northwest employees feel at home in the combined airline and give them a seat at the table, they also made quite clear that the airline going forward would be Delta, and that everyone should pull in the same direction. Delta has made a few gestures to honor Northwest - the most recent of which was that the latest A330s were delivered with 'NW' registrations. That's the way to do it: A nod to the past while striving towards the future.

Over at United, meanwhile, you still have a stitched together brand, in which neither work group really feels all that invested. As I wrote earlier, they should have taken the United brand and run with it. It's too late for that now, of course, which means that any new identity probably needs to be something new entirely.

There is definitely something in the works but it doesn't involve the tulip.

strfyr51 wrote:

forget about it!! The Tulip is an Icon that would polarize the company. We're not ready for that yet. The time may come when we are? But it's Not right now..

Yes, and forcing the legacy UA people to fly around in planes that are 99% continental livery was not.....

The tulip will never be fully successful as long as the meatballs are still in charge, that process is underway and the results speak for themselves.

My take - the time for a re-brand will be when all of the merger activities are completed; all crews integrated and all that.

At that point, it could make sense to re-brand, but if they do, I doubt that they'll look to history; the vision and strategy will be centered around a new, cohesive company that is looking towards the future. The globe and the tulip will be great options for heritage liveries, and there may be ways to incorporate them both in unique ways, but I don't think a new brand will feature either of them prominently.

Just my 2 cents...perhaps consideration out to be given to digging deeper in each companies history.. the "Friendship" theme of UA and the "Move our tail for you" of Continental back in the 70's...when both carriers were more of what the current UA is.

I'm not sure what that Logo/ theme would evolve to be..but for darn sure, the Tulip is dead as is the Blue/ Gold globe.
I would suggest one thing..BLACK lettering on a clean , white background.

correction ...when UA and Co were more of what the current UA THINKS it is! Big difference in the service/ culture of the late 70's and the current one. Lessons to be reviewed.

tlecam wrote:

My take - the time for a re-brand will be when all of the merger activities are completed; all crews integrated and all that.

At that point, it could make sense to re-brand, but if they do, I doubt that they'll look to history; the vision and strategy will be centered around a new, cohesive company that is looking towards the future. The globe and the tulip will be great options for heritage liveries, and there may be ways to incorporate them both in unique ways, but I don't think a new brand will feature either of them prominently.

This is exactly when a new paint job/rebranding is needed. The FAs need to start flying together as one and get all that bad mojo out of the air. Once the hostility dies down, and it won't take long the airline can finally move ahead as one.

ALL United employees get new uniforms in the spring of 2019.
ALL employee groups will be working together and there will be no more L-CAL or L-UAL just UNITED.
United should have a strong fleet of Polaris equipped aircraft flying around in all hubs by summer of 2019.
United should have Polaris lounges in most of its hubs by summer of 2019.

All the above leads me to believe that a new brand will be rolled out in 2019. Kirby is just biding his time until he can put his mark on United's branding history and he is smart for not rushing into it.

I imagine if UA go for a new livery it will coincide with when Kirby takes over the throne from Oscar. Oscar is the "turn around" CEO there to clean up the mess Smisek left. His departure will mean the executives/board believe the turnaround is complete and UA is ready for its next long term chapter.

maortega15 wrote:

If they were to introduce a new logo, a polar star would be a perfect fit to match their Polaris branding.

You and I think along the same lines, but not sure how to play it out...remember, United is NOT all about Polaris...might as well change their name. But then again, their whole product needs revamping.

The Polaris Lounge (instead of United Club)
Polaris (first class)
Some other name for their lower classes. Fly Polaris...or that crappy seat in the back. At least give it a decent name such that it's appealing...Stellar? Constellation? (Many stars (economy), but Polaris is the brightest)

The logo can still be a globe, but maybe put the Ursa Minor constellation with Polaris very bright at the top of the globe.

I give props to American and Delta for coming around a common theme with their product. ("American" for AA and Sky for DL)

I love the Tulip, and I own a number of Tulip memorabilia, PanAm and VARIG too. But, once an icon of that stature is gone it's near impossible to revive. I can't even think of an old dead iconic brand mark that was brought back to life successfully.

I maintain what Ive said in all the other threads on this particular topic: A new livery for United will send a powerful message to the world, it will essentially be a PROMISE of something NEW & GREAT. When United ultimately achieves their goals of being a great airline, when Polaris is 100% available to premium fliers, when the service is consistently good and there is "buzz" as there was with Continental once upon a time, then change the livery...scream from the mountain tops! But, until then the biggest mistake in branding (or advertising) is leading a consumer to believe something is new and great, and then they go and it's the same old thing. "Fool me once...." as the expression goes.

I think that the average consumer thinks the current livery is fine, and that if they have a number of great experiences on United, nothing is more powerful than word of mouth. Articles will be written about a "come back story" (which everyone loves) and then make that investment so the outside matches the inside. But if I was Oscar, I would be devoting as much money and resources against continued improvement of the soft and hard products, (channel 9) brand new airplanes and obviously while not relevant to everyone: their amazing route system.

United does have a "theme" you can see it spilling down from Polaris. You will see a refreshed globe logo or its negative in everything. From the dishes and linens onboard. To the bulkheads on the plane to the walls in the clubs.

I am sorry the Tulip has joined all the other Saul Bass logo in the history books.

That said I would welcome a retooling of the titles on the aircraft. The font UNITED on CO livery never looked good. I have seen UNITED AIRLINES branding offshore and it looks more balanced.

http://www.priestmangoode.com/project/u ... in-lounge/

I like the globe, it looks very Pan Am'ish and it shows that United is indeed uniting the world.

Yes, if anything they are embracing the globe even more. I dont mind it so much on the tail, I loath it in a box. How it's done in the entry hall of the 77W looks more modern. If there is a livery update, it will be just that: an update to the current. No more wild changes. A friend of mine at Landor who is the Creative Director for all the airline branding business always says "A Globe, A Flag, A Bird or a Swoosh thing...I can't do that anymore" he did Etihad and others...and he tries to break with that old construct. PanAm owned the globe, UA can't (just their version). AA is trying to own the American flag but used to own "AA" and VARIG had the compass sun, every brand named Delta has a triangle. The flying U that Saul Bass created was great, it was unique. But it's also gone.

Is it that time of the month again? Every 28 days we go through this same question.

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.

It is fun to watch people bicker and argue about things that doing matter at all. Who cares what the paint job on a plane is?

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.

I think United should take a page out of Air Canada's book.

The problem with rebranding is all the cost associated with it, especially with repainting the large fleet of aircrafts.

What Air Canada is doing is essentially repainting the planes when they are due for a heavy check. They had to refresh the paints anyway, why not tag on a fresh new branding along with that.

This should be more cost effective.

I also love the tulip logo. However, I do also believe they need to build a new iconic logo to represent the future airline.

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!

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!

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!

I agree with all the common-sense arguments against the "Tulip". Nevertheless, that "Hollow Earth" logo inherited from Continental is just plain ugly, ugly, ugly!

No... but the hairnet globe from CO should be killed off along with anything else Continental.

CFM565A1 wrote:

No... but the hairnet globe from CO should be killed off along with anything else Continental.

Hey, anyone working at UA who used to work for CO should quit their jobs IMMEDIATELY!

I have good reason to believe your life is in an alarming amount of danger! Come bring your good customer service to AA! Let UA rot!

Kilopond wrote:

I agree with all the common-sense arguments against the "Tulip". Nevertheless, that "Hollow Earth" logo inherited from Continental is just plain ugly, ugly, ugly!

I would just like to say that behind every aesthetic judgment there are preconceptions and prejudices at work in all of us. I was a Northwest fanboy for most of my life and it has taken me a long time to be comfortable with Delta in Detroit and Minneapolis, and those 744s with the widget - even if the widget is pointing northwest on one side! I think the same thing applies to the combination of the United name and the Continental logo. It was partly a pragmatic decision, and partly a compromise which was intended to satisfy both sets of employees. So what is this ugly, ugly, ugly business? It is a clean, simple design and was appreciated when it belonged to CO. Search deep in your souls, people, and extirpate that demon prejudice, and then look at the current United livery again. And don't worry, it won't last forever - but enjoy it now.

STT757 wrote:

It should not be hard to combine the Tulip and the Meatball logos.

Tilt the Meatball 90 degrees clockwise, and overlap the Tulip to the right of the white line. Extend the white lines towards the tulip, which in marketing bull-shit would symbolise the two companies coming together. Perhaps use darkblue and gold to make a bridge to the current livery.

Boeing778X wrote:

CFM565A1 wrote:

No... but the hairnet globe from CO should be killed off along with anything else Continental.

Hey, anyone working at UA who used to work for CO should quit their jobs IMMEDIATELY!

I have good reason to believe your life is in an alarming amount of danger! Come bring your good customer service to AA! Let UA rot!

Fine point taken, everything to do with the CO branding should be killed off...

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.

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

Oh boy. I feel like new members should be required to take a tutorial of the search function.

Short answer. No. Loved the tulip, but it's time to move on. Again.