Comments

1. Polaris offers a critical advantage that most of the carriers you listed do not – a 100% consistent hard product experience across the entire widebody international fleet. For Delta, you gloss over how large their 767 fleet and just how inferior that product is. None of DL, AA, BA or LH can remotely match United’s consistency here. If you book a United Polaris seat, you know exactly what you are getting.

   Is it better than all of these airlines best seat? Possibly not (although I take issue with the premise that Polaris is noticeably inferior). However, is Polaris better than all of these airlines least best seat – some of which still comprise a majority or their respective fleets – yes, vastly.

2. John nailed it. The Polaris seats can feel a bit claustrophobic and the food generally sucks (although it’s just as good as what AA and Delta offer) but at least I know what I’m getting. If they offered a truly improved (wider) business (or even better a first) class seat again I might forego the ME3 and Singapore/Air France. They probably lose $150K per worth of business per year from me alone.

   Not much at all in the grand scheme of things but I can’t be alone. My wife and I fly a fair amount and I know others who fly a lot more.

3. I personally prefer the United Polaris seat to any business class seat that American or Delta offer. It is not claustrophobic.
   Delta seats are flat out awful on the 767 and most A330 – those seats debuted in 2008!

4. The FAA’s issue could be easily mitigated by modifying the circuit that turns on a green led that FA’s use to check if the seat is locked upright for landing/take off. Add a detector for door open and latched.
   No led the FA will open and latch the seat door in the process of fixing the seat position. If led is blue the door is incorrect but seat is ok. Green means all is well per current process.
   But as I write I realize the FAA’s position. US airlines are poor in maintaining the cabin so manual checking is the default..

5. Of all the fascinating airline economics out there, the one the I find most fascinating is how a door is both needed to the point the extra weight and potential maintenance is a non-issue, but also not needed the second an extra FA is needed, whose time amounts to ~$20/J seat/flight.

6. Polaris was designed purposefully to be the densest business class seat in the US. Because Smizek wanted his 2-4-2 J cabin to be just as dense with all aisle access.
   I’m amazed more travel bloggers don’t talk about that.

   Good riddance if they ever do get rid of it. It’s a Smizek relic that shouldn’t be celebrated.

7. The strive for density that fractionally compromised dimensional fit that many here complain about also permitted the upgrades they sought and enjoyed. Without maintaining density levels, they’d be in upright, non aisle seats in economy. United’s ability to strive for the highest premium cabin ratios is impressive. They do need to staff accordingly to deliver the service they promise… and some crew need to execute it as intended.

8. Polaris was obsolete when it debuted. Delta had already rolled out the Delta One suites on the A3 . Delta now has 60 aircraft with Delta one Suites and United hasn’t even announced a new product.

   Delta somehow managed to staff an A350 and 339 with enough FAs to meet the FAA’s staffing requirements but UA is debating about whether even to offer doors because they won’t staff the planes adequately? FA staffing for doors is the least of the issues.

   Despite being the only one of the big 4 that does not have a new FA contract or elevated non-contract FA rates (DL), UA wants to be stingy on FAs?

   and let’s be clear that the only way they can make the 787-9 operationally compete with the A350 is by having 50 seats less than DL will have on their newest and most capable 359s, let alone the 35Ks.

   the 787 was never designed to go the ranges that UA needs. their costs will soar, they will have an uncompetitive product, and more efficient competitors will eat UA’s lunch.

   Pride cometh before the fall.

9. I’m one of many (and I see some have already chimed in here) that don’t feel Polaris is inferiors to DL and AA.

   Tim loses all credibility so his opinions don’t even matter anymore, but I actually prefer UA over the other too. I agree with others that DL’s seat isn’t that comfortable. I don’t think UA is all that small, I think the bedding is what puts it over the top for me. As one that flies long haul wide bodies alot, I don’t really see why a door is a big deal. Whether an airline has one or not, I can’t see anyone else in the private biz class seats and no one can see me. I could care less about the door!

10. Lisa,
    you are free to come up with your own opinion.

    but the global industry is moving toward suites with doors.

    Polaris was obsolete before it even entered service. They stuck to it for a decade and are now debating whether they will sufficiently staff an aircraft with suites.
    DL has managed to operate two widebody types w/ doors for a decade and clearly meets the FAAs requirements.

    just as w/ seatback AVOD, where it exists on planes, the majority of passengers use it. Those that argue it doesn’t matter are the ones that don’t ever get on planes that have it and know what they are missing.

    and DL has precisely THREE more 767-300ERs than UA at this point. DL will be retiring more 767-300ERs this year and it will be UA that will have not only an even larger fleet of older and less reliable aircraft but also a fleet that is less economical.

    and all of the non-sense about the consistency of UA Polaris across the fleet will go out the window the day the first aircraft enters service w the new configuration.

    Everyone could see that UA chose an obsolete product and has stuck with it and the arguments for why they haven’t changed it will vaporize in about a month when they realize that, like AVOD that UA copied from DL, suites with doors are a must have.

11. I also do like the Polaris seat. Important for me is the lie flat seat so I can sleep. Installing a less dense product will most likely mean that the prices go up. Airplane real estate is expensive. There is nothing I really miss with the current Polaris product. Personally, I don’t need doors. Everyone can pick over the door when standing in the aisle anyway. And United has always been about ‘Uniting people – Connecting the World’. It’s more difficult to connect with Doors 🙂 And to Tim’s argument about the A350: If the A350 is really so much better – United has some on order. But they have stated before that they don’t have the Mega Hubs that could fill much bigger airplanes. British Airways makes BNA, AUS etc work on 787. That’s all traffic that would otherwise go via bigger hubs. Maybe the future is more direct? Certainly the A380 has been a struggle for many carriers. Size isn’t everything 🙂

12. Bill,
    the A350, like the A320 compared to the B737, is only slightly larger and more capable but it is enough to make a difference.

    No, United didn’t order the B787 because its hubs weren’t big enough. UA didn’t order the 787 because UA is a former division of Boeing and UA wanted the first new generation widebody that became available and that was the 787.

    Airbus has followed Boeing on just about every product and has improved in the process.

    The A350 is simply a little big larger but has the capability to do far more than the B787. DL has configured its newest A350-900s with 275 seats which is apparently what they think will be enough to fly the maximum those planes can fly which is well beyond what even the high gross weight 787s can fly with 225 passengers.
    Being able to carry 50 more passengers and able to fly even further and carry even more cargo matters.

    and we aren’t even getting to the A350-1000 which will be the longest range ultra long haul capable new generation aircraft.
    Only if Boeing ever gets the 777-8 in the air will there even be a contest.

    Yes, UA has A350s on order and they will add enormous cost to their operation to add them on top of their 787s and 777s which will remain in their fleet for another 15 years.

    so UA’s solution is to use the planes they have and add higher and higher operating costs.

    Some people here are so convinced that UA’s international network is invincible but DL already makes about 30% more profit flying 30% fewer ASMs.
    DL IS beating UA in the international marketplace. UA has to subsidize its international network and that will continue to be the case as DL’s international fleet is modernized even further while UA holds onto older 777s and then replaces them w/ less capable 787s.

    DL figured out a decade ago that suites matter. Whether you or I want to close the door or not doesn’t matter. Suites have become industry standard.
    UA will have a mismatched fleet; Polaris 1 will not be standardized. It took UA 7 years to install Polaris and the retrofit of a new seat will take just as long if not longer.

    and UA will either have to not put doors on which will make their product uncompetitive or they have to add additional FAs which will make the plane overstaffed or it won’t be as capable.

    UA’s international leadership is very much being challenged – by their own decisions.

13. I thought United’s business class was okay but then I flew Turkish airlines. There was no comparison. Turkish was Head and shoulders above United

14. I do not get the hate for Polaris. The seat is solid. Its not the best but it gets most of the basics right. The door fetish is just that. With the Polaris layout you have to go out of your way to look at other passengers.
    At the end of the day its all $$. Space on a plane costs money. If UA move to a less dense layout, they have to charge more. Wallstreet does not care how its done, they just want their payout.

    By far and away UA’s biggest issue is catering. The food is really bad. They would be far better off working on improving that.

15. I read here that Gary refers to “Delta business class seats are far better…” Well, well, well… Gary, in the comments of your other recent post about Riyadh Air’s 787‑9, you, or someone impersonating you, suggested that DeltaOne Suites are “garbage Thompson Vantage XL.” So, which is it?

    I do like United Polaris on their 787s (and the 767 and 777s that have the ‘new’ suites). I mean, you need to set expectations right–it’s Q-suite, or ANA’s ‘The Room,’ but it’s decent for a modern, premium ‘business class’ product. Sure, doors are nice, but it’s really not that big of a deal. Keep the ice cream sundaes and pajamas (for the longer flights), please.

    @Tim Dunn — Like, @John, @cairns, and @James, I know I’ve complained on here about the older seats on Delta’s 767s and a330s. But, as in Dr. Strangelove, I’ve ;learned to love the (older seats).’ In fact, the two-class 763s are fantastic for using GUCs to Europe, when you can get outsized-value by purchasing Main and getting confirmed upgraded to DeltaOne. Yeah, it’s the older seat, but think of those deals! Anyway, I realize you’re often approaching this from an industry/financials level, but on the passenger-side, it’s just something to consider. Besides, I’m sure DL will phase those out at some point, like their 747s and 777s. Nothing lasts forever.

    @MaxPower — My least favorite US-carrier current business class configuration remains United’s 772 with the backward facing 2-4-2. Sure, 1A on that aircraft might be better than 53E (last row, middle economy), but it’s simply a ‘bad’ plane these days. When you book the ‘new’ Polaris on a United 787, but the airline swaps it for one of these on a redeye from SFO-EWR, it’s groan-worthy.

16. Polaris is a joke, I hope the seat gets replaced soon. For all those who claim consistent excellent Polaris seats, I guess you haven’t been on a United 757 ‘Polaris’ lately

17. Absolutely true! CrAAppy food and crAAppy wines make people buy elsewhere. And they do. And the AAirline who has fewer people willing to pAAy for their crAAppy product (food and wine included) and has to give it out for free to upgraders ends up with finAAncial performance problems.

18. I enjoy reading complaints about First Class seating, that long last bastion I’ll never get the pleasure of again.

19. I do travel twice a year to South America Polaris class and it’s pleasant, but united should upgrade little bit better, the clean up crew is missing the target, dirty seats used pillows and pillows cover maybe because it’s going to South America , just a suggestion, thanks

20. @Jd — Hey, those 757s are still alright. I’d rather have the 2-2 with tiny, old lie-flat than a recliner. Besides, they operate those on short-haul, sometimes, too. Like, EWR-ORD, EWR-BOS, EWR-FLL, etc., so it’s still a treat when you get that over a 737 or a320. But, sure, for EWR-SFO/LAX, I’d certainly prefer a 787 with Polaris, any day.

    @Mary — MA’Am, this is AA United post… oh, I see, you hAAte AAmericAAn. So subtle. BAAh!

    @Joanie Adams — I know this is quite petty, but we were talking about Polaris ‘Business’ Class here (like, lie-flat seats, found on mostly wide-body aircraft for long-haul flights, think 787 from EWR-JNB.) It is ironic that much of the existing ‘First’ Class with United these days is just recliners in 2-2 configuration on like a 737 for a domestic or regional route. American is the only remaining US carrier with a true ‘First’ Class in addition to ‘Business’ Class on it’s 773 (and a321T). Ah, nuance.

21. Y’all just mad because you cant afford FC, unless you get a free upgrade.

22. @Tim ja — I don’t see any ‘mad’ people here, but ok… I definitely pay plenty to sit up-front.

    Pretty sure that Gary’s post here was about United’s Polaris business class seats (the ones designed by Acumen), and the speculation that the airline may upgrade its hard product.

    Other than EWR-SFO/LAX, and a few other domestic routes that United operates with wide-body aircraft, these particular seats aren’t even on many domestic routes (you know, the ones eligible for ‘complimentary’ upgrades, which you referred to as ‘free,’ even though folks ‘earn’ that status to be eligible for those privileges, but, again, ‘ok…’)

    So, this isn’t about who’s willing to pay for what–that’s an entirely different matter–no, this is all about seats, sir. Like, do you want ‘doors’ with your seats? Well, do ya??

23. @ Tim — No one here besides you cares about Delta or United’s profits. United is better. Get over it.

24. Tim, UA was more profitable than DL in Q1, with UA also having more revenue from running the airline. This is without the billions in extra credit card revenue DL receives. It is also without UA having four fortress hubs in cities that don’t even have competing airports in the city.

    When UA updates its agreement with Chase, they will have a significant tailwind that will amount to significantly more than what they pay in updated contracts.

    UA is also number in local market share in each hub, including NYC, where DL inefficiently has a split hub operation, one of them constrained by a perimeter rule. It’s why DL needs 15% more flights just to have a similar number of seats.

    UA is tied for number one in LAX with DL, in spite of DL offering more total seats.

    It won’t be long before UA has over 200 787s, some with high-premium configurations. They’ll have close to 300 787s if they convert options to orders, which Kirby has indicated will be done.

25. @ Mark — But DL will have 100 POS 767-300s!

26. Mark,
    UA exceeded DL’s margin in Q1 because UA has 6 CBA representing 65k employees- nearly all of UA’ s non-pilot employees that do not have current CBAs or they will not be current as of May.
    When you pay your employees $1 billion less than the competition, of course you can generate higher margins.

    Cling to the notion of a new Chase contract. Do you not realize that DL’s Amex contract is also up for renewal later this decade?

    DO you also not realize that DL has US airline exclusive engine overhaul agreements that will deliver $5 billion in revenue and $1 billion in more profit EVERY YEAR on every engine in the US carrier fleet except the GEnx on the 787?

    and, no, UA is not adding 200 787s to its fleet. They have no choice but to retire scores of ancient 767s and 777s. DL is retiring its 767s while UA keeps holding onto just a “little more growth”

    and you also realize that DL did not invent the credit card loyalty program? but it has managed to perfect it better than any other airline. You desperately want to exclude whatever advantage DL has while making excuses for UA for failing to figure out what it takes to come up w/ an industry leading credit card program years ago.

    and UA can’t stand that AA will have so many business class seats on its 777Ws so AA will do the same thing on the much smaller 789s and then push that plane to fly 17 hour flights which the 359 can easily fly with 50 more seats.

    and because the 789 has so few seats and so many suites, UA will have no choice but to spend much more on staffing and overstaff the aircraft or else have an uncompetitive product while saying that “doors don’t really matter”
    the real issue is that the 789 doesn’t have the range to fly 18 hour flights w/o pulling dozens of seats off the plane and then they need too many FAs because of the doors relative to the number of total seats on the plane.

    UA’s fleet is already far less fuel efficient than any other large airline’s fleet and now they are also going to make it far less labor efficient.

    DL is just waiting for UA to continue to trip on the banana and DL will economically grow where UA can no longer economically do so.

27. and Los Angeles World Airports specifically says that DL’s share at LAX is the largest at 19.41% while UA’s is at 15.55% which is hardly TIED.

    It is no surprise that UA fans like you can’t get the basic facts straight. But, of course, LAWA has no idea what they are talking about and you do.

    Gene,
    I can assure you that UA will have 767s long after DL has retired them because DL is retiring them now and UA is desperately afraid that they will not be able to keep growing so holds onto every single widebody they can for fear that someone else might be able to add a route before UA can.

    and even when those 787s come, they will have to be configured w/ 50 less seats than DL will have on their 359s in order for UA to get the same amount of flight time out of the 787s as DL gets out of its 359s.
    and the economics of staffing for 64 or how ever many business class seats doesn’t work.

    UA has painted itself into a corner and their vaunted international route system won’t economically work as UA continues to push airplanes that aren’t capable of flying the routes UA wants them to fly.

28. Tim, when UA mechanics get a raise, DL will also give their mechanics a raise. The only group that hasn’t had a new contract in years is the flight attendant group. Mechanics at UA got a new contract, now they’ll get another new one.

    And yes, all airlines will renegotiate credit card agreements. UA’s last one was the first of the most recent cycle so they are missing out on billions of extra revenue that DL receives. Yes DL will also have a new agreement, but future credit card agreements between UA and DL will be much more level, especially with all the credit card uptake UA has seen, and their number one share in all hubs, especially NYC, where DL is number 2, behind UA.

    And the figures in question were UA’s share of *local* traffic. That DL is tied with UA for LAX local traffic in spite of having 4% more seats speaks to the success of UA’s strategy.

    And whatever UA retires, yes they will take delivery of almost 200 787s. DL will also retire many planes but without as many new planes to backfill and allow growth.

    UA has so much growth and momentum because of Kirby. Bastian is more about maintaining status quo at DL. That’s why the gap has narrowed so much and why UA was more profitable than DL in the last quarter.

    I know which airline is setting themselves up for a brighter and more exciting future. It isn’t DL.

29. Tim, you also talk about how DL needs two hubs to compete against UA single hub operations as if it’s a good thing, when really it’s the opposite.

    You yourself have said many times that split hub operations are not winners, usually in the context of Tokyo or London.

    But of course you know that DL runs a split hub operation in NYC, one of them constrained by a perimeter rule. You also say that DL is large in the Midwest due to two hubs in DTW and MSP. As you admit, UA’s single hub in ORD is much more efficient at covering the Midwest.

    We could also bring in the fact that DL also has two marginally profitable hubs on the west coast. SEA is the worst-performing hub thanks to being a distant second to AS. Margins will drop further as AS continues to bulk up. That leaves LAX, where DL doesn’t even have 20% market share and faces intense competition. DL would love to have UA’s powerhouse SFO hub.

    And the revenue DL gets from engine overhauls and oil refineries still left them less profitable than UA in the last quarter.

    And of course you know that UA’s domestic revenue and traffic numbers will continue to grow at a high rate, thanks to all of the A321s and 737s being delivered this year.

30. Tim, I’ll let you have the last word. My points have been made and I can’t listen to you make the same points over and and over again, especially when you don’t even answer Max’s repeated question about “which UA hub do you consider a fortress?” in spite of you saying UA has them.

    Brett Snyder calls you out on this, saying people get sucked into circular arguments with you. Ben has temporarily banned you from OMAAT, and it is so refreshing to read civilized comments that don’t devolve into this.

    So please, have the last word here. My points are made. I’m out.

31. Mark,
    LAWA as with every other airport reports passenger boardings.
    DL is 24% larger than UA at LAX by that metric and I can assure you that DL doesn’t shove that many more connections through LAX than UA does. You simply can’t admit that UA really isn’t a distant #2 even though data clearly shows it is.

    UA’s mechanics shot down the company’s proposal and the offer the union brought them by a near unanimous amount. They are so far underpaid that no other airline will have to increase pay by the same amount.
    UA’s labor costs will grow far faster IF and WHEN UA decides to pay its people industry comparable wages. and if that doesn’t happen, the much improved labor relations that Munoz handed Kirby will quickly fall apart.
    We all know that UA’s massive growth plans don’t work at industry comparable wages. Ed Bastian does not need to grow any strategic holes at the cost of DL employees; DL is committed to running an economically sustainable operation and UA is not – now matter how much you and everyone else want to argue otherwise.

    and UA is not going to grow as fast as you think they are. And if UA can make money, DL can as well. And DL will do it with much more fuel efficient aircraft – which is exactly why DL makes so much more money per seat mile over the Pacific than UA.

    LGA and JFK compliment each other and serve different purposes. DL uses LGA to be the largest domestic airline in NYC and doesn’t try to match what UA does on the international side. It is not hard for anyone that is remotely objective to understand. LGW/LHR and NRT/HND are nowhere comparable to LGA/JFK.

    and UA did not make more revenue in 2024 or in the first quarter based on all revenue sources including credit cards and the refinery. And you are quick to dismiss credit card revenue because UA doesn’t do as well as DL and UA did try to buy a refinery but failed – which is why DL consistently pays less for jet fuel than UA.

    You simply spout the same things over and over again and are incapable of seeing the big picture.

    In this case, UA faces the prospect of overstaffing its 787s because of the FAA’s FA staffing requirements and yet DL has been able to work within those requirements for a decade. UA can’t stand that AA will have aircraft with larger premium cabins or that DL has A350s that can fly further than AA or UA’s 787s so UA will turn its 787s into the most expensive widebodies in the industry per seat and not generate the revenue to cover those costs.

    UA has been painted into a corner and those who can really understand that UAs house of cards will fall
    Pride always comes before the fall.

32. @Gene — Hey now, I care about airlines relative and comparative financial viability and success. Over the years, I’ve invested and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on airfare. It’s no fun to become a ‘creditor’ or to lose it all when an airline fails. Those who know keep up with this stuff. I don’t think most frequent flyers need to bother with Form 8 or 10-Ks or quarterly reports, etc. But it can be interesting if you find it so.

    On Delta vs. United, I’m mostly with @Tim Dunn on this, though I still think DL flight attendants and ground crews should join the pilots and finally unionize (and maybe they will soon!) Also, as a passenger, I simply prefer Delta’s superior customer service and their soft-product over United–*usually* better food on DL, too. Bah!

    On older aircraft, yeah, they both airlines have that problem (as does American, depending on the particular type, like Flagship First seats on some a321Ts needing literal duct tape to keep operable, yikes). I referred above to the ancient 772s that United still flies with the 2-4-2 rear-facing ‘lie-flat.’ Again, better than Economy, but not great. And on the premium lounge side, while the newer Polaris lounges are excellent, Delta is really stepping up with DeltaOne lounges. Of course, regardless of the airline, all older lounges need a refresh.

33. @Tim Dunn — “Pride always comes before the fall.” 100%. Sometimes feels like ‘smoke and mirrors,’ and not just in this industry…

    Anyway, since you and others were discussing these aircraft ‘modernization’ projects, I can’t help but think of the relative lifespan of these airframes and the proliferation of composite materials, especially with the 787.

    I presume most commercial airlines expect to get at least 20-30 years from their aircraft, if they own them. But, we really don’t know yet is what will happen in the later years with the 787, which is primarily composite (not just the wings, etc., but the actual fuselage).

    Like, will that be more of a long-term issue than say those with mostly aluminum? It sure could be. *nervous laughter*

34. Not a one talks about the catering in the Polaris Lounge in EWR. You aRe served on An unsanitary unsafe placemat without benefit of your cutlery being placed on a napkin. Please complain. It’s disgraceful and UA is not even trying to ameliorate it.

35. I also don’t get the hate for the Polaris seat. I have flown it many times including 4 TPACs last year. It’s a seat that holds up in terms of comfort for 12-15 hours, especially with the bedding. Perhaps I’m not the target market but I care a lot more about the pillow, mattress pad, and entertainment system than a door. There’s already plenty of privacy as you basically can’t see any of the other pax when you’re in your pod.