After asking MileagePlus members about their interest in an upgraded “Polaris Plus” seat, United Airlines has offered additional details about what such a product might look like onboard.
United Airlines Offers More Details On “Polaris Plus”
On April 17, 2024 United Airlines held a (delayed) earnings call, reporting a quarterly loss it blamed on Boeing and the temporary grounding of its 737 MAX 9 fleet. The way these events work is that CEO Scott Kirby begins with remarks, followed by other C-Suite members. That is followed by a time of question and answer, first by financial analysts and then by journalists.
During that exchange, Chase analyst Jamie Baker brought up the new Polaris Plus product:
“So I’ve been following this Polaris press for Champagne topic on social media. And I’ll admit, in all seriousness, as an analyst, I’m intrigued by the notion of potentially unbundling the forward cabin. The evolution in economy is well chronicled at this point, but we haven’t seen much change upfront. You had the — the passenger that books last pays the most, but has the same experience as the passenger of the books early and pay the least, the way it used to be in economy. Is this something I should even be thinking about or is it a waste of my time?”
Andrew Nocella, United’s Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, answered the question and provided more insight on what United is considering with its enhanced product within business class:
“What I would say is we continue to believe that there’s ways to further diversify our revenue streams and segment them. And we continue to believe that there is more opportunity for premium products that we don’t have on board the aircraft today. And those incremental premium products, I’m not going to announce it today, but I can tell you, you have many teams of people work on how to further innovate and provide more and more choice and to monetize that choice on our behalf, obviously, in the future. So I think that headline was just a hint more to come and a lot of people working hard at United to make sure that we can differentiate ourselves not only from our US competitors, but many of our competitors around the globe.”
Notice Nocella frames this question as driven by revenue. I like that he says “there is more opportunity for premium products that we don’t have on board the aircraft today,” thereby implying that Polaris Plus will not simply be Polaris in its current form, with cutbacks (a la “Polaris Basic”) coming for those who do not pay up.
But I cannot help but think that instead of paying “many teams” to “innovate” and “monetize” Polaris, Nocella should focus on continuing to improve the catering and service onboard. If United truly wants to “differentiate” itself from other carriers, it should at least offer what Delta does…espresso, mixed nuts with pistachios and pecans, not just broken cashews and almonds, and more fundamentally, perhaps an a la carte approach to dining.
Of course, moving to a la carte dining in Polaris Business Class would require more staffing. But how about just placing another 1-2 flight attendants in business class instead of paying “many teams” to try to squeeze more money out of the product? I’m quite confident that people (myself included) would be willing to pay more for a product that delivers consistent and reliable bedding, wi-fi, food, drink, and service. Offer better Champagne for everyone, and everyone will pay more for the product.
> Read More: United Airlines Considering Polaris Plus Cabin With “Press For Champagne” Button
In the meantime, American Airlines has announced its own enhanced product within business class it calls a Flagship Suite Preferred Seat. In addition to a larger seat, additional amenities like pajamas, a mattress pad, and larger amenity kits will be offered.
CONCLUSION
Nocella offers us a bit more insight into what United is thinking concerning a “Polaris Plus” product. While the focus is on monetization, I cannot help but think that United’s resources would be far better spent improving the service and food onboard for every passenger, creating goodwill and a consistent experience that passengers will be happy to pay for instead of “class warfare” within the business class cabin.
image: United
While I suspect it will happen, I do hope it does not lead to Basic Business fares. I do not want to be concerned or bothered with wondering if I bought a fare that includes everything or leaves out things, especially on board. I also easily can see less-informed travelers on board seeing some passengers receiving varied service aspects and being upset with FAs. Would mgmt truly expect FAs to be consistent with the differences in service?
Agree they should focus on overall improvement to the product do differentiate rather than squeezing additional pennies from existing customers
As long as it’s a reduced fare by a noticeable amount, I wouldn’t mind a Business Basic on a red eye to Europe. I’ve skipped meals in J before and I have just needed a good amount of zzz.
Except we know that will never happen. Given that it’s already a reality on some foreign carriers, “Basic Business” is coming, but what will happen is, the existing fare will be rebranded “Basic” with seat assignments, checked baggage allowance, mileage earning, and lounge access stripped out. Then if you want the same amenities you get today, you’ll be asked to buy up to “Business Standard” for a $500 premium. It’ll be the same BS and gaslighting about “responding to passenger feedback” that we saw with the rollout of Basic Economy.
Unfortunately I agree.
Unfortunately, I think that is most likely. UA is already just a decent seat (though not hugely different than the competition to my thinking, and starting to fall behind) with a poor soft product. But moreover, it is usually more expensive than the competition. That is why over the last few years I have gone from 1K to silver. I just don’t hear anything in this that makes me want to fly them. It sounds like paying more for an already overpriced product.
I don’t really understand this fascination with ‘better Champagne’ which appears to come mostly from bloggers more than anything. I fly nearly 200k miles a year, mostly up front and I couldn’t care less about what Champagne or Sparkling wine is offered. It has zero impact on my purchasing behavior, same goes for my similarly well travelled colleagues. Do I appreciate a nice glass of cold bubbly? Sure. Am I going to pick AA or an international carrier with a connection over UA because of it? Absolutely not.
Now food offerings are slightly different animal (pun intended). I often find myself having a nice meal (early dinner, late lunch) wherever I am as opposed to relying on the inflight option because I know how bad it will be. If I could pre-order (even pre-purchase) a significantly enhanced meal, that’s something I would be open too and I believe UA could derive a significant new revenue stream from.
I feel the same way the coffee/espresso obsession some bloggers seem to have. But hey, it’s not my thing, and yet others seem to enjoy it, so…oh well.
I think it’s just Ben and me? 😉
Which rather nicely sums up the most consistent blogs to follow and read.
I’m with you. It’s rare that I drink wine that isn’t champagne. It’s something I enjoy and have paid handsomely for in the past. The offerings on most flights in business class are pretty entry level, which seems fine to me given the setting. It’s an all you can drink buffet, which doesn’t really match well with providing a high end bottle, and the food service in-flight with Polaris is, at best, mediocre– at worst, truly terrible.
People who get on a plane with the plan to drink more than 2-3 glasses of champagne need to consider if they like champagne or have a problem. And how much more money are you going to pay for those glasses of upgraded champagne? Are you going to pay $200 or $300 or more for a seat that gets you maybe $50 worth of better, but still relatively low end, champagne (if you’re lucky it will be $50 worth) to go with a poor rendition of a BBQ chicken breast before nodding off on your way to an early morning landing in Europe? Your money would go a lot further on the ground in Europe buying champers, if that’s what you actually like to drink.
For me, I’ll have maybe one glass of the low end stuff, or a cocktail (which is generally consistently better than wine on a plane anyway), hope the food is reasonable enough, and get some rest.
Champagne is like caviar in first class for the miles and points crowd…it’s not something they will buy when at home, but they will gladly indulge it when flying.
Seems like F is making a return
If only UA had done F right the first time.
If only AA would do F right now…
F would be a change of more than 30 years of the Texas Air Corporation idea that a merged J/F is “good enough” (though, I’d argue today that Polaris is basic J, not a merged J/F)
Yes, there is a market for F. It is not business travelers, but very high end leisure. As such, it probably should only be on the following routes to start
HNL
OGG
PPT
NRT
LAX
If F takes off in these markets, than expect to others
PPT is averaging 48% loads. Seems there is not much market for any class of service.
NRT is tough to compete with JAL or ANA with F service. It will end up being nothing but non-revs and upgrades.
The rest are domestic markets and they are not going to configure anything for that other than the remote possibility of transcon NYC-LAX….but even AA is failing on that.
The only markets that might ever generate revenue in F on a daily basis are
NYC-LAX
NYC-LHR
LAX-LHR
you are thinking business routes
Business routes are NOT routes F should EVER be on. F is NOT a OPM product. The only route that F would work that you mentioned is LAX/LON due to the rich movie stars
People are dropping tens of thousands when they go to HNL and OGG. NH has no issues selling F there. There is a market for F on those two islands (think rich honeymooners/vacationers.
PPT, yeah, the loads in the back are brutal. But again, that’s not a poor person’s vacation spot. Not surprised they cannot sell out Y on that route
F is an alternative to flying private for the very rich
I find all that extremely tedious, this kind of customisation complicates the customer journey at the best of times and fails miserably when you’re selling tickets as part of a joint venture which is supposedly ‘metal agnostic’ and includes multiple airlines trying similar, but not quite identical, things (see e.g. Allegris seat differentiation). Nothing to stop anyone from trying, but I suspect, and very much hope, that these initiatives will not generate any real return on investment, and could have a negative impact on customer goodwill/loyalty.
Indeed. This is not complicated. It’s just bean-counters (you know, the same ones that have absolutely destroyed Boeing…) obsessed with finding ways to screw customers by squeezing more and more out of them while giving them less and less: cut costs everywhere, but never reduce prices, while you upcharge for less and less. It’s screw the customers, screw the employees, screw everyone because they have no other options (everyone’s doing it). This is why people come to absolutely despise corporations, and they celebrate when your giant corporation falls apart – note all the joyful dancing on Boeing’s grave. United constantly devalues their “loyalty” program massively, over and over again. I wish them Boeing’s fate.
The quotes from the earnings call are bafflegab moronic .
Simply another slight-of-hand by companies which advocate for DEI , which is also moronic .
why not finally get one thing right, and then move on, instead of butterfly from shiny object to shiny object?
i think discussions by teams of people on this subject is bad news for fixing the current state of Polaris
The idea of “unbundling” the cabin is a recipe for disaster. This is an elite product and should be marketed, priced and sold as such. They need to quit thinking and start doing.
@Maryland-Yes, UA is increasingly behaving like a government agency-lots of talk, lots of meetings, lots of teams, lots of nothing.
@ jetAway
A lot of time and expense wasted when the solution is apparent. They want to create Polaris Minus .
Unbundling the premium cabin will be quickly reversed once the economy falters, demand drops, and the industry, perpetually in a boom and bust cycle, will need to cut “ancillary” costs.
Polaris “Plus”, or whatever they call it (I avoid United wherever possible because I’ve never had a good experience with them), makes no sense. United does do a lot of things right and in an cutting edge way in serving some markets, but when it comes to Polaris, they should improve the food, make the service levels consistent.
This is just F starting again…how many times do we have to keep seeing J get better, and then they decide they are leaving money on the table, so they add something to make F…kinda. it’s just history repeating itself.
Agreed with all above that UA and Polaris need better food and service at the regular J level before they move on to adding business plus things or paring things back. I currently eat in the Polaris lounge before flights, and won’t fly through Denver bc there is no Polaris lounge there, because the food and service flow on board UA is awful especially on shorter trans-Atlantic flights. If they could fix the food and have one or two more FA to make the service better and the current FA less stressed, then customers would be more open to paying even more for extras.
I think the reality is they will do business basic with no lounge access and crappier or no bedding/food on board is far more likely.
Let’s be honest, they’re just looking for ways to squeeze more cash from their customers. The corporate bullshit bingo phrasing is all you need to know.
@David … +1 . Yep , the greed is transparently obvious .
Amen!!
Matthew, as a 1K flyer for a decade and avid reader of your blog, this is one of the best comments sections I’ve read in a while.
I know you’re a big “free speech” fan, but your efforts would be so much improved if you removed all the dumb-*ss comments left behind on typical posts (and also ignored Reddit stories…but that’s another conversation).
Thank you for bringing this situation with UA to light. I agree with 90% of flyers’ remarks above. Focus on getting Polaris right in the first place b/f advocating for an “advanced” product. Otherwise, who is dumb enough to buy/upgrade?
This reminds me of the concept Thompson is trying in hotels. In the Austin property, as an example, their Tommy brand (a supposed limited and lesser version of Thompson) is in the same structure as the Thompson. In fact, the elevators are the same, the restaurants are shared, and the hallways are all connected. You even check in at the same desk.
For me the takeaway was a really strange experience. Coming off the elevator on your floor there are signs pointing to Tommy rooms or Thompson rooms which was very odd. You are basically in the same hotel with people paying $189 for a more budget oriented property and those paying $400 for more upscale. In the end though you are really all in the same hotel. I have opted for The Proper now when there as I find it all a bizarre experience.
When you have a bean counter running an airline, they are going to count beans, not customers’ satisfaction.
They have some expensive, some would say unrealistic in the long term, labor contracts to pay. Expect more nickle and diming to be the norm. Personally I find it annoying. Exhausting.
I think they already started rolling out “basic” Polaris when I flew HND-SFO this week. Dinner was dried chicken and the IFE monitor didn’t work (except for the commercials, then the screen would go blank. No movies, no safety video, no map). Luckily I was able to stream IFE on my tablet. Meanwhile my friend flew on JAL and had a feast. (But a shout out to the crew. They were wonderful!)
Polaris Minus. You nailed it.
The food in Polaris is mostly inedible in my opinion. For the past two years United mgmt has promised a better dining experience and has failed to deliver. (I am on a FB page with UA GS/1K and some of them regularly meet with UA mgmt ). While I don’t expect Polaris meals to be on par with the ME carriers they should at least be similar to what is served on DL and AA. When I fly UA Polaris I eat in the lounge prior to my flight.
Maybe their focus on qualifying frequent fliers is likely an impact. I don’t spend as much anymore with United because I have no incentive with the devaluation of miles and greater difficulty in attaining status. I’m flying more with other carriers based on convenience rather than airline loyalty. And I’m a million miler with United.
Flew UA 188 Polaris from JNB to EWR on May 1 and the service was exceptionally pleasant with a crew that went the extra mile. However, the flight itself was not a success: the food was inedible – disappointing on a 16-hour flight – to the point the FAs surrendered their salads so we Polaris folks could have something to eat, the main dishes were so bad. Flight left JNB late due to incoming delays, which caused a ripple effect for most of us missing our connections. UA’s choice option was for us to sit in EWR 10 hours, fly to Chicago then sit there for another 3 hours then fly on the SAT. Come to find the Chicago-SAT flight was canceled so we’d have been worse off in Chicago than siting in IAH. We were re-routed to Huston. Long story short, it took me 36 hours to go from Houston to SAT (bad storms in Houston where we were foolishly re-routed by UA notwithstanding the weather). UA personnel at the various clubs in IAH were terrific and tried their best but the complete meltdown at IAH simply overwhelmed everyone. If UA is seriously considering switching up Polaris, they had best start with food… Polaris food remains awful as compared with most other Star Alliance partners. The next step to “upgrade” an already experience is to take better care of missed connections and delays.