You guys are delirious. I mean, do they actually drug test you or not? You don’t see the ramifications do you? You are creating a company within a company. From maintenance viewpoint at a minimum you’ll need some line maintenance. Maybe, just maybe, a little more in the way of checks, possibly even “c†checks. Just like the Shuttle, didn’t really matter what was painted on them, we still worked them the same way. But what happens if TED does do well but United continues to struggle? At some point people (F/A’s and pilots, management, etc) are going to affiliate themselves with TED. This is going to get messy and complicated. United lays off because they suck, but now people bump into TED because we’re all the same yet you had nothing to do with TED and just knocked out a person that made TED successful? As for the public, people want simplicity. “I want to go from here to here, do I call TED, and do I call United? but it doesn’t matter because TED is part of United but I need to go to TED’s website to get what I want but TED doesn’t do that or go where I want to go so I need to go back to the United website to get to where I wanted to go…..sort of, right?, screw all this, lets go check SWA first.†You can’t fix what you already have so lets start something else; it’s bound to be successful. The people at United are its strength….ya…we were so good we found a way to go BK, amazing.
Ted- The Speculation
- Thread starter TheLarkAscending
- Start date
Ronin,
To be successful in business you have to take risks. This is the first innovative thing from UAL in years. The previous Shuttle was nothing more than mainline with some fresh paint. I say we cut them some slack and see where this thing goes. You might just be surprised.
To be successful in business you have to take risks. This is the first innovative thing from UAL in years. The previous Shuttle was nothing more than mainline with some fresh paint. I say we cut them some slack and see where this thing goes. You might just be surprised.
There is another danger to this 'irreverent' marketing approach, at least for an airline, that hasn't yet been mentioned: Ten years ago there was another new entrant that also had a casual, lighthearted approach to their advertising and corporate image. Even had a cute cartoon jet on the side of their airplanes.
But after Mothers' Day, 1996, it didn't seem so "cute" any more.
Just something to consider...
But after Mothers' Day, 1996, it didn't seem so "cute" any more.
Just something to consider...
Hey, I love innovation. You people know this is junk. YOU KNOW THIS...but you hope and pray that just somehow you can last a little longer. That somehow the bad will all go away and things will get better (and yes, all storms will pass). But do you really want United to succeed? Not Starfish or TED or my personal favorite...Cheap Trick. Then stop bullsh*ting yourselves with this charade. United does need innovation, it does need a huge facelift. If you want UNITED to survive then this is where your effort lies. You want to offer multiple products...fine. You want a new look and atmoshere with your business...great. Do what you need to do to accomplish this. Or gut this huge pig and start a "new" airline. You cannot have it both ways folks.737nCH11 said:
You're right this is off topic on UA. Perhaps you'd do better checking the US board and do a search for MDA/MAA. With all the time you spend on the US board fighting with CHIP, I find it hard to believe you dont know "who" this new airline is and have NEVER seen it mentioned there before. :down:ual06 said:
Nice try though.....
tadjr,
You miss the point. Some refer to it as "Brand Recognition".
Perhaps more importantly, "Brand Recognition" by the paying customer.
You miss the point. Some refer to it as "Brand Recognition".
Perhaps more importantly, "Brand Recognition" by the paying customer.
Um, no I dont think I did. If you've been following the MDA/MAA threads the plane is supposed to say USAirways on the side. It wont be MAA/MDA/Midatlantic. There wont be a midatlantic.com website, it will be USAirways. The distinction appears to only be for CCY to be able to pay "those guys" a different scale. Other than that, there wont be "another brand" to have to recognize.ual06 said:
In a perfect world, when the management team came out of their "brainstorm meeting" and declared that we were going to start ANOTHER airline and call it Ted, they would have been told to spend the rest of the day cleaning out their desks and pick up their final paycheck on the way out the door.
But this is United, where management has become the core thing. In maintenance it's no longer about maintaining aircraft, it's all about ADMINISTERING the maintenance of aircraft. Ted is just another layer to justify the thousands of management people we have on the payroll - one manager for every ten employees by recent count. As to responsibility and accountability - HA, HA what a joke! For example, we were recently told that United pays $16 a piece for one inch micarta scrapers. Management sees this as a problem - not because some managemant bozo is paying $16 a piece for one inch micarta scrapers but because we, the mechanics, are using them. The managers all have cellphones, pagers, laptops and all kinds of fancy assed "communications" tools but do you think a mechanic could find a working drop light so he can get into a dark E&E compartment and change the ships battery?
Somethings very wrong here and Ted ain't gonna fix any of it.
But this is United, where management has become the core thing. In maintenance it's no longer about maintaining aircraft, it's all about ADMINISTERING the maintenance of aircraft. Ted is just another layer to justify the thousands of management people we have on the payroll - one manager for every ten employees by recent count. As to responsibility and accountability - HA, HA what a joke! For example, we were recently told that United pays $16 a piece for one inch micarta scrapers. Management sees this as a problem - not because some managemant bozo is paying $16 a piece for one inch micarta scrapers but because we, the mechanics, are using them. The managers all have cellphones, pagers, laptops and all kinds of fancy assed "communications" tools but do you think a mechanic could find a working drop light so he can get into a dark E&E compartment and change the ships battery?
Somethings very wrong here and Ted ain't gonna fix any of it.
Exactly....nobody wants to hear, speak, or see the truth. The "towers" are still everywhere. But ssshhhhhh......somebody might here you 
Not to argue that they weren't indeed an accident waiting to happen, but until said day in May '96 they technically had a PERFECT safety record.737nCH11 said:
But, as Air Florida also learned a decade earlier, when you're a new kid on the block in this business one major screwup can do you in.
ValuJet hadn't killed anybody up to that point, but there were several indications that they were headed down that path. Remember the DC-9 which blew an engine on takeoff from ATL? The debris from the exploding engine severed a fuel line which started a major fire above the cabin of the aircraft. Luckily, the crew managed to get the plane on the ground and get everyone off before it was completely consumed on the runway. The FAA eventually cited ValuJet for trying to scrimp by using some third-world outfit to do engine overhauls. I worked in ATL during the ValuJet years, and this is one of several incidents that raised my eyebrows. Even before the Everglades crash I wouldn't let my family fly on them.
A little off topic, but let's put the record straight.
A little off topic, but let's put the record straight.
