UA commits to LAX with terminal 7/8 renovations

[WorldTraveler]

http://newsroom.united.com/2015-05-13-Sneak-Peek-Convenience-Comfort-and-Class-to-Await-United-Customers-at-New-Look-LAX

some nice looking improvements

good job UA

 

[FWAAA]

Looks nice.   UA frequent flyers are already bitching that the new United Club apparently won't have showers, particularly galling now that DL has finished adding showers to its LAX club (AA's club has had showers for a long time).   
 
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-airlines-mileageplus/1679707-groundbreaking-redevelopment-t7-t8-lax.html

 

[WorldTraveler]

does seem a little hard to believe that UA isn't willing to invest in showers but that hardly seems like a make or break part of the whole plan.

I would also bet that if push came to shove, UA could add them if the outcry is great enough.

As for AA, since they were the first of the big 3 to do a 21st century renovation of their terminal, it isn't surprising that they have had them longer than other single terminal carriers.

 

[FWAAA]

AA added a shower to the old Admirals Club (that's now the TSA clubhouse) before the terminal renovation, so its position as first-mover on the LAX terminal refurbishment isn't relevant to the shower situation.

 

[WorldTraveler]

good to know but I'm not sure too many passengers really care who did it first.

It's a matter of who has them and who doesn't.

specific to UA, they are slowly realizing now that their yield is the lowest among the big 3 that their product is not up to par and they have to bring it up - including their operational reliability - if they want to have be a high value carrier.

I'm not sure that adding a couple showers is really going to make a huge difference in the expense of operating or renovating their terminals but some decisions aren't solely based on standalone economics.

Finally, for me, a shower on arrival after an int'l flight and before I start my activities in that city is of more value than a shower in a lounge that is behind security and before I board a flight.

 

[FWAAA]

good to know but I'm not sure too many passengers really care who did it first.

It's a matter of who has them and who doesn't.

AA's Admirals Club members and Oneworld elites who access the LAX Admirals Club certainly appreciated that AA installed the shower a long time ago.

You're the know-it-all who tried to re-write history and declared that AA's LAX club had a shower because it remodeled its terminal in 2001-03, before UA or DL. Those of us who use Terminal 4 on a very frequent basis over the course of many years actually know the timeline. I don't know any of the specifics of the Delta (formerly Western) terminal because I don't enter it very often. Same thing with ATL - I try to avoid flying there.

Anyway - you're the one who brought it up, and I figured that the purveyor of "whole truth" would want to know the actual facts.

An arrivals lounge for visitors to LAX would be a great idea and should be considered, but I certainly see the value of showers inside the departure lounge of a world-wide hub like LAX. Travelers from numerous airlines arrive at LAX, enter T-4 for their connecting flights, and can take a relaxing shower in one of eight private shower suites in the Admirals Club before that connecting flight. Plus three more showers in the Flagship Lounge (first class lounge) adjacent to the Admirals Club.

Given how popular those showers are, I agree with the UA elites who are angry at the prospect that their new LAX club won't have showers available.

 

[WorldTraveler]

again, other than you, there aren't customers who care who had it first.

They care who has them and who doesn't. As long as DL and AA and whoever has them in TBIT have comparable facilities, there isn't any market value is saying "we were there first." You don't build market strength based on how long you have had showers. If you believe otherwise, provide the proof.