GenevaFlyer

Yes, it is indeed. (Or, disclaimer, in the many recent trips I've taken in the past months, it has been)

NickB

I agree with the point you make in principle although, I must say, that I much prefer the lounge used by BA at CDG (viz. the CX lounge) to the AF CDG lounges (setting aside the Première lounge, of course): much better catering, better seating, plenty of light and apron views...

orbitmic

Actually, on that particular front, while I really like the CX lounge at CDG, I also very much like the lounge AF uses at LHR (ie the Skyteam lounge), which also matches much of your above description. In fact, I wouldn't mind stating that I prefer the CDG CX lounge to most BA lounges and the LHR Skyteam lounge to most AF lounges!

brunos

I agree that the CX CDG lounge, used by BA, is much nicer than the AF CDG lounges. I also find the catering somewhat superior to the Skyteam LHR lounge.

AF lounges outside of Europe tend to be quite poor (great that they moved to the QF business lounge in HKG). As a BA Gold you have access to the F lounges of OW airlines and I fully enjoy the F lounges in HKG (CX), KUL (MH), NRT/HND (JL), SYD/MEL (QF). These are better than the CX CDG lounge in terms of food/drinks.

San Gottardo

Simply not true that the home carrier always has the better lounges.

There are a number of lounges at CDG that are significantly better than AF. Emirates, Cathay, Etihad, to name but some. SAS is even worse, LH (ignoring their basement location for which one cannot blame the airline) only very slightly better.

Same at LHR, where a number of foreign - European and non-European - airlines' lounges are better than BA's First and Business lounges.

The real difference between airlines operating at their hubs and others is only that at the hubs some airlines may have a top-end lounge for use of First Class pax and selected FFP that outshines everything else. The Air France P lounge at CDG; the FCL/FCT at MUC, FRA, ZRH, GVA and VIE; the CCR at LHR (although I find the QR lounge in LHR much better than the CCR).

AF overall has mediocre lounges (with the exception of the P lounge @CDG) and it's usually even worse at outstations.

orbitmic

Yes, but that was not really my point - I was suggesting that the T4 Skyteam lounge at LHR is actually nicer than the BA Galleries Club lounges at LHR T5, just like the CX 2A lounge at CDG is superior to the AF business lounges at CDG. In other words, not comparing the "challenger" at LHR to the "challenger" at CDG but rather making a point similar to San Gottardo suggesting that the "home disadvantage" is not unique. On that front, by the way, I also agree with San Gottardo about LHR QR lounge > BA CCR.

CX CDG vs ST LHR is a different and complex question. Like you I tend to prefer the catering at the CX lounge (although not hugely), and while both have nice showers I prefer the CX ones. However ST has much nicer spaces including lovely relaxing rooms, it is a more pleasant lounge décor-wise in my view, and it is has a massage offer (although not permanent which makes it odd) which the CX lounge does not have. I like them both, but if I was pushed to choose, I would actually probably choose the ST lounge over the CX CDG one.

On your other lists, I am surprised that you like the JL lounges at HND and NRT. I actually find them poor even the F ones (and to me a shocking lapse considering the rest of the JL service which is excellent. I am also not that bothered by the MH F lounge at KUL. It is nice but to me nowhere near the new wing at HKG or the QF F lounges at SYD and MEL or the new one at LAX. To me, those (QF F at SYD, MEL, LAX, and CX F Wing at HKG) are world leaders when it comes to lounges accessible with mere FFP status.

NickB

That begs the question of whether we should bring the BA Flounge into the equation and if we do, I would undoubtedly prefer it to the ST lounge. I am barely ever in BA's LHR GC lounges so I cannot really comment on GC v ST Lounge.

The catering in the LHR ST lounge was rather nice in the very early days but that was a long time ago. Maybe I have been unlucky but the food I have seen in the ST lounges has generally been rather disappointing (although admittedly still better than in AF's non-P lounges). From that perspective, while neither will deliver anything remotely near a gastronomic experience, I would nonetheless personally see a much clearer demarcation catering-wise between the CX CDG lounge and the ST LHR lounge.

orbitmic

I prefer GF over the ST lounge too. There are, however, parts of the ST lounge I prefer over GF (e.g, those rest areas, the showers, the bathrooms, and even the general décor). I prefer the food in GF. I get to experience GC when I leave from the B gates and frankly, considering that many seem to suggest that it is the nicest of GCs it summarises a certain decline in BA lounge standings compared to the time I was silver. Even including GF, there are other LHR lounges that are significantly better than it, such as the QR lounge in T4 already mentioned by San Gottardo.

I agree it has gone down a lot, but I have a feeling that it "depends on the day" and time of the day. The other day, the breakfast offering was actually good and better than the last time I was in the CDG CX lounge at breakfast time in February. I have a bit the same feeling about the CX lounge, where again, I agree the food is better than the ST lounge overall. I have had both reasonably nice dishes (a weird but not unpleasant duck a few weeks ago) and very underwhelming ones (especially some of the Chinese options - not including the noodle bar - have sometimes felt like Tesco value dishes).

That said, again, if the purpose was to compare OW lounges to ST lounges, then I much prefer OW overall lounge offering. If the point was to compare "home" airline lounges to outstation lounges, my point remains that foreign airlines can sometimes do very well in outstations that they deem to be strategic and better than the home airline is not unusual (bar "star" lounges such as La Premiere or LH FCT/FCL), possibly also for the fact that smaller and less crowded lounges are in a way pleasant in their own right anyway!

brunos

I am in agreement with the points made by Orbitmic and NickB.

I find it fair to compare the OW lounges open to OW Emerald to the ST lounges open to AF FB Plat. This is the relevant comparison for the very-frequent flyers who post here.
And I believe that on regional flights, most of the posters here access lounge based on status rather than because they fly business class.

brunos

My point is that those lounges, even JL or MH, are quite superior to any AF lounge. I only used JL F lounge at NRT and I agree that it is not excellent, but I still like it with decent food served and an outstanding bar with some great liquors. MH is bankrupt (will terminate and be restructured on July 1). But the lounge itself is very nice, comfortable seats, airy with open tarmac view. The toilet/showers are nice. I love the cigar room. Their dining room serves a nice buffet all day and some nice ordered dishes at meal time. Wine is poor (only muscadet as white wine) but service is outstanding.

orbitmic

I fully agree with you that I much prefer the JL F lounge to any AF normal lounges. The HND one has a very nice atmosphere, but the food is not good and as you say wine poor too. I guess what I meant is that to me JL F and CX F simply do not play in the same league as CX F Wing or QF F or QR lounge at LHR. If AF was to try and take a "best practice" example, I'd rather they did not look at the JL/MH F lounges but at some of the above. Even if they wanted "generic" lounges as examples, I would prefer them to look at the TK lounge at IST which is actually very good.

I'm not a smoker so cigar lounge does not do anything for me, but more to the point, national legislation means that I believe it would not be an option for AF lounges at CDG.

And OT but indeed, sad about MH. To be honest, it had been trailing behind most other airlines in her area for years, but I still had a few nice flights with them in the past. Of course, years of atrocious management combined with a very mysterious accident were probably too much for it.

brunos

The *A lounge has an outdoor smoking area

MH had two successive accidents on top of an already bad situation. MH was taken private, has just appointed a foreign CEO, Cristoph Mueller who revived Aer Lingus, and will void all contracts (including employment) at the end of June. It will rehire some employees and renegotiate all suppliers contracts. Could not happen in France.

orbitmic

Indeed, it will be interesting to see how this shapes out but as you say, it simply could not happen in France (or in Italy for that matter which some argue might have needed some similar potion!). And yes, those two MH accidents (especially the very unclear one) were two too many for an already faltering airline...

GenevaFlyer

Can we get back to the subject of the thread, which is the lounge at FRA?

Thanks.

GenevaFlyer

FD1971

Sure.

The lounge is actually okay, furniture is worn and outdated, but the staff was nice and the food was superior to what they used to offer on the roof at DUS. The HJ lounge at DUS is a major improvement in terms of food, but not when it comes to finding available seats, which brings us back to LH.

The old paradigm seems to be intact in 2015; most KL and AF lounges are superior to LH FTL/C lounges, but are inferior to most LH Group SEN/*Gold lounges.