Originally Posted by
A_Lee
The 2009 PP Asia-Pacific lounge of the year was the east wing Hub lounge. So if you're a PP member, and in the main terminal, and aware of this award, you're likely going to want to try that lounge, or maybe the west wing Hub lounge. Furthermore, if you've read at all the OZ FT forum, you'd realize that the OZ lounge in the main terminal can be severely overcrowded at times. I do not know what the policy is of the lounge, but would not at all be surprised if they recommended that PP members use one of the alternative Hub or Matina lounges when the OZ lounge is at capacity. It could be that they'd even refuse customers. I personally have visited all three of the PP lounges on the west wing, and I'd choose the Hub lounge over the OZ lounge. The lounge is very spacious with plenty of seating and a better food selection than the OZ lounge. So it is very possible that this OZ lounge gets only a small percent of the total PP customers at ICN.
Totally invalid. Did you know that 2009 award reflects the opinions taken from 2008, and Concourse A became available in the second half of 2008? In the first half of 2008, both KE and OZ were in the east side of the main terminal. Now this fact totally contradicts your argument, right? Also, note that none of OZ lounges participated PP in the first half of 2008.
Originally Posted by
A_Lee
If all things were equal, you'd expect the PP lounge customers at the concourse to be equally divided between the two lounges. Again though, one major factor could be that the main concourse KAL lounge was selected as a PP lounge of the year in the past. Anyone who was a member then might assume that the same situation holds true now, and that the KAL lounge is better than the OZ lounge, based on the voting from years past. In fact, KAL lounges were so well known within the PP community that some passengers might not even be aware that OZ lounges are now also PP lounges.
Ya dee ya daa. You used too many assumptions here. Did you know that if you take the escalators from the third floor to the fourth floor where the lounges are in the Concourse A, the first thing you see on the fourth floor on your right is Asiana lounge, and Priority Pass sign is there. Meanwhile, KE lounge is the farthest thing away from the escalators on the fourth floor.
Originally Posted by
A_Lee
Another factor that could affect passenger numbers is the mere fact that in looking at the nationality of passengers at ICN, Koreans are in the majority, and Koreans in general show a high degree of partiality to KE over OZ. PP is well marketed in Korea, and included free with many Korean issued credit cards, so it's safe to say that there's a fairly large number of Korean PP customers at ICN. If a Korean PP customer was in the concourse and given a choice of which lounge to use, the OZ or KAL lounge, I'd be willing to bet money that a significant majority would choose the KAL lounge based solely on the fact that it's operated by KAL, even without knowing anything about either of the actual lounges.
Yes, this might be little convincing if and only if we were to compare the number of PP members vising the lounges in Concourse A. But as I said, how about the number of PP members in OZ lounge in the main terminal? With using less assumptions than you, I would say Korean people are more likely to choose either KE and OZ, so the proportion of Korean people to foreigners should be higher in the main terminal than in Concourse A. Since it is so easy to get PP card in S. Korea (the cheapest credit card with PP only costs USD50 or so), there should be a fair number of PP members at any time of the day. Then OZ lounge in the main terminal should be getting a good portion of those members. Also, compare the size of OZ lounge in the main terminal and KE lounge in Concourse A.
Originally Posted by
A_Lee
Now I think any logical person could see that based on the above facts that it is entirely possible that the concourse KAL lounge COULD get more customers than the OZ lounges. I'm not saying that it definitely does, I'm just stating that it is a POSSIBILITY. I've provided plenty of evidence to back up my position. You on the other hand made the ridiculous statement that this situation is impossible. Please provide some evidence to back up your claim. Of course you can't, but I challenge you to give it a shot.
What you stated above are assumptions, not facts. So any logical people would see that your argument is heavily faulted.
Originally Posted by
A_Lee
Regardless of how many passengers go to one lounge, it doesn't really matter. I was only bringing up several possibilities of how the PP survey could be flawed. Just as likely though it could be accurate. But we really don't know because we don't know the details about how that lounge was choosen. Either way, does it really make a difference? Sure quote the PP survey all you want, but without detailed knowledge of their selection process, it's merely only another opinion. Some of us will agree with it and some won't. If you're a PP member and at the ICN concourse and need to choose between one of the lounges, pop your head into one, then go to the other side and pop your head into the other and make a decision which one looks best to you personally. If blindly choose a lounge simply because of the PP survey, or N227UA's opinion, or A_Lee's opinion, you might be disappointed. It's not rocket science, it's simply one's personal opinion of a lounge.
It matters since this survey can be cited as a source if some FTers were to ask which lounge is the best at ICN.
Originally Posted by
A_Lee
My reason for bringing up the SkyTrax survey is because you attempted to use this PP survey as way to try to personally attack me and my personal opinion that the KAL lounge interior design is horrible. Somehow you think that because PP members chose the KAL lounge, that means A_Lee's opinion is worthless. So by your same logic, I'm showing that because the SkyTrax survey shows OZ as a 5-star airline, and KE isn't, that means N227UA's opinion about OZ is worthless. Of course, I don't agree with that logic. Unlike you, I realize that some people like OZ over KE, and some the reverse. The same with the KAL lounge vs. OZ lounge. Some prefer one, and some prefer the other. Quoting the surveys are fine and a good data point, but to take the survey as the final word, or to use a survey in an attempt at character assasination of another's opinion is being foolish and I don't think appreciated by the majority of FT members.
I don't go on and on about my perceived negatives of an airline. I visited the KAL lounge once, hated it, posted my opinion, and basically forgot about it. In general I like KE. I like OZ even better, but I don't bash KE in an attempt to make OZ look better. I don't continue to bash any airline, even if I have an extremely low opinion of the airline. Posting one's experience, positive or negative, I believe is appreciated by almost all the members. Continuous negative posts about an airline, such as your negative posts about OZ, I believe are not appreciated, especially when they're based on such obvious bias, and evidently have no basis in actual recent experience.
Sir or ma'am, please do not digress from the topic. The topic of this thread is lounge just in case if you forgot.
BTW, I did not personally attack you nor your opinion. Wonder what made you think like that. The problem is the way you think is full of presumptions. In similar notion, we elect a president out of a few candidates based on votes from many people. If the person you chose not get elected, do you say that your opinion is worthless? Compare this to what you stated above. Did I say that your opinion was worthless or did you presume that I said your opinion was worthless?
If I really did attack you or your opinion, please quote. I would sincerely apologize if and only if this happened.
Originally Posted by
A_Lee
Enough of this though. Continue to post all you want in this thread. I will not respond further if you do. The members of this board deserve better than to see a bunch of nonsense posted by someone who is only trying to push his agenda of promoting one airline over another.
That someone will not respond further because he/she cannot make any more story based on huge assumptions without digressing from the topic, right?