Originally Posted by
zkzkz
I find this thread really amusing. Strange how UA/US fliers have such low expectations of their FF program. Half of the reason I was looking forward to making *G with AC was precisely being able to use lounges whenever I fly. Getting a snack, checking email, and showering when on a connection for a red-eye is the whole reason they exist.
This thread is an issue of SQ policy (rejecting *A pax on domestic itineraries..which in the US is coincidentally UA/US, and now CO, since other *As don't operate domestic flights in the US), not an issue with UA's frequent flier program. It was SQ not letting UA FFs in (at one point), not UA disallowing it. In other airports, SQ pulls the same shenanigans against all *A carriers, not just UA (e.g. SIN, where they set up an inferior *A lounge and deny all *A access to their flagship SQ lounge).
Originally Posted by
zkzkz
I used the SFO RCC a few months ago and was shocked. chips and crackers, a bartender who expects to be tipped, and paid wifi. Why is this any better than just sitting in the airport terminal?
RCCs are nothing fancy, or even special. Can't argue there. Wifi is free for members and premium pax however. And obviously it's still better than just sitting in the airport terminal.
Originally Posted by
zkzkz
The agent seemed embarrassed about the wifi actually. She pointed me at a corner where I could pick up SQ's regular router. I bet UA pays t-mobile thousands of dollars for the wifi and SQ just bought a $50 router at Fry's.
Actually, I think it's the other way around (or was until recently)--I think
T-mobile pays UA out of the fees that T-Mobile collects selling wifi access in RCCs. But now UA comps wifi access to RCC members and premium passengers, as well as one-time pass guests (basically everyone with RCC access except *G flying Y).