I posted this question in the CX forum, unaware of this thread. Someone referred me over here, and I just read the whole thing, -- fascinating discussion. I see that the extremes of opinion are well represented, doesn't seem to be much middle ground, though.

To answer what seems to me to be an important question (after reading this thread), it would, indeed, be worth it for me. I'm looking at a nine hour connection when I will likely be jet-lagged sufficiently that I won't feel like going into the city for any sightseeing.

After reading all that has been written here, this situation seems to me most analogous to obtaining a credit card you do not intend to use, just for the mileage bonus. You don't, in fact use it, and cancel after the required waiting period, but keep the bonus miles. People do that all the time. Is it wrong? Here, we're looking at making a purchase you intend to cancel/return solely for the purpose of obtaining the extra benefit (which admittedly has a cost to the issuer), just like obtaining the credit card for the miles.

There's a well known U.S. Supreme Court case (yes, I'm a lawyer, too) regarding someone convicted of tax evasion in which the Court distinguishes tax avoidance from tax evasion. You are allowed to arrange your financial affairs in order to take advantage of the way that the Internal Revenue Code is written even if there is an unintended loophole which allows you to avoid a tax which they really intend you to pay.

Is buying a refundable ticket to gain lounge access really all that different?