Originally Posted by
Often1
This is no different than any other aspect of pricing / service. Carriers look at competition in a given market and adjust. UA gives lounge access for its p.s. service (F for F and UC for C(J)) on LAX/SFO-JFK, but not on a 3-class 777 IAD-LAX. They've got serious competition for the NYC business, but largely none for the IAD business.
Same sort of things back when carriers served Y meals. Whether there was a meal was often linked to competition on the route more than time/distance.
AA has judged that it won't lose much business from this move, so it can cut costs and not affect reveue. This goes straight to the bottom line.
I don't think the UA anecdote is quite accurate for two reasons:
1. UA has done a lot more to keep give it's JFK-LAX/SFO service a distinctive brand (p.s.) that comes with certain services and amenities, including lounge access. It's part of a brand package only used on certain routes. In some ways, this makes things easier than with AA. AA is route-specific, UA is brand-specific.
2. By that logic, AA should not offer access on LAX-MIA. It's very similar to IAD for UA in that there's little real competition on the route since MIA is AA-dominated.