FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - AC Moving to T6 at LAX in 2017
View Single Post
Old May 21, 2017 | 9:23 pm
  #176  
canadiancow
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
1M
40 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
10 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, SK Gold, Bonvoy Plat LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 47,285
Originally Posted by N1120A
I'm not sure you understand this. The LH and UA situations are in places where an alternative is offered.



Delta paid for everything, including building AC the MLL. They were behind the plan and had to pay.



AC isn't taking THAT many people on connections from Asia. Their primary focus at LAX is O&D to their Canadian cities and TATL connections, with some TPAC connections over YVR.
Originally Posted by rehoult
There are alternatives offered in LAX too, namely the *A J and F lounges in TBIT that anyone could walk to if they wanted, and which are run on behalf of the entire alliance.

If you want to argue that *A policies say *G get into all J lounges operated by a *A airline, go for it. You're on decent ground, and there would be a lot of people that agree with you. But when you accept that UA can exclude *G from the Polaris lounge, which is a J lounge, then it's tough to swallow you also arguing that other *A carriers shouldn't be allowed to customize their access policies too.
Polaris is a J lounge, not a *G lounge.
SQ J lounges are J lounges, not *G lounges.

That's fine.

The issue is if AC advertises the MLL as a *G lounge but then doesn't allow *G in.

But this is a common problem in US airports.

AC*G on UA domestic flights - good luck getting into the SFO SQ or BR lounges.
Heck, last week, I was asked for my *G card to get into the BR lounge, with an AC*G and J on my BP.

1. What are the rules?
2. What should the rules be?
3. What is enforced?

1 is very straightforward.
2 is highly debatable.
3 is inconsistent, even for a given lounge.
canadiancow is offline