Originally Posted by
CZAMFlyer
Clearly the company sees differently. But I still question the implication that big spenders should be entitled to avail themselves of lesser-cost items that "regular spenders" need to purchase.
Originally Posted by
CZAMFlyer
Lest we need to reread the entire thread, the allegation is that the OP took advantage of multiple lounge entries by purchasing a refundable fare for which no travel was intended. As Ken mentioned, the sum total value of those lounge passes is on the order of $300, or relative peanuts compared to the cost of maintaining top tier AC status.
Flyers with status are indeed entitled, as per the business model, to the perks you mention. The operative word here is "flyers".
As others noted, that is what status means.
So, are you not allowed to change plans? What does a refundable fare mean? How can you prove intent? Is this a murder trial where intent matters?
Is it illegal to buy something in a store for the purpose of using it and then returning it? Has a company ever gone after somebody for that?