Originally Posted by scubadu

Actually, I believe that fee increases could absolutely "cut it" if they are actual, real increases, not "effective increases" masked with additional credits. No matter how much people endlessly debate the crowding issue in this thread (is it children? is it guests? is it business travelers? etc, etc.), it quite simply is a supply/demand problem, no more complicated than that. Part, though admittedly not all, of the reason that some of the majors (AA/UA/DL) clubs are now more relaxing/less crowded than Centurion Lounges is because it actually tends to cost more money to get in the door. Whether paying for a membership directly or getting a credit card, the cost is the cost; there are no offsetting credits. If you want into the AA clubs, the absolute cheapest route is via the Citi card with a straight up $450 annual fee. No credits, no coupons, no offsets. That gives people some pause and brings into very clear focus, exactly how much lounge access is worth to them.

In the case of say, a Schwab Platinum cardholder with significant assets at Schwab, the math looks more like:
- $200 statement credit (assuming +@1m in assets)
- $200 airline fee, straight to UA Travelbank (so effectively cash if one flies UA)
- $200 FHR/THC credit, again straight up cash back if you would stay at some of these properties (and many do)

So, right there you are already @ $600 vs. a $695 annual fee, so an "effective" annual fee of $95. Now throw in Uber credits, Clear credits, Saks credits, digital credits, etc, for those that use/find value in them, and then even the occasional Amex retention offer,and basically, Amex is paying you to carry the card.

Now, several FTers will want to jump in with but, but... "the airline credit is useless to me" and "the FHR credit is useless to me" and "I don't have a million dollars to put at Schwab" Save your breath, I already know. First, plenty of people do fit that model and they are waiting in line beside you trying to get into the same Cent Lounge you are. Second, nobody uses exactly all these Amex offers/credits in the same way, but the broader point is that, if one is sufficiently motivated, there are many ways to make the math work in your favor, or at least close enough to justify keeping the card and seeing lounge access as "gravy."

So, Adelphos, I respectfully disagree with you that increasing fees won't cut it; if Amex made the annual fee of this card a straight-up, $695 or say, $750 and dropped all the credits, coupons, etc. you can absolutely bet your bottom dollar those lounges would be quieter and less crowded. And believe it or not, some (though likely not enough!) would pay for that experience. It's the same reason many foreign carrier lounges (e.g. CX First class lounges) are not overflowing; because you can't "subsidize" your way in; you have to buy the ticket or have the status, there is no "coupon path to entry."

Now, in the very next breath, I also fully acknowledge that this will absolutely, positively, never happen. Amex would never do this. Amex has a self interest in "warping" the supply/demand curve because they don't solely care about the lounge experience. They care about the number, spend, and profitability of cardholders and creating as many more of them as possible.

There was a time when lounges had a somewhat high barrier to entry (i.e. cost) and now they have almost zero barrier to entry. There is no way the experience of the former can be equivalent to the latter when dealing with an actual, physically constrained space. Unfortunately, as the old saying goes, if everyone is special, then nobody is special. And that is pretty much where we are now...

Regards