RichardMannion

mia

That's correct for USA personal Platinum cards $550 base fee, $175 for three supplementary Platinum cards, then $175/each for additional.

However, for USA Business Platinum card the base fee is now $595, and it's $300 for each supplementary Platinum card.

In Canada personal Platinum cards are CAD$699 plus $175 for each supplementary.

In Canada Business Platinum cards are CAD $499 plus $199 for each supplementary.

In Europe, one supplementary Platinum card is typically bundled in the base annual fee.

This means American Express has data, which we do not, on a range of price points, marketing models, utilization rates etc.

Pricing also reflects different competitive environments. $175 for three looks cheap for lounge access, but not everyone who pays $175 activates three additional cards, and lounge access is not the only consideration. Prices don't exist in a vacuum. When looking at competing cards, $175 for one additional card would be high, while $175 for three is competitive. (Citi Prestige has advanced its annual fee from $450 to $495 + $75/each for additional cards. Chase Sapphire Reserve is still $450 + $75 for additional cards. )

Doppy

I don't mind the three hour rule, though I wish AmEx knew how to use technology - they make us scan boarding passes for entry, then rather than automating the flight departure check, the desk agents manually review boarding passes.

I do mind the no access on arrival, as grabbing a quick bite or shower after a flight is nice. Of course you can eat elsewhere, but showers are harder to come by.

PWMTrav

I was finally going to bite on one of the Amex Platinum offers - I canceled about 3 years ago, but now live near an airport with a Centurion lounge. No access on arrival is a deal-breaker for me. I don't like getting there early, but I DO like stopping off at the lounge on the way home to grab a snack, maybe wait out some traffic depending on the time of day, shower, whatever.

I do agree on the no guest thing that others in the thread have pushed for - and I say this as someone who travels with my family quite a bit. I'd certainly get an AU card for my wife - my daughter's too young for one though, so I'm not sure how that'd work. Point is, I'd willingly pay for all of us if it meant the crowds were under control, but the last time we used a lounge pre-departure was when my kid was a baby and we needed a clean airport changing table.

joe_miami

This thread seems to be full of people who don't actually use Centurion Lounges but are convinced the lounges are mayhem.

Steve M

They're too crowded - nobody goes there anymore.

GUWonder

scubadu

So which lounge, at your current home airport, will you be using as an arrival lounge, since that apparently is of paramount importance to you and you seem to be implying you can't functionally survive without one. Which club, specifically, are you using to fulfill that incredibly important need now?

Regards

Visconti

The topic is about overcrowding. Do you think eliminating guests would increase, decrease, or have no effect on the crowding?

Sure, if you want to look at revenue balanced by the crowding issue and to what extent it's tolerable, is an entirely different issue. Speaking of revenue driven decisions, Amex can easily surgically isolate all those Plat holders who spend nothing, guest tons into the lounge, churn cards, and just categorically fire them, which they easily would have done once upon a time.

joe_miami

Visconti

While I can only speak for myself, I'm not sure how you've reached the conclusion that I'm for increasing the Plat cardholders by 50%. While I do think RichardMannion has come up with some interesting ideas, at least better than the status quo where the specific issue of overcrowding is concerned, my original position, irrespective of my view on Mannion's, were to examine the data to see if things may improve by (1) eliminating or reducing guest to 1; (2) charge $30 for an extra guest. I had posited, which I assume you disagree, that those already paying for AUs will continue to do so, at least a significant number of them.

I'm speculating that the majority of those who have been paying for Plat/Cent AUs have been doing so for reasons that may include lounge access, but certainly isn't based purely on it. That, if this $30 charge regime is implemented, guests policy reduced, those cardmembers who cancel purely because of the change are the very cardmembers that Amex is better off without, including those who pay for AUs exclusively for the purpose of lounge access and the additional 2+ guests.

And, regarding the free AUs...

I'm not suggesting Amex offer up free AUs. My agreement, where I may have misread the post, was that it was stupid to allow, for $175, 3 AUs who may freely guest in 2 guests each.

RichardMannion

Up to 50%, as not every person that is the primary cardholder would add a free secondary supplementary. I think the key point that is being overlooked is that at the same time, I'm proposing that Platinum's get reduced to no free guests (so a decrease of up to two people that could be coming in per Platinum cardholder). I never said it would eliminate guests, as Plats would have the option to pay for guests if they didn't have their own card.

If you've got 10 million Platinum card holders, they could bring 20 million guests in for zero extra cost - for a total of 30 million. If you change it to zero guests for free, but change it that each main cardholder gets one free supplementary card, you're at up to 20 million potential lounge visitors before any extra revenue.

joe_miami

Reducing free guests for Plats to zero undoubtedly would cause a decrease in total lounge visits. Creating a new population of millions of free AUs who could now use the lounges when traveling apart from the primary undoubtedly would not.

The number of people whom the average Plat cardholder would trust with a free AU card is assuredly higher than the number of people with whom the average Plat cardholder regularly travels.

mia

An amusing aspect of these discussions is that they invariably occur immediately after American Express announces a policy change, rather than some months after that policy change has been implemented, when we might be able to anecdotally observe a change in crowding. American Express practice frequently deviates from written policy. At this stage we do not even know how American Express' contractor will actually implement the rules for originating vs connecting vs arriving passengers.

What do you mean by crowding, specifically? Is it only when the lounge turns away cardholders because it has reached legal capacity, or is it (example) when you cannot find a seat without sharing a table?

Visconti

Here's how I define it, which actually happened. Every table occupied including the ones designated as "reserved" by Cent members, staff opening up because of peak demand, poachers, or combination thereof; whereupon, a Cent member is faced with two equally unpalatable choices, (1) leave, or (2) accept staff's offer or request non-Cent members sitting in prior designated reserved tables be removed. In addition, while others may disagree, I find having to share a table with anyone I'm not acquainted with to be overcrowding.