Explorer789

If I had already started eating, then I certainly would not move. I would politely tell them to wait for a few minutes nearby until I finish eating, then I will call them over so can take the table.

notquiteaff

There are communal tables in at least some lounges. I'd use one of those if I want "company" but I generally prefer my privacy.

I generally don't spend much time in the main restauranty area and prefer to relax in the areas with more comfortable seats/couches. Many of those don't really appear to be meant for sharing with strangers

canadiancow

Are you suggesting this new change will only be enforced when there are actual overcrowding issues in the lounge?

I hear that. I fly business/first class and have status with the majority of the airlines/alliances I fly. It's very hard for me to use the credit without following FT tricks to turn it into Amazon gift cards and whatnot.

GUWonder

I've seen more than one family with young children at a time in these lounges on less than ten percent of my visits to the lounges. I can see there being some lounges and flying patterns where that would not be the case, but when I see the lounges packed, it's mostly packed with or exclusively by adults.

pcoll

Beautifully put. My spouse complains but, enjoys his "premium" travel experiences.

Visconti

We'd all agree that overcrowding has become an issue. Amex has to start somewhere to fix this problem. While the solutions can range or be a combination of increasing space to reducing "free" guests, the pecking order should obviously be: 1) Centurion members, 2) Plat Basic members, 3) paid AUs, and 4) everyone else.

Makes perfect sense to begin with 4. Still a problem, then progress to 3 and thin those out.

kevneerg

I wish AMEX would've made an exception for children under 12. I'd gladly pay $50 for my teenager, but can't justify paying for my toddler.

I only fly with my family (spouse + 2 kids) 4-5 times a year and rarely have a layover at any of the CL locations. However, the CL benefit was definitely one of the reasons I got the card for those rare occasions.

The increased fee, restriction on CL access and continued limitation with the airline credit has definitely decreased the value of the card for me.

I don't think I'll be renewing this year.

dhuey

Toddlers should have to pay $100. Kidding!

My wife has the card, so we could each bring in one daughter as a guest. But if she ends up canceling the card and we would have to pay $50 to get all four of us in the lounge, I'd probably pay it if we have more than an hour to kill. I wouldn't think of it as $50 for daughter #2 -- it's $50 for all of us to be in there.

radiowell

After yet another experience at SFO (where I barely found a place to sit, only after a pure, dumb luck), [Flame suit on] I now welcome both the increased annual fee AND the guest limit [/Flame suit... adding another layer]

notquiteaff

So you guest in your spouse and toddler and pay for your 2nd kid (teenager). Where's the problem?

kevneerg

Both toddlers now. 9 more years before one of them is in their teens. Point is, the value has decreased too much for me.

I do spend quite a bit on the card because I like AMEX's customer service, but difficult to continue to justify the annual fee. I consider the changes a devaluation. I was already on the fence when they announced the increased fee. The CL change has pushed me over the edge.

AMEX can't compete with the CSR or Prestige cards at this point.

baccarat_king

Then you drop the card and move on. That's how things work in a competitive marketplace. Some of us find other value (like FHR, with all the buy 2 get 1 deals + extra $200 on top of the FHR $100 credit etc.). And CSR and Prestige don't have airport lounges, and the AMEX Centurion Lounges, when applicable, are way nicer than most priority pass lounges.

Once again, the vast majority of the world is not "dialled in" or as "obsessive" as the FlyerTalk crowd (not meaning that's bad). Personally, they probably prefer NOT to have such folks as card-members since they are less profitable. It's a big world out there, and companies like AMEX need to find their less savvy and often more loyal niche. Could they be wrong. Yep. But, I've seen this time and again. Look at MGM Mlife. Resorts fees sky high. Parking Fees in Vegas. Fees on top of fees. Gaming downgrades. Everyone said, "I'm not playing at MGM anymore, I'm done.. screw them" -- guess what? One of the most profitable January+ periods ever. Sometimes, companies just need to focus on their profitable customers.

Visconti

Excellent post.

For my needs, I will be closing the Prestige after losing Admirals Club, 1.6X on AA and the Golf perk. As to the 4th night, FHR has it often enough for my needs and with better perks. Only time I find PP even remotely useful is when traveling abroad; even then, it's only marginally useful for those with Elite status or flying J or F.

As to MGM, they have the nicest properties. Nothing compares to gambling at Bellagio, especially BJ. Sure, one can go play on Fremont street/off strip to grind out 50 bps on video poker, but it's easier to make a living doing just about anything else. Nix the perks for the AP players and divvy it up to the real gamblers (suckers, whatever you prefer). At least, they deserve the rebate.

steveman518

certainly-I was only answering a question that was posed by another member. I wouldn't suggest for a minute that families are the primary source of overcrowding in my experiences at SEA and SFO-just that families are far more noticeable. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that I'm suggesting that to be the case.

GUWonder

CSR comes with airport lounge access. While the Centurion lounges are better than most of those lounges CSR members get, that is a factor to be considered amongst others.

Focusing on your most profitable customers while gaming the rest of the customers? It doesn't mean it works out all that well -- United is an example of that, and it would have been even worse for UA if the government hadn't stacked the deck in the airline's favor.