If it was a connection, then that is absolutely correct. The OP didn't indicate that it was a connection, though. However, the OP also didn't indicate that it wasn't a connection so maybe it was.

It was not a connection in my case, as there was a stopover. I did ask the lounge attendant, however, what the case would be if it were a connection. He stated that there would be no admission in that case, either, as EI's iron-clad rule was that "you have to have one of these (gesturing at picture of about 30 different cards) cards to be admitted".

I am, as stated earlier, curious and slightly irritated, rather than enraged and adamant. EI doesn't seem to know what their policy is, far from a rare occurance when dealling with airlines. They also don't seem to feel a need to comply with Oneworld rules, which suggests that they may be exiting Oneworld soon.

I paid extra for a "deluxe" package, which included preferential seating, food, and drink in the air and preferential check-in, security clearance, and lounge access on the ground, all clearly "where available". I had never been downgraded before. If some of these amenities were unavailable at certain locations or on certain flights, I can clearly understand that those amenities would not be provided. It seemed like a gratuitous slap in the face, however, to be told that because some of the amenities that I had purchased were unavailable, those that were available would not be provided (and there would be no pro-rata refund). I know of no other industry where this is the case. For example, consider a hypothetical situation where a company offers two tour packages with the same itinerary. You have your choice of business class flight, superior hotel accomodations, and deluxe meals, or coach flight, standard hotel accomodations, and standard meals. If, on one segment, the business class flight was not available, I would still expect the superior hotel accomodations and deluxe meals. To be told that I would have to accept the standard hotel and meals when deluxe were available, merely because the business class flight was unavailable, would seem like a poke in the eye. I guess that here I'm not discussing the way the world is, but the way it should be. Too many carriers are living in the past, where governments assured them of a profit and passengers were a nuisance to be tolerated, and I have found that to be even more the case in Europe than in America. I don't plan to spend the rest of my life tilting at this particular windmill. :)

In that case we are back where we started: you have no basis for a complaint and no oneworld rule has been broken.

And speaking of "it ain't fair" issues, spare a thought for some people here, that buy AONEs and lots of times end up with their First Class fanny in J or even Y. Now, that hurts. :)

Well, I DO feel for the AONEs. And no Oneworld rule has been broken in my case, although EI clearly stated that they would break the Oneworld rule, given the opportunity. Given the volume of passengers that they handle, I would assume that they break it regularly.

I have done some selling in my career, and found it pretty hard, time consuming, and expensive to acquire a customer. Once I got one, I tried to give them little "extras" periodically, things that might be valuable to them but not cost my company very much to provide. I am always surprised when an organization tries to seize every opportunity to rankle their customers.

Thanks very much to all who took the time and trouble to respond. I think I understand the situation much better now. ^

While I agree with Darren's sentiments generally, I have to argue with this:
That has never been my experience - I regularly fly on UAX services connecting from longhaul biz and always get my double miles, as the fare basis on the UAX segment is biz also. It may vary from carrier to carrier, and from FFP to FFP, but I've never come across this.