How will airport lounges operate in the future? A real life example from the Aspire lounge in Zurich

Links on Head for Points may pay us an affiliate commission. A list of partners is here.

There has been much speculation about how airport lounges will operate in the future, especially with social distancing measures in place.

(I am beginning to think that the reason British Airways is not rolling over elite status is to dramatically cut the amount of people who would be eligible for lounge access.  We couldn’t blame them if they took that option.)

Here is a real life example.  Aspire re-opened its Zurich Airport lounge on Friday, following the lifting of restrictions in Switzerland.

Aspire Lounge Zurich open

This is what Aspire is doing:

“The Zurich Airport Lounge will reopen with a reduced capacity to ensure at least a 2-meter physical distance in-between all tables and seating areas throughout this lounge.”

“There will also be a maximum limit of 2 guests per table upon re-opening.”

“All employees working at the lounge will be provided with and will wear personal protective equipment including gloves and face masks. Staff levels within the lounge will be reduced at opening to avoid crowding as much as possible.”

“A new and more frequent cleaning schedule has been introduced at this lounge using effective disinfectants. This includes surfaces, especially high contact services being cleaned even more rigorously and frequently.”

No buffet service will be provided at the Zurich Aspire Lounge upon reopening. All food and beverages will be served by a waiter via an aircraft meal trolley until further notice.”

The only food available will be cold snacks.  Your options are:

  • A selection of “mini” sandwiches
  • Mini appetizers (glas)
  • Vegetable dip
  • A selection of sweets

It doesn’t sound like a barrel of laughs, but at least airport lounges are now opening again and are serving some food and drink.  One upside of the reduced service is that the cost of access is reduced to CHF 20.

You can find out more about the Aspire Zurich lounge policy on the Aspire website here.

Aspire Lounge Zurich open

Getting airport lounge access via a UK credit card

As a reminder, here are the three options to get FREE airport lounge access via a credit or charge card:

The Platinum Card from American Express

Two free Priority Pass cards (one for you, one for your supplementary Platinum cardholder, each admitting two – so a family of four gets in free) giving access to every lounge in the Priority Pass network – search it here.  You also get access to Plaza Premium, Delta and Eurostar lounges.  Our American Express Platinum review is here.

American Express Preferred Rewards Gold

You get a Lounge Club card loaded with two free visits to any Lounge Club network lounge – see the list here.  The list is slightly shorter than the Priority Pass list, but not by much.  Additional visits are charged at £20 per person.  You get two more free visits for every year you keep the card.  No annual fee in Year 1.  Full details are in our American Express Preferred Rewards Gold review here.

HSBC Premier World Elite Mastercard

You get a free LoungeKey card allowing you access to any property in the LoungeKey network.  Guests are charged at £20 although regular travellers will find it cheaper to pay £60 for a supplementary credit card (adults only, of course).  The card has an annual fee of £195 and there are strict financial requirements to become a HSBC Premier customer.  Full details are in my HSBC Premier World Elite Mastercard review.

The new HFP chat thread - Monday 18th May
Review: Get 10,500 Avios with the Capital On Tap Business Rewards Visa credit card!

Click here to join the 15,000 people on our email list and receive the latest Avios, miles and points news by 6am.

Amazon ad
AMEX Gold 20,000 bonus points
About Head for Points

We help business and leisure travellers maximise their Avios, frequent flyer miles and hotel loyalty points. Visit every day for three new articles or sign up for our FREE emails via this page or the box to your right.

Comments

  1. Mike White says:

    I think this is all crazy and a modicum of common sense and rowing back will be needed at some point when face can be saved. The current death rate for under-60s In UK is 0.0049%, which, if I can try to put into some perspective, it is the same probability that the aircraft will suffer an engine failure on a transatlantic flight. So hardly any. Put simply, if it is safe to fly then it is safe to fly. IF you are under 60. For those over 60 then the risk is very different at a whopping 0.29%. Combined it is 0.056% I think it won’t be long until the proverbial coffee is smelled and this whole thing is put to bed. Unfortunately, at the cost of a large-scale disruption to the world’s mobility and the aviation industry.

    • memesweeper says:

      The low rates are because we had/have a lockdown/social distancing. And the low rates still mean a > 50% increase in the death rate in recent weeks.

      Travelling doesn’t much increase the traveller’s risk. However, lots of travelling significantly increases a society’s risk. Looking at this from any individual’s standpoint then, outside of high risk groups, personal adherence to lockdown/distancing is going to insignificantly affect your chances of getting ill or dying. However, everyone’s else’s behaviour is going to make a huge difference to all of us.

    • Callum says:

      1. I would love to see where you get those figures from given they bear no resemblance whatsoever to any official statistics I can find.

      2. One of the perks of modern living is that we can also worry about things that don’t result in death. If you pay attention to what government does, you’ll notice that the vast majority of what they do doesn’t involve trying to prevent death. In fact, you’ll probably find the vast majority of your energy is spent improving your life as opposed to staying alive.

      3. Although it may frustrate you to no end, this post is the perfect example of why REAL experts take no notice of self-appointed armchair experts posting online. Though, given people like yourself are increasingly fooling the insanely gullible public and getting into powerful positions, it’s a disturbing thought that this may not be the case for the foreseeable future.

      • Mike’s post is not out of whack with what experts are increasingly saying. Just do a few minutes of research on what the estimated Infection Fatality Rate (not Case Fatality Rate) is by age group and you’ll come to similar numbers. ie <1% across age groups, with a massive skew towards 0.1% or lower in those <50 without preexisting conditions. The more we test the more evident this becomes. Look at the case studies of prisons in the US or dorms in Singapore.

        The reality is that policy is now being driven by politics and not experts. I totally understand the fear – the media has not helped at all in how they have presented this. And few governments have shown true leadership but have caved to fear. We should all take some sensible precautions in life as a result of this to shield those who are vulnerable. But – the faster society can return to near normal the faster we'll stem off the inevitable second order effects of what is happening now. Continuing to perpetuate fear has already started killing people by making them avoid hospitals.

        • Lockdown Larry says:

          The chances of dying in a terrorist attack are lower than getting struck by lighting twice on the same day. However, we’ve still had this security “theatre” nonsense at airports since 11/9.

          (For context, 7000 people die in America every day)

  2. Andsman says:

    This two person requirement at a table creates problems for families. It’s a useful article. Shame the offerings are always going to be less.

    • memesweeper says:

      If you’re in a family group > 2, then the two person requirement at a table creates greater risks and problems for everyone in the lounge!

  3. Interesting that the cost is lowered, I would have thought if anything the new arrangements would be more costly to provide, per pax?

    • Lady London says:

      Well…. their costs of providing might always have allowed this door price, just maybe previouslty they could get away with charging a lot more!

      am guessing the above so fae as their marginal costs are concerned. as regards their fixed costs I am not sure what they pay airports, what portion is fixed rent, is there a % of turnover cost paid to airport as well, etc.

  4. Iirc, the zurich lounge only served hot food for a couple of hours at early lunch and dinner before the virus, outside of that they only had a few cold options.

  5. Surprised the cost is lower. I had assumed both airport lounges and restaurants would simply decrease demand (maintaining social distance) by increasing cost (maintaining some semblance of profitability).

Please click here to read our data protection policy before submitting your comment.