How we source and check lounge access rules

The one-sentence version

A lounge page says only what a source published by the lounge’s operator or by the access programme itself supports, checked within the last twelve months, and cites that source. Where there is no such source, the page says so instead of guessing.

Where the rules come from

The rules on each page come from published sources, in this order of authority. A value is written to the data only from tier 1 or 2. Tier 3 coverage is how we hear about changes; it never sets a value, because secondary posts routinely copy stale hours and eligibility lists from one another.

A source has to be dated within twelve months. A network’s homepage is not a source for any particular lounge: it proves the network exists, not that this lounge is in it. Where an operator’s site blocks automated reading, a person opens the page in a browser and the capture is kept with the change.

What a lounge page shows, and why

“Rules from qantas.com, checked Aug 2026.” A citation, not a certificate. It names the page the rules were taken from and when. We do not say “verified” anywhere on the site. The catalogue was first compiled in one pass in May 2026, and a flag from that pass is a record that a job ran, not that anyone stood at the door. Presenting it as verification would have told readers something the data cannot support.

“Access at a glance.” Each rule rendered as a sentence, built from the structured rule and nothing else. “Or above” appears only where the programme’s tier ladder is known and the rule sets a floor. Conditions are quoted as the source wrote them. The absence of a rule is never shown as “no”: the page says a programme is “not among the entry methods we have on record”, and only when there is a source to cite for what is on record.

“Paid entry: reported, but price and availability are not confirmed here.” Many listings note that paid entry has been reported without a published price or condition. That wording means exactly what it says: we have seen it reported and have not confirmed it. Where the operator publishes a price or a booking condition, the page shows that instead.

“Access details unavailable.” The lounge exists but we hold no rules with a source we can cite. The page shows nothing rather than a guess. As of 1 August 2026 this was 401 lounges, 14.2% of the catalogue, most of them independent or network-only lounges where the only candidate source is a programme directory.

“Listing last updated.” The date the record last changed in any way, which includes routine data maintenance. It is a freshness signal, not a statement that every field was re-checked on that day.

Confidence behind each rule

Every lounge carries a confidence tier computed from the sources it cites, not from a checkbox. verified means at least one cited page is rare across the catalogue (used by only a handful of lounges) and names this lounge or its airport in its address, so it is about this lounge rather than a programme in general. sourced means a source exists but it is shared across many lounges or cannot be shown to be about this one. unsourced means none. The site treats the first two the same way on the page: rarity is not the same as relevance, and until the check tests relevance more strictly, a rarer source has not earned a quieter caveat. A disputed tier for conflicting sources is designed but not yet in use; conflicts are recorded in the research log and left off the page.

Rules we follow when the data changes

• Absence of data means unknown, never a default. A terminal is not “connected”, hours are not “24 hours” and access is not “granted” without a source saying so.
• A page that would not load is not evidence of anything. Automated link checking on this catalogue produced large false-failure rates, so a lounge is never removed because a fetch failed. Removal needs a closure reported by a source and chased to the operator.
• Withdrawing a rule needs the same evidence as adding one. An operator page that does not mention Priority Pass is not evidence that Priority Pass is not accepted; operators routinely omit third-party networks from their own copy. Before a network rule is withdrawn, the network’s own listing for the lounge is read first. We learned this the hard way: in September 2026 a Priority Pass rule was withdrawn from the Air France lounge at Frankfurt on the strength of Air France’s silence, and reinstated within a day when Priority Pass’s own roster showed the lounge had joined the network the week before.
• Announced changes carry their effective date. A rule can hold a start or end date, so a benefit that ends on a known day disappears from every page on that day rather than lingering until someone remembers.
• Conflicting sources are flagged, not written. If two credible sources disagree, neither value is published until the conflict is resolved.
• Nothing is deleted without a copy. A retired listing is captured in full before it goes, and every retirement names the sources that showed the lounge does not exist or has closed.

How the checking runs

A research pass runs daily. It sweeps for announced changes whose effective date has passed, reads the operators’ and programmes’ own update pages for news, audits one airport or one operator against that airport’s or operator’s own published lounge directory, re-verifies a rotating slice of the catalogue, and looks for newly opened lounges. Every finding becomes a proposed change with its sources attached, reviewed by a person before it is applied. The automated pass cannot write to the database at all; it can only propose.

Audits so far have retired listings that no source supported (fabricated rows at Dubai, Singapore, Narita and Tokyo Haneda among them), added lounges that were missing, corrected terminals recorded as blank or wrong, and narrowed rules that had been copied from a neighbouring lounge. The changes page lists the ones that would alter a traveller’s plan.

Terminals and getting between them

At many airports the terminal a lounge sits in decides whether you can reach it at all without clearing security again. Where an airport has been researched, the airport page marks which terminals form one airside area and lounge lists are grouped accordingly. As of September 2026 this covers 62 airports and about 30% of lounges. Airports not yet researched show no reachability claim; a blank is a blank, not “connected”.

Scores, reviews, photos and money

Lounge scores are editorial ratings assigned by LoungeIQ from public information about amenities and reputation. They are not averages of user reviews, and the site’s structured data does not present them as such. Reviews from registered users are published unedited except for spam or abuse. Photos appear only where the operator has licensed them to us; every other lounge shows a departure-board tile rather than a picture taken from somewhere else. Some links to access programmes are affiliate links, disclosed on the page. Affiliate relationships do not change which entry methods a lounge page lists.

What we do not know

Measured figures, with the date they were measured, because they change:

• 401 lounges (14.2%) had no source we could cite for their rules on 1 August 2026 and show no rules.
• Roughly 40% of lounges cite a programme directory rather than a page about the lounge itself, so their rules describe the programme’s terms, not the lounge’s every condition.
• About 1.5% of cited source pages (26 URLs across 42 lounges) no longer resolve; they are replaced as lounges are touched.
• Some listings still have no terminal recorded, and a small number carry a location description that was cut short on import.
• Coverage is deepest at large airports. Audits work through airports by traffic, so a small regional airport is likelier to hold a stale or missing listing.
• Access programmes change terms with little notice. Confirm with the lounge or your card issuer before a trip that depends on it.

Corrections

Email support@loungeiq.com with the lounge name, the airport, what is wrong and, if you have it, a link to the page that shows the correct information. A photo of the sign at the door counts. Reported errors are typically corrected within 48 hours and the change is recorded on the changes page.

Coverage figures on this page are as of September 2026: more than 2,800 lounges at more than 850 airports.