Connect with us

Business

Delta’s struggles with the airport lounge and the angst of the upper middle class in the age of ‘elite overproduction,’ explained

Published

on



Delta Air Lines is having a good 2025, reporting strong second-quarter earnings and reinstating its April profit guidance, leading to a substantial stock bump (up roughly 16% from June to July). True, its guidance is down from its January projections, but it’s weathering the storm of the tricky global economy well, maintaining its status as America’s leading premium airline. As Fortune‘s Shawn Tully reported in March 2025, it has somehow managed the trick of being America’s most profitable airline, while giving billions back to employees in the form of profit sharing.

At the start of the year, CEO Ed Bastian kicked off a celebration of Delta’s centenary by announcing “a new era in premium travel” with the opening of Delta One lounges, a step above its usual Sky Clubs. The Delta One locations will offer “amenities for the premium traveler” ranging from fine dining to spa-like wellness treatments and valet services. Bastian clarified that Delta will continue to invest in its Delta Sky Clubs, with more openings planned to come.

But there is more to the story for Delta, America’s leading premier airline. The Sky Clubs are coming off years of turbulence, with significant customer backlash following several of Delta’s attempts to improve a lounge experience that has become overcrowded. These problems date back several years, to the beginning of the “revenge travel” boom that accompanied post-pandemic reopening. Bastian told Fortune in 2022 that even he was shocked by the level of demand: “People talk about revenge travel, or pent-up travel—this is beyond anything that people can classify as truly pent-up,” he said, adding that his team calculated a whopping $300 billion burst of travel thirst. “That gap is $300 billion—with a B,” Bastian emphasized. 

America’s leading premium airline has long offered a standard lounge experience through its Sky Clubs, with free wi-fi, buffets of cold snacks and heated steam trays, and a range of complimentary drinks. The Sky Clubs were no match for the burst of revenge travelers. Bastian’s efforts to fix these problems in 2023—barring Basic Economy passengers and capping the number of visits allowed for credit card holders—sparked backlash on customers’ part and soul-searching for Bastian. “We are victims of our own success,” he told Fast Company‘s Stephanie Mehta in 2024, as he explained changes to benefits including access to Sky Club lounges. “It’s hard to tell someone who’s been at a certain status for many years that what they’ve earned is no longer as valuable.”

That’s why the declining pleasure of the airport lounge resonates for a deeper reason: it’s a metaphor for the declining prospects of the upper middle class in an age of “elite overproduction,” which argues that certain societies grow so rich and successful that they produce too many people of premium education for the number of premium jobs—or premium experiences—that the economy can actually support.

The elites have been so overproduced that you can literally see them—in lines stretching out of airport lounges.

The elite lounge overproduction theory

Several factors make Delta’s overcrowding issue particularly severe, and they have to do with how Delta is really trying—and, as Bastian says, succeeding—in offering a premium service to a large, affluent customer base. Delta offers more comprehensive food and beverage options than many competitors, so travelers linger longer, compounding capacity issues. Indeed, when reached for comment, Delta confirmed that its SkyMiles program has seen “unprecedented engagement,” and its member satisfaction is higher than ever. Delta said it’s committed to continuous investment to further please customers, which includes “modernizing and expanding our lounges.”

Generous lounge access deals with American Express (including non-Delta-branded Platinum Card holders) have greatly expanded eligibility, overwhelming facilities. As more travelers achieve status or purchase high-tier tickets, both due to credit card spending and business travel rebounds, demand for lounge space has increased beyond what legacy facilities can handle.

Delta isn’t alone in its lounge struggles, as shown by its partner, American Express, which has tried to physically expand many of its Centurion Lounges. Those have gone from the epitome of exclusivity and comfort to another kind of crowded waiting room—albeit with arguably better snacks and Wi-Fi.

The root of the problem is the same: too many people now have access. The proliferation of premium credit cards, airline status programs, and paid day passes has democratized lounge entry, eroding the exclusivity that made these spaces desirable in the first place. It is unclear if Delta expanded too far, too fast, or if it was surprised by the number of lounge lovers in its clientele. UBS Global Wealth Management has noted a surprising trend in the upper middle class: the rise of the “everyday millionaire,” or people whose assets fall between $1 million and $5 million. These are exactly the kind of people who would see themselves as lounge-worthy, and likely frustrated to find their small-M millionaire status doesn’t go so far.

The consequences for travelers are palpable. Social media and travel forums are rife with stories of travelers paying hundreds of dollars in annual fees only to find long lines clogging, say, New York’s JFK terminals on a daily basis. The proof is abundant on TikTok. On the other hand, expectations are heightened. Travel research firm Airport Dimensions has conducted an “airport experience report” for over a decade and found in 2024 that airport lounges are a contradiction: the definitive democratic travel luxury.

This widespread expectation—and dissatisfaction—is not just a matter of comfort. For many, the lounge was a symbol of having “made it”—a reward for loyalty, status, or financial success. Its decline has become a source of frustration and even embarrassment, especially for those who remember a more exclusive era. There’s an emotional trigger behind an unpleasant lounge experience.

The theory behind the malaise: elite overproduction

The overcrowding of airport lounges is more than a logistical headache—it’s a microcosm of a broader societal phenomenon. University of Connecticut professor emeritus Peter Turchin has developed a controversial theory of “elite overproduction” which posits that frustration and even instability result when a society produces more people aspiring to elite status than there are elite positions. It’s an unorthodox theory from an unorthodox academic: Turchin is an emeritus professor at UConn, research associate at the University of Oxford and project leader at the Complexity Science Hub-Vienna, leading research in a field of his own invention: Cliodynamics, a type of historical social science.

The catch with Turchin’s theory is that his own type of complexity science takes on a pseudo-prophetic quality, similar in some ways to William Strauss and Neil Howe’s “Fourth Turning.” And Turchin has foreseen that the United States has reached a stage repeated in civilizations throughout history, when it has produced too many products of elite education and social status for the realistic number of jobs it can generate. Decline and fall follows, Roman Empire-style. The Atlantic profiled Turchin in 2020, warning “the next decade could be even worse.” Several writers have expanded on his ideas since then, approaching it from their distinctive and different sensibilities.

Ritholtz Wealth Management COO Nick Maggiulli posted to his “Of Dollars and Data” blog on the subject of airport lounges specifically, writing that the “death of the Amex lounge” simply shows that “the upper middle class isn’t special anymore,” although he did not specifically link this to the concept of elite overproduction. “There are too many people with lots of money,” he concluded.

In the context of airport lounges, the “elite” are not just the ultra-wealthy, but the vast upper middle class—armed with a combination of higher degrees, status, and premium credit cards—now jostling for the same perks. But what if much of society has been turning into some version of an overcrowded airport lounge?

In an interview with Fortune Intelligence, Turchin said this theory makes sense and fits with his thesis when presented with the similarities. “The benefits that you get with wealth are now being diluted because there are just too many wealth holders,” he said, citing data that the top 10% of American society has gotten much wealthier over the past 40 years. (Turchin sources this statement to this working paper from Edward Wolff.)

Turchin said lounges are not by definition restricted from expansion in the same way that political offices are, with a core element of his thesis being there are too many sociopolitical elites for the number of positions open to them, but “it’s the same thing” in light of the difficulties many providers have in expanding lounge access. “There is a limited amount of space, but many more elites now, so to speak … low-rank elites.” Turchin said these low-rank elites, or “ten-percenters,” don’t have the status typically associated with elite status. “The overproduction of lower-ranking elites results in decreased benefits for all.”

When asked where else he sees this manifesting in modern life, Turchin said “it’s actually everywhere you look. Look at the overproduction of university degrees,” he added, arguing that declining rates of college enrollment and high rates of recent graduate unemployment support the decreasing value of a college diploma. “There is overproduction of university degrees and the value of university degree actually declines. And so the it’s the same thing [with] the lounge.”

Noah Smith argues that elite overproduction manifests as a kind of status anxiety and malaise among the upper middle class. Many find themselves struggling to afford or access the very symbols of success they were promised—be it a prestigious job, a home in a desirable neighborhood, or, indeed, a peaceful airport lounge. He collects reams of employment data to show that Turchin’s theory has significant statistical support from the 21st century American economy.

Freddie DeBoer largely agrees, framing the issue as “why so many elites feel like losers.” He focuses more on the creator economy than Smith, but asserts that he sees “think many would agree with me about “a pervasive sense of discontent among people who have elite aspirations and who feel that their years toiling in our meritocratic systems entitles them to fulfill those aspirations.”

Delta’s plan to restore status

In its lounge strategy, Delta is trying to walk a fine line: Offering a premium service to a class of consumers that is becoming more and more mass-market. CEO Ed Bastian acknowledged as much on the company’s latest earnings call. While touting the fortunes of Delta’s target customers, households making $100,000 or more a year, Bastian noted the income cutoff “is not, by the way, an elite definition—that’s 40% of all U.S. households.”

Beginning February 2025, Delta implemented new caps on annual lounge visits for American Express cardholders, setting a maximum of 15 visits per year and requiring exceptionally high annual spending ($75,000+) to re-unlock unlimited access. Basic Economy passengers, meanwhile, are permanently excluded from lounge access, further tightening entry. Travelers can only enter lounges within three hours of their flight’s departure time, discouraging extended stays and unnecessary early arrivals.

Delta is opening and upgrading lounges in key markets: New Delta One Lounges in Seattle, New York-JFK, Boston, and Los Angeles feature larger spaces, exclusive amenities, and new design concepts for premium passengers. Major expansions are under way in hubs like Atlanta, Orlando, Salt Lake City, and Philadelphia, with multiple new or enlarged clubs opening between spring and late 2025—some over 30,000 square feet in size, making them among the largest in the network. Renovations to existing lounges (e.g., Atlanta’s Concourses A and C) are aimed at maximizing capacity and improving guest experiences. Delta is also exploring emergency overflow options and flexible staffing to address unpredictable surges, especially during weather and operational delays.

Delta executives are optimistic. They predict that by 2026, most crowding issues—aside from extreme disruptions—will be resolved on “almost all days.” Continued investments in larger, better-designed lounges, coupled with tighter access controls, are expected to restore the premium experience customers expect.

However, critics note that crowding still occurs at peak times, especially in flagship locations, and design/layout flaws occasionally undermine even the newest clubs. The success of Delta’s fix-it agenda is being closely watched by both rivals and loyal travelers.

But Delta may be overmatched in rehabilitating the overcrowded airport lounge as a potent symbol of this broader malaise. What was once a marker of distinction is now a crowded, noisy, and often disappointing experience. The democratization of luxury, while laudable in some respects, has left many feeling that the rewards of success are increasingly out of reach—or at least, not what they used to be.

As airlines grapple with how to restore the magic of the lounge, they are also confronting a deeper truth: in an age of elite overproduction, the promise of exclusivity is harder than ever to keep.

For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

U.S. troops have been in Syria for over a decade. Here’s what to know after deadly IS attack

Published

on



The death of two U.S. service members and one American civilian in an attack in Syria by an alleged member of the Islamic State group has drawn new attention to the presence of American forces in the country.

Saturday’s attack was the first with fatalities since the fall of Syrian President Bashar Assad a year ago.

The United States has had troops on the ground in Syria for over a decade, with a stated mission of fighting IS. While not part of its official mission, the U.S. presence has also been seen as a means to hinder the flow of Iranian and Iran-backed fighters and weapons into Syria from neighboring Iraq.

The number of U.S. troops in the country has fluctuated and currently stands at around 900. They are mainly posted in the Kurdish-controlled northeast and at the al-Tanf base in the southeastern desert near the borders with Iraq and Jordan.

Here’s the back story and present situation of the U.S. military force in Syria:

What U.S. forces are doing in Syria

In 2011, mass protests in Syria against the Assad government were met by a brutal crackdown and spiraled into a civil war that lasted nearly 14 years before he was ousted in December 2024.

Wary of getting bogged down in another costly and politically unpopular war in the Middle East after its experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, Washington sent support to rebel groups but at first avoided direct military intervention.

That changed after the rise of the IS, which carried out sporadic attacks in the U.S. and Europe, while in Iraq and Syria, it seized territory that was at one point half the size of the United Kingdom. In the areas the group controlled, it was notorious for its brutality against religious minorities, as well as Muslims whom it considered to be apostates.

In 2014, the administration of then-U.S. President Barack Obama launched an air campaign against IS in Iraq and Syria. The following year, the first U.S. ground troops entered Syria, where they partnered with the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces in the country’s northeast.

By 2019, IS had lost control of all the territory it once held, but sleeper cells have continued to launch attacks.

The US military and Syrian forces

Before Assad’s ouster, Washington had no diplomatic relations with Damascus and the U.S. military did not work directly with the Syrian army.

That has changed over the past year. Ties have warmed between the administrations of U.S. President Donald Trump and Syrian interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, the former leader of an Islamist insurgent group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham that used to be listed by Washington as a terrorist organization.

In November, al-Sharaa became the first Syrian president to visit Washington since the country’s independence in 1946. During his visit, Syria announced its entry into the global coalition against the Islamic State, joining 89 other countries that have committed to combating the group.

While the entry into the coalition signals a move toward greater coordination between the Syrian and U.S. militaries, the Syrian security forces have not officially joined Operation Inherent Resolve, the U.S.-led military mission against IS in Iraq and Syria, which has for years partnered with the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces in northeast Syria.

The future US footprint in Syria

The number of U.S. troops posted in Syria has changed over the years.

Trump tried to withdraw all forces from Syria during his first term, but he met opposition from the Pentagon because it was seen as abandoning Washington’s Kurdish allies, leaving them open to a Turkish offensive.

Turkey considers the SDF a terrorist organization because of its association with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, which has waged a long-running insurgency in Turkey.

The number of U.S. troops increased to more than 2,000 after the Oct. 7, 2023, attack by Hamas in Israel, as Iranian-backed militants targeted American troops and interests in the region in response to Israel’s bombardment of Gaza.

The force has since been drawn back down to around 900, but Trump has given no indication that he is planning a full withdrawal in the near future.

After Saturday’s attack, U.S. envoy to Syria Tom Barrack posted on X: “A limited number of U.S. forces remain deployed in Syria solely to finish the job of defeating ISIS once and for all.”

The U.S. presence “empowers capable local Syrian partners to take the fight to these terrorists on the ground, ensuring that American forces do not have to engage in another costly, large-scale war in the Middle East,” he said, adding, “We will not waver in this mission until ISIS is utterly destroyed.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Trump’s demolition of East Wing of White House challenged by National Trust for Historic Preservation

Published

on



President Donald Trump was sued on Friday by preservationists asking a federal court to halt his White House ballroom project until it goes through multiple independent reviews and wins approval from Congress.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a privately funded group, is asking the U.S. District Court to block Trump’s White House ballroom addition, which already has involved razing the East Wing, until it goes through comprehensive design reviews, environmental assessments, public comments and congressional debate and ratification.

The project has prompted criticism in the historic preservation and architectural communities, and among his political adversaries, but the lawsuit is the most tangible effort thus far to alter or stop the president’s plans for an addition that itself would be nearly twice the size of the White House before the East Wing’s demolition.

“No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever — not President Trump, not President Biden, and not anyone else,” the lawsuit states. “And no president is legally allowed to construct a ballroom on public property without giving the public the opportunity to weigh in.”

Additionally, the Trust wants the court to declare that Trump, by fast-tracking the project, has committed multiple violations of the Administrative Procedures Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, while also exceeding his constitutional authority by not consulting lawmakers.

No more work should be done, the Trust argues, until administration officials “complete the required reviews — reviews that should have taken place before the Defendants demolished the East Wing, and before they began construction of the Ballroom.”

White House maintains that Trump has ‘full legal authority’ over the building

Asked questions about the lawsuit, White House spokesman David Ingle responded with a blanket assertion that Trump is within his “full legal authority to modernize, renovate and beautify the White House — just like all of his predecessors did.”

Ingle did not specifically address an Associated Press question asking whether the president would consult Congress at any point.

The White House response correctly notes that essentially every president makes some changes to the White House. But Trump’s efforts are the most sweeping since a nearly complete gutting of the decaying interior of the oldest portion of the mansion during President Harry Truman’s tenure. Truman sought and received explicit authorization from Congress, along with appropriations. Further, he consulted the American Society of Engineers and the Commission on Fine Arts, and he appointed a bipartisan commission to oversee the project.

Trump, a Republican, has emphasized since announcing the project that he’s doing it with private money, including his own. But that would not necessarily change how federal laws and procedures apply to what is still a U.S. government project.

The president already has bypassed the federal government’s usual building practices and historical reviews with the East Wing demolition. He recently added another architectural firm to the project.

Trump has long said a White House ballroom is overdue, complaining that events were held outside under a tent because the East Room and the State Dining Room could not accommodate bigger crowds. Trump, among other complaints, said guests get their feet wet if it rains during such events.

The White House is expected to submit plans for Trump’s new ballroom to a federal planning commission before the year ends, about three months after construction began.

Will Scharf, who was named by Trump as chairman of the National Capital Planning Commission, said at the panel’s monthly meeting last week that he was told by colleagues at the White House that the long-awaited plans would be filed in December.

“Once plans are submitted, that’s really when the role of this commission, and its professional staff, will begin,” said Scharf, who also is one of the Republican president’s top White House aides.

He said the review process would happen at a “normal and deliberative pace.”

Besides being too late, the Trust argues, that’s not nearly enough.

Federal law cites ‘express authority of Congress’ over D.C. projects

The Trust asserts that plans should have been submitted to the National Capital Planning Commission, the Commission of Fine Arts and Congress before any action. The lawsuit notes that the Trust wrote to those entities and the National Park Service on Oct. 21, after East Wing demolition began, urging a stop to the project and asking the administration to comply with federal law.

“The National Trust received no response,” the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit cites a litany of federal statutes and rules detailing the role the planning and fine arts commission and lawmakers play in U.S. government construction projects.

Among them is a statute: “A building or structure shall not be erected on any reservation, park, or public grounds of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia without express authority of Congress.”

The Trust notes also that the range design and environmental reviews, along with congressional deliberation, would involve public input.

“This public involvement, while important in all preservation matters, is particularly critical here, where the structure at issue is perhaps the most recognizable and historically significant building in the country,” the complaint says.

Besides the president, the lawsuit names as defendants the National Parks Service, the Department of the Interior, and the General Services Administration, along with leaders of those federal agencies.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Maine is getting Loony again as population of beloved bird doubles since 1983

Published

on



Loons are on the mend in Maine, filling more of the state’s lakes and ponds with their haunting calls, although conservationists say the birds aren’t out of the woods yet.

Maine is home to a few thousand of the distinctive black-and-white waterbirds — the East Coast’s largest loon population — and conservationists said efforts to protect them from threats helped grow the population. An annual count of common loons found more adults and chicks this year than last, Maine Audubon said this week.

The group said it estimated a population for the southern half of Maine of 3,174 adult loons and 568 chicks. Audubon bases its count on the southern portion of Maine because there are enough bird counters to get a reliable number. The count is more than twice the number when they started counting in 1983, and the count of adults has increased 13% from 10 years ago.

“We’re cautiously optimistic after seeing two years of growing chick numbers,” said Maine Audubon wildlife ecologist Tracy Hart. “But it will take several more years before we know if that is a real upward trend, or just two really good years.”

Maine lawmakers have attempted to grow the population of the loons with bans on lead fishing tackle that the birds sometimes accidentally swallow. Laws that limit boat speeds have also helped because they prevent boat wakes from washing out nests, conservation groups say.

It’s still too early to know if Maine’s loons are on a sustainable path to recovery, and the success of the state’s breeding loons is critical to the population at large, Hart said. Maine has thousands more loons than the other New England states, with the other five states combining for about 1,000 adults. The state is home to one of the largest populations of loons in the U.S., which has about 27,000 breeding adults in total.

Minnesota has the most loons in the lower 48 states, with a fairly stable population of about 12,000 adults, but they are in decline in some parts of their range.

While loons are not listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, they are considered threatened by some states, including New Hampshire and Michigan. The U.S. Forest Service also considers the common loon a sensitive species.

The birds migrate to the ocean in late fall and need a long runway to take off, meaning winter can be a treacherous time for the birds because they get trapped by ice in the lakes and ponds where they breed, said Barb Haney, executive director of Avian Haven, a wildlife rehabilitation center in Freedom, Maine.

“We’re getting a lot of calls about loons that are iced in,” Haney said, adding that the center was tending to one such patient this week.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.