Heres a topic that Ive written about in passing endlessly, but which Ive never dedicated a post to, so I think its time. Can we just take a moment to talk about the complete collapse of hotel brand standards over the years? Whats going on, whats driving this change, and how should us consumers adjust our travel planning because of this?
The real problem is franchising, which is the real driver for hotel profits. But the hotel franchisor often doesn't have control over these franchisees, so they cheap out.
The franchisor absolutely *can* have control over the franchisee, they just realize that the franchisee is the one paying the bills at the brand, which is what is making it difficult. I don't know how to change that as long as the largest brands are asset-light (and especially in business hotels where you need a critical mass to get any real "loyalty"), but that is the reality of the hospitality world today.
A privately held franchisor is probably more likely to maintain control.
Likewise, a model where franchisees were invited in but had to use the franchisor for management (essentially swapping their investment for returns) might limit the damage.
You are absolutely correct about this. This was for example sooo true for DoubleTree Hotels in Germany, there where three (now two) and they varied so widely that it was unbelievable. The one in Hannover has a good soft product, location & mostly hard product but the bathrooms are straight out of the 1960s. The one in Berlin is great, they have the best executive lounge in germany (yes Ive been to the Conrad in Hamburg) offering full meals in the evening, a great hard product and a somewhat varying soft product (but I blame that on Berlin). The one in Frankfurt was an absolute desaster, there I was downgraded twice, only one of two elevators worked for years, air conditioning was regularly broken and most staff was untrained and at times cheeky.
Peninsula, Airelles and Belmond own much of the real estate for their hotels, which explains a lot (although LVMH can't figure out what it is doing with Belmond).
Hotel companies that trade publicly (Marriott, Hilton, IHG, Accor) also face significant market pressures to demonstrate constant growth at the expense of a sustainable, long-term business. That element is not unique to the hotel business. It plagues businesses such as fashion, where the pressure for growth ultimately erodes craftsmanship and exclusivity.
I am most depressed by what's going on with Four Seasons and Rosewood, each of which has a single brand that has suffered greatly with massive over-expansion. I haven't given up on Aman yet (having had extraordinary recent stays at Amanzoe and Amanruya, with Aman Sveti Stefan booked for next month), although its new city hotels do not interest me at all.
All of this makes me appreciate independent hotels whose business is really hospitality.
As David Rose put it, "I like the wine, not the label".
End of the day, a hotel is either a nice, well maintained property or it's not. It either provides good value for money at its price point, or it does not. They can slap whatever brand they want on the outside, whatever. Maybe the consistency makes a difference to the 100+ night a year road warrior, but in general, the idea of loyalty to a hotel brand never made much sense to me.
You're missing the point. It's not loyalty so much as expectations. Admittedly this matters less in the internet review age, but part of the appeal of a Hampton Inn (which actually has largely maintained its standards) is you know what you're going to get
"It's not loyalty so much as expectations."
Nailed it.
Names of brands set expectations. Simple concept but carried out horribly by Marriott.
Expectations?
Who blindly books a hotel based on a "brand" without checking reviews?
Or more like filtering out the glowihg reviews chain hotels give themselves with fake accounts.
I donno, James. It’s not a Big Mac. I think Peter both ‘got the point,’ and also added more points… I’ve stayed at plenty of Hampton Inns, but can’t tell you that much unique about it. DoubleTrees? Cookies. Ok. Got me there.
Expectations of what exactly? Powdered eggs? The Hampton Inn waffle?
What percentage of Hampton Inns have a pool. Some do, some don't, right?
My point is that a) every hotel rises and falls on its own and b) there's always a price paid to experience received calculation. If you are staying in a Hampton Inn in a more desirable location and they jack up their prices and you're still at a Hampton Inn, maybe one that has not been renovated in awhile, you may not be thrilled. If you're staying in a Hampton Inn in a tertiary location and it's surprisingly nice and well maintained and the powdered eggs taste reminiscent of non-powdered eggs... hey, pretty good!
Delta? You mean like the faucet? Oh, the Marriott brand of hotels? Airline? What? Never heard of it… /s
What is equally confusing is figuring out which hotel brand actually gives you breakfast or not. That is frustrating.
It seems so short-sighted to me. One poor example of a brand could cost other hotels within the same brand dearly in the long run.
Is this why there are so many brands nowadays? "This brand used to guarantee a decent hotel. That's no longer the case, so we need a new brand that decent hotels actually want to be associated with". Repeat ad nauseum.
So as a thought question - out of all the franchised business models and individual businesses, why does this issue seem to be most unique and prolific among hotels? Is it the comparatively higher cost of maintaining a brand standard or mere raw greed?
Is it that the ‘average’ hotel consumer doesn’t know what the difference between a Hilton and a Conrad should be? How does the current highly experiential leisure travel market play into the situation?
I would argue that the average John and Susie Q Public checking into 3 separate Hiltons over the course of a year don’t notice much in terms of minor differences. However they’re likely to notice if 3 visits to Jersey Mike’s in different cities are highly dissimilar. I think the latter does more brand “damage” hence the incentive for consistency is higher in businesses with lower costs/lower pricing.
Curious to hear others’ takes.
You sound like a Stockholm syndrome victim for franchises.
If John Q stayed in a Jersey Mike for 12 hours each and have more contact points than just a streamlined sandwich, the Qs would definitely notice the difference in 3 visits even at the same store.
Harder to mess up if you're job is just to assemble a sandwich from only approved supplier. Did you notice the assembly of Hilton minibars?
But if Hilton cuts it breakfast, it's like Jersey Mike's selling sandwich without meat. If Hilton cuts it's lounge, it's like Jersey Mike closed it's dining room. You can tell.
Then you're comparing a Hilton to a Conrad, do you notice the different design between Subways and Jersey Mike's besides the branding and coloring? The difference is there. Also if every Jersey Mike has the exact same layout eg. 6 tables 4 chairs and 3 exactly same decor/art at the same postion. You wouldn't even notice it for a few visits. But when you do, you will call the decor boring. Same with hotels, you can't expect every Hilton to look the same, unless it's a Motel 6.
I agree the number of brands had got incomprehensible to most consumers but it’s always been the case that some properties are notably better than others within a single brand e.g., Marriott Park Lane in London vs Marriott Heathrow airport. Price is usually the guiding factor. I guess now we see a bit more confusion where e.g. a Doubletree Hilton can be nicer than a Hilton in the same city. Not sure I particularly agree with the examples in the post, partly because no consumers read the marketing jargon that describes each brand and it’s often just a way of getting around exclusivity agreements with owners. RC bringing its ‘resort in nature’ brand to a city mirrors Aman and Six Senses ‘urban resorts’ trend, and I’d expect a property with more focus on wellness/calm.
I totally agree, generally speaking. However, I have to say that I've seen remarkably consistent brand standards across Europe. Whether it's Radisson Collection, Radisson Blu, Gran Meliá, Paradisus, Meliá, Tivoli, Anantara, or NH Collection, the experience and service level tend to be quite predictable, in a positive way. You generally know what to expect from these brands. Perhaps this is more of an American phenomenon, or an issue that tends to affect very large, heavily franchised hotel companies?
I don't think my last few Radisson Blu stays in EU are consistent.
I think you feel that way because unlike the American brands that over promise and under delivers. The brands you mentioned doesn't promise much but still delivers. It helps having a fraction size of elite members. Then GHA elites don't get much either nor fixed cashback gives much aspirations. Again doesn't promise much. Where influencers love to brag about redeeming 80k points at a $5000 room in Maldives but most average people could never book it. Can't set much expectations if you get a fixed 5% hotel dollars as cashback.
To some extent, I think that's true. What those hotels promise, they generally deliver, and I believe that's the foundation of it all.
The European market is still not saturated with co-branded credit card holders, and it really shows. Elites are still treated like elites. A Radisson VIP member gets the best available room. That's happened to me 9 times out of 9 stays over the last two years. A Meliá Platinum member gets their upgrade on top of lounge access and the additional amenities at Gran Meliá. Personally, I've been upgraded 18 times out of 18 stays in the last 12 months. A GHA Titanium member gets the promised double upgrade. That happened to me 8 times out of 9 stays over the last year. The ninth was during Christmas, when the hotel was fully booked, and I only received a one-category upgrade instead of two.
We don't play the points game as much. GHA feels like a different and refreshing option. Radisson's points program is hardly worth pursuing in my opinion, and Meliá used to have some excellent redemption opportunities until the devaluation last year. Nowadays there are only a few remaining sweet spots. What we do receive, however, is a greater number of tangible perks.
On the other hand, I'm also talking about brand consistency. Over the last ten years I've traveled roughly 140 to 150 times, mostly within these kinds of brands, and I've generally had a very consistent experience, with the exception of some properties in the Americas and Africa.
All of my Radisson Blu stays (Bucharest, Berlin, Riga, Oslo, and so on) felt remarkably similar in terms of both service and architectural style. Likewise, all of my Gran Meliá experiences have shared the same culture and even elements of gastronomy, whether in Madrid, Tenerife, Rome, or China.
I think you've made a very good point. It really comes down to receiving what was promised.
At the end of the day, luxury isn't necessarily about receiving more than promised. It's about consistently receiving exactly what was promised.
From my POV, the "tiers" of business are more meaningful and I think some of the differentiation is overblown and should never have been a thing to start with. A CN or CP hotel was going to be quality regardless of whether it was in downtown Montreal or the Rockies. Today they're all Fairmonts.
I travel a lot and I don't see a major difference between some branding within a tier. Courtyard vs Fairfield vs Springhill blur together (Marriott's breakfast chaos aside), and Hyatt Regency vs Grand Hyatt do as well. That's not the end of the world - in some cases the differences are really a matter of paint job and a need to provide a few brands for franchisees to be able to use so you don't have four of the same hotel at the same interchange (even if you might as well have that) since business over time might increment in 200-room steps better than 1000-room steps.
I'm more bothered by hotels within a given tier "crashing out" in terms of overall standards (and not being knocked down a tier) than I am between brands. Put another way, it's less bad having to sort a Westin from a Marriott or Sheraton than figuring out that THIS Sheraton should probably be knocked down to a Four Points.
And of course, most of the "luxury" space (Fairmont aside) is invisible to me for a whole host of reasons, so smaller high-end brands just gets a shrug from me.
Good point re:not wanting four of the same brand nearby.
As an aside, I'm always amused to hear Four Points referred to negatively - my one experience of the brand was Barcelona Diagonal, which I found to be excellent.
@mickyb: I don't see Four Points as /bad/, but it has lower expectations than a full-service Sheraton. It's a lower tier, mostly-indistinguishable from the other limited-service tier hotels (if possibly prone to a few more bad apples than some of the other brands?).
Of course, with a dozen "select service" brands, Marriott should probably formally differentiate them into two tiers at some point - the expectations definitely vary a bit. Yes, I realize a few brands are geographically bounded and one or two exist as "repositories" for whatever boutique stuff wandered in off the street this week that doesn't really want the whole "brand standards" thing.
[Also, Delta seems to straddle the full service/select service line depending on the property.]
You travel a lot and don't see a difference?
Courtyard has a restaurant/bar better work table.
Fairfield is basically cheap no frills.
Springhill is a suite version of Fairfield.
Hyatt Regency is modern and functional with a club lounge.
Grand Hyatt is classic luxury large hotel
Park Hyatt is boutique luxury but too boring.
Now if you only focus inside your bedroom, then that has less to do with branding and can look much more similar.
You should stay at Motel 6 and save some money next time since you can't tell the amenities outside your room.
Eskimo, "too boring" LOL. Not all PH are same. Maldives Hadahaa ain't 'boring' at all.
This may be the pandemic coloring things, but I've run into CYs that only intermittently held to the pretense of a staffed bar. Springhills sometimes dress breakfast up enough to seem nice than a CY. The price points are randomly interchangeable in places (one interchange often had the Springhill like $50-80 more expensive than the other two).
Over in Hyatt land, a lot of Regencies don't have an operational lounge (a bunch of these fell off during the pandemic). Some GHs have an operating lounge, some don't. So the two are effectively interchangeable for me.
Edit: An example is in DC. The HR at Dulles has a lounge (closed on weekends). The HR at Tysons has a lounge (all days). The GH downtown has a lounge. The HR at DCA, HR on Capitol Hill, and HR Bethesda don't have lounges. Elsewhere, MCO doesn't have a lounge (neither does Grand Cypress), but the one by the OCCC has one. Buckhead in Atlanta has a lounge, HR downtown doesn't. HR at JFK (the casino) has a lounge (but has restricted hours). Hyatt Grand Central has a lounge. HR Times Square doesn't have a lounge. So really, I feel like it's around a 50/50 shot in either event - I think the only difference is probably, in theory, room count/convention orientation, but even that's fuzzy.
I didn't make any notes on Park Hyatt (it generally reads as "overly expensive with a variable experience" to me, usually with a badly overblown restaurant menu).
Except most Hyatt Regencies no longer have a club lounge.
Fairfield and Holiday Inn Express are basically the same.
Courtyard and Hyatt Place are basically the same, although Hyatt Place has better bedding than Courtyard and the other limited-service Marriott brands.
Delta, Four Points and Holiday Inn are basically the same.
Marriott, Sheraton and Hyatt Regency are basically the same. I think your traditional Sheraton and traditional Hyatt Regency are closer. I think your average Marriott has a better restaurant than your average Sheraton or your average Hyatt Regency. Sheraton has long-suffered from poor F&B offerings. Same for Hyatt Regency.
Westin and Grand Hyatt are basically the same.
I think Park Hyatt is more like a JW Marriott or Fairmont than a St. Regis or Four Seasons.
I'd note that the Delta bit applies in the US. I think it's something a bit different in Canada; the US iteration just shook out because they needed somewhere to slot the brand in the US when they expanded and they didn't need "yet another" Sheraton/Marriott-coded brand.
I find Novotels remain very consistent indeed, and NHs are also pretty consistent. The few Hilton Graden Inns I've visited were predictable/consistent enough, and the same can be said for budget chains like Ibis or Toyoko Inn.
I think that the point of an upper upscale/luxury hotel is to have some personality- I can't really understand why consumers would even be looking for consistency per se.
@Ben,
I don't understand why you keep referring to the JW Marriott brand as a convention centre brand. The first JW Marriott was the Washington DC property, the first international property was Hong Kong. Neither of these are convention centre adjacent. Admittedly in Hong Kong, you can get to the convention centre in a taxi in 10 minutes or less, but not really a convention centre hotel. (In Hong Kong that would be Grand Hyatt and Renaissance)
I have stayed in a fair number of JW Marriotts across 6 continents, and I have yet to stay at a convention centre hotel. My impression was always upscale/luxury hotels, well above a Marriott but not quite the level of a Ritz Carlton.
I'm midway through a pretty horrible stay at the Hyatt Regency in Vancouver. I am shocked by how each Hyatt hotel seems to choose if they reward loyalty and if so to what degree? Here they basically did nothing, or at least, the bare minimum. I'm a Globalist. My assigned room is what I paid for, not even a good version of it, not a high floor, not quiet, not far from the elevators (as I always request) not with the best view and certainly no upgrade even though when I check there are several other rooms that would have qualified. Before I got here I had a question about upgrades and they told me don't ask us call the Globalist phone number. Globalist breakfast is now only offered in the lounge: which is like sitting in an soul less Airline Terminal designed by Ikea with a to-go shop in the corner. When I asked if I could eat in the dinning room and forfeit what ever dubious benefits come with lounge access ( snacks! 3 pm Happy Hour! Continental breakfast! ) The assistant Front Office Manager Mr Mehta came to speak to me, predictably because it was such an outrageous request. Speaking to him was like having a negotiation with a used car salesman. It started with no. Then it moved to: I can offer you 20% discount on breakfast in the restaurant? And finally: I will let you have 1 breakfast out of the kindness of my heart so you might be able to have the experience (literaly what he said). I declined. No I avoid all F+B and eat locally at friendly places with good food who are glad for my business and welcoming. Of course, it's not about breakfast. It's about the greedy, cheap, short sightedness that makes me sp mad. I stay at 60 Hyatts last year and have been brand loyal for a decade, have the credit card, I'm all in and this is the best they can do? Had Mr. Mehta said Yes, it would have created so much good will. Saying No just clarifies for me how pointless it is to be loyal to a corporation that could care less about you or hospitality. The only thing the Vancouver Hyatt regency wants is my money and give me the least they can so they can make the maximum profit. This isn't the first time I have had experiences like this at Hyatts this year. This just was the proverbial straw, where I realized done. They've lost me and my business. It used to be great but now, not so much. I'm not sure what's happening, but it sure isn't about hospitality.
The Hyatt Regency in Salt Lake City is like this. They offer a very limited breakfast in the lounge but then the lounge closes in the mid-afternoon with zero evening offering. It's a complete scam to avoid giving globalists a restaurant breakfast where they might order an omelet or something.
I know people here are more concerned about upscale brands but there is one brand we find very consistent:
Holiday Inn Express.
The room features, hotel amenities and the reliability of breakfast make it our preferred airport/exit ramp/post event hotel.
I wish more brands were this reliable.
Yes--I think this is generally true. The inconsistency described in the article is mostly chains/owners trying to cash in on the halo of upscale brands. A Hampton Inn, on the other hand, tends to be a Hampton Inn.
Definitely agree, especially newer builds outside of North America. Decent cleanliness, decent furniture (and always has a desk!), decent internet, and free breakfast. I find them to be even more consistent than budget brands of other chains like Hampton, Fairfield, Springfield, etc. so they’re my first choice if I’m looking for something in that segment.
Ibis properties (including Styles and Budget) are also very consistently unexceptional…but gets the job done, especially for shorter stays.
, I'm sitting on the Hilton Los Cabos beach after 24 hours realizing I've spent too much time in SE Asia (Bali, Thailand) lately. Sitting here as an earned Diamond I was shocked at the 1 category upgrade and the 3 balloons on the bed to celebrate our 55 anniversary. Spending $170 on a burger, fish taco and 1 bottle of cheap Pinot Noir pointed out how being a $60 taxi ride away to the closest restaurant allowed hostage pricing to overpower decent pricing in the name of greed.
My only excuse is that this is nights 972,3,4 of my DFL journey. At this point I ask "why am I bothering?" and "did I miss the boat by a decade because 'everybody is a diamond'"?
What should I expect for 975-1000?
Why are you bothering?
Unless lifetime status is earned before age 50, at most 60, why bother?
The concept of a "brand" is interesting.
The job of brand is to make people spend more money than the place is worth (hello Fairmont or Park Hyatt for example). It works well. Fools buy believing higher price = somehow better quality.
So called brand standards are worthless, you really have to do your own research on any property you are considering. The inconsistency and dilution in the upper segments will probably drive the introduction of even more new brands on the top of the pyramid, as the quality erosion keeps us guessing in the mid-upper range. when will we see a new "ultra luxury" brand on top of RC Reserve introduced? Gotta keep up them growth numbers you know.
I go by regional standards. I know a hotel stateside is going to do the bare minimum and nickel and dime you for everything. A hotel in Mexico is going to be overpriced and under deliver and make me question why I even bothered to travel there. A hotel in Asia I might actually get upgraded and there’s probably a decent free breakfast.
I've had outstanding value at lots of hotels in CDMX and other parts of Mexico, though the one time I went to Acapulco I had an experience that would've been poor value at $100 a night... and I was paying 2.5 times that!
Unless you're making a generalization based on the high taxes / service fees for many properties in Mexico, that's an odd comment. I would agree with the US issue on service and charging for everything but Mexico doesn't have consistent issues like you describe. Lots of great properties that have a phenomenal hard product for the price and great service. Definitely less common at the most touristy places (Cancun, Cabo, Tulum) but present elsewhere in Mexico.