View from the Wing wrote about this a couple of days ago, though I think it’s worth writing about it as well to get as many eyeballs on this ridiculous practice as possible. It’s simply not okay.
Unfortunately “resort fees” in many destinations have become the norm, as annoying as they are. They were originally introduced primarily for two reasons:
- They’re a way for hotels to try and get more revenue without increasing the room rate
- It works out better for them than an increase in the room rate, since they don’t have to pay travel agents a commission on the resort fee; in some areas it also allows them to skirt the typical occupancy tax that otherwise applies on the room rate
Resorts were able to get away with it at first since they could throw in amenities like beach chairs, etc., which they might otherwise charge for. The problem is that once a majority of hotels in certain destinations introduced these fees, it made it tough for other hotels not to. They were at an extreme disadvantage if they didn’t charge these fees. If they simply raised their rates they’d appear more expensive than the competition, given how good many hotels are at hiding resort fees.
We’ve occasionally also seen some city hotels introduce similar fees, and it’s just ridiculous. For example, I’ve written in the past about the Le Parker Meridien New York “facilities charge.” That’s $15 per day, which I still find ridiculous, but at least they have a pool, which is otherwise a unique amenity in NYC.
But much more ridiculous is the new fee at a few Hilton hotels in New York City, including the Hilton New York Midtown. This is New York City’s biggest hotel, with roughly 2,000 rooms.
Some Hiltons in New York have introduced a new $25 per day “urban destination charge,” which includes the following:
Daily Mandatory Charge will be added to the room rate and includes: Urban Destination Charge with premium guest internet access (3 devices); daily $15 beverage credit in Lobby Lounge or Bridges Bar; daily $10 food credit in Herb N’ Kitchen (grab and go only); local and toll-free calls.
So you get free internet, which you already received before as long as you’re a Hilton Honors member. You receive local and toll-free calls, which in 2017 is like offering free faxes. And you receive a daily $10-15 credit at select outlets, which is a way they’re presumably hoping to generate even more revenue, since no one is going to spend exactly that amount, and nevermind that most people won’t use that credit at all.
But you know what’s possibly more offensive than the fee itself? The fact that on Twitter the hotel has the indecency to claim that “a small number of Hilton properties in NYC are testing a fee for amenities and services that [they] believe enhance the guest experience.”
Hi Gary, a small number of Hilton properties in NYC are testing a fee for amenities and services that we believe enhance the guest experience. We appreciate your feedback and will share it with the right people.
— NY Hilton Midtown (@NYHiltonMidtown) November 30, 2017
That’s right, this $25 per night fee is an enhancement.
We’re used to hearing loyalty programs spin negative changes as enhancements, though this has to be one of the most egregious uses of the word “enhancement” that I’ve seen in a long time. Do hotels really think people are this stupid? There’s a certain point at which you’re just better off not saying anything, rather than lying to your guests’ faces.
If you’re as offended by this fee as I am, and since they’re just “testing” this, I’d recommend Tweeting @HiltonHotels and @NYHiltonMidtown to express your displeasure with the fee, and share that you wouldn’t stay there (if that’s in fact the case). What makes this interesting is that while most Hilton properties are franchised, this one is actually corporately owned, which makes this even more disturbing. This isn’t an individual hotel trying to pull a fast one, but rather Hilton corporate trying to do so.
@HiltonHotels @NYHiltonMidtown Your "urban destination charge" is ridiculous, and would prevent me from ever staying at your property. Whoever came up with the idea should be ashamed.
— Ben Schlappig (@OneMileataTime) November 30, 2017
Of course the hotel hopes this works. They have 2,000 rooms, and at $25 per night in fees, they’re looking at up to an extra $50,000 per day in revenue, or up to $18,250,000 per year.
Unfortunately the Hilton New York isn’t alone — at this point over 40 NYC hotels charge these fees. Once the fees are in place at a certain number of hotels, you can bet even more hotels will follow, as it becomes the norm rather than the exception. It’s no different than airline “fuel surcharges.”
I stayed at Embassy Suites located at 60 W 37th St in Midtown Manhattan NY. I do not understand what this Mandatory Urban Service Charge of $25 per day. There was no housekeeping, no condiments, no happy hour/breakfast (common at other Embassy Suites).
This is some brilliant idea which may work......once. Fool me once shame on you,,,,,, fool me twice,,, shame on me.
OMG, I never know this... now they charge 30 per day + state sales tax and occupancy tax, so in total it's 34.42 per night. RIDICULOUS!!!!
@DCS: "You’ve now gotten the fix for your OCD, now please get lost."
Translated: When DCS's argument has been successfully called out as ridiculous, he resorts to narcissistic rage in the form of name calling and other insults.
Oh my god. Will you two please shut up, get a room, and let somebody else comment for once? The comments thread isn't your personal debate forum.
You've now gotten the fix for your OCD, now please get lost.
@DCS: "Only one who deludes oneself could argue that just dropping the cost for one night is as intuitive as calculating the mean over 5 nights then multiplying that by . Hilton had the data that showed it was a problem for their members so they made it REALLY simple without devaluing the benefit, as some knee-jerk alarmist tried to make everyone believe — a real 'tour de force.'"
Way to move the goalposts on your argument, DCS.
Only one who deludes oneself could argue that just dropping the cost for one night is as intuitive as calculating the mean over 5 nights then multiplying that by . Hilton had the data that showed it was a problem for their members so they made it REALLY simple without devaluing the benefit, as some knee-jerk alarmist tried to make everyone believe -- a real "tour de force."
And because I forgot previously, this statement of yours is completely laughable:
"You claimed that the rule change had nothing to do with the switch to the revenue system, but if you bother following the link to read the post, you’ll see the mathematical proof of why Hilton made the change. It was to simplify the math, which got a bit more complex because of the switch to the revenue system. "
There is no...
And because I forgot previously, this statement of yours is completely laughable:
"You claimed that the rule change had nothing to do with the switch to the revenue system, but if you bother following the link to read the post, you’ll see the mathematical proof of why Hilton made the change. It was to simplify the math, which got a bit more complex because of the switch to the revenue system. "
There is no reason why the switch to the revenue system required this change to be made - either calculation is just math. The only difference is that the cost of an award changed from (A+B+C+D+E)/5*4 to (A+B+C+D) - the former calculation is no more or less complicated under the revenue system than it was previously.
Again, though, you're trying to assign some sort of ulterior motive to my statements when there was none to begin with, just in a pathetic effort to win an argument that you invented.
@DCS: "FYI: I am the only one that I can find that got this exactly right, which you won’t know because you are too obtuse to even bother trying to understand what it is that you are challenging."
Yet more evidence of DCS's NPD, which has manifested itself in his continued arguing over nothing, just so he can say that he is the only one who is ever right.
For the last time, DCS, I...
@DCS: "FYI: I am the only one that I can find that got this exactly right, which you won’t know because you are too obtuse to even bother trying to understand what it is that you are challenging."
Yet more evidence of DCS's NPD, which has manifested itself in his continued arguing over nothing, just so he can say that he is the only one who is ever right.
For the last time, DCS, I don't care about why Hilton made this change. My only observation was that the change was made, and that there are consequences to the change -- both good and bad. You can bluster all you want about being right or proving whatever you want to prove, but none of that changes anything.
The point that was originally made about you only continues to be reinforced.
Again, get help.
We're done here because you are worse than useless. The best way to convince anyone is to actually know what they are saying. That is the basic rule of intelligent discourse. You just huff and puff hot air, oblivious to all reality around you. You claimed that the rule change had nothing to do with the switch to the revenue system, but if you bother following the link to read the post, you'll see the...
We're done here because you are worse than useless. The best way to convince anyone is to actually know what they are saying. That is the basic rule of intelligent discourse. You just huff and puff hot air, oblivious to all reality around you. You claimed that the rule change had nothing to do with the switch to the revenue system, but if you bother following the link to read the post, you'll see the mathematical proof of why Hilton made the change. It was to simplify the math, which got a bit more complex because of the switch to the revenue system. It had nothing whatsoever to do with the nefarious motive that you and the blogger who got me to write the long, thorough and exhaustive post on the subject were predictably alarmist about.
FYI: I am the only one that I can find that got this exactly right, which you won't know because you are too obtuse to even bother trying to understand what it is that you are challenging. You are afraid your worse fear would be confirmed that the proof is as devastating to your thesis as I said it is.
Goodbye.
And frankly, DCS, I really don't care about what you have to say about the subject, because I don't have to click the link to know that, yet again, you've cherry-picked analysis to create a statistically insignificant sample that reeks of confirmation bias, all in an effort to blindly support Hilton no matter what it does.
The only thing that you are trying to do here (as usual) is prove that you are the only...
And frankly, DCS, I really don't care about what you have to say about the subject, because I don't have to click the link to know that, yet again, you've cherry-picked analysis to create a statistically insignificant sample that reeks of confirmation bias, all in an effort to blindly support Hilton no matter what it does.
The only thing that you are trying to do here (as usual) is prove that you are the only one who can be right and the only one who is allowed to have an opinion. Maybe someday, you'll realize just why you feel the need to do that.
@DCS: "Your alarmist comment that I took issue with was this '…the end result is a system that may result in price increases for these awards.'"
Whether you like it or not, my original statement was factually correct. I know you are fluent in English, but it's pretty well understood that when someone says that something may happen, it leaves open the alternative -- that is, prices may NOT have increased as a result.
Nonetheless,...
@DCS: "Your alarmist comment that I took issue with was this '…the end result is a system that may result in price increases for these awards.'"
Whether you like it or not, my original statement was factually correct. I know you are fluent in English, but it's pretty well understood that when someone says that something may happen, it leaves open the alternative -- that is, prices may NOT have increased as a result.
Nonetheless, now that I have proven that your argument was completely fabricated, please give up and get the help you need.
@Mike: Your alarmist comment that I took issue with was this "…the end result is a system that may result in price increases for these awards.” From there it was the usual childish taunt, but then I decided to do a rather lengthy post to set the record straight after a travel blogger claimed that the rule change was a "massive" devaluation.
Please just follow the link I provided on December 3, 2017 at...
@Mike: Your alarmist comment that I took issue with was this "…the end result is a system that may result in price increases for these awards.” From there it was the usual childish taunt, but then I decided to do a rather lengthy post to set the record straight after a travel blogger claimed that the rule change was a "massive" devaluation.
Please just follow the link I provided on December 3, 2017 at 8:50 am upthread. The end result is nowhere close to being a "system that may result in price increases for these awards” ...au contraire!
Q.E.D.
Fixed that for you:
@HiltonHotels @NYHiltonMidtown Your "urban destination charge" is ridiculous, and would prevent me from ever staying at your property. Whoever came up with the idea should be FIRED.
— Ben Schlappig (@OneMileataTime) November 30, 2017
@DCS: Like I said, I have better things to do than read you citing yourself as evidence that you are right, so I didn't read the post you linked. If it's your usual modus operandi, though, I'm sure that your so-called "analysis" is a statistically insignificant sample that was cherry-picked to get the result that you wanted, as you have done elsewhere.
(It's kind of hard to take a researcher who does that seriously in...
@DCS: Like I said, I have better things to do than read you citing yourself as evidence that you are right, so I didn't read the post you linked. If it's your usual modus operandi, though, I'm sure that your so-called "analysis" is a statistically insignificant sample that was cherry-picked to get the result that you wanted, as you have done elsewhere.
(It's kind of hard to take a researcher who does that seriously in his actual research, but that's a different argument altogether.)
Since you want evidence of my argument, here is what I said about it here (in comments on another OMAAT post, since Lucky didn't deem that change significant enough to merit its own blog post:
"Under the new change, the award cost for the example given on that page will depend on whether the fifth night is a peak night or an off-peak night. If the fifth night of the stay in that example priced at the peak rate of 40,000 points, then the cost of the award would be 140,000 points (or 2 nights at 30,000 and 2 nights at 40,000), and would accordingly reduce the award cost by 4,000 points compared to the old calculation.
If the fifth night of the stay, however, is the off-peak night priced at 30,000 points, then the cost of the award will increase by 6,000 points over the old calculation, to 150,000 points, because of the elimination of one 30,000 point night (which leaves 3 nights at 40,000 points and 1 night at 30,000 points).
Translated: If the fifth night is more than the old average, then the new change results in a reduction in the award costs. However, if the fifth night is less than the old average, then the cost of the award will increase when compared to the old calculation."
https://onemileatatime.com/best-travel-credit-cards/hotel/hilton/#comment-3778783
My comment was (and always has been) that the change may or may not result in a higher award cost, which is a pure function of the math that is used in the equation when compared to the old formula.
In the meantime, the only thing that you have done is proven what was originally said about you in this thread -- that is, your blind defense of all things Hilton -- so thank you for proving what everyone here already knows.
BTW, @Mike, the post I asked you to read did not mention you at all. You are not as important to me as seem to imagine. Almost invariably you address me, and not the other way around.
If you are so sure I am making things up, then the way to prove it is to search and find your comments and post them here, along with the link to the discussion and let people be the judge. That is what I would do. To constantly claim that people are putting words in your cybermouth when you can simply post and link to what you purportedly said to settle the issue, further diminishes your already tenuous credibility.
@DCS: I don't need to read your post to know that your portrayal of my argument was (and remains) fabricated in an effort to make yourself look good, because I never said what you claim I did.
Get help.
@Mike -- Read the post. Whatever you thought you pointed out was totally bogus and knee-jerk alarmist, as usual. I searched and searched and searched for such cases and not a single one materialized. Read the post and see the multiple examples I provided. What Hilton accomplished with the rule change was precisely what they'd intended to accomplish: to simplify the calculation of the 5th award night free benefit, which got just slight more complicate...
@Mike -- Read the post. Whatever you thought you pointed out was totally bogus and knee-jerk alarmist, as usual. I searched and searched and searched for such cases and not a single one materialized. Read the post and see the multiple examples I provided. What Hilton accomplished with the rule change was precisely what they'd intended to accomplish: to simplify the calculation of the 5th award night free benefit, which got just slight more complicate when they switched to the revenue system. Period. There was no hint of 'devaluation' or anything that you claimed the rule change was intended to accomplish. Again and again and again, you have made claims that have simply turned out to be wrong, and, yet, you seem to learn nothing from being so consistently wrong. There is a word for that...
Goodbye.
@DCS: "Case in point: you went on and on about how Hilton ‘devalued’ their 5th award night free perk because of the change they announced about how the total cost of benefit is calculated."
Except for the fact that DCS has completely fabricated what I said, that is. The only thing I ever pointed out about that change is that it may require more points if the fifth (free) night is less than the average...
@DCS: "Case in point: you went on and on about how Hilton ‘devalued’ their 5th award night free perk because of the change they announced about how the total cost of benefit is calculated."
Except for the fact that DCS has completely fabricated what I said, that is. The only thing I ever pointed out about that change is that it may require more points if the fifth (free) night is less than the average of the five nights under the old calculation. There are plenty of instances where this won't be the case, but in the end, you may or may not lose under this calculation.
This is nothing new for DCS - he has, on multiple occasions, fabricated other people's arguments in an effort to make himself look better, which is merely a symptom of his narcissistic personality disorder. And, as usual, he ends up only portraying himself as a Hilton apologist who resorts to insults when people disagree with him or who point out any of the instances where he posts something false.
@Mike is back!
I am "funny" but I am not laughing. It would help to offer some kind proof that I've ever mindlessly defended Hilton. Every time you've tried proving my arguments wrong, you've only ended with a pie in the face and looking ridiculous.
Case in point: you went on and on about how Hilton 'devalued' their 5th award night free perk because of the change they announced about how the total cost of...
@Mike is back!
I am "funny" but I am not laughing. It would help to offer some kind proof that I've ever mindlessly defended Hilton. Every time you've tried proving my arguments wrong, you've only ended with a pie in the face and looking ridiculous.
Case in point: you went on and on about how Hilton 'devalued' their 5th award night free perk because of the change they announced about how the total cost of benefit is calculated. Well, I did the easy math and showed that the claimed 'devaluation' is as bogus as anything else you've claimed that I've debunked. Here's the link to the post:
https://goo.gl/xSczff
which is titled: "No, There Has Not Been A “Big Devaluation In Hilton ‘5th Award Night Free’ Benefit.” Au Contraire!"
G'day!
$25 is the difference between you staying or not at this hotel?!? But it's easy for you to drop a cool $3000 on a 10 hour flight one way
"DCS is not a mindless defender of Hilton..."
You're funny.
Thanks for writing about this and being so vocal about it, Lucky.
I think there's a lot of things we can do about these fees if we come together in taking action. Literally nobody likes these fees, which means we have a chance to hit these hotels where it hurts: profits and reputation. If you have stayed at a hotel that charged such a fee, leave a 1 or 2 star review on tripadvisor...
Thanks for writing about this and being so vocal about it, Lucky.
I think there's a lot of things we can do about these fees if we come together in taking action. Literally nobody likes these fees, which means we have a chance to hit these hotels where it hurts: profits and reputation. If you have stayed at a hotel that charged such a fee, leave a 1 or 2 star review on tripadvisor (which hotels care about a lot). If everyone who is unhappy about the fee leaves a low review, the hotel will feel it. File complaints with the FTC and the attorney generals in the appropriate state about these being fraudulent - again, congress might not be looking at it right now, but there's plenty of other legal consumer protection avenues to follow. Give them a hard time about these fees: if the fee includes use of the pool, demand that the pool be filled even if it's the middle of winter (as it was for an above commenter). December and 10 below? But I want to go swimming, and the resort fee says it covers pool use! Toll free international calling? Call somewhere in Asia and don't hang up. Rack up a huge bill for the hotel. It's covered by the fee, after all. Demand a voucher for two drinks at the bar for EVERY NIGHT you're staying. after all, you're paying the fee per night, so if the fee includes two drinks, why wouldn't it include two drinks per night? If you're in charge of corporate accounts, move your business meetings/stays away from these kinds of hotels and let them know.
And, of course, tweet, email, and complain. Who knows? It *might* have an effect.
@Tommy Trash trash talks again: "Tellingly, DCS has not emerged to defend this Hilton marketing dumpster fire. Perhaps this is a bridge too far for even the most rabid Hilton fanboy."
DCS (a) lives in NYC and couldn't care less, (b) had anyone bitching about this bothered doing the most basic or cursory research, they would have known that this fee has not originated with Hilton (as has already been pointed, Marriott, Starwood and other...
@Tommy Trash trash talks again: "Tellingly, DCS has not emerged to defend this Hilton marketing dumpster fire. Perhaps this is a bridge too far for even the most rabid Hilton fanboy."
DCS (a) lives in NYC and couldn't care less, (b) had anyone bitching about this bothered doing the most basic or cursory research, they would have known that this fee has not originated with Hilton (as has already been pointed, Marriott, Starwood and other properties and chains were already charging it), and, lastly, (c) DCS is not a mindless defender of Hilton, and there is nothing to defend about this fee, by Hilton or any other service company.
G'day.
What more readers of this should do is leverage their corporate purchasing teams to register their displeasure with this practice. Individually, it will be difficult for members to sway the corporate raiders that think they can keep stealing from our wallets. If you ensure that your travel management team is aware, they will send a much more impactful message to Hilton and others that corporate travel spend with Hilton or this particular property will fall...
What more readers of this should do is leverage their corporate purchasing teams to register their displeasure with this practice. Individually, it will be difficult for members to sway the corporate raiders that think they can keep stealing from our wallets. If you ensure that your travel management team is aware, they will send a much more impactful message to Hilton and others that corporate travel spend with Hilton or this particular property will fall to zero - especially when as indicated, we already receive Wifi, some/many corp travel policies don't allow for the consumption of alcohol, so where this is meant to pay for alcohol, this might be a violation of travel policies, and who uses the telephone in a hotel room to make call but to the front desk?!?
How does using Aibnb solve the fee problem? Airbnb is fee central. Every time I've ran a search on there, the rate on the calendar is lower than the rate when you click on your dates. Some hosts charge extra fees per person. Many (most?) hosts charge cleaning fees. Most smart cities now force Airbnb to collect their local hotel tax on Airbnb bookings.
For example, I just searched "New York City" and clicked...
How does using Aibnb solve the fee problem? Airbnb is fee central. Every time I've ran a search on there, the rate on the calendar is lower than the rate when you click on your dates. Some hosts charge extra fees per person. Many (most?) hosts charge cleaning fees. Most smart cities now force Airbnb to collect their local hotel tax on Airbnb bookings.
For example, I just searched "New York City" and clicked on a random "whole apartment" listing on the 1st page of results. Advertised price is $181. I put in Friday-Sunday dates in January and now all of a sudden the rate is $218. Then I've got the $35 cleaning fee and the $61 service fee. So what started at $181 ended up at $266.
An even worse example in DC: listed price is $99. Click in and select Friday - Sunday dates in January and it goes to $145. Cleaning fee is $50. Service fee is $45. Taxes $56. A listing that started at $99 per night is now $220 per night. Worst part is that even after taxes, most hotels in DC that weekend cost way less and I wouldn't have to stay in some dude's basement.
Ben
Thanks for the heads up. As a Diamond member I certainly will not accept these.
I think it would be very helpful if you would find the government agencies, senate or congress to have a huge write in.
What N.eu writes in is rather funny, but awfully (hope not) true in the future. I mean do I want a bed with or without sheets. Oh boy.
Kent
Tellingly, DCS has not emerged to defend this Hilton marketing dumpster fire. Perhaps this is a bridge too far for even the most rabid Hilton fanboy.
There is one solution to avoiding these fee's, that would be Airbnb. Which comes with it's own challenges but at least "urban destination fees" are not added (yet).
Same goes for the Kimpton Sir Francis Drake in San Francisco: "A $22 + tax nightly Facility Fee applies and includes: $10 daily credit at Scala's, Free WiFi, Fitness Center & more!" Yes, that's $22 for free wifi.
Stay in New York for $0.99 per night in a luxury hotel *.
* Terms and conditions apply.
Single bed: $59.99 per night
Double bed: $99.99 per night
King bed: $129.99 per night
Daily new towels: $19.99 per night
Daily new sheets and pillows: $24.99 per night
Soap, shower gel and shampoo: $14.99 per set
Wired internet for 1 device: $29.99 per night
Wireless internet for 1 device:...
Stay in New York for $0.99 per night in a luxury hotel *.
* Terms and conditions apply.
Single bed: $59.99 per night
Double bed: $99.99 per night
King bed: $129.99 per night
Daily new towels: $19.99 per night
Daily new sheets and pillows: $24.99 per night
Soap, shower gel and shampoo: $14.99 per set
Wired internet for 1 device: $29.99 per night
Wireless internet for 1 device: $34.99 per night
Additional devices: $3.99 per device per night
TV channels: $14.99 per night
Breakfast: $24.99 per person per night
Daily newspaper: $6.99 per night
Heating: $17.99 per night
Cooling: $21.99 per night
Electricity: $12.99 per night
Safe usage: $6.99 per night
Minibar: $1.99 per night
Wakeup service: $5.99 per night
Elevator fee: $0.29 per night per floor
Recycling fee: $1.99 per night
Room cleaning: $4.99 per night
View fee: $1.99 per night
Location fee: $2.99 per night
$250.64 per night for a single bed room with a nice view, daily new towels, sheets and pillow, wireless internet for one device, multiple tv channels, breakfast, daily newspaper. Heating, electricity, safe usage, minibar, wake up service, elevator usage, recycling, room cleaning are included. This doesn't include the $14.99 for the soap, shower gel and shampoo.
The Park Central in San Francisco...$44 per night facilities fee! Outrageous!
Years ago when resort fees begin, I would go to meetings in Hawaii and stay at resorts. The resorts would bundle some fees such as pool use/towels and some other resort-type things. The bundling would be a good value if you really were going to use those facilities. But, and it's a big but, you had the option of buying this resort-fee bundle. My, how things change. Such a scam.
this is insane. Lemme text my friend Paris and see what she can do about it.
Marriott's Lexington Hotel Autograph Collection started doing this earlier this year, but you get even less for the ridiculous $25. Plus that hotel also charges exuberant daily luggage storage fees. Not a good trend for real what are basic city hotels.
Stayed at the Westin in Times square last month and they had the $25 fee. Im a lifetime platnium and they waived it only once and the front desk manger blamed the Marriott merger...i won't be staying there again
Almost all Spg hotels started to charge urban destination fee even before this hilton. They were simply copying marriott...
I’d say it’s time for a class action lawsuit against these “fees” when most of what they are charging are included for those of us with status.
@Scott
the problem with regulation is that as soon as you propose it, another group will denounce it and say smaller govt or let the market be free. Then you know what will happen right. Nothing for many many years and the eventual solution won't be beneficial to either side. And considering this is NYC where is are hotel tax, state tax, city tax, some other tax for the heck of it, I doubt...
@Scott
the problem with regulation is that as soon as you propose it, another group will denounce it and say smaller govt or let the market be free. Then you know what will happen right. Nothing for many many years and the eventual solution won't be beneficial to either side. And considering this is NYC where is are hotel tax, state tax, city tax, some other tax for the heck of it, I doubt govt will do a whole lot about resort fees.
Personally, I think the response to hotels who do this has to be swift and an avalanche full of noise. Thats why they're announcing it on twitter. If there isn't enough outrage they'll go right ahead and do it. If there is, they'll rollback and think about plan B. But once the fee goes in, they will not let it go that easily. So you have to target one hotel at a time.
I was in vegas once and the hotel's $35 resort fee/day was charge which included pool usage. I gave the front desk a long stare and then alerted her that the hotel pool is currently empty not that I would use the pool anyway because it 55 degrees outside. She rescinded the fee but it should never get to the point where the guest has to make a fuss for them to rescind the fee. Just plain obnoxious. We have to just do our due diligence and call it out as often as we can on as many high profile places as we reach.
I’m a capitalist I vote with my feet. And I hate how some hotels sneak the fee in buried in the fine print. Aloha Hotels Hawaii???
I also avoid hotels that charge egregious fees (or any) for wifi
I agree this situation is shocking and unacceptable but we are making a mistake if we direct our ire at the Hilton or any other specific hotel. As others have mentioned, plenty of NYC props are doing this. I stayed at the Westin Grand Central a few months ago and they charged a similar $25 daily destination fee.
The problem here is that once one hotel in a market does this, they all pretty...
I agree this situation is shocking and unacceptable but we are making a mistake if we direct our ire at the Hilton or any other specific hotel. As others have mentioned, plenty of NYC props are doing this. I stayed at the Westin Grand Central a few months ago and they charged a similar $25 daily destination fee.
The problem here is that once one hotel in a market does this, they all pretty much have to do it to remain competitive. Who knows which Hotel started this first, but it sounds like this is new at the Hilton whereas the Westin told me they’ve been doing this for almost a year.
We need government regulation to fix this, that’s the only way. Unfortunately I don’t see the current federal administration doing much about this, but call and email your reps in Congress and maybe we’ll get lucky. I’m not sure local governments have the right incentive to fix this since the fees generally hurt visitors, not local voters.
VRBO and AirBnB
‘Nuff said
This hotel is ranked #328 out of 470 NYC hotels on TripAdvisor. Perhaps the Marketing dept shot down “bed bug elimination fee” as this property has multiple reports of an infestation in the reviews.
Hilton in Florida charges for having a package delivered to the hotel. Many people from South America go to Florida for shopping and they buy thing online in advance and get their packages delivered to the hotel. They charge a fee "per package' delivered. Unless we have legislators to put an end on all this BS things are going out of control. Problem is that one hotels starts and the others follow so suddenly all...
Hilton in Florida charges for having a package delivered to the hotel. Many people from South America go to Florida for shopping and they buy thing online in advance and get their packages delivered to the hotel. They charge a fee "per package' delivered. Unless we have legislators to put an end on all this BS things are going out of control. Problem is that one hotels starts and the others follow so suddenly all hotels in NYC will charge the same so no matter where you stay you will have to pay for nothing.
Just had a look at the tripadvisor reviews for this place (pretty bad!) and it seems they've removed in-room tea and coffee making facilities. I would imagine it's so your experience is 'enhanced' by having to go to the coffee bar in the lobby to use your $15 'credit' on coffee. What a scam. Some people were paying $1100 a night for that place! crazy.
At this point, I'm hoping that most hotels start charging these ridiculous fees as that will mean scrutiny by the government (from a tax & consumer protection perspective), OTA's (want more commission). That would hopefully mean regulation of how prices are displayed similar to the airline industry. The only negative would be if award nights comes with surcharges
Simplest solution - don't visit New York City. All the hotels there are a ripoff one way or the other. The area airports are horrible as well.
The hotel taxes are egregiously offensive as well.
&DaveS - don't hold your breath for the FTC in this current administration to do a bloody thing that is consumer oriented.
I left them a comment. I work near the NY Hilton and my clients typically choose hotels on my recommendation. I let Hilton know that I will be directing their business elsewhere. They just lost tens of thousands in revenue over a petty grab for $25
The taxes are applied on the total, not on the room rate without the adjustment fee. So it definitely has the same 14.5% tax as the room. You can see that on the hilton website when it shows you how it calculations the final cost.
But, if you are looking at 2 hotels and one has a $25 fee and the other without a fee is $30 more expensive, do you pay the extra...
The taxes are applied on the total, not on the room rate without the adjustment fee. So it definitely has the same 14.5% tax as the room. You can see that on the hilton website when it shows you how it calculations the final cost.
But, if you are looking at 2 hotels and one has a $25 fee and the other without a fee is $30 more expensive, do you pay the extra $5 because you don't believe in fees? It just means you have to compare TOTAL costs (with taxes and fees) when you make your choices.
If the fee is assessed on an award stay, that goes into the calculation as well. I think it sucks, but I am still going to do the math.
@ Ben: If it were really an enhancement for our benefit, they would make it optional and opt-in
I agree completely, and it's becoming increasingly ridiculous.
The silver lining is that unlike the actual room rate, the fees are easier to negotiate or get removed from your bill.
The W Times Square now adds a $25 + tax destination charge. It's supposed to be for a drink at the bar and some other nonsense.
Surcharges and fees need to be outlawed. The price listed should be the price paid. No exceptions.
The Park Central SF has a $44/night facilities fee. It ends up making it one of the more expensive properties in SF, even though it appears much cheaper in search. Super annoying and I'll probably never stay there because I can't trust the rates that turn up when searching.
And then we accuse individuals of tax evasion.
Just imagine if the same law requiring airlines to advertise *the total out-the-door price that you actually pay* also applied to hotels. Lack of price transparency is incredibly frustrating, especially culturally within the US (sales tax, tip).
I agree, the spin is more maddening than the fee.
If it were really an enhancement for our benefit, they would make it optional and opt-in.
Hotels should only be able to advertise all in prices, the same way airlines do. Base room, resort fees and taxes all included.
These need to be banned. It's simply lying about their prices, which is well within the rights of the FTC to deal with.
Taking a work trip to Dallas and was surprised to see a $25 charge on a hotel room that isn't even in downtown. The terms and conditions state the following.
"Daily $25 Resort Fee is added to the room rate and includes: Self-parking; Guest Room Internet 3 devices; Health Club Access; 15% Off Spa Services; 2 Kids Dinners in Media; 2 Starbucks Coffees; Local/Toll-Free Calls; Pool Recreation."
I guess it sucks that I don't...
Taking a work trip to Dallas and was surprised to see a $25 charge on a hotel room that isn't even in downtown. The terms and conditions state the following.
"Daily $25 Resort Fee is added to the room rate and includes: Self-parking; Guest Room Internet 3 devices; Health Club Access; 15% Off Spa Services; 2 Kids Dinners in Media; 2 Starbucks Coffees; Local/Toll-Free Calls; Pool Recreation."
I guess it sucks that I don't drive, am an HHonors member, don't have kids, and am not a coffee person...
The Hilton Midtown was one of the worst hotels I've ever stayed at. This fee is another reason why I won't be going back.
Slightly related subject. I did not planned well and I have some HHonors points expiring soon (in 6 days). What's the best way (If I don't have use for them) to not leave them to expiring?
Found this... http://killresortfees.com/newyorkcity/
Useful list of the hotel offenders and a description of why these fees suck.
some SPG properties in NYC are charging these 25USD also.
Lucky: I am glad that you are calling out this outrageous BS.
It is probably for bed bugs extermination. This hotel is bed bug central, just read reviews on tripadvisor....I would never stay there. It's my #1 black-listed hotel in NYC.
Ha, at this rate soon we will see un-bundling of the hotel space. $1 for a room, want a bed, thats +$50, want sheets and pillows, another $20. Use of shower and towels, another $20.
Hi Hilton. I'll never stay at a property in NYC with one of these fees. EVER. K thanks.
Lucky,
Two things
1) Hilton New York is no longer corporately owned
2) Many other full service hotels in New York have already added these fees
Yet another reason to ditch hotels for airbnb. Although, the "enhancement" comes from the fact that a resort fee doesn't attract hotel occupancy tax in nyc, just state sales tax. If set up properly, a resort fee could enable hilton to capture that 5.875% difference.
I can see a future where hotels charge a $1 room rate, that is then "enhanced" by a $198 resort fee. Perhaps there might also be an $18 fee for...
Yet another reason to ditch hotels for airbnb. Although, the "enhancement" comes from the fact that a resort fee doesn't attract hotel occupancy tax in nyc, just state sales tax. If set up properly, a resort fee could enable hilton to capture that 5.875% difference.
I can see a future where hotels charge a $1 room rate, that is then "enhanced" by a $198 resort fee. Perhaps there might also be an $18 fee for booking online, or a $30 fee for bringing bags. Oh, and lets not forget the $20 energy fee. But, hey, you could be staying in nyc for $1/night!
Kiloton Hotel Rogue in DC charged $17.18 in daily resort fees. I was shocked to see this charge at an urban hotel with no amenities and kinda run down.
Renaissance Las Vegas Hotel charges a $20.99 daily Destination Amenity Fee. I voted with my feet and now stay at a "non-destination" hotel without this stupid fee.
First to comment, and I absolutely agree. It's egregious. I recently cancelled a stay at Marriott's Lexington hotel in NYC because of this charge. Tweeted about it, and they tweeted saying none of their NYC hotel's have an amenity fee and they'll investigate. I guess calling it an "urban destination charge" makes it okay. If you want to complain, you can also lodge complaints with the FTC and the new York attorney general.