Skift reports on how Marriott has unveiled the details of its newest hotel brand, which will have few brand standards…
In this post:
Basics of Marriott’s new Project Mid-T
Marriott’s newest hotel brand is using the working name Project Mid-T (weird, no?), and it will be in the midscale hotel category. This brand is intended to be a conversion brand, for developers with existing hotels or even office spaces, which could inexpensively be converted into this new Marriott brand. So this isn’t intended for new construction. Honestly, though, why stop at converting office spaces — why not storage spaces as well? Anything for a buck…
The brand is aimed at middle class transient leisure and business travelers staying an average of around two nights. So, what will the key features of these properties be?
- Simpler fees for owners, so Marriott will charge a flat fee of 10.5% on revenue, rather than breaking up the fees into various categories
- Modern guest rooms with “essential” amenities, like an open closet, a work surface, and effective storage solutions
- A business friendly lounge with long communal tables, power strips, and TVs
- A basic fitness center with three cardiovascular machines and free weights
- A complimentary simple breakfast
Here’s how Diana Plazas-Trowbridge, Marriott’s SVP and Global Brand Leader for Select Service Brands, describes this new hotel brand:
“We’re really focused on making it an easy process for the owner to convert existing assets into this new brand. For consumers, we’re meeting demand at a particular price point we weren’t reaching before with guestrooms with a few key signature items, simple fitness, complimentary simple breakfast, and open social spaces in the lobby.”
It’s sad how few standards there are nowadays
It’s worth keeping in mind that new hotel brands are really created for hotel owners, and us guests are just the product. Marriott obviously just wants to grow at any cost, and the brand isn’t concerned about the quality or consistency of hotels.
With interest rates being as high as they are, there’s less new hotel activity at the moment. That’s why there’s so much emphasis on conversion brands, since it’s the easiest way for Marriott to grow its key count.
It’s pretty clear that Project Mid-T would be Marriott’s lowest end brand in the United States, and would be below brands like Fairfield. What’s interesting here is that last year we saw Marriott announce the StudioRes brand, which is a budget, extended stay brand.
Really StudioRes and Project Mid-T are very similar concepts in terms of being heavily focused on property conversions. The difference is that StudioRes is intended to be an extended stay brand, while Project Mid-T isn’t.
Project Mid-T seems to be along the lines of the new Four Points Express by Sheraton brand, focused on Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, as well as the recent acquisition of City Express, offering budget accommodations in Latin America. Except Project Mid-T seems to be focused largely on the US market.
Back in the day, staying at a hotel belonging to a major hotel group meant something in terms of knowing what to expect. Sure, there were differences between properties, but there were brand standards. That’s just not a thing anymore, as Marriott will add just about anything, as long as it pays the brand a commission.
Bottom line
Project Mid-T is Marriott’s newest hotel brand. This is intended to allow developers to inexpensively convert existing hotels or office spaces into Marriott properties. As consumers, don’t expect this brand will offer much in the way of consistency. But Marriott cares almost exclusively about the size of its portfolio, and this is a reflection of that…
What do you make of Marriott’s new Project Mid-T?
City Express? More like Shitty Express.
ffs. is yet another hotel brand really necessary? this feels like a "baffle the consumer with bullshit" strategy...
Am I the only person that thinks that the 30 hotel brands that Marriott has is plenty?
I kinda thought that the merger with Starwood would bring some consolidation to it's brands but they are still expanding.
Especially in their Select and Extended Stay category it seems like there is a lot of overlap.
There's also some people that are equating standards with high end, when it should really equate with consistency....
Am I the only person that thinks that the 30 hotel brands that Marriott has is plenty?
I kinda thought that the merger with Starwood would bring some consolidation to it's brands but they are still expanding.
Especially in their Select and Extended Stay category it seems like there is a lot of overlap.
There's also some people that are equating standards with high end, when it should really equate with consistency. They don't have to be great sheets and a great mattress, you just have to know what you are getting. Like McDonalds.
In some cases, they need more and more brands because some owners don't want to be the second Westin or the fifth Courtyard in a given market and/or some legacy brand owners may have franchising or licensing contracts that prevent Marriott from opening a property under the same brand within a certain geographic radius.
Have the big brands missed one up from the hostel? Or is this going to be it?
Not only the hotel business is changing rapidly, please look around the planet, there is much change taking place.
No matter the price, having a clean hotel, a clean bed and a clean bathroom still remain important to most travellers.
Accor in Europe actually has a hostel-like brand JO&JOE, tho it's only 6 locations.
If you look at the massive number of properties signed under Spark, Comfort, Baymont and Wingate, you’ll see a ton of former Fairfields. When they switched from exterior corridors they let hundreds of hotels leave the system and I doubt they want to do that again.
I’m currently staying at a full-service, Marriott-managed, Host-owned property and it’s clear from every touchpoint that the entire business is a transactional money grab. Why would they give up...
If you look at the massive number of properties signed under Spark, Comfort, Baymont and Wingate, you’ll see a ton of former Fairfields. When they switched from exterior corridors they let hundreds of hotels leave the system and I doubt they want to do that again.
I’m currently staying at a full-service, Marriott-managed, Host-owned property and it’s clear from every touchpoint that the entire business is a transactional money grab. Why would they give up the opportunity to let worn out hotels leave the system purely on principle?
That rendering is clearly a Holiday Inn Express. The blurb around what the hotel will have to offer is very HIX. I wouldn't be surprised if this is what they're going after.
How would you like to be the owner of a nice Marriott-branded hotel — a property that does everything right and even punches above brand standards? Marriott is making zero investment in the United States in full-service or luxury hotels. Heck, St. Regis and Ritz-Carlton are now conversion brands. What incentive is there to be a great owner or operator of a Marriott, Sheraton, Westin, etc. when Marriott is willing to ruin the system and...
How would you like to be the owner of a nice Marriott-branded hotel — a property that does everything right and even punches above brand standards? Marriott is making zero investment in the United States in full-service or luxury hotels. Heck, St. Regis and Ritz-Carlton are now conversion brands. What incentive is there to be a great owner or operator of a Marriott, Sheraton, Westin, etc. when Marriott is willing to ruin the system and portfolio with Motel 6-type properties?
The real problem here is that these "budget" properties will be no less expensive. Most travelers would go for a good bed, clean room, quiet working AC, with a basic shower/bath combo reliably available for sub $100/night across the US, but this is just not the reality anymore. With how expensive many of the "basic service" or even mid tier hotels are becoming, this is simply a race to the bottom and nothing else.
...The real problem here is that these "budget" properties will be no less expensive. Most travelers would go for a good bed, clean room, quiet working AC, with a basic shower/bath combo reliably available for sub $100/night across the US, but this is just not the reality anymore. With how expensive many of the "basic service" or even mid tier hotels are becoming, this is simply a race to the bottom and nothing else.
I won't say what city, but there is one where a newly opened independent 5 star hotel is handily outcompeting low and mid-tier Hilton offerings (and all other competitors) on price, location, AND quality. Do I get free breakfast? No, but Hilton screwed around with my Diamond status (didn't want to honor my loyalty stats from last year for some reason...) and found out to the tune of 10k this year already, and now I found a much better property.
I expect this trend to continue as brands race to the bottom...
Agree with this. I've stayed at Super8 motels before, and they actually have a brand standard: you can expect similar size rooms, decor, relatively comfortable bed, and good wifi. Sure, the TV is tiny, and there's no fancy lobby. But they're also consistently cheap, and honestly, for <100/night, it's all I'm really looking for.
Marriott's "budget" brands don't hold a candle to that. They are more expensive and there's no assurance of any sort of...
Agree with this. I've stayed at Super8 motels before, and they actually have a brand standard: you can expect similar size rooms, decor, relatively comfortable bed, and good wifi. Sure, the TV is tiny, and there's no fancy lobby. But they're also consistently cheap, and honestly, for <100/night, it's all I'm really looking for.
Marriott's "budget" brands don't hold a candle to that. They are more expensive and there's no assurance of any sort of standards.
But this is the hallmark of late stage capitalism: take whatever brand awareness / loyalty you've painstakingly built up over decades of providing quality and value, and burn it all down in a few years in exchange for a short-term infusion of profits and "growth", then golden parachute out before it all goes bust.
I agree with the statements 100%, but I don't blame Marriott (or Hilton, or any other brand) for setting these prices if the paying public is willing to pay them. I am not a psychologist, so not going to even attempt to offer an explanation, but it is very obvious that Amercian travelers are willing to pay a hefty premium for staying at a sub-standard property, as long as it belongs to a group.
...
I agree with the statements 100%, but I don't blame Marriott (or Hilton, or any other brand) for setting these prices if the paying public is willing to pay them. I am not a psychologist, so not going to even attempt to offer an explanation, but it is very obvious that Amercian travelers are willing to pay a hefty premium for staying at a sub-standard property, as long as it belongs to a group.
Case in point: when visited by any of my offshore colleagues (I am based in Australia), I typically suggest to them what I found to be the best properties in the city they are visiting, within our corporate price range. That works very well for most visitors from Europe or Asia. North American visitors consistently book one of the Marriott properties, low-end, inconveniently located, or both. I am not sure what drives this - love of a brand or status considerations, but either way, their stay is always well below what they could have had for the same price,
Even when the Marriotts controlled the company, I never understood the blind loyalty for the company. I thought they were unremarkable and undeserving of the price premium. With that said though, I really think you are overselling Super 8. I’m glad you have had good luck with them :)
I don't hate this concept, and I think there's a place for it in the market. There will probably be further guidance on room specs / appearance / colour scheemes etc. but that's still being finalised.
Brand standards doesn't have to mean high-end. When I was much younger and much poorer, I used to stay a lot at Motel6. Certainly not luxurious, but I did find it gave a very consistent experience at an affordable price point.
I think the point here is that Marriott could have chosen to make it consistent, but have not.
My experience is to stay away from anything under 3.5 stars because the franchisee owners really don't care. Not to mention I want a good night's sleep and not woken up by people screaming and running and up and down the aisles.
Ibis hotels are very reliable at getting the basics right, and there are a few smaller chains (e.g. the Japanese Toyoko Inn which also has a few properties in Europe) which use the same model to deliver a consistent experience at the 2-star level. It really is all I need for 1-night stays and not bad at all for up to about 3 nights, particularly when travelling solo (admittedly rooms are a bit too small for longer stays).
My general rule of thumb is if I'm in a small town somewhere in tjhe USA (say 100,000 population or under), the Holiday Inn, Holiday Inn Express in IHG or the Courtyard and Fairfield in Marriott are probably the best chain hotel options. If I'm in a bigger city with multiple full-service branded properties –– Westin, Renaissance, Sheraton, Marriott, etc. -- then I never, ever book a Courtyard, Fairfield, etc. I assume a Fairfield in...
My general rule of thumb is if I'm in a small town somewhere in tjhe USA (say 100,000 population or under), the Holiday Inn, Holiday Inn Express in IHG or the Courtyard and Fairfield in Marriott are probably the best chain hotel options. If I'm in a bigger city with multiple full-service branded properties –– Westin, Renaissance, Sheraton, Marriott, etc. -- then I never, ever book a Courtyard, Fairfield, etc. I assume a Fairfield in big cities is going to be an awful value and generally not a good hotel.
"It’s worth keeping in mind that new hotel brands are really created for hotel owners, and us guests are just the product. Marriott obviously just wants to grow at any cost, and the brand isn’t concerned about the quality or consistency of hotels."
Wait until you realize this is how 90% of our housing is built...
City Express is not that bad, Ben. For a basic hotel it offers a quality room with breakfast for an affordable price. You should stay in one if you travel to Mexico to test the brand
Marriott recently changed the logo for City Express, and it very closely resembles that of this rendering, leading me to believe their eventual plan is to bring the City Express brand to the US.
As a practical matter, this has no effect on me or the properties at which I stay. Should I care?
@Lee you must be new here. If you’re not interested in reading Ben’s reviews, then don’t make moronic comments like the one you just made.
Long-time readers come here for almost all of Ben’s reviews, as we both trust in, and care for his opinions; yours? Not so much.
How will anyone be able to tell the difference between a mid-level marriott with few brand standards to a high end marriott that also generally seem to have no brand standards anyway?
Notorious third-party operators like Aimbridge are going to love this. If you think the Aimbridge-operated Courtyard or Marriott is bad, wait until you see the ex-Motel 6 or ex-Red Roof Inn that they converted to this new Marriott brand.
When’s the last time Ben stayed in a hotel costing less than $400/night?
Of course he feels standards have fallen, but there’s clearly a market for budget hotels, and clearly people who will pay little to sleep in them. Marriott is wise to chase after any dollar it sees.
Actually, if you were a long-time reader you would already know for a fact that Lucky stays in a shitload of sub-USD400 per night hotels every year. He also stays at aspirational properties too, of course, though regular readers know many are also pretty cod-ordinary as well. A nice balance between the two.
Long-term readers would know that, but there's definitely been a shift to more aspirational properties recently, especially Four Seasons, which is probably not unrelated to his husband's travel business.
This is an observation, not a criticism, by the way. I appreciate that Ben does need to monetise this blog, as it's his livelihood.
Whether he stays in sub-$400 properties is inconsequential. He knows his readers span all walks of life, and that this news will be relevant to a certain group of his readers.
The yellow and blue blah color scheme says: "Set your expectations to IKEA levels- we aren't even going to pretend this is trying"
So Marriott is going after Red Roof Inn and Motel 6? This new brand won’t even have TVs in guest rooms. Probably no phones either. Can’t wait to see the reports of guests fighting over the communal TV. What next no en-suite bath? How is this any different than a boarding house or hostel?
People under 30 do not use TVs unless it’s to connect their gaming console. tv shows and movies are consumed in phones, iPads and laptops.
I'm way over 30 and not having a TV is actually a plus for me as I don't have to unplug it to remove the light pollution. But everything else about this new brands sounds pretty horrible..
Almost no self-respecting Gen Y or Z has ANY remote use whatsoever for a TV in a hotel room, mate. They’d rather the discount to the hotel rate and instead use their phone or laptop etc.
When I look at the TVs I see at most 4 and 5 star hotels, to which I can't connect my devices easily, I don't mind having no TV.