MikeFromTokyo

I actually use trip advisor quite a bit to see traveller photographs. As with any source of information, it is important to be an informed user of the information presented on trip advisor (and even on Flyertalk). I don't take everything at face value, but instead try to find information that I deem credible wherever I can, and then draw my own conclusions.

It is just as valuable to me if information on trip advisor helps me decide where NOT to stay when choosing an hotel or resort. And even if photography is bad or a review is biased, there are often enough traveller photos to get an accurate sense of what to expect.

And lists/rankings of hotel brands are pretty useless, because virtually every hotel and resort group has good and bad properties. The closest to a perfect city hotel group I can think of is Peninsula, in terms of consistency. I do not think they have any bad properties, but of course there is a lot of variation between properties. Notably the Paris property is really disappointing compared to the competition.

chinmoylad

I think no one has mentioned this point - the result is also skewed because of the number of business travellers who rate on TripAdvisor.

Plus, how do you compare city hotels with resorts?

There are very few Ritz-Carltons in the world I'd consider staying at on a leisure trip - I'd always opt for the more boutique, local hotel. But if it were a business trip, then the consistency of a brand like that would be very much welcomed.

nicolas75

Not quite sure to understand your point.

Whatever the kind of travellers (business or leisure), luxury hotels should not deliver discrepancy in quality of service between their different properties.

The study suggests that it is true only for some luxury brands.

MikeFromTokyo

I don't think that kind of consistency is possible, and cannot think of any hotel group that is even close to perfectly consistent. With changes in management even the very best hotels fluctuate in terms of service quality over time.

Even Aman, FS, MO, Pen, and Dorchester have, or previously have had, subpar properties, and they are much more consistent than other hotel groups.

bhrubin

Rather, I actually think the study suggests that:

(1) some luxury hotel brands are more consistent than others...but
(2) luxury hotel brands with higher price points (Aman, FS, MO, Pen, etc) are judged more harshly than those with lower price points...and
(3) the difference in evaluation between the above distinctions between isn't necessarily consistent...probably because
(4) most people who stay at certain luxury brand price points don't often stay at others of higher or lower price points.

For the same reason that many people laughingly find great differences between UA, AA, and DL and will swear by one over the others--largely because they don't usually fly but one--and other people swear by the super premium airlines First Class like CX, SQ, EK, etc even though the economy and business classes on some are not and better than those of UA, AA, or DL, there is a similar evaluative factor with luxury hotels. People rate more highly the more affordable luxury and are more stringent with rating the less affordable luxury. People also tend to rate highly what they know well and are more stringent in rating other brands the don't know as well.

uggboy

IMHO, there's a case that the term "luxury" should be seen in a bigger context and what's constitutes "luxury" should be broader in terms of what's included in this very forum ie. diverse hotel brands and experiences incl. boutique / independents / design...not just "what's the cost"...or "what's the prestige"...as I pointed out before, luxury is personal, but to get a "fairer" picture of what's actually "luxury" people should be open to different / diverse experiences of others and not "almost prejudice" against them and this incl. judging luxury in terms of value and personal feel / knowledge.

"Luxury" usually means very different things for very different people, lifestyles and life situations all around, this shouldn't be overlooked. Honest "affordable" luxury can also have it's very own advantages to many people incl. price / and how we feel about this...ie. achievement of staying at a particular hotel, this shouldn't mean we judge the poster, it's all about the hotel at this very moment, it's a celebration of a stay, we should be happy about this. It's about emotions of what's value, what's fair and what's "luxury" and what's affordable for the individual, it shouldn't be about "who pays most" or "who gets most". "Luxury" shouldn't be "over" analyzed, often it's about enjoyment for the poster, there's no point to argue for the sake of arguing. Plus, I'm all for it to include "diverse luxury hotel brands" in this forum incl. more affordable ones. Of course, what's "affordable" for one is "rare" for others, this shouldn't be discussed here, it's about hotels, not "who can afford what"...it's all about quality / value / consistency as the survey points out. As I mentioned above "Luxury is personal, and luxury in the 21st century is very different from what it was lets say 20 / 30 years ago and how it's perceived today". There's enough space here. ^

MikeFromTokyo

I don't think this forum is focused only on the most expensive luxury hotels. Rates can range from $200~ a night (or occasionally even less!) to $5000~ a night (minimum entry). Discussion is also rarely about money, but mostly about quality, especially service quality.

RichardInSF

FYI: A FT member has requested we verify whether the new member Luxury_branding is indeed a staff member at the company which produced the original report. A few days ago, I sent a note to Luxury_branding as well as soliciting the aid of SanDiego1k, the FT community director, but so far I haven't heard anything back.

RichardInSF, moderator, luxury hotels

chinmoylad

The issue is to do with how business travellers look for different things than leisure travellers do in a hotel. And not all leisure hotels are suited towards or meant to cater towards business travellers - while you will still have the odd few staying at these hotels expecting them to be good business traveller hotels.

mike_la_jolla

Did you just put SQ, CX, and UA in the same sentence?

MikeFromTokyo

+1

chinmoylad

Aman, Belmond and Hotel Ibis.

MikeFromTokyo

l'Arpege, Sukiyabashi Jiro, and Applebee's.

nicolas75

Again, whatever the kind of travellers, luxury hotels are supposed to offer consistency in service (and cannot claim: we accept business travellers and do not deliver good service to them).

By the way, Aman resorts are not exactly business hotels, and I am not quite sure that it is part of the problem raised by the study.