MJonTravel

I'm in the Marriott Marquis DC as I type this. One thing I noticed... last time I was here I was in an exterior room, and had OK cell coverage. This time I'm in an atrium room, and my call home was dropped 3 times tonight. I turned off LTE, and found that my call quality improved.

In the end, I don't think there's some conspiracy to deny cell service to certain customers here, I think it's more a factor of "network coverage." This building probably needs to be wired by Verizon to get a really good signal inside.

BostonBusinessTraveler

This was in the news recently... http://fortune.com/2014/10/03/marrio...i-fi-hotspots/

RogerD408

Unfortunately, this post does not deal with the subject of this thread. Cell service was never interrupted just WiFi. Anyone that's been using a cell phone for any length of time has found there are shadow areas for service and buildings, mountains, and other objects will interfere or drop calls. Many companies have found the need to install mini-cells inside their buildings to improve cell service. But with so many different providers and technologies it's tough to cover everyone.

aaupgrade

Actually, I believe you are mistaken. If you go back and read the OP, cell service being interrupted is the subject of this thread. The ancillary topic about the Gaylord and personal Wifi access points being blocked, and links to the related articles, was introduced later in the thread (post #9) and is in fact unrelated to the subject of this thread as noted in post #10.

IMO MJonTravel's post is totally on topic; however, posts 9 and 32 are not.

pinniped

With Wifi, it's clear why Marriott jams it: to drive people to their insanely-high-priced Wifi in the convention areas of the hotel. Get caught, get a slap on the wrist by the FCC, no big deal.

But for regular cell service, it doesn't seem like they have enough skin in the game to either try to jam it or not allow microcells from any carrier who wants to install one. If I have crappy cell signal while I'm in a particular hotel, I'm less likely to book that hotel again. A bad experience at a Marriott in DC isn't going to make me break my mobile contract and switch to someone else.

It's more likely to make me try the Hilton or Starwood down the street...don't need a new 2-year agreement to try out a new hotel.

Perhaps it's Verizon, Sprint, and T-Mobile who have chosen not to put the microcells into this building? We don't have any evidence that they've tried and been denied by Marriott, do we? The OP suggests an "exclusive" agreement with AT&T, but the bolded part seems to be more about the area around the Marriott than the Marriott.

CJKatl

Excuse my ignorance on this, but don't the phones and the mobile WiFi go through the same access to the same towers? I really don't know, and am asking.

pinniped

Marriott was recently caught jamming local hotspots...communication between your own mobile phone and your laptop, for example. They weren't jamming signals between the carriers and the phone.

In DC, I think it's just a case where AT&T has put in the microcells, no one else has, and the other carriers' service sucks because of it. Still don't see real evidence of nefariousness on the part of this particular DC hotel. I think the response from Marriott in the OP is simply nontechnical, not evidence of a conspiracy.

apodo77

Per the article it seems a single Gaylord property was caught and there isn't some huge conspiracy to block wifi nationwide.