Jump

I don't get the point of this. http://www.tennessean.com/story/mone...obro/26134859/

hhoope01

The article itself actually states what they think the benefits will be. Cheaper staff expenses through employee sharing. Attract more customers through different sales/price/service points with multiple brands. IOW, they are hoping to be able to fill up more rooms per night with multiple brands than if they had the same number of rooms in a single branded hotel.

Now whether it will work out as cheaply and well as they think or hope? That is a different story.

Horace

For the past couple of decades, it's been common for a hotel developer to build two or three hotels side-by-side at the same suburban location, such as a Courtyard, a Fairfield, and a Springhill. In recent years, there have been also been cases of two or three hotels stacked in a single building. It's really the same thing, even though the physical arrangement is different.

The newspaper writer picked poor wording when he called it a "tri-branded Marriot hotel with 455 rooms." (He even misspelled Marriott.) It's not one tri-branded hotel. It's three separate hotels in the same structure, each with a single brand.

The biggest surprise to me is that the three brands are AC Hotel by Marriott, Residence Inn by Marriott, and SpringHill Suites by Marriott. I thought Marriott was committed to locating hip AC Hotels in hip locations and keeping some distance — perceptually and literally — between AC Hotels and traditional Marriott brands.

dayone

Shared properties usually have more robust (common) workout facilities, which are much larger and better equipped than what a single property would offer.

NYTA

Accor does this all the time with Novotel/Mercure/Ibis next to each other.

davie355

Cheaper expenses -> easier to cut corners -> degraded guest experience.

I stayed at a (Hilton) Embassy Suites across from a Hampton Inn. My suite had the Embassy brand shampoo, Hampton brand conditioner, and Embassy brand lotion.

dayone

Orange -> wood -> radio.

rylan

The problem is going to be keeping the level of service up for the higher end property that is in there. Are you going to get crowds of families from the RI packing in to the quieter areas of the AC? How about shared breakfast, gym, and pool facilities again taken by larger groups that can be common in a SHS and RI and end up cheapening the AC experience?

rthib

I have seen the side-by-side before, but this one says that each hotel will be on a floor range.
That is sort of weird.

But it works for cruise ships so who knows.

MileageGoblin

Simple. Developer thinks it will maximize profit. Next topic.

nicnac16

There is a Hampton/Homewood in downtown Denver like this. Floors 2-6 are Hampton and 7-12 are Homewood. They have separate check in desks and separate breakfast areas but share all others amenities (pool, gym etc)

Horace

They can still be separate hotels with their own amenities, such as breakfast rooms or restaurants. And it doesn't strike me as weird to stack hotels by floor range.

By stacking the three hotels, the real estate is used more efficiently. Separate side-by-side buildings work when the hotels are built on a big empty field at an Interstate exit, but a high-rise with ranges of floors makes sense where the property is more constrained and costlier.

Each of the hotels could have a separate porte cochere, entrance, and lobby on a different side of the building, with a separate bank of elevators only serving floors associated with each hotel.

iztok

If you read the article you see that RI and SHS will be in one part on different floors while AC will be separate portion on all floors. Basically two buildings with shared wall.

iztok

Four Seasons in Las Vegas is good example. It is on top of Mandalay Bay hotel.

lsugolfer

I'm aware of five Marriott sites with multiple properties in the same building/block:

- RI & CY: Downtown Austin, TX
- CY, Ritz, & Saint (Autograph): New Orleans
- Ren & RI: Arlington, VA
- CY & SHS: New Orleans
- JW & Ritz: Los Angeles Live


All have their own check in desks and any shared areas are prevented access via key card. Isn't a big deal, IMO.