mahasamatman

While keeping it in the equally confusing Four Points by Sheraton brand name.

James Luckard

Sukhumvit is still an LC hotel for now, but the brand/designation/grouping was only announced today. I wouldn't be shocked to see it move.

FozBoy

This upper-level echelon within the Sheraton brand used to exist before Starwood bought the company--it was called Sheraton Hotel & Towers.

Towers properties were a notch above regular Sheratons, better situated and with more features and anenities, such as top restaurants, conference centers or spas.

Some of the new Sheraton Grands were indeed Sheraton Towers before this moniker was discontinued by Starwood.

MSPeconomist

Isn't the first principle of branding in marketing that brands should be defined in a way to avoid confusing consumers about your brand identity?

There are still some Sheraton Towers, although they now have "and" in their titles and tend to be the hotel within a hotel model. They're not especially good; think of Hong Kong, for example.

James Luckard

Very true, they were somewhat similar in that they were "top of the line" Sheratons, but the "Towers" were a hotel-within-a-hotel, with their own clubs and such. Most Sheratons in big cities used to have a "Towers" component.

James Luckard

That's what they all were, it was always "Sheraton New York Hotel & Towers", "Sheraton Cairo Hotel & Towers", etc. The only exception was Singapore, where they tried building a standalone "Sheraton Towers Singapore" hotel in the mid 1980s. They never built another one, so the idea must not have worked, but that one remains under that name.

MSPeconomist

The NYC version was a horrid hotel. Not a notch above, top of the line or upper echelon.

jpdx

I've only stayed at the Asian ones, and really, the only reasonably "Grand" one is SGS, which is part of the Luxury Collection, so it makes little sense to be included in this grouping of wannabe upper-upscale Sheratons. Tokyo Bay is old and run-down, Walkerhill is in an atrocious location with lots of horrible rooms, and Taipei is overrun by tour groups and feels like a soulless block of concrete (leaving aside its good Plat recognition). Miyazaki of course is in a league of its own, a truly grand testament to the excesses of bubble-era Japan, the tallest building between Hiroshima and Taipei, and part of the gigantomaniac (and now mostly defunct) Seagaia project. I can see how you might call these hotels a notch above the really crappy Asian Sheratons (say, Yokohama and Hanoi), but IMO there's minimal difference between these "Grand(e)" properties and the Sheratons in Kuala Lumpur, Saigon, or even the (much maligned) Singapore or HK properties.

neuron

I used to love the Park Lane, stayed there for about 10 yrs straight before I noticed a significant decline in the rooms and service. Hopefully the ventilation system and rooms are fully redone, and they improve their declining customer service.

metoo

Does the Sheraton Grand count as free lounge privilege with the SPG biz card?

Flying Lawyer

True. The one in Berlin is not a SHERATON GRAND but a SHERATON GRAND HOTEL ESPLANADE. It was always called GRAND HOTEL ESPLANADE and they added the Sheraton when Starwood took over.

PTahCha

I'm guessing Sheraton Grand is similar to the marketing moniker as Grand Hyatt (compared to Hyatt Regency). Bigger/magnificent lobby space, in key destinations, with more rooms than a typical chain hotel. Otherwise everything else is equal.

hoteltraum

I would not have used "Grand"... There are many "Grand Hotels" in Europe which are really old and bad...

MSPeconomist

IME Grand lounges are better than Regency.

travelswithmyself

Another case of an unsually named Sheraton in Singapore was the Century Park Sheraton, which eventually became the ANA Hotel which was then demolished to make way for a condo.