Originally Posted by
SkiAdcock
Does anyone else find it ironic that JWs are supposed to be 'better', but the JW Washington is just a basic biz hotel? I can't think of one thing that makes JWW a JW other than they named it after the founder. IMO they should strip this hotel of that moniker, but due to why it was named that I get why they don't.
That's been my experience at every JW I've stayed at. Granted, I've not stayed at any international JW's, which seem to get rave reviews. But in the U.S. I quite honestly do not see any brand differentiation between JW properties and run-of-the-mill full-service Marriotts.