FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - Intercontinental, not a luxury brand?
Thread: Intercontinental, not a luxury brand?
View Single Post
Old Mar 13, 2017 | 10:12 am
  #23  
Land-of-Miles
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: MAN and LON
Programs: Mucci, BAEC LT Gold, HH Dia, MR LT Plat, IHG Diamond Amb, Amex Plat
Posts: 13,900
Originally Posted by stimpy
IC is not at the level of MO, Pen or FS. But I completely disagree that it is lower than StR or RC's. At least in certain markets. And you do have to go market by market. The IC HKG as we all know is a pretty good hotel. Yes it could use a room renovation and it is getting one next year, but it is still a far sight better than most St. Regis hotels. No matter how good the new St Regis Hong Kong will be, the views will be awful in comparison to either IC. And I can think of about 30 IC's that are better than the St Regis Washington DC, including of course the IC just a short walk away. And I know several RC's that are quite poor in comparison, just as I know some RC's that are really great.

And if you mix in Royal Ambassador treatment versus Ritz Platinum or SPG Platinum, RA wins out everywhere that I can think of.
I think you have to look at average to average to assess the true quality of the brand not compare best IC's with worst elsewhere.

I am not sure in the brave new world of cookie cutter RA treatment even that is a good differentiator and that is totally different to how good the hotels are anyway.
Land-of-Miles is offline  
Reply