Originally Posted by aks0516
Is that Sprint Vision service provided to you for free? Do you have a "principle" against using it, then?
I was told that hoteliers consider "free" Internet access the biggest mistake made in a long time. Even a wireless setup seems to run in the neighborhood of $30,000 just to install, plus thousands of dollars per month for the ISP and the equipment servicer. The lower end chains figured they could not move rates enough to pay for the service, so they threw in the towel and gave it away. This huge foolishness was copied by some, but others are saying that they are not jumping off the cliff just because others did. So now we have hotels which, faced with a drain on their resources caused by their own short-sightedness, are unwilling/unable to maintain the networks, and spotty service is the result.
My Internet at home is not free. My verizon AirCard costs $79 a month. While I am thrilled to take advantage of the stupidity of hotels which give away this value-added service, I find myself staying at higher-end places which have a business model that will ensure on-going commitment to making sure I get what I pay for.
Firstly, no, the Sprint 1xRTT service costs me $72/mo.
I'm not saying I think everything in the world should be free. I simply think there is a severe case of branding issues in that, as JDiver pointed out, the Hilton and Doubletree chains charge it and the Hampton and Garden Inn chains do not.
To me, and maybe it's unfair for me to feel this way, I get the feeling as if -- and this is simply a weak analogy, I don't know anything about Japanese cars -- Toyota is tossing in the GPS-based navigation system free of charge in an Avalon, but Lexus wants $2000 for the same system in an ES300. Shouldn't it work in reverse? Lexus tosses it in since I'm paying $25k more, or whatever?
If I had to pay $9.95/day at an $80.10/nt Hampton, and got the Internet access for free at the $169/nt Hilton, I would understand. But under the current arrangement, I don't understand. Or rather, I don't like the conclusions my understanding brings me to. The poster who said "they can get the $9.95, so that's why it exists" I presume hit the nail right on the head. So as such, my preference from this day forward will be to stay at the Hampton or the Garden Inn. I guess it depends on each individual hotel's cost to provide me with a room, but overall the decision to try and nickle and dime me $9.95 is going to cost them about $90/night (if you include the sale price of the Internet access I will get elsewhere for free) worth of revenue on average. Whether that's in the hotel's best interest or not is up to them, I'm just throwing it out there that I don't feel like I'm getting the best value at the Big Hilton chain beause of this pricing decision.