Originally Posted by
EuropeanPete
That’s not what I said though! I have stayed at many modern St Regis properties (Istanbul, Mexico City, Beijing, Moscow for example), but all unarguably hark back to the founding days of the St Regis New York: it’s the entire point of the brand. Every St Regis has a signature Bloody Mary, Astor Suites, Butler Service, references to the parties held in New York, etc. It is not that the hotel architecture has to be from the 19th Century, but that the entire brand is based around a reference to the Upper East Side in the 19th Century.
I could be wrong, but I think you may be projecting! What you said was this:
Originally Posted by
EuropeanPete
I suspect St Regis is the "most luxury" in that group of chains (mixture of cost and style/ facilities), but I would also usually choose a Park Hyatt because I like their service style and (usually) the architecture. It's usually a bit more modern and not linked to a 19th century New York upper class that I feel nothing in common with as the St Regis brand is.
You are most entitled to think whatever you want about St Regis...but I think that may have more to do with your own background and less about the actual brand.
Naming rooms and suites after the founder’s family members doesn’t harken to any age or class; it simply references the founder’s family.
Having a Bloody Mary signature drink evokes 19th century classism to you? Really? It only evokes to me that the famous cocktail was supposedly created as the Red Snapper at the original St Regis King Cole Bar. It’s a cocktail that is reinvented with local style at other St Regis hotels. I find it difficult to get classism from a cocktail.
What references to parties in New York do you mean? I’ve not had any references to any parties in any of my many StR stays around the world.
Butler service is offered by many hotels. Heck, Las Ventanas by Rosewood also offers butler service to its signature suites. If you’re bothered by the terminology of dress of the St Regis butler, despite them being dressed differently at different locations throughout the brand, so be it. But a butler bringing me coffee versus in room dining at another hotel bringing me coffee doesn’t evoke 19th century upper classism to me. Having an unpacking and packing service is just excellent service. Having complimentary shoe shine and pressing is something that many hotels offer for their guests or even for their suite or Club level guests. There’s always been a distinction with better service for those paying more.
Both St Regis and Park Hyatt offer excellent service, so I have no idea what you mean when you talk about liking the Park Hyatt service style. They have no difference in service “style” that I’ve ever perceived. Their “style” is pretty comparable also to the “style” used at Four Seasons, Peninsula, Aman, Mandarin Oriental, Rosewood, Banyan Tree, Ritz-Carlton, Waldorf Astoria, and the like. I think the difference in your perception may have more to do with you than the hotels.
Waldorf Astoria is another brand founded on its original famous property in New York. Yet the various Waldorf Astoria properties around the world don’t evoke WA-associated ambience of Manhattan. The WA Shanghai and WA Beverly Hills evoke Manhattan as much as the Peninsula Shanghai and Pen Beverly Hills do—not really at all beyond the WA name, perhaps. The WA Caledonian Edinburgh doesn’t evoke New York at all.
I’d say the same is true for St Regis. There is nothing New York or 19th century oligarchical about the StR Lhasa or the StR Bora Bora or the StR Punta Mita or the StR Istanbul. Referencing the original property with room category names and a signature cocktail hardly evokes classism, I think. It is only a minor and respectful homage to the original.
I can understand you liking a more modern sensibility. That absolutely can explain a preference for PH over many StR. But I must disagree vehemently that most StR property evoke 19th century New York. The StR New York does. If there were a St Regis London, I’m sure it might. But few if any of the others do, and it would be quite a surprise to me!
Arab, Russian and Chinese money is obsessed with Anglo-Saxon nobility and the days of empire, which is why the brand resonates with their target market and is so successful. It’s fair to say i’m effectively the opposite of a Russian oligarch or a Chinese govt fixer, as a result this aspect of the brand is actually a turn-off for me.
So be it. But again, this really just makes me think you’re projecting! I love the St Regis brand AND I love the Park Hyatt brand. I don’t have any thoughts of any Anglo-Saxon nobility and days of empire when I stay at either. I’m pretty sure I am not a Russian oligarch in waiting either. Being a gay Jewish guy probably precludes that, I’d guess.
I think you have images of what types of people frequent the StR brand, and that is prejudicing you toward the brand. I think you’re wrong, though. I think your perception has more to do with you and your background and less with the hotel brands to which you ascribe such evocations. You’re most entitled to your thinking, though!