Originally Posted by
The Road Goes On Forever
Exactly. An LSOP like this is only put in place because of multiple bad past experiences, not because of some rogue new manager trying to flex their muscles.
While I get why people looking from the outside in would think it's BS, when you're on the other side of the desk dealing with drugs, gangs, prostitution, locals looking for a party/hangout spot - there are only so many times you can call the cops, comp other guests or clean up destroyed rooms until you decide to take action. Does that mean that locals who wouldn't engage in this type of behavior get unfairly wrapped up in this? Maybe, but not all money is good money and sometimes it's just not worth the potential aggravation to the staff or other guests.
Somehow, requiring a high deposit / pre-authorization for locals as well as banning the actual perpetrators didn't make your (or their) list.
Originally Posted by
smmrfld
Good for the properties that are doing this...makes smart business sense. And re the comment above during a disaster...many restrictions are invariably removed or relaxed at the request of local agencies. Not a factor...but even if the bad behavior policy was still in place, so what?
I struggle to figure out how it makes good business sense to refuse service to someone already documented in your system as a frequent stayer with a proven track record of being a non-threat to both your establishment and to the chain at large.
Sounds like one of the stupidest broad-brush decisions anyone could make. But, of course, it can be rationalized to no end.