these two statements.

the second is presented as an empirical, yet it is your opinion. i happen to hold the inverse opinion. (and again, i've stayed in each twice within the past year).

the first statement, though, is one of those patently false 'you said yourself' statements. i decidedly did not. even a cursory glance-through of this conrad review drives home the fact that i find it a superior hotel product to the WABH as concerns just about every attribute. i didn't mention any 'other properties', other than my own guess (called out as a guess within the review) that the conrad offers at or near lop level for DTLA. so i'm not sure what you mean by that. is it a superior hotel to the the pen? the BHH? no. is it a superior product to many of the hotels i've stayed at within the cities of los angeles and santa monica? yes.

i did mention a few caveats - namely location (and that only if one needs to be on the westside vs downtown.).
as for service, i never said the service was 'better' at WA, just a different kind of service. i also stated i prefer the kind of service offered at this conrad. service at WA felt a bit stiff, overbearing, not very l.a., trying too hard to be the george V.

i didn't mean my review to be a direct comparison of conrad and WA, even as it makes some sense as they're the two competing luxury properties from hilton in los angeles. and there had been some other posts in other threads wondering how the two stacked up.

but now, just to be clear, here's a concise opinion on the comparison - for what i want in a luxury (albeit big-chain) hotel, the conrad wins over WABH in just about every category. the valet might be better at WA, didn't drive there. that's it.
everything else: the building itself, the interior design, the room size and layout (across class), room furnishings, common spaces, art, f&b, pool (and especially snappiness of service at pool), all of it is simply better and more 'luxurious' (for me) at conrad. i used the word 'warmth' and 'inviting' a lot in my review. i think the WABH is an excellent hotel, but to me it's kinda sterile, shiny. even cookie cutter, by comparison. everything at conrad feels slightly more interesting and fresh.

finally, a last word about 'location'. if you want to be in bev hills or weho or ucla or all the shopping, etc etc etc, at a hilton property, the WA will win every time. but it doesn't necessarily feel all that less urban than DTLA. somewhat, of course, the skyscrapers are shorter, everything around the hotel looks and feels more upscale. but i don't think the WABH's location is what people picture in their heads when imagining 'staying in beverly hills'. for that, you'd need to head over to l'ermitage or BHH or HBA or montage (now a maybourne). the WA is placed very much in 'downtown BH', not at all a quiet location. it's a shorter hotel than conrad too, and abutted by much taller buildings (banks and corporate HQ's), so there's no comparison in terms of views from the rooms or pool either, the conrad's are all commanding. were i in fact needing to stay in BH, i'd choose (and have chosen) any of those properties mentioned above over WA. particularly considering the rates at WA, waaaay overpriced in my estimation for what's on offer.