FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - Interesting Brand Hierarchy
View Single Post
Old Oct 24, 2023 | 10:27 pm
  #19  
DJ_Iceman
1M
50 Countries Visited
100 Nights
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Redondo Beach, CA USA
Programs: UA 1KMM, Bonvoy LTE, HH D, Hertz Plat, Avis PC
Posts: 4,021
Originally Posted by arlflyer
Yes. Having been to a few in the U.S., the first word that comes to mind when I think of a W is "trashy". The second word is "garish". The whole brand is predicated on trying too hard to be avant garde, and ends up attracting the types of people who want to become social media famous but have no actual class or taste.
I pretty much agree with you. I always felt the W brand was more about style than substance, and attracted the kinds of "influencers" who would care that it's considered a luxury brand even if the product delivery isn't anywhere near Ritz-Carlton levels. There's a wonderful article out there written by a guy who worked at a W early on, and the nearly cult-like training he had to go through. I can't find it right now, but it reinforced every negative stereotype I had about Starwood and their intense desire to create a cool, hip, avant garde brand despite the fact that the very effort by a huge corporation to create such a brand was the very definition of irony.

But since then I've had a couple of good experiences with W, and think maybe they've shaken the worst pretensions of what they could be and have instead focused on creating an actual luxury hotel experience that avoids the perceived stuffiness and cookie-cutter nature of the Ritz-Carlton and St. Regis brands. The so-called influencer crowd is extremely flighty anyway, and Marriott likely realized that W couldn't attract them forever. A better long-term business model is just what I described, and if they stick to that then I think the brand could indeed live up to being included in Marriott's "luxury" tier.
DJ_Iceman is offline