Originally Posted by
number_6
My own experience is that NZ is such a charming country that the non-luxury B&B options are preferable to the luxury accomodation (which is severely limited, in any case). But I also think the Hilton in AKL is poor, with about 10 good suites and the rest of the hotel is not up to standard -- I would rate it the 6th best hotel in AKL, and not the #1 that it is often touted as.
Some of the *great* non-luxury B&B options in NZ are at
http://www.bnb.co.nz/index.html
As an example of what I mean by a great non-luxury B&B, see
http://www.bnb.co.nz/coromandel/resu...s.html?lid=816
Very memorable, comfortable, great food (both the B&B breakfast and in the area). But the opposite of luxury. But that is what I would pick. And a car is a must in NZ, all the best parts of NZ can only be reached by car.
I totally agree with the above. NZ is just not the country to spend big money on accommodation. Although I am not dissing anyone who spends US$1,000 per night (I do that myself in places like Paris), in NZ it just defeats the purpose. It's the small, homely places that give you suprises and memories that will last. I'd say, get off the beaten track, avoid the 3,4 ,5 luxury properties that are out there and rent a bach (NZ slang for holiday home) near a secluded beach somewhere.
SaraC mentioned Bronte Lodge. This is indeed a nice place. Slightly cheaper and, to my mind, slightly better is the B&B across the road. The name escapes me now but if you search in
www.friars.co.nz for Bronte you'll find the other one. The views are fantastic.
BTW, for what it's worth - I love the Hilton in Auckland and do think it's the number 1 choice by far, far, far (except perhaps for Mollies where I have not stayed). The recently renovated Langham looks much improved but I haven't stayed there since it was done up. The location is still terrible, though.
I'll second the need for a car.