Eagle_traveler

A lot of people here are saying they won't stay at Fairmont once FPC is gone. Just wondering, are there any specific Fairmont you would love to see them being reflagged?

For example, I would like:
- The Fairmont Pacific Rim to become a St Regis
- The Fairmont Waterfront to become a JW Marriott maybe?
- The Fairmont Banff to become a Ritz Carlton
- The Fairmont Lake Louise to become Ritz Carlton

Those are the ones that I would miss most... but I guess it would be interesting to see those being reflagged too:

- The Fairmont Empress into Ritz Carlton
- The Fairmont Vancouver into Ritz Carlton
- The Fairmont Whistler into a St Regis? (maybe with some updates?)
- Fairmont Charlevoix into Autograph
- Fairmont Chateau Frontenac into Ritz Carlton
- Fairmont Tremblant maybe a Marriott?
- Fairmont Washington Dc maybe a Ritz Carlton

Fairmont Royal York and The Queen Elizabeth...? meh I guess Accor can keep those :P

Anyway, I guess I can keep dreaming!! But I want to know.. what would be your reflags?

khlay

Eagle_traveler

Yes I guess it would make a great Park Hyatt.

Unfortunately I don't have status with Hyatt and I would miss butler service from the St Regis :P

LarkSFO

Former Plat - Did not requalify for 2018.

I called 2/28 to ask about the possibility of extending my free night cert for an upcoming stay. They not only extended the free night, but also applied an expiring suite upgrade and extended my $100 dining credit.

Clearly I do (did) not do a good job managing my certificates, but was happy they accommodated my request.

Also clear - The certs were not what kept me loyal to Fairmont. The people and the properties do. As long as these remain consistent, I will continue to stay at my normal Fairmonts.

CanadaDH

This.

Yes, the FPC was a great loyalty program and LCAH offers nothing of value. But as long as the quality of the hotels and the service remains at the same high level, I will continue to stay there. The loss of FPC will play a factor in my decision, but the loyalty program is far from being the main driver in my decision of where to stay. Accor has worked long and hard to build up their track record of poor service, both at the hotel level and the head office level. If that starts to make it's way in Fairmont hotels, that is when I can see people being pushed away to other chains.

I'm curious what percentage of people staying at Fairmont properties were even a member of the FPC. I stay a lot at the Chateau Lake Louise, and it's a very common sight to see a big line of people checking in, using the regular line, meanwhile there's not a single person in the Presidents Club priority check-in line. And it's not like the FPC check-in lines are for elites only... it's for anybody who bothers to sign up for free. I think there are a lot of properties where people stay because of the hotel itself, and not the brand it is affiliated with. I'm sure there is an element of that in all hotel chains, but Fairmont has a lot of very unique properties in great locations. This is particularly true at their resort properties. But even in the city, where there is tons of hotel competition, they still have something unique. It's difficult to find something to compare to the quality and locations of the Raffles in Paris, the Savoy in London or the Plaza in NYC. Even in Toronto or Montreal (love their recent renovations, btw), they're right downtown at (or on top of) the main train station in the middle of everything. The Chateau Laurier in Ottawa has the best location you could possibly find in that town. The Frontenac in Quebec City. Etc. The properties themselves stand out in their area. Combine the high quality service with a great or unique hotel, and the loyalty program matters less.

I never chose to stay with FRHI every place I went, even when there was one available. Istanbul is a great example. They opened a brand new Fairmont there recently, and they also have a nice Raffles. I could have had some status benefits there, including a free upgrade or free night. I stayed at the Four Seasons on the Bosphorus. Why? Well, they had the best product and location for me in that city. Period. Loyalty programs are a factor in the decision, but not the driving factor for me.

Yul_voyager

Well I will still go to some unique hotel especially if they still are part of Amex FHR.
But for some other there is just no reason to stick with them anymore. Ottawa ? The Westin will work. Quebec ? Maybe, I like the Chateau very much but may want to try the Auberge St Antoine. Toronto ? I wil certainly look the Starwood / Marriott option first. Same for Montreal if I ever have to stay at the hotel here.

Antonio8069

I will miss staying @ two properties:
- Chateau Montebello (I just burned a free night & upgrade cert there last month);
- Chateau Le Manoir Richelieu (a divine location, c/w 3 salt water pools).
Incidentally, one has already been reflagged and renovated - St. Andrew's, NB is now a Hyatt! We managed to make an anniversary visit before the change1

escape4

Very interesting comments. I think you are correct that Fairmont's mix of customers might be more slanted towards non-members than other hotel chains, for specific locations such as Lake Louise. So they do not need to offer elite perks in order for people to come and when Accor is going to cut perks, it might not impact those hotels much. I will probably continue going to Lake Louise, Montebello, Richelieu, etc. because there is no competition in those locations.

But I would suggest that for some people, the loyalty program had a material impact on their decision-making. If Mr ABC only has Fairmont Plat via 10 stays or 30 nights, then if Mr ABC stops going to Fairmont he won't get anything better elsewhere even if he chases status elsewhere because the benefits elsewhere will be small anyway if he only has 10 stays 30 nights. So if Mr ABC was happy with Fairmont, most likely he will stick with Fairmont even if the loyalty program is diluted. But for Mr XYZ who has Fairmont Plat and top tier status elsewhere, then absolutely the loyalty program matters. Let's say Mr XYZ is going to a city where there is competition, if Mr XYZ stays with Hyatt or Starwood, he will get lounge access and a suite, but with Fairmont he will get no lounge access and a very unlikely upgrade, under Accor. If the price is similar, then Mr XYZ will probably not consider Fairmont in those circumstances, it simply does not add up. Mr XYZ will be losing the value of the gold floor and the suite under Accor, which is a big downgrade in value.

In the past for example in Singapore I could use a suite upgrade cert and get lounge access, which brought Fairmont on an even level as other hotel chains (in my personal situation). Without the certs, I cannot see myself going back to Fairmont Singapore unless the price drops well below competitors, which is unlikely to happen.

CanadaDH

That's a bit of a unique situation. Even under Fairmont, Plat members don't get Gold lounge access, so that's not changing under Accor. Your example of using a suite upgrade in Singapore and getting lounge access is a rather unique thing done by that hotel. Under the FPC program, certs can't officially be used to upgrade to the Gold floor or provide Gold lounge access. Great you've been getting that at Singapore, but that's not part of the FPC program. Who knows, if upgrading you to Gold was something that the local hotel was doing outside the FPC program, maybe they'll continue to do it outside the Accor program?

I can only guess why Singapore is different. Nearly all Fairmont properties are owned by other entities and Fairmont just operates them, and perhaps the local owners don't want to give away a free Gold upgrade to someone redeeming a cert provided by FRHI. Fairmont Singapore is a corporate hotel, where Fairmont leases the building, but they operate the hotel for themselves, instead of managing it on behalf of other property owners. I don't really know why, but Singapore is a bit unique with the Gold upgrades as being a regular thing.

In most cases, if the competition is offering lounge access and people are still choosing Fairmont today (who doesn't generally provide access), that's not likely to be much of a deciding factor tomorrow.

So you like Montebello? I stayed there once, two summers ago. While I was upgraded to their best Signature Riverview room (or whatever they called it) in the hotel, I found it, well, in need of a very big renovation. I thought the old carpet in the room was the only thing keeping me from falling through to the floor below! I wasn't terribly impressed with the setting and facilities either.

escape4

Yes Singapore might be a unique situation, but lounge access in general is not. Someone who does not have status elsewhere gets no lounge, Fairmont or not. But someone with elite status can have the lounge with other chains, but not with Fairmont. While I agree this is not changing, but on top of it such a guest would most likely be in a standard room at Fairmont compared to a suite elsewhere. That's becoming quite a bit to ask now, lounge+suite. I might have been willing to forego the lounge in order to stay at Fairmont if I like the hotel, but now add the suite, that changes the equation. A suite + lounge access is sometimes double the price (if not more) than the standard room. The base room at Fairmont better be absolutely fantastic for me to stay there if there is competition in town where I can get suite + lounge. And I have not even mentioned yet that an elite guest at another hotel sometimes also get the breakfast in the restaurant for free, in addition to lounge access. At Fairmont we do not get breakfast now, but at least we had dining certs. Those will be gone too.

Montebello is a location without competition, and the hotel does not have a lounge or suites, so post-Accor I do not lose much, if anything. I don't even lose breakfast because I never had it there. I agree the Fairmont Montebello hardware is far from the best, but if you want to go to this destination there is no other choice, so I will go back. But Singapore, Dubai, Manila, Istanbul, etc. = different story. I am very unlikely to stay at Fairmont in those cities (and many other cities) after July 1st.

margarita girl

Interesting discussion, but part of the attraction for me with Fairmont was the benefits I enjoyed as a Platinum member. Without the Platinum status, I become a nobody and I lose the perks that made my stays so special.

I stay over 100 nights/yr with SPG and have enjoyed some amazing upgrades. I don't know if that will continue with Marriott but one thing that is for sure is, there is NO WAY I am spending 60 nights/yr at Accor Hotels to maintain Plat status. So after 2018, it's bye-bye Fairmont.

CanadaDH

Wow. I don't have enough vacation time to spend 100 nights anywhere, other than my own house! I wouldn't go out of my way to maintain Accor Plat either. It will, however, maintain itself automatically simply through the revenue component of the qualification. By my estimates, I'll hit the annual revenue component of the program three times over, just with our annual Lake Louise and Banff vacations.

CanuckFlyHigh

Accor just paid ALOT of money for Fairmont. The Brand, not the assets. I highly doubt they will rebrand anytime soon.

khlay

Accor definitely does not want to but property owner might be willing to. As I know, some management contract (between property owner and Fairmont) may have exit clause when management team has major change.

escape4

Then the way they structured Accor Plat seems well be suited to your travel pattern. You need 5600 EUR to hit Plat, let's say you pay on average 300 EUR per night in LL + Banff, that means you'll renew Plat with only 18 nights which is even easier than before. Anyway, you were already Plat so no change for you. If I compare with another luxury hotel chain with a relatively small footprint, such as Hyatt, you need 60 nights for top tier (55 nights if you renew) so perhaps you would not make the cut if you don't have 55 nights so Accor is a better fit.

And for me it might be the opposite. Not all 55 nights are at Park Hyatts in expensive locations paid in cash. If I consider that there is a significant number of nights that I won't pay anything because it's a points redemption (for example in 2018 I will have 10 nights at Park Hyatt Maldives, all on points), or pay a modest sum with cash & points, throw in a handful of cheap stays in Hyatt Place here in there, a handful of Grand Hyatts in a low to moderate cost city, some stays at expensive hotels but off peak season... I doubt I am averaging far more than 100 EUR per night out of those 55 nights when it's all said and done so maybe I would be close to not qualifying with Accor criteria unless I significantly exceed 55 nights.