cravenstatus

This is a fallacious analogy.

Has there been a law broken by those who took advantage of this mistake?

46long

No there has not been a law broken, you are right. Quite simply, by booking months at a time I think hotels/airlines will become less likely to do what the Conrad Bangkok has done in honoring it.
My last 2 cents, see u in BKK.
46

tcook052

Agree.

Then I guess we live in a nonsensical world; if buying 2 tickets to a concert is okay, so must buying 200, except most jurisdictions have a law on the books against ticket scalping and this is little different to me. But that's just me and my nonexistant moral consistancy...

SchmutzigMSP

One definition of greedy might be to be taking more than you need, especially to the point where there is none left for others. Two months at a Hilton? How can anyone deny that's greedy? 7 nights at a Travelodge? You'll have differing opinions there, but just like people that have airline benefits are not supposed to use them to travel for work, I think these BRGs are a similar thing, in that people shouldn't be using them to supplement their routine, regular daily lives. If you're planning on being in SF anyway, perhaps a couple of nights, but hooking yourself up for the rest of the year? As I stated earlier, that's obviously going to raise some eyebrows, and it's going to take inventory away from other FTers that might only want one or two nights, it makes Travelodge catch the error faster, and it might even cause them to change their BRG policy considering how much people are publicizing it and going overboard with it.

Remember how we used to get on people who "call in" to the airline when there's a fare error? Well, booking up massive amounts of rooms is going to essentially do the same thing, and potentially jeopardize the deal for everyone, now and in the future.

I find it curious how most of the hotel/fare deals that get posted on FT always seem to have issues with the airlines/hotels honoring all the bookings. But on the deals that haven't been posted, or don't receive much play on FT, there's hardly any question whether the company honors the deal.

Just my two cents. Some people, like me, use BRGs a couple of times a year when they get stranded in an airport or somewhere else for some other reason. Not everyone uses BRGs to supplement regularly scheduled travel.

TrojanHorse

What is a BRG? is that Best Rate Guarantee?? or is it something else. If its what I think it is, then how is that a problem with what IT did? if its something else, can someone add a little more to this so I can figure out what he is doing?

IceTrojan

BRG = Best Rate Guarantee.We'll just have to differ then. You may think I'm greedy... but I think you're way overly cautious and paranoid. Isn't the nature all these deals is that it's first-come, first-serve, which of course takes away inventory (besides the fact that the BRG is not capacity controlled)?

I'll admit I'm having problems seeing the problem with saving myself money (tangible) vs. ignoring personal finances for the possible greater good of keeping the window open for others (speculative at best). How do you know I'm taking those nights away from FTers? Isn't it more likely that if I don't use the deal, no one else will either? And I imagine the system is designed so that as soon as the FIRST request is sent in, the prices are looked it... so IMO everyone needs to jump in ASAP.

Now that I'm up 9 nights that I FOR SURE will be using, I'm saving myself at least $500 over my avg PL stays (and close to $1000 on Travelodge rates, or $1500-2000 in web rates at hotels I normally would stay at), which is nothing to sneeze at.

I fail to see your reasoning that I should only get a couple nights at most for myself. As self-serving as it is, my personal definition of greed is taking more than one actually needs. I'd wholeheartedly agree booking the Hilton for a month straight, or calling into the La Quinta demanding a suite upgrade, is just plain stupid, and I'd be first in line to smack those people upside the head. However, I'm taking exactly what I need, and no more. If I wanted to, I probably could make reservations for the whole end of 2006 and just move up to SF... or I could reserve rooms for whole weekends I THINK I may spend up there. But I don't... I'm only reserving those nights I am sure to be there.

What it boils down to is that you have a very low threshold for what is considered greedy, while comparatively I ruin for everyone

ingy

to see how Ice Trojan feels showing up at the Travelodge the same night each week and probably facing the same desk clerk with the same price. I wonder after 3 or 4 weeks how that will go over????? Best of Luck.

IceTrojan

Are you refering to whether or not I get the rate, the treatment I'll get, or my guilt? My rate has already been changed for all nights to $0, and I'll be sure to put in a smile and be a great guest... otherwise, I don't care what they think. As for guilt... no.

I do wonder who absorbs the $0... corporate, or the local location.

DeirdreTours

Ticket scalping is reselling tickets to others at a markup-- not buying more than John Doe bought.....

kaukau

Correct. The room bookers are not re-selling the rooms! The analogy is flawed. Hey, one day the supermarket shelves are packed with Babich N.Z. Sauvignon Blanc for $9. The next day they're all gone. Did one person buy them all, or did lots of people stop in and buy? What's the difference?

kaukau

Very well said.

tcook052

Disagree. While I haven't asked any of those who have booked months at a time, I understand from the discussion on FT that the folks hope to get something from the hotel as a goodwill gesture, in essence to profit from the room rate error.

tcook052

Yeah, right, they're not out for anything.

They may not be re-selling the rooms to the public, but they are seeking some compensation from the hotel for releasing the rooms. Call it holding the rooms for ransom then.

kaukau

This previous post of mine is my reply to the above post #133.