Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Luxury Hotels and Travel
Reload this Page >

Do you have a minimum room size that is acceptable?

Do you have a minimum room size that is acceptable?

Old Sep 18, 13, 5:18 pm
  #1  
Community Director
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Anywhere warm
Posts: 29,775
Do you have a minimum room size that is acceptable?

I've been predominantly a chain hotel person. I have status in a number of chains. I get upgraded and rarely face a small hotel room. Thus, I haven't paid much attention to sq meters or sq ft. Recently, though, as I book more luxury hotels, I've realized I need to be mindful about it. I've had some rooms under 20 sq meters. If my husband is with me, it's a totally unacceptable size. We're bumping against each other trying to get thru the room.

I'm still trying to decide what the minimum is for me. Hotel websites give a dimension that includes the bathroom space. Thus, a number can feel very different in one hotel versus another depending on the split between the bathroom and the bedroom. And the number can feel very different depending on how well the hotel lays out the furniture. So, this number is very soft. I've decided 25 sq meters is the minimum that I want, and I'll be happier at 30 sq meters and above.

This really matters when I stay at luxury hotels. I need to book the room in which I will be happy to stay. Yes, there are sometimes Virtuoso upgrades and the like, but I don't count on them. It's frustrating when a hotel website does a very poor job of explaining the various room categories and their sizes.

What about you? Do you think about room size when you book? If so, what size do you seek?
SanDiego1K is offline  
Old Sep 18, 13, 5:46 pm
  #2  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: IAD/DCA
Posts: 31,520
you are definitely not alone here - the topic of small rooms comes up here regularly, especially with new construction and renovations, where its a matter of current decision making. (and questioning that decision making.) also things like combination showers and no tubs in bathrooms. also as you mentioned, design in terms of shape/walls, as well as furniture placement. someone just recently brought furniture placement up, and i posted that i recall Groombridge discussing this in several of his reports, and that it also came up in one of the feltrinelli threads. ah, i think it was in one of the recent vegas threads, the larger MO vs FS report, where they compared the rooms including in these terms.

Originally Posted by SanDiego1K View Post
I need to book the room in which I will be happy to stay. Yes, there are sometimes Virtuoso upgrades and the like, but I don't count on them.
that is also primary position here. in some cases there are confirmed upgrades via virtuoso and amex centurion FHR, and possibly LHW unlimited, for example. but the latter two are expensive, and ive not seen any of the (i believe few) LHW unlimited members here say they have always received a confirmed upgrade. and there may be real limitations on hotel brand and location based on which program.

Originally Posted by SanDiego1K View Post
depending on the split between the bathroom and the bedroom

It's frustrating when a hotel website does a very poor job of explaining the various room categories and their sizes.
i agree - the disparity between room and bathroom can be huge, as well as which is emphasized. re size, while some care very little about room, and others care very little about bathroom, clearly (luxury) hotels need a minimum amount of balance between the two. variations, including sizes, within categories can be problematic, especially if variation is quite dramatic. and having little to no information on website can be a hassle in terms of time. (bad sites is another topic here.)

sometimes other factors "may" help offset size >
hotel offerings including number of rooms
location, in terms of physical site
(both being value/price factors)

Last edited by Kagehitokiri; Sep 18, 13 at 10:06 pm
Kagehitokiri is offline  
Old Sep 18, 13, 5:57 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ORF
Posts: 1,723
For me, I would say 35sm is the minimum for two people to move around comfortably, but you really have to take room layout into account, and that varies wildly, especially dealing with luxury properties that are in older cities and dealing with historic buildings and codes.
gegarrenton is offline  
Old Sep 18, 13, 7:11 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jakarta
Programs: Krisflyer PPS, SPG, Hyatt GoldPassport, Shangri-la Golden Circle, British Airways ExecClub
Posts: 1,198
I find the room size published on hotel websites to be rather inaccurate, ie one hotel's 50sqm can be much bigger than the other. The perceived room size and how spacious it is to me will be influenced by number of furniture, how bulky they are and very critically, how much free space ( walkable space ) is in the room. One really has to see the room to be sure. Personally, I am kind of claustrophobic so anything less than 40sqm will not do and 50 - 60sqm is the norm. Preferably the room comes with high ceiling as well.
BENLEE is offline  
Old Sep 18, 13, 9:10 pm
  #5  
Moderator: Luxury Hotels and FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palo Alto, California,USA
Posts: 17,160
I guess I am at about 400sqft minimum which is 40sqmt, although slightly smaller can work if the room is not jammed full of furniture. Even 400 sqft can fail if large wardrobes or strange massive pieces of furniture (think Andaz in NYC if you have ever been to any of them) fill the room and rob space.

I am seriously tired of room clerks and assistant managers who chuckle patronizingly at me and say, "You Americans are always wanting large rooms, but we here in Europe are all used to smaller rooms," sometimes still adding (I kid you not!), "because of the war."
RichardInSF is offline  
Old Sep 19, 13, 1:41 am
  #6  
Moderator: Asiana & Qantas Frequent Flyer
Aman Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: STR/SYD/SMF
Programs: QF SG, LH SEN, OZ D+, HH D, SPG P
Posts: 13,991
I am not sure whether I have a specific size in mind but I do know that the Hudson Hotel in NY is below whatever size one might think of.
DownUnderFlyer is online now  
Old Sep 19, 13, 2:35 am
  #7  
Four Seasons Contributor BadgeMandarin Oriental Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Luxembourg
Programs: HH Dia, AClub Plat, Hyatt Dia, FB Gold, LH SEN, TK *G
Posts: 646
Excellent question that often comes to mind, especially when you're talking about Luxury boutique hotels. It's very important to stress that how the bedroom is arranged is also of crucial importance. I stayed at the Munchen Palace in a single room over the week-end. Size was 18 sqm but layout was well thought out with a lot of storage space in the walls which made the room look more spacious and overall it was more than enough.

(For some pictures, you can check my review on TripAdvisor): http://www.tripadvisor.fr/ShowUserRe...ECK_RATES_CONT

But I was alone and the room was cute.

Normally I wouldn't go for something below 25sqm and just like you with 30 sqm, I'm starting to be happy, especially when I'm staying with my girlfriend. 35-40 sqm is an ideal size. Over this, it's more extra space but it's not really needed I would say.
SeamasterLux is offline  
Old Sep 19, 13, 4:45 am
  #8  
Four Seasons 5+ BadgeSPG 5+ Badge
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Germany
Programs: Some
Posts: 8,194
I normally only book Suites, so I expect a big room. What´s acceptable depends on the layout. I had 30 sqm rooms which seemed more spacious than 45 sqm room. In general I think a suite with less than 60 sqm is a little bit small. Less than 40 sqm is (normally) inacceptable. A suite with 25sqm is a joke.
offerendum is offline  
Old Sep 19, 13, 5:12 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: BKK
Posts: 6,691
For a short stay the minimum room size I can tolerate is around 30~square meters, assuming the room is well laid out, the bathroom is spacious, and there is adequate closet space. Whenever possible, I always want at least a premier room or junior suite of at least 50 square meters. I like suites to be of at least 70 square meters.

The most important thing is that rooms and suites must be intelligently designed and user friendly in order to feel spacious and comfortable.
MikeFromTokyo is offline  
Old Sep 19, 13, 5:34 am
  #10  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Italy
Programs: millemiglia - milesmore- spg - goldpassport - priority club- the leader club - others
Posts: 393
Travelling alone, for business, any size works for one night sleep but in a luxury property I expect that not to be under 25/30 sqm.
For longer business stay, always alone, 35/40 minimum are required.

For holiday alone and/or with family make it "LARGERRRRR"....
The_Daddy is offline  
Old Sep 19, 13, 6:23 am
  #11  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: UA GS>1K>Nothing; DL GM 2MM; AS 75K>Nothing
Posts: 8,371
King size bed, shower, toilet, and I'm fine. Quality is a lot more important to me than room size.
5khours is offline  
Old Sep 19, 13, 6:32 am
  #12  
SPG 5+ BadgeFour Seasons 5+ Badge
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Germany
Programs: Some
Posts: 8,194
Originally Posted by 5khours View Post
King size bed, shower, toilet, and I'm fine. Quality is a lot more important to me than room size.
True, but a room with 20 sqm can´t be proper in my eyes, even with perfect service and great furniture.
offerendum is offline  
Old Sep 19, 13, 6:34 am
  #13  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: UA GS>1K>Nothing; DL GM 2MM; AS 75K>Nothing
Posts: 8,371
Originally Posted by offerendum View Post
True, but a room with 20 sqm can´t be proper in my eyes, even with perfect service and great furniture.
Thought we were talking minimum acceptable. If we're talking desirable, then we're looking well north of 50sqm.
5khours is offline  
Old Sep 19, 13, 8:35 am
  #14  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Four Seasons Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Programs: BA, EK, IHG, SPG
Posts: 25,662
I feel happy when I see 40 sq m, but as that is tricky to get in cities I can settle at 30 sq m.

Once had a 12 sq m room in Stockholm (The Grand) ....
Raffles is offline  
Old Sep 19, 13, 8:54 am
  #15  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: France
Posts: 925
For a room less than 25sqm is not acceptable.
I am usually happy with something around 50sqm.
But lay out is more important than size only.

Depending on the occasion I prefer to have a suite with two separate rooms (as Pierre usually wakes up later than me). For a suite less than 70sqm is probably too small.

For city hotels one of the best lay-out I have in mind is Deluxe Suite in Bvlgari London (no powder room so no lost space but double access to the unique one from bathroom side and foyer side + narrow but long bathroom with lots of natural light and superb bathtub).
Pierre&Cédric is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: