orbitmic

I need to book one night in Vancouver in March. Will likely book through FHR or equivalent. The Fairmont Waterfront comes quite cheap but is not mentioned anywhere in this thread so I assume that it is a lot less luxurious than the Pacific Rim?

The Rosewood is only a little bit more but the reviews in this thread seem to very from outstanding to appalling. I'd say that I'd be slightly worried by the lack of view and if I chose it it would be predominantly to be able to use the breakfast and food credit at Hawksworth, but this in particular seem to concentrate a mixture of excellent and very unhappy review?

Shangri La a little bit more yet. Then the Pacific Rim is quite a lot more, views would seem very tempting but is the hotel worth a $100 difference/night over the Rosewood? And again, some reviews mention lack of identiy/service/soul. It would be a bit over my ideal budget unlike the others but if it is a lot better I would consider it.

In short I am a bit lost. For the sake of comprehensiveness, whilst I have omitted them, I can also get the Loden or the Opus for a lot cheaper with similar perks or the Pan Pacific for a lot less with no perks but I read upthread it is a lot weaker?

Any help on how I should decide would be appreciated!

Jasper2009

I'll focus on the Fairmont Pacific Rim vs. Fairmont Waterfront question since I've stayed at both hotels a dozen times:

Many would rank the Fairmont Pacifc Rim as the top choice in Vancouver, or at least the top modern luxury hotel (with the Rosewood being a good option for people seeking a more traditional decor). The hard product is excellent, though I've found the service to have slightly detriorated over the years (still very good, but some of the outstanding staff seem to have left).

The Fairmont Waterfront is literally 50m away and has actually been improving over the years. Traditionally, I would've ranked all aspects one notch lower than at the Pacific Rim, but especially since they've renovated many of their rooms/suites, they are very similar to those at the Pacific Rim (though stupidly they decided to renovate the rooms on the lower floors first, so you have to choose between renovated rooms and the best view).

The lobby lounge at the Pacific Rim (and the hotel in general) was / possible still is the go-to place for celebrities, people who like to see and be seen, sugar daddies and their companions etc. whereas the Fairmont Waterfront is more liek a "regular" upscale / luxury business hotel.

If it's within your budget - consider a room on the Gold floor, the service and views from the patio are outstanding at both properties.

While I have limited experience with the Pan Pacific, I'd probably rank it as a generic 4* hotel in a great location (across the street from the Pacific Rim, on the waterfront) with somewhat poor service.

orbitmic

Thanks Jasper2009, that's very helpful! Gold floor at the Pacific Rim on my dates is definitely more than I wish to pay. Gold floor at the Waterfront would be the exact same price as entry level category at the Pacific Rim, would you then go for that? Rosewood still tempting too to try something a little different (and I have liked the Rosewoods I have stayed at elsewhere, though I quite like Fairmont as a brand too and my get better treatment with my Accor Platinum card) but I imagine that the views at the two Fairmont's must be a lot nicer!

Jasper2009

In that case I would definitely choose a Fairmont Gold room at the Fairmont Waterfront vs. a standard room at the Fairmont Pacific Rim.

Rooms on the Gold floor have been renovated, so are quite similar to those at the Pacific Rim. Main difference is the bathroom (those at the Pacific Rim are more spacious and have both a tub and walkin shower; whereas renovated rooms at the Waterfront have a large walk-in shower).

Gold floor is excellent at both properties; and unless you are there in winter, hanging out on the patio is a great feature.

Regarding views: A fair number of the rooms at both Fairmonts have a "city view" (i.e. no view), though your Platinum status may get you a harbour or Stanley Park view. However, views from the patio are quite good.

FlyerEC

bhrubin

For all the back and forth here, it really doesn't feel like Vancouver has a true top line of 5 star hotels in the same way that other major cities do. It reminds me a bit of Sydney, with an excellent Park Hyatt and then some others that are between 4 and 5 star but have less optimal locations/overall characters.

My impression is that the following hotels qualify in the 5* luxury category from the broadest sense:

Rosewood Georgia
Fairmont Pacific Rim
Wedgewood
Shangri-La Vancouver
JW Marriott Parq Vancouver
Trump Vancouver (not that I'd ever consider it now)
Four Seasons Vancouver (soon to be deflagged)
The Douglas, Autograph

I realize that not everyone will approve of all hotels listed. But I am curious to learn how the JW Marriott and Douglas stack up in terms of location, hard product, and soft product in comparison with the others--since I might be considering those with an eye to cost/benefit as one with elite status. I especially will appreciate the perspectives from this Luxury Forum, rather than those from less specific forums.

Thanks!

DavidO

My favorite on the list is the Shangri-La. I've stayed in an Executive Balcony room and really enjoyed the space, the quality of the furnishings, and the view.

Any Shangri-La Luxury Circle TA on this forum can get you:

MacMyDay

We decided to stay at both the Rosewood and Fairmont Pacific Rim in the end. It was a choice akin to: would you rather be shot or stabbed? Neither are remotely decent hotels, but they are your only choices so I suppose I should pick one. I'd probably go with The Rosewood, simply because it's 60% smaller and therefore there is some hint of service that feels like a luxury hotel. It took 15 minutes just to be seated for breakfast at the Fairmont.

Pausanias

And I hope you spent those 15 minutes wondering why they didn't know who you are, or were.

I believe Macmyday has blocked me because I often question his travel ethic. This latest is an absolute classic. Does he really need to approach every hotel as some sort of challenge? Some sort of check list? Frankly I don't want to be shot or stabbed. I just want a room over my head in Vancouver knowing it won't be the hotel Olympics. You go to Vancouver knowing that and moaning about it not coming up to some ridiculous standard is . . . ridiculous. I think we should all get real here.

bhrubin

Me'think the pot may be calling the kettle...!

You and @MacMyDay come at luxury travel from different angles--and both can be quite entertaining and yet important to note. There's room for both.

You seem to think of luxury travel often as quite absurd and overpriced, and MacMyDay likes to call out luxury properties and restaurants often for not delivering on luxury claims despite absurd prices and pristine reputations. You both can be wildly sarcastic about the same things for different reasons. Hyperbole is in both your blood.

Personally, I think @MacMyDay's comments are very entertaining and often on point. I don't always agree, but then that's not the point. Like you, he offers a particular perspective commenting on the luxury space. We can choose to accept or reject that perspective as we like, but that perspective is as worthy as any other. And usually far more entertaining.

MacMyDay

Not at all, old chap. I simply have nothing to add to your differing view on a luxury travel forum. You can have your standards and I have mine. I will not come here and start throwing insults at you for what you consider to be acceptable. The luxury hotels of Vancouver are dreadful - this entire thread says as much; I have put it across in my own wonderful words to reflect that. If you consider paying high prices and waiting 15 minutes to be seated a luxury experience, then I am pleased for you. I do not. If you consider waiting 55 minutes to get some granola, live the dream. I do not. If you consider having rooms with see through curtains, no room service, poor sound isolation and cheap materials, then fill your boots. I do not. You wish for a simple room over your head, I expect a level of decency for my spend in a so-called luxury hotel, particularly in a well developed city. This is the purpose of these forums after all. I wish I could have your low standards, as perhaps then I would be as happy as you always are.

BESVISOR

I agree with @bhrubin on his points. It's good to have different perspectives and take away what is of value to you.
It's also a bonus to read something that not only provides feedback but also entertainment.

While @MacMyDay is sarcastic and shares his personality in his feedback, he does support his opinions with hard facts.
Many of his reviews are of the most expensive luxury resorts in the world ($2.5k - $7k/night for entry rooms/villas), therefore, by its nature, should have a high degree of standards and deliver on it.

Many here share different points of view and it's all good!

KatW

MacMyDay

Whilst we only stayed in a room back within both properties in August last year, as we were there for barely 12 hours each time, I would never go to Pacific Rim again. It was exactly as I imagine a Fairmont to be, with the huge crowds, lobby like an airport, completely standardised everything due to robots running the place, and some of the facilities were awful. I was tempted by their jacuzzi to venture outside, until I saw the queue for it. In our short stay, we had to move room as they gave us someone else's with their belongings in, and it took over 30 minutes for them to come and get us and move us. The room was actually a downgrade. We had no turndown and waited over an hour for a yoghurt at breakfast (in their defence, they did comp it without us asking), after a night of suffering all the noise from outside.

Rosewood is not a good hotel either, but at least it has elements of luxury to it, such as the restaurants.

Aventine

Pacific Rim is a zoo. I'd take a Rosewood suite in a second.