bhrubin

damon88

Kagehitokiri

and are franchise like some other well regarded LC (and bvlgari london and RC montreal)

seems there is some agreement to not make assumption based on brand

few rooms and large scale is hard product (could operate at profit without return)
few rooms and large staff is quantitative soft product (many operate at loss)
services and many rate inclusions are not hard product (reduce margin)

some of us dont care about privacy (many do) but are willing to pay for few rooms

clearly OP was trying to differentiate, just not sure exactly what they were going for

even top 100 properties may be too many, although tons in africa and a bunch in NZ

one differentiation i make is "hotel" vs "property" (safari-style pool-villa-only al maha)

al maha owned by dubai, successfully began independent then signed LC management

Ksw299

Oh yes - for instance the Equinox in Vermont is only ok - they dont offer anything special.

Kagehitokiri

franchise (LC allows) puts more dependence on owner

but even managed can vary dramatically - RC (and FS etc)
bhrubin has made that point for non marriott brands

and ultra luxury pretty much requires at least decent owner
(true ultra luxury operating at loss are all about owner)

world could use more luxury, ultra luxury, great owners
especially beachfront, for some of us low density beachfront

rny321

Some of the aspects are customer service aren't necessarily a function of spending. Unless I am mistaken Asian airlines don't spend more on compensation and training of flight attendants, yet they generally provide better customer service than many American airlines. A waiter or other employee in countries where tips aren't customary costs an employer the same amount of money regardless of how helpful they are. Not all enthusiastic service is a plus as anyone who has dealt with an overly friendly waiter when trying to engage in a business conversation.

In addition to the clear examples of bad service, we may have different preferences about how much interaction we desire with salaried employees. People in a business or a social situation who are able to quickly determine whether a counterpart wants additional attention or privacy have a skill that many people lack. Unlike suite upgrades and room with premiums views which are easy to review, beyond the obvious examples of excellent or poor service, there is an area where opinions will vary. When I'm in a restaurant, on the beach, or working out, I generally don't want to speak with the GM or other management employees. In contrast, some people understandably appreciate the personal attention.

Providing live music at dinner adds to the cost of operating a restaurant. While many people appreciate it, I find that it is often loud enough to make conversations difficult. When I'm on the beach, I want to listen to the ocean and not someone else's music choices. Some people will consider the same things that I find objectionable essential to their concept of luxury, which is why I value the detailed reviews of the soft product that some provide so highly and not just the summaries.

Kagehitokiri

properties target different guests (especially properties with only a few rooms, many of which also operate at low occupancy level) as you and others have noted >
ultra luxury should include service, but may have zero service/staff whatsoever (rentals)

an argument that zero components of service can be quantified in any way is not a good argument

no reasonable argument against detailed reviews, so there must be some cross talk here

i think many agree re "many" >

re definitions, i would define everything other than hard product as soft. i am not sure if that is how the industry does it, and i am sure that others may define it differently regardless of industry.

re preferences i liked "psycho-graphic" instead of demographic. attitudes, styles, preferences, tastes opinions, beliefs, values are not limited by demographic. one luxury research report contrasted "trendsetters" with "connoisseurs" , i thought a better approach vs demographic.

rny321

While it's true that some aspects of customer service are valued differently by customers, I don't believe I said zero components of soft products can be quantified. For some reason you took issue with a single sentence in a post where I was complementing those who provide detailed reviews of the soft product aspect of luxury. In your criticism, you tried to make the argument that the value of soft product was determined by its cost to a merchant. If you read my prior post, you will see several reasons why a merchant's cost isn't always a good indication of value to a customer.

Kagehitokiri

development cost is not soft , definitely we are talking past each other on certain points of emphasis

caviar is expensive, regardless of whether one likes it, and that is where i will end on quantitative

re quality of service (re ultra luxury) while ignoring style, it is extremely difficult to deliver. four seasons is fantastic with procedures including hiring. they use situational/behavioral interviews, not sure much of a trendsetter they were with that. many do it now. ritz carlton was also big on procedures, and obviously marriott did not completely discard all of them upon acquisition. other smaller brands perhaps best represented by amanresorts under adrian zecha, did the complete opposite from procedures. general managers ran property like they owned it, and like it was a large private residence hosting friends. no top down from corporate. regent hotels under bob burns was similar according to a four seasons manager / executive. zecha was at regent with bob burns. some smaller brands and independents prefer hiring people from outside hotel industry.

outside of hotels, steve jobs and apple can be compared in terms of being an outlier. they made stores work, are secretive, and some stock analysts say their stock is "hated" by many analysts.

many upscale hotels that do operate at a profit were seen as having no chance at ever working. the first amanresort. four seasons hualalai. latter for example was said to not have anywhere near enough rooms, and too much was spent on things that would not generate revenue.

its unfortunate it seems financing is currently very difficult for luxury villa resorts, whether there are residences or not. while lehman brothers bankruptcy suspended development of many such resorts, they may have been single handedly responsible for big expansion of luxury hotel industry.

regardless, marriott + starwood blows away hilton, IHG, accor in terms of upscale and luxury.

quinella66

Kagehitokiri

most dramatic at bal harbour is (1) presidential , not always crazy rate >
marriott.com/hotels/hotel-rooms/details/miaxr-the-st-regis-bal-harbour-resort/pres
(edition and W SoBe have suites / bungalows with lap pools at crazy rates)

st regis punta mita has beachfront villas with pools (and beachfront rooms)

RC has some villa resorts, and Reserve brand
Reserve brand real step in right direction luxury wise vs big box
also - montreal (franchise) , waikiki (new residence-only) , FLL
the good ones in asian cities likely a function of city theyre in
condo owners at FLL dropped st regis and replaced with RC