Hi All,

I hope I can be proven wrong, but I'm really frustrated at the moment with the pure lack of choice offered by Marriott Bonvoy. A few years ago, I had Starwood Gold and it came in pretty handy at times, however the selection available was limited. When Marriot, SPG, Ritz Carlton and others came together to form one brand, I was under the impression there would be a decent amount of options available. I currently have silver status with Marriot, and would really like to move up to gold and platinum - but the choice is so limited it is ridiculous.

Now I understand it is a pandemic, but most hotels around Europe have opened up and are desperate for customers now. For example, me and my partner want to go to Rome on the first weekend in October. When I searched through the Marriott Bonvoy website, I find 12 hotels only! 12! When I search through Booking.com - I find over 2,000 4 and 5 star properties.

I also searched for properties in London and Dubai, finding the following:

London: 55 hotels available through Marriott, 1,171 hotels through Booking.com that are 4 and 5 star.

Dubai: 46 hotels available through Marriott, 855 hotels through Booking.com that are 4 and 5 star.

Am I doing something wrong in the search?

With a choice that is so limited - why do people bother chasing status with Marriott? What is the point? Do the benefits really outweigh the significantly limited options?

According to Hospitality Insights, Marriott is the largest chain in the world with over 5,700 properties (https://hospitalityinsights.ehl.edu/...t-hotel-chains). Are all these properties advertised on the Marriott Bonvoy site?

55 Hotels in London is considered limited?

Most people can't cope with deciding between 5-10 hotels of similar price / standard. But if you need to choose amongst 2,000 hotels, then by all means you need to be using an OTA and pay for whatever you truly desire...

So 5,700 properties, with 55 in London is about 1% of the total. That feels reasonable for a global brand - how many Bonvoy properties were you hoping to find in London? You can only stay in one at a time.

If you find a chain with more than 5,700 properties, please let us know.

I'm really not sure if the OP was including London and Dubai to say that they're also limited, or if they were included as examples with much better presence.

OP, if it's the former, I'm really not sure you're going to get much support. 55 hotels is a lot, basically allowing any traveler to find a Marriott property in their preferred area, taste, and price (keeping in mind London's expensive on the whole).

If it's the latter, well, as your own research points out, they're the largest chain in the world. Just about anywhere travelers want to go, they're going to have an option-or options, in the Marriott family. Choosing one specific destination, and deciding that the number of choices doesn't meet your standard, is certainly your prerogative, but it's fairly arbitrary.

There can always be an anomoly-whether it's because Marriott hasn't succeeded there in the past, or they have difficulty with property owners/managers, or even just the city tending to have a higher concentration of independent properties. None of that changes the fact that by and large, Marriott's footprint is massive.

It's worth noting, the article you cite, lists the next largest chains as well. Here's how they stack up in Rome:

Hilton-8 hotels
Accor-13 hotels
Best Western-21 hotels
Wyndham-1 hotel

So, on average, they're a touch smaller than Marriott.
But, looking a bit closer....the furthest Marriott is 7.6 miles from the city center. Using that same metric, Accor drops down to....7 hotels. Best Western drops down to 14.

Other large chains: Hyatt-7 properties; Choice-6 properties; IHG-5 properties

So really, it seems that the takeaway here is, Rome has a lot of smaller brands or independents, but within the realm of loyalty programs, Marriott is still one of the best represented.

I have/chase/maintain the status for a number of reasons, but the benefits and downsides for me have nothing to do with how many options they have in Rome or London. For me -- it's so I can have some free nights for my family or other loved ones every now and then.

Those 12 properties look pretty nice to me...are you upset they don't have more low-end offerings? Like a FI or RI? I mean there's a Westin, St. Regis, couple of Design hotels...what are you after?

Just for the record, a quick search shows Hyatt having 7 properties in Rome and Hilton having 8. Not every hotel, fancy or otherwise, belongs to a megachain.

To nitpick a bit, Hyatt actually has zero properties in the Rome area. The 7 that show when searching on hyatt.com are actually Small Luxury Hotels of the World (SLH) properties. SLH and Hyatt have a marketing arrangement, where one can book via hyatt.com for some limited benefits and often at a significant premium over booking the property directly.

Point taken, and actually makes the numbers look better for Marriott.

Still, for the purposes of OP's question, since they're bookable via Hyatt's site, and as you said, include some benefits, they at least reflect some "point" to that particular loyalty program-similar to the Design Hotels that show up when searching via Marriott.com.

Just for clarification, how many properties would you consider Bonvoy needs to have in Rome so there would be sufficient choice for you ?

You're not using Booking.com correctly in terms of comparison. Unlike Marriott.com or other hotel group websites, many Online Travel Agencies (OTAs) like Booking.com include other types of lodging.

After checking the 4 and 5 star boxes, keep scrolling down on the right. (That's on the full version. No clue how their mobile site is set up.) Eventually, you'll get to the Property Type section. it looks like this:


Source: https://www.booking.com/searchresult...r_ht_id=1&rdf=

Those are the number for Rome, by the way. For an accurate comparison, you need to select the "Hotels" box and ignore all the other options.

When you do that, those 12 Marriott hotels suddenly become roughly 5% of the 235 hotels that are rated 4 or 5 star in the city. If that's not enough choices for you, perhaps you should follow craigthemif's advice and just book the best option regardless of hotel group connection.

This thread is hilarious!

Just to clarify, my point was a more broad one of hotel chain loyalty, and Marriott being the largest, I posted here.

My main question is what is the point of loyalty, when in reality, you are tied to a small proportion of properties. This is probably why Amex offer their Platinum card holders mid-high level status at a few different chains, rather than just one - which is a great benefit no doubt - however, if you are loyal to just one hotel chain, it does create a significant limit. Is the chasing of top-tier status at a chain (any chain) worth it? And again - it is an honest question purely out of figuring out if it is worth the hassle or not.

When I held Gold with SPG, it was definitely at times useful, however the hotel choices were limited. Now with the addition of marriott and ritz etc, it still feels limited in choice.

Except, you're not.

I'm Titanium with Marriott. When I look at hotels, I usually start there, but I'll check other places as well. If one of those other options is a clear winner, I'll book it. If it's close, I'll factor in the benefits I get. Sometimes, even with benefits, a non-Marriott property wins out.

Sometimes, the deciding factor is redeeming points. When it's not, those points are still there for a later use.

As far as I know, no one's ever been turned away from a non-Marriott property due to their loyalty to Marriott, so no one's really "tied" to it.

No need for the sarcasm, your point is taken without you needing to be arrogant about it. I never sat here implying one's loyalty to a hotel chain will result in being turned away from other properties.

When people have a high status with a hotel chain or airline, my question was would they tend to sway that way and be biased towards that, when other options may be better.

As I had said, I briefly had mid level status with SPG and was swayed that way when better options are available. I genuinely don't know how people act when comparing hotel chains to airline loyalty programs. I, for example am Gold with Qantas, and will do whatever I can to fly one world airlines.

You don't get swayed by it, so congratulations.

When your definition of "a small proportion of properties" is dozens in a major metropolitan area, up and down the price scale, while the total inventory of all hotels in said area numbers in the thousands... yes, there's no point to loyalty in your case. Although I think finding fault with Marriott (or any chain) because its options obviously add up to well less than all the hotels in a given city... is pretty silly.

If you are determined to be loyal to Hyatt, that's another matter -- Hyatt has just four properties in London proper -- but if 55 hotels in London, 45 in Dubai, etc., strikes you as "a choice that is so limited," I don't think there's much any hospitality provider can do to earn your satisfaction.