Which explains why elites are avoiding the brand if they have other options or unless the price is so cheap to ignore - it's prudent to do so ;) :p :D

Cheers.

It's all about expectations.

I think one reason that this sticks in the craw of so many MR members is that the breakfast is one of the main tangible benefits that Platinum is designed to deliver. That's why I get so mad when they withhold it because some marketing person decided to call the property a "resort", and it's why we always ask this question about Courtyard.

When I think "What's cool about MR Platinum?" I think EEO first, breakfast second, and reasonable assurance that I won't have a problem with my stay third. (e.g., I'll get a good non-suite, right bed/smoke, etc.)

I try to be fair the other way, too: I have zero expectation of a room upgrade at Marriott, so when I get one or two per year I know that's not part of Platinum benefits, I know most Marriott properties aren't built with a huge number of suites anyway, so I don't even bother asking about it.

It's the reverse at Starwood: I don't expect breakfast at most of their brands, but doggonit if I go 2 or 3 stays without a decent-sized suite, I'm wondering why.

So yeah, I know Marriott wants us to set our expectations that CY and "resort" properties will withhold certain benefits. But we still wonder "Why?" What's the business logic? Especially for me, someone who was long Marriott-first in terms of business and leisure stays. It forces me to diversify into SPG and HH. I've been happy...that's probably a good approach independent of breakfast...but why does Marriott want me doing that?

Actually Sharon they aren't avoiding the brand at all - but I'm certain you are correct there is a demographic of elites that are but that is exactly why MI has a multi brand strategy playing in the same market space

I want to be clear I'm not trying to be smug or avoid the question but trust me - MI put a really strong Branding team together many years ago, it's the job of these folks to determine what each brand is and what each brand isn't so the development team can go out and sell deals (ie grow the brands) - the power of MI's brands is second to none, the closest competitor is Hilton but they have a substantial premium to them too....IHG, Starwood and Hyatt all have a long ways to go to offer what MI can but Hyatt certainly is moving quickly but still years away from substantially closing the gap - the Branding team has determined that right now it does not make sense to offer breakfast either to elites or other guests (they have and will continue to look at this) but that doesn't mean they wont decide otherwise in the future (it was the branding team that originally decided against offering the ability to earn points at the Ritz-Carlton brand...as market conditions change it's their job to keep the brands premium to the compset)

Spent 3 nights in past month at Courtyard and did not sleep more than 8 hours total. Does anyone else find that the beds are hard to sleep on? I find them too soft.

We stayed at 1 new CY is the US and the bed was very nice. We stayed in a couple of CYs in Europe and we also think the beds were nice.

IMO I don't feel the difference between FFI, CY, RI, and the Ren regarding bed quality. I guess because we are sleeping on a bed from IKEA we don't have so high expectation. I have heard some people having trouble sleeping in a hotel because they have a tempur bed, and they can't live without one.

I think Hyatt Place's Hyatt grand bed was the best we have tried.

We are done with Courtyards! Just sayed at one on Brown Deer Road in Milwaukee and it was tired. Add to the fact that they have eliminated the breakfast perk for Platinum members. Time to move on. More value at a Carlson Country Inn at half the price!

Did you read the rest of the thread? They did not eliminate free breakfast for elites, they never had it.

Nope, that title goes to all the FFI's out there. Absolute worst.

On the topic of the thread, I've also notice a downtick in value of CY's. I stay mostly at FS properties, but when the only option is a limited service, I try and go with SHS. They offer free breakfast, big rooms, nice staff, non-douchey lobby's and good rates.

it's actually Hyatt's Grand Bed (used in all of their brands)....yes it's awesome (it's what I sleep on at home)....not to get too far off topic I like the Renaissance Bed next and then Marriott Full Service Bed & Sheraton Suite Sleeper (tied)

My question is what does Courtyard offer? Great rooms-no, value-no, consistency-no, style-no, convenient location-sometimes, Incentives for loyalty-no. I am curious about what this branding team considers to be Courtyards' reason for being. I see value and relevance in all of the other Marriott brands, but Courtyard appears to be having an identity crisis.

I've taken a look at my stays this yr and I have stayed at more FFI and CYs then other Marriott props. At least from my selection of these chains, I would say CY really is on the way down. What's really bad is some of the clerks at CYs look like they'd rather be elsewhere. Some FFI clerks, at least IMO, try to make you feel more comfortable while you're there.

Also a +1 about the CY bedding being downright awful.

Also being an SPG Plt, I could not agree more w/this statement about 4P, the absolute pits.

The Courtyards in DC and New York are often the only Marriott family properties under his corporate hotel budget for those cities. That's what they offer.

Guys I'm not trying to be difficult - the brand has value otherwise it either wouldn't be around today or it would look very different....I too don't identify with the brand BUT that doesn't mean the brand is wrong, just means I'm not a customer for them....the actual results from the brand since the last reinvention (not sure they used that term this time around) have been terrific by all metrics (saying the brands direction is wrong would be like telling a bunch of HHonors elites that their brand is going in the wrong direction too because MR does things differently)

I just don't see the problem as that's a correct statement as well. ;)