![]() |
Originally Posted by sophiegirl
(Post 11608470)
...BUT in most hotels, HSIA and Brekkie costs more than the $25 savings. So why would anyone want to do that?
|
Originally Posted by sophiegirl
(Post 11608470)
If the rate is $99 and included Brekkie and HSIA; then Marriott matches it with a 25% off but no bennies - new rate is $75 - BUT in most hotels, HSIA and Brekkie costs more than the $25 savings. So why would anyone want to do that?
Are you saying Marriott will match a rate with a 25% discount on a competing site but NOT include the extra bennies? |
You think others are wasting their time on this issue.
OK. Fair enough. Then you decide to post and advise us that we are wasting our time. You do know that you don't have to read a thread? Have you considered quietly moving on to other matters when you encounter folks doing something you consider unproductive? Perhaps you could apply for the monitors job on this site....that way your talents and insightfull admonitions will not be wasted, and you can fulfull your destiny and dream by becoming a professional scold. |
ohmark; Soc, I think the opposite. It's rational in the sense that Marriott is interpreting the rule literally so as to preclude its having to match a lower price. It's unethical in the sense that the rule wasn't intended for this purpose, but to preclude Marriott from having to match package prices. [COLOR="royalblue"]In other words, the right thing for Marriott to do in these situations is to match the lower price, and not necessarily provide the extras.[/
imverge: That's a good point and I totally agree :) imverge: Let me just clarify something... Are you saying Marriott will match a rate with a 25% discount on a competing site but NOT include the extra bennies?[/QUOTE] No. I am offering a different perspective on ohmark's post (blue bold above) to which you offered agreement (orange bold above). |
I can see this playing out...
--Guest books at hotels.com for $100 including internet and breakfast. --Guest then calls Marriott and invokes BRG; Marriott says "we can do $75 without internet and breakfast." Guest says cool - I'll take it. --Guest then checks in at Marriott and says, "where's my free internet and breakfast?!? You guys are unethical!!!!!" :rolleyes: I think scenarios like this are why Marriott and every other hotel brand would not directly price-match unless comparing exact apples-to-apples bookings. |
Originally Posted by sophiegirl
(Post 11610682)
ohmark; Soc, I think the opposite. It's rational in the sense that Marriott is interpreting the rule literally so as to preclude its having to match a lower price. It's unethical in the sense that the rule wasn't intended for this purpose, but to preclude Marriott from having to match package prices. [COLOR="royalblue"]In other words, the right thing for Marriott to do in these situations is to match the lower price, and not necessarily provide the extras.[/
imverge: That's a good point and I totally agree :) imverge: Let me just clarify something... Are you saying Marriott will match a rate with a 25% discount on a competing site but NOT include the extra bennies?[/QUOTE] No. I am offering a different perspective on ohmark's post (blue bold above) to which you offered agreement (orange bold above). I would like to see Marriott price match on rates that include bennies even if it's just on price. The reservation can be noted by the ICC dept. stating no breakfast or internet is included. |
Originally Posted by socrates
(Post 11603654)
sorry didn't have time on Friday - but I'll do my best to see what's up on Monday
|
Originally Posted by ohmark
(Post 11604001)
Soc, I think the opposite. It's rational in the sense that Marriott is interpreting the rule literally so as to preclude its having to match a lower price. It's unethical in the sense that the rule wasn't intended for this purpose, but to preclude Marriott from having to match package prices. In other words, the right thing for Marriott to do in these situations is to match the lower price, and not necessarily provide the extras.
|
Originally Posted by socrates
(Post 11614600)
ok didn't speak to my contact but did speak to the Look No Further Folks - No question about it - Hotels.com DOES qualify (as many others have said) as a valid comparison, there has to be another reason why the claim was denied is what I was told
|
Not the case here.
My email message to MC stated only that the rate on Hotels.com was lower. I said nothing about the side issues (internet, breakfast, etc.). MC responded to me that hotels.com does not qualify for the rate match. I am happy to send copies of the correspondence to anyone who wants -- including the MC folks. It is clear from all the posts that the rate guarantee is not consistently applied. My guess is that the higher up you are in the MC loyalty programs, the more likely you are to have your rate matched. I see no other explination. |
Originally Posted by dugar
(Post 11616134)
Not the case here.
Originally Posted by dugar
(Post 11616134)
My email message to MC stated only that the rate on Hotels.com was lower.I said nothing about the side issues (internet, breakfast, etc.).MC responded to me that hotels.com does not qualify for the rate match. I am happy to send copies of the correspondence to anyone who wants --including the MC folks.
Originally Posted by dugar
(Post 11616134)
It is clear from all the posts that the rate guarantee is not consistently applied.
I agree that the guarantee is not always consistently applied (Although, I have benefited from this inconsistency)
Originally Posted by dugar
(Post 11616134)
My guess is that the higher up you are in the MC loyalty programs, the more likely you are to have your rate matched. I see no other explination
|
Update: Booked three nights at the Sydney Marriott the other night. Went to hotels.com to read some reviews, and guess what? They had a lower rate. Filled out the form, and a few hours later, my rate was adjusted, plus 25%.
Hotels.com IS accepted. |
Originally Posted by dugar
(Post 11616134)
Not the case here.
My email message to MC stated only that the rate on Hotels.com was lower. I said nothing about the side issues (internet, breakfast, etc.). MC responded to me that hotels.com does not qualify for the rate match. I am happy to send copies of the correspondence to anyone who wants -- including the MC folks. It is clear from all the posts that the rate guarantee is not consistently applied. My guess is that the higher up you are in the MC loyalty programs, the more likely you are to have your rate matched. I see no other explination. |
Originally Posted by imverge
(Post 11616433)
So what about the PM you sent me indicating the hotels.com rate included internet & breakfast?
Don't you think the ICC dept keeps records of denied claims? The LNF dept takes screen shots ;) Yes all claims are kept |
Originally Posted by dugar
(Post 11588259)
I have email from MC internet.customer.care (James White) advising me that
"Hotels.com is not a qualifying website." for the Best Rate Guarantee. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:17 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.