hockeyinsider

I'm starting this thread after a slightly off-topic discussion in another thread (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/marri...l#post28785782).

Basically, I have always thought that properties managed by Marriott are generally better than franchised/licensed properties. Anecdotally from 125-plus nights per year, this would include benefits/amenities to elite-level guests.

Now, I've come across data from Marriott itself. Brands like Ritz-Carlton and St. Regis are generally renown for their consistency. They're basically entirely managed by Marriott itself, as opposed to a licensee/franchisee.

That isn't the case say with Sheraton, which is really, really inconsistent and, in my opinion, one of the worst brands in the Marriott portfolio post-Starwood. Of the 193 Sheraton hotels in North America, 162 are franchisees/licensees.

In all, 2,966 North American properties are franchised/licensed while 424 are managed by Marriott.

Internationally, it would seem that the high percentage of Marriott-managed properties could be the reason why international properties are so much better.

For example, 47 J.W. Marriott properties are managed by Marriott while 7 are franchisees/licensees. 154 of the Marriott and 50 of the Renaissance hotels internationally are managed by Marriott compared to 43 and 26 managed by franchisees/licensees respectively.

I had a conversation with a 30-year Marriott general manager, most recently of an international property, who told me that the inconsistent standards between domestic and international properties, to say nothing of having too many brands, is a frequent complaint. However, all the Marriott CEO cares about is having more properties, particularly franchised properties, because they don't have to do anything but get easy profit. He said they get 17% from J.W. Marriott franchisees/licenses.

All of the data can be found on pages 35 and 36 of this document: http://files.shareholder.com/downloa...ual_Report.pdf. (Hat tip to @Horace for providing it at http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/28785782-post17.html).

Srisarin

I for one won't be picking a property because it is managed vrs franchised so IMO this thread is really useless.

hockeyinsider

Why? I'd be willing to guess that a majority of the "bad" properties are licensed/franchised.

RogerD408

Fortunately others may have a different opinion so even though it's useless [/b]to you[/b] doesn't mean it shouldn't exist. I can see this data point being helpful in determining how to proceed with a complaint regarding the property. Given franchises may own many different brands, should I choose to boycott a property, I may choose to avoid all of their properties.

joshua362

This would be an interesting study and go along way towards understanding why some Marriott's go all in and others grudgingly provide the bare minimum.

Only 14% are managed (in NA) according to the 10-K? I bet most of those are FS and above which would kick up the percentage dramatically where the benefits really count. Nationwide, I'd peg my good vs bad rate at about 50%.

But without having a list of managed properties its going to be hard to correlate who is what.

Srisarin

What next, determining if the next flight is on an owned or wet leased plane and if the flight is bad boycotting the airline ?

SkiAdcock

It wouldn't occur to me to check if a Marriott brand was owned, managed or franchised. Whether a property is located where I need to be, has a reasonable rate, has an exec lounge (if full service) is more important to me.

Cheers.

Horace

There are three major business functions involved for any hotel:

• Hotel owner
• Hotel management provider
• Hotel branding, including marketing, standards, reservations, and supply chain

There was a time when a single business entity performed all these functions. For example, all early Marriott hotels were owned and managed under the Marriott brand by the old Marriott Corporation.

Now there are usually two or three companies involved. In fact, there can be more than three, such as one company owning the building and another leasing it as hotel space -- essentially splitting the function of hotel owner. Also, parts of the operation can be outsourced (valet parking, housekeeping, restaurant, and others).

Every business entity involved in the hotel wants to make a profit. I have no problem with that.

Marriott International owns relatively few hotels. Marriott doesn't want to be in the hotel ownership business, but it sometimes happens. It's a temporary until Marriott can find a buyer.

For owners of hotels under various Marriott brands, Marriott International is one choice as a management company, but there are many others. I'm not convinced that there's a correlation between the quality of a particular hotel and whether it's managed by Marriott or another company. My guess is it has more to do with the general manager, the willingness of the hotel owner to fund ongoing improvements, and geographic expectations.

There are large hotel companies, such as White Lodging, with portfolios of hotels operating under various Marriott and non-Marriott brands. Take a look at their portfolio on their website. It includes excellent properties such as the JW Marriott Indianapolis.

In these days of social media and review sites such as TripAdvisor, it seems a hotel's focus should be on providing a flawless guest experience within the expectations for a given brand -- regardless of who owns, manages, and markets a given hotel. That would seem to be the best way to achieve high occupancy and rates above those of competitors. But there are clearly companies that think the way to maximize profit is to control spending, even if it means, for example, having gross, worn-out hallway carpets that should have been replaced years ago.

My purpose in writing his post is to suggest that there's more at play than a binary distinction between managed and franchised.

C17PSGR

In terms of the franchise vs. managed issue, I think its worth breaking out FS vs limited service.

In my experience, Courtyards, Residence Inns, Fairfield Inn, Springhill Suites offer a pretty consistent experience even though the overwhelming majority are franchised. But, there's not much to mess up on as there usually aren't upgrades available, I don't really expect much, and they always offer me a market item and points.

Experiences at full service properties often differ. As I read the data from the annual report, 1/3 of US properties are managed by Marriott and 2/3 of US properties are franchised. I suspect, but don't have any data, that Marriott managed properties are more consistent in recognizing elites. For example, JW's managed by Marriott seem to regularly recognize I am a Plat Premier and give suite upgrades when available. Some franchised properties are excellent, however, and some are also consistent in a negative way.

So ... it would be interesting if we could track them in a consistent way. As I mentioned in an different thread, Spire Hotels, MDM, and Remington Lodging seem to hire engaged GM's. The problem is how to identify these properties as its unclear unless you look at the wall to get the name of the management company running the hotel.

hockeyinsider

I agree wholeheartedly. From a consistency standpoint, Courtyard is actually really, really consistent. Much more than than full-service Marriott or Renaissance properties.

From my experience, as well as reading reports of others, the most consistent brands are J.W. Marriott, St. Regis and Ritz-Carlton, which have the highest percentage of Marriott-operated management.

darthbimmer

As an armchair business analyst, I understand the reasons for that type of arrangement and don't begrudge the companies their profit motive. But as a traveler I periodically find it frustrating. Whenever there is a customer service problem and there needs to be some form of remediation provided, it all too often degenerates into finger-pointing and "That's not our contractual responsibility" arguments with the 3, 4, or more corporate entities involved in providing what, to the consumer, should be a seamless hotel service.

s0ssos

Checked in to a RI that was owned by Marriott, and it seemed they had proactively upgraded me. Which most RI don't do.
So I'd have to add a datapoint that it seems Marriott-owned have better elite treatment.