Goldlust how many people received the "private" email? Let others judge whose comment is absurd.

If you have a beef with a company and send them an email, that is private. When you then share that email with others, as was obviously done here, it ceases being private.

Since you "know pretty well what I'm talking about" please educate me. Wasn't the origin of the list to ensure that companies didn't close the window on deals before as many people as possible got through. Wasn't this $0 window closed prior to the original post on this thread? If so, why cry about the sunshine? Why lobby to close the thread? The list member's ability to book the secret deal was uncompromised. Is is because something else is at work here?

Just asking.

I wouldn't have responded, but this is how to get the post count up and some seem to think that is important.

Welcome to FT, ilander; it's the quality of posts and not the quantity that matter.
We are all netizen's of Randy Petersen's FlyerTalk community, including the faction known as the "list". Don't ever feel your voice is insignificant to another's, no matter how self-important we make ourselves out to be.

I've read the posts debating the issues of whether Hilton should or should not honor the rates and while I don't necessarily agree completely, all have expressed some veryy valid points. Is booking 300 rooms ethical and a sheer sign of greed? In my opinion, absolutely and this is not intended to be a flame against whomever it was that booked the 300 rooms. Whether Hilton should honor the rate is questionable and if so, should the 300 room guest be entitled to an alternative form of compensation? Hilton offered on it's website the "lowest available rate" which appeared to be zero. In essence, they made an offer and it was accepted. Any company that desires to have an online presence should set in place the necessary safeguards to prevent these types of mishaps from occuring. It's a cost of doing business and Hilton should honor the rates for one booking or perhaps offer a weekend during low peak. Hilton was negligent in loading the rates and it could have been avoided had the responsible individual performed a "test" booking or reviewed the changes.

Likewise, since rates are tied to the occupancy rate and had someone booked a room at the SDMV during the same period the 300 room person did, he or she would have paid a higher than normal rate. Now, when 299 of 300 rooms are empty or the reservation cancelled 24 hrs prior to the date of arrival, is Hilton going to contact the individual who is paying the inflated rate as it was an "error"? Their error caused an inflated rate but I sincerely doubt they will attempt to make any corrections for any guest who had booked a room at a higher than normal rate. Now we have an innocent guest who is truly wronged due to someone's greed of booking 300 rooms.

A $100 energy surcharge and a $30 resort fee will clear the whole problem up for Hilton.

How about a $50 urgently needed computer programmer assistance fee as well?

Whilst I agree that Hilton have no legal obligation to provide $0 rooms, I think that their hands-up attitude sounds fair enough. They could have got aroung it perfectly and taught that greedy fool a perfect lesson.

I am aware that in the USA the rates that you quote are exclusive of taxes state city or anything (In the EEC this is forbidden all prices have to be net of VAT, only city Taxe de Sejour may be aded but these should be notified). Hilton should have honoured the rate and added $50 for provision of bed linen, $50 for provision of TV, $50 for providing a telephone (laugh not, Sheraton in Fort Lauderdale did exactly that)...you get the picture.

I would have given anything to have seen this Smartalec to have rolled up and been susequently thrown out on his ear for not providing sufficient credit. I am so bored with this sort of "clever" behaviour.

Had Hilton charged $1, or indeed 1 cent then they would have a far more difficult time. However silly these $29 fares may be, they do sometimes charge "silly" fares to get headlines and publicity. To reduce this to absurdity, if everyone paid this there would be few decent hotels or airlines left.

Oh, and yes I think that this is exactly what should be on these pages and I am deeply grateful for learning that these sort of things go on.

I am the "300-room-guy", 318 room-nights to be precise. And yes, as of September 7th, 2001 - 2:00pm CEST, I think of using them all.

Summary of this post: I hold 318 room-nights in 29 reservations at three different properties for dates all over 2002, not 300 rooms for one night in one property. I could use all reservations I hold theoretically, but will not use all. I have not decided which I will not use. I did not contact Hilton to ask for a freebie, they asked me for my price to give up the reservations when I asked them about a change in one of my reservations.

I have thought long after reading this post if I should post a statement here or not, but finally I decided that I have to clear up some things. I post this that late because I have been traveling the past days, and departed about 30 minutes after I read about the offer from Hilton. The eMail to "The List" was about the last thing I did before getting to the airport.


The reason for booking that many rooms is pretty simple: I am still four to ten month out to the dates I made the reservations for, so I booked every date-combination that may be interesting for me for next year's holiday. I carefully reviewed the cancellation-policy that goes with these rates, and it says that I can cancel them up to 24 hours in advance without penalty if I like to. That's what I am going to do when I finally have decided when and where to go.

I was reviewing my reservation the other day when I found out that three of my reservations had been altered manually by the hotel, and that triggered me to contact Hilton what had happened to this three reservations.

When they replied they did not adress my original question but I was asked what I would ask for giving up my 0$-reservations, and as I am used to negotiating, I asked for something pretty hefty to have something to spare for negotiating. In that response I asked for 10 years comped diamond, honoring all nights I really need at the confirmed 0$-rate and a couple of HHonors points (unspecified amount) for each night I don't. I still think this is a reasonable base to find a mutual agreement benefiting both sides.


I do not see this as "blackmail" or "extortion" as it was posted here, because I did not contact Hilton with a request for any freebies and a threat to do something if they do not do what I want them to do, but they ASKED me for "my price" for giving up the reservations NOW. Before that point, I was still thinking of having the reservations I need to be honored and cancelling those I don't need without anything in return.

So they asked me what I want to get, and I gave them something to negotiate. Their offer was what was posted in the article printed in the WSJ, and it is my opinion that this is pretty lame, especially since this is the third time in twelve month that they had this kind of problems and the rates were in their systems from at least July 21st to August 8th, a span of 18 days. It was not a temporary glitch or system-malfuction judging from that point of view.


318 room-nights, btw., are far different from 300 reservations or 300 rooms. These 318 room-nights are booked in a total of 29 reservations in three properties. But if you are traveling with a family that requires three rooms, each night of your stay counts at three room-nights. So let me do some math:

I booked three weeks in spring next year twice (once for each property in question, each week seperately) for three rooms, making this 126 room-nights in six reservations. The same I have done for the summer, which comes to another 126 room-nights, bringing the total to 252 room-nights and twelve reservations. The rest of the 318 room-nights (66 room-nights) are distributed all over the upcoming year and over the three different properties where I might have the oportunity of visiting the corresponding places.

It is my understanding that this way of booking is a common practice. When you see a good hotel-rate that is refundable, you will likely book that just in case you could use that reservation with a certain likelyhood. If you don't, then you cancel, and that's it. This is also the way many people that use Priceline work: They reserve a cancellable backup until they are successful getting their price at Priceline, and then cancel their backup, and I'm sure many of you do not see anything bad about this.


So while I am risking being flamed all over by posting this here and having a live eMail-adress in my profile, I still stand to what I have done and why. And hopefully in the light of these extra explainations (which I must admit the original poster did not have), my actions do not look deplorable any more.

Greetings - Dirk

Dirk-

Thanks for coming out and trying to clarify and address the issues at hand here. No stones coming your way from me.

While I now better understand your position and intent, and admittedly even agree with some of what you say, your comment that "I still think this is a reasonable base to find a mutual agreement benefiting both sides" did catch my eye! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Reviewing,

Really? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

If the reservation system actually permitted booking further out, would you, or I, or anyone, book say 3,100 rooms - just for good measure?

Don't we need to be somewhat "reasonable" and fair in our booking behavior and in our negotiations as well? i hope so.

Let's not go overboard, and also try to think of the other side/persons involved!

This is not a WAR, is it? As noted previously by boomer and subsequently quoted by me, it is not about world peace her on FT, but rather simply about accumulating and maximizing miles and points.

We ALL like 'em, and want 'em, but IMHO, Hilton has been quite upstanding and fair in response as I noted above and I do hope we ALL can try to do the same.

As I'd joked before, what do I get for NOT booking this rate? I have not yet heard from Hilton! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

All the best to you in obtaining a prompt and hopefully mutually satisfactory resolution.

Have a great weekend everyone! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

After reading Goldlust describe the email Dirk sent as a private message I wrote,

Describing an email sent to all the people on "the list" as a private email message is truly funny.


Dirk,

Thanks for adding perspective to the story. A few facts make a lot of difference.

Goldlust,

Since Dirk said he emailed "the list", whose comment is absurd? What was the point of your original post to which I responded, oh yes, it was ethics. I guess more than one thing was put in perspective.

Actually, at one point I wished that I had been able to book anything beyond August 3, 2002, but that was not possible. I hope I made it clear enough that I only made reservations that I could use to a certain degree of likeliness, and I can assure you that this degree is in fact higher than 25% for each reservation I made.

I never expected them to give me everything I asked for, but to have something to negotiate, your first move has to be to request something very big. And to repeat it again: THEY came forward to ask me what I would like to get to drop my reservations. So as a starting-point, I still see it as acceptable to put everything imaginable on the table and the see how it shrinks to something that finally fits everyone.

Greetings - Dirk

Hey Dirk - First thing is that I believe you should be commended for that kind of stand-up attitude and taking the risk to come in and give some more background information. I do want to make clear to everyone that this post was not intended as an attack on Dirk but I used Dirk (without all of the facts above) as an example of how people abuse obvious errors.

I think Dirk makes some very good points in his post and I so have a better understanding of his response to Hilton. With all that said - I still disagree. I believe that the remedy offered by Hilton is adequate.

Even though I and others may strongly disagree with djohannw, let's not turn this into a personal attack flame session with Dirk as the target.


------------------
Ken in Sacramento

Your comment is still the absurd one, since you are of the opinion that emailing "The List" would make one's email part of the public domain. As I state, only a person with very little knowledge of "The List" would make such a bold yet foolish comment.

Actually, that's not true either. I am on the list, and I still think you're the one whose comments here have been absurd.

And I agree with those above who have commended Dirk for "coming out of the list" for this discussion. I don't agree with him on all points, but he makes a good case.

As for "The LIST" theres no reason it shouldn't exist.Thanks to those for making it happen and keeping it alive.

As for free nights.IMHO its free if you live close by.Otherwise one is gonna have to fly paying for that tkt or using miles for a free tkt. Yes it would be nice to get together with everyone but that can be done at a P.I.P also,albeit with a cast of different people.

Whats bad is why Jane printed anything especially when it was stated,its not allowed. I can only think what would be the case if I did the same to her sources B4 she printed anything,but then again I sort of doubt anyone at WSJ knows from anything thats not on The LIST or FT.

Dirk --

I commend you on coming forward and providing some additional details.

I do, however, feel that you have tremendously abused the Hilton reservations system and their error. I have a number of friends who apparently have taken advantage of this error, and on that, I just have to say that reasonable minds can disagree as to booking rooms under it. However, given that Hilton has assumed the onus of this error, not once but twice now, and is willing to provide some form of compensation to all who book it in spite of common business sense (IMHO), then as I have said, since they have treated this "rate" as a valid rate, or at the very least, one that should be honored, then I feel no hesitiation on booking such a rate in the future, since this is their business judjgment.

However, that does not mean that one should continue to abuse the system. At the very least, it would be in your collective good sense not to abuse it so that they will not spend the $$ to place a filter on their site to prevent this from occurring again.