DHAST

I truly get that most of the issue here is psychological. Heck, I only stay in NYC on award stays, and this works me up. And yeah, if $30 for the weekend is going to break my bank, I really shouldn't go...

Given that $10 is a drop in the bucket for NYC hotel rates, I'm just curious how you guys would feel if the property quietly increased its rates by $10, and just started advertising something like this:

In an effort to serve you better, the LPM NYC no longer charges a pool access fee, and is the first full service hotel in NYC to give all customers free wifi in the room! The following benefits are now included for all guests at the LPM:

Personally, I don't think I'd even notice a $10 increase. I might think that I already get internet access as a gold, but whatever... non-status people just caught a break. As a non-status person, I might actually be gullible enough to think they're actually giving me something for "free" -- no FS property gives away free internet. For overseas travelers, they might actually get something out of the free calls -- I'm still stuck in the stone age when I go; my phone doesn't work outside the US.

dcstudent

^ +1

dcstudent

I would think that your idea would drive more business, but maybe LPM doesn't want more business, just more $$$ from the business it has.

BigBopper

I think the truth of the matter is that LPM doesn't actually NEED more business. NY hotel occupancy rates are among the highest in the world. I believe the figures reported for the city on a whole in October were over 91%. There's a shortage of hotel rooms in NY and a majority of new hotels are being built in the outer boroughs thanks economics and a push from Bloomberg.

Add to it the fact that so few of the LPM guests will read this and be in an uproar that they flat out just don't care. For every one of us here that will no longer stay at the property there's a French tourist (they still seem to think LM is a French brand) or business person who had a corporate TA book their stay to replace us 10X over. This is the reason LPM initially did not participate in SPG when the LM brand joined, the reason many of us don't get upgrades and why they flat out don't care about our SPG status.

Bottom line, LPM isn't going to lose guests so it's going to squeeze every little bit from the one's they get. As much as I hate the policy and the insulting way it was defended here, our complaints aren't going to change anything. The only way this will change is if the FTC hits Starwood and LPM hard in the wallet.

sbtinme

This is precisely correct and it's why the LPM really has no need to revisit this thread. You're correct in every way. We here on FT may loathe it, but it is what it is. Worth remembering that the LPM owners are the ones who really established a position of disinterest in participating in the SPG program from the get-go. In fact, I am quite sure that both LPM properties refused to participate in the former (pre-Starwood) LM affinity program. I suppose its their position that their properties just don't need a loyalty program to fill their rooms, but they sure like the branding.

My best guess is that they were coerced into SPG participation at the most recent contract renewal, but did so begrudgingly. As such, they're not apt to go above and beyond for any component of the SPG program nor SPG members themselves.

C'est la vie.

clublounger

Completely unrelated. That is not a mandatory fee for all guests.

How much would LPM have to set their mandatory fee at for you to "hesitate"?

DHAST

I get your point... but serious question: If occupancy is so solid, why be sneaky about rate increases? The NYC market being what it is, how does a $10 rate increase not stick? That's 3% of BAR on some random night that I checked.

DHAST

I loathe it not so much because of SPG/status related issues, but as an underhanded rate increase. That affects everybody.

BigBopper

Id like to say its because they're pigs but I'm not sure the TOS will allow it so ill just say poor management.

HNLbasedFlyer

Only LPM can truly answer your question - some reasons that come to mind:

Free rooms and cash and points rooms generate the $10 fee. With over 700 rooms, the fee adds up.

They'll spin this to many corporate contracts - book xxx number of rooms per year, get xx% off and waived facilities fee for your employees. Some corporate customers will feel "special"

Someone thinks they can do an accounting trick by allocating a facility fee to various parts of the infrastructure and tax/depreciate it differently as expense versus income.

Marketing/finance did a presentation and convinced the executives this will translate into real bottom line money - and they figure they can always cancel the program if it really did have a poor impact.

The economy is clearly improving - if you are going to add a fee, this is the time to do it.

They are annoyed at lost revenue Starwood makes them give away to golds and plats. They probably don't feel their guest base is best served from the elite pool.

And lastly - don't be shocked if they said to themselves, we don't want people staying at the hotel who are going to sweat a $10 fee (which will probably go up in the future). Just saying - there is no way 1 person came up with this and implemented it, several people had to be in the loop.

sbtinme

Oh, I certainly understand. My point was that I was sensing a number of folks here on FT were trying to push this point vis-a-vis their SPG status and I don't think that's gonna carry much weight at this particular property given their legacy of not wanting to really play the game in the first place.

itsaboutthejourney

^^ Remember it's also owned by the same entity/family that own the Parker in Palm Springs and both hotels have so-so track records on adhering to the SPG program. Its great the head of SPG convinced these two properties to finally join SPG, but clearly they do very well on their own.

DHAST

I wonder why the property even bothers to play. We've already seen the Manhattan at Times Square die a slow and painful death -- they went "limited participation" (and then I think they even stopped accepting points reservations altogether, no?) before finally getting sold off and leaving the SPG program altogether.

Status has got to cost the properties something... it's a form of volume discounts. If they want the benefit of the SPG flag, they've gotta pay in the form of SPG benefits. If they're that good, they can make it as an independent.

There's lots of options across many chains -- LPM is far from the only game in town.

GUWonder

This property has a rather extensive history of dumping a lot of rooms via Priceline/Hotwire "opaque" bookings. If the properties did well enough on their own, then they could stop with that; and also then they could drop Starwood/SPG affiliation and see reduced costs as there are costs that arise from bookings coming via Starwood channels and of brand affiliation.

sbtinme

I think this is apples and oranges. The ancient, worn old Sheraton Manhattan was really at the end of the line. It was a very old, run down facility in an excellent location. Starwood recognized that it needed more rehabbing than they were willing to invest. It sort of faded away.

The LPM, on the other hand, is a high demand property in excellent shape and well poised for success into the future.