Wayfahrer

The article I find relating these keywords - Do we have too many hotel brands? -
ponders a different problem, though. (It is just healthy competition)

My pet peeve is the various sub-brands between one chain. There are just so many of them, differing by region. Just browsing the popular booking engines I can discover new interesting sub-brands from the major chains as well at various locations.

The question is: Why? Who needs this level of complication? Is the major chains' intention to hind their properties by accident at the 5th, 10th look on a 3rd party booking engine?

Consider Apple with it's easy to get simple marketing: just a few products, simple product line.

Consider also mobile network operators which unify their brands through countries for easy identification.

Edit: not to mention it is hard to find a sub-brand even on the chain's main site - http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/22025659-post25.html

Eastbay1K

As the majors are nearly completely franchises, and very few remaining hotels are corporate-owned, it provides a panoply of options (including varying degrees of brand standards) for the franchisee. Want to be affiliated with Starwood but don't want to provide a lounge, or perhaps upgrades, there's a choice for you. Want to be affiliated with Hilton but don't want to have an executive lounge? And so on.

And part of it might be the strategy of Coke and Pepsi. That is, to have a lot of products, whether or not they are particularly great, but there's no shelf space for much of anything else, so you're going to consume one of their products, even if Tim's Organic Cola is better, at a lower price.

Wayfahrer

So far sounds reasonable but do these brands offer an easy explanation for the customers' side, eg. if you do not need a lounge or upgrades, but want to have a cheaper stay, look for this sub-brand, if you want the full service, go to that sub-brand?

I have found no clear distinguishable descriptions of the sub-brands from the customer's standpoint: to have a lounge in a property is a hit and miss, you have to look for each and every one and find out.

If I understand you correctly, in your above quote lounge = executive lounge.

Kagehitokiri

8941 wyndham 2020Q4
8639 franchise
300 managed
2 owned timeshare

7892 marriott 2021Q3 (excluding design hotels)
5703 franchised
1930 managed
65 owned + 92 timshare + 102 residence

7102 choice (franchise) 2021Q3

6758 hilton 2021Q3
5964 franchised + 59 timeshare
735 managed
59 owned

6031 intercontinental 2021Q3
5072 franchised
936 managed
23 owned

5252 accor 2021Q3
2789 franchised
2339 managed
124 owned

1415 = 1126 hyatt 2021Q3 + 289 (out of ~520) SLH
548 franchised
452 managed
37 owned + 16 timeshare + 73 residence

market cap >
hotel consolidaton after marriott/starwood

you could look at groups' sites for investors and hotel owners/developers
which hotel groups do you think have too many brands?

CPRich

Marriott's the one that always strikes me as too many. 16 seems kinda high.

Kagehitokiri

ihgplc.com/index.asp?pageid=411
188 hotels americas + 5 hotels europe + 4 hotels asia middle east africa
5 EU (UK) >
Birmingham UK
London - Stratford City UK
London - Vauxhall
Liverpool UK
Newcastle UK

4 AMEA
Jeddah
+ 3

ihgplc.com/index.asp?pageid=412 "2003 IHG acquires the Candlewood Suites brand"
indeed
5 acquired (or more?) - residence inn, renaissance, ritz carlton, AC, gaylord
1 joint venture - bulgari
1 'nonbranded' franchise brand - autograph
upcoming moxy brand may not be JV, but its franchise with ikea owning initial hotels
it is interesting marriott chose to rebrand Fairfield Suites to SpringHill Suites

CPRich

I realize there were many acquisitions. I've seen quite a few airline merger/acquisitions - very few of them keep multiple brands.

Steve M

That seems to be an obvious way to consolidate the brands. Also, I'm not sure what the difference is between Towneplace Suites and Residence Inn. But most of the others are clearly different brands with different offerings. I'm not sure how you could combine any of the following:

Ritz Carlton, JW Marriott, Marriott, Courtyard, Springhill/Farifield Suites, Residence Inn, Marriott Executive Apartments, Gaylord, and Marriott Vacation Club.

Each of those offers a product that's clearly differentiated from the others, and serves a different part of the market. Some of the others are more obscure and may be attempts to create new market segments that although are not widely understood today, will be 10 years from now. Think back 20 years when many of the well-established market segments didn't exist.

Kagehitokiri

http://www.marriott.com/hotel-develo...sidence-Inn.mi
http://www.marriott.com/hotel-develo...lace-Suites.mi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TownePlace_Suites
http://www.marriott.com/hotel-develo...hill-Suites.mi

http://www.marriott.com/hotel-develo...-Inn-Suites.mi

ROCAT

------

stvr

What's the difference between a Rodeway Inn and an Econo Lodge?

Efrem

Does General Mills have too many brands of cereal?

Does Crest have too many varieties of toothpaste?

Does Toyota have too many car models?

Very few people outside FT are hung up on the corporate ownership of a hotel brand. It hardly matters outside the corporate frequent guest program. When I see a Fairfield Inn or a Sheraton, I pretty much know what I'm going to get. The fact that the brand belongs to Marriott or Starwood is, to most people, totally irrelevant.

heraclitus

A bunch of redundant brands seems like a good way to give the impression of great choice. Don't like Fairfield Inns? Well, how about a Residence Inn? Or a Courtyard? Or a Springhill Suites?

To most people these are interchangeable, but I guess it makes sense to offer this range of brands and selection as opposed to just having, say, four different Courtyards around a major airport.

Kagehitokiri

Eastbay1K answered in first reply in thread - its about hotel owners who are trying to pick a franchise. heraclitus mentioned choice. yes, sometimes multiple properties all have one owner, but most of the time it is different owners wanting differences.

and for owners who dont want brand, hotel companies are launching 'nonbranded' options.

hotel company acquire brands for the brand's properties, they dont want to lose the franchise/management contracts. hilton actually created waldorf brand in order to get management contracts of 3 launch properties, which all had the same owner.

franchise owners are clients of hotel companies, hotel companies bring guests to owners.

there is no point comparing to things that dont involve franchise owners.

re multiple brands, management, and hotel owners >
http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2...ickelRitz.html
in other words, would have been ok if ritz carlton had not been managing bvlgari

stimpy

Accor had over 4400 hotels a couple years ago. Right now their site says 3700+ and over 480,000 rooms. So you have a discrepancy somewhere. http://www.accorhotels-group.com/en/brands.html