CDTraveler

Saw this on Expedia when I was looking for an NYC hotel:

• Internet access
• Phone calls
• In-room coffee
• In-room bottled water

der_saeufer

Not sure what else it could possibly be, other than a way to game search engines and make the room appear cheaper than it is, which is particularly aggravating for those of us trying to get the nicest room we can at or below a set rate. When the airlines enjoyed this too much, Uncle Sam slapped them.

If even two of the large OTAs would ban the practice, it'd disappear overnight with no government action required. It wouldn't even be that difficult--the hotels are already required to disclose the resort fee, so all the OTAs would need to do is automatically add it to the displayed room rate. It'd even make for good advertising and press for the OTA: "Hidden mandatory "fees" are shady. At hugeota.com, we've made them a thing of the past. The price you see is the price you pay at hugeota.com"

84fiero

I'm surprised they don't start adding things like "breathing air, bed sheets, door lock" to such sham lists.

Efrem

from the play Les Miserables discusses this practice.

Personally, I think it's a con, pure and simple - an attempt to advertise a rate that is lower than what guests will be required to pay. I'm not a huge fan of additional government regulation, but if the industry won't regulate itself that might be the only remaining option.

Often1

The bottom line is that properties have decided to add what is a resort or amenities fee and then tell you that it includes whatever it includes. Even if it included something special, valuable, and new, it is still mandatory. Until and unless hotels are required to list the total price of a room as including any mandatory fees and then break out whatever it is that they want, this is not going to change.

Bigger problem is that there is no data suggesting that people book away from properties which charge such a fee. So long as properties are full and build in ancillary revenue, the fees will spread and increase.

CDTraveler

Expedia is getting better about disclosing such fees. It used to be hidden in the fine print, now it shows up at the top of the page, right under the room rate, when you are on the actual hotel page. What I'd like to see Expedia do next is add an option button for "Don't show hotels with resort fees" in the same way you can select hotels with free parking or free breakfast. I think that would slow down the spread of such fees.

YVR Cockroach

I have a 1-day layover in HNL and searched for a hotel. Pretty much everything (except for one property and that may be because it was hidden somewhere) had resort fees. I don't think it was so bad or widespread just a few years ago. Ended up booking at airbnb as a result (and that has it share of junk fees though the one we booked into doesn't have too much). That certainly soured my opinion of the Hawaii hotel market. What will help is that the raison d'etre for the HNL layover seems to be going away (cheap pseudo BC fares on AirAsiaX) anyway.

rickg523

I despise these junk fees and mention them prominently in my reviews of properties. Even when I recommend the property, my final line is always something like "this property deceptively lists their rates without the mandatory $25 so-called resort fee. Calculate your actual cost per night accordingly, regardless of the property's deceptive claims."

GetSetJetSet

very annoying to look at hotels on OTAs these days everytime you think you've found a good price, you click through to book and the price shoots up with taxes and fees. Just show us the actual price and don't waste my time telling me it's $200 when it's going to be $310 after you finish adjusting the rate.

der_saeufer

I think they should go a step further and simply add the fee to the displayed room rate on the results page. If the hotel charges a $200 room rate plus $25 resort fee, that hotel should be listed and sorted in the search results at $225 and the breakdown saved for the detail page.

I don't really care what the hotel calls the room rate vs. fees, I care what it'll cost me to sleep in that hotel room.

Taxes are a different story--the North American practice of adding the taxes later is annoying, but the taxes on any $200 hotel room in the City of Springfield should be the same so it's hard to call it dishonest.

COSPILOT

I've never understood why people get so worked up about this. I don't care if its called a toilet paper fee. I simply look at the total cost and make a choice.

der_saeufer

Because the whole point of the "resort fee" is to obscure the total cost.

I also don't care what the hotel calls it, only the total cost of the room. Charging a "resort fee" allows hotels to advertise a $200 room and then charge $225 for it. It's annoying as hell to fire up your favorite website and see six hotels for $200 only to find out that two of them are $200 but two are $220 and two are $230 thanks to mandatory fees that allegedly go to pay for things that should be included in the room rate.

No matter what you think about airline fees, it's possible to buy the ticket at the advertised price and pay no extra fees--even on Ryanair, if you travel light and don't mind a middle seat you can actually fly for that price. Reasonable minds can differ about the best way to run a business, but Mick isn't lying when he says you can fly to Berlin for €20. Hotel resort fees are dishonest by their very nature because it's not possible to stay in the hotel without paying the fee--if I can't use your service without paying the fee, you should include the fee in the advertised price.

timfountain

Talk about missing the whole point of the thread, which is that these fees are most often completely hidden when making an informed choice between a variety of accommodations in an area you need to find said accommodations. Not quite sure how you "simply look at the total cost" when those exact costs are hiden. Maybe I need to work on my internet x-ray foo more?

COSPILOT

I tend to stay in the same hotels, just as I tend to always fly on UA. I'm fully aware of what the total cost will be, but an extra click or two for hotels that I'm not familiar with simply doesn't bother me. It's fine that it bothers you, and it's fine that it doesn't bother me. Maybe because I book direct with the hotel chain and things are different? I cannot recall the last time I booked on something like Expedia, but I hate OTA's so I never use them as I'm not a fan of some middle man.

maniac78

I don't get why they don't make it even more blatant. Make the resort fee $200 and the standard room rate $1. Destroy the concept of price comparison sites entirely. Everyone changes their rates to $1 and the hidden resort fee is displayed on booking. At least we'd no longer have to see the creepy trivago guy again.