Agree, agree, agree. Total waste of money. But oh, a nice big airy clean spiffy room and a huge comfortable bed with huger big fluffy down duvets over zillion-thread count crispy cotton sheets and big fluffy down pillows - nice if you can afford it or put it on the expense report.
I’ll admit that I’m suspicious of hotels that cost under $100/night. I want clean and comfortable, of course. And I want cotton sheets, not some cheap polyester blend. Beyond that, I’m pretty easy to please.
For personal travel, if it’s just the two of us or our immediate family, I prefer staying in privately rented condos/studios or timeshares vs. staying in a hotel. I own a Westin timeshare and really love their resorts. Our favorites are the Westin St. John and Westin Ka’anapali (in Maui). I love that they blend the conveniences of a condo (including separate bedrooms and tv’s, kitchen, washer/dryer, grills) with the amenities of a hotel, such as a great pool, hot tub, tennis court, and poolside service. That, IMO, is the epitome of my type of vacation. And they usually run less per night than neighboring hotels (~$250/night per bedroom).
With a group of people, it’s hard to beat renting homes via VRBO. A year ago, we rented a 5 bdrm house in St. Maarten that was fantastic. Travertine tile everywhere, gourmet kitchen, 180 degree views of the Caribbean, en-suite bathrooms for everyone, private pool, elevator…All for ~$7000/week. (We paid for it because we were celebrating our 25th anniversary, but had we split it, it would have been $200/night per couple. Less than the cost of a moderate hotel.
I’ve stayed in fleapits, including one where I actually slept in my clothes with a gun and jammed a chair under the door. These were military contract quarters that more often than not also smelled of vomit and stale beer.
I also spend two weeks in a Ritz Carlton. Did you know ritzy hotels have a private floor where the real haut ton stay? I didn’t. I didn’t make it to the private floor, I got to stay in the regular rooms. Since I was in military uniform at the time, people struck up conversations with me, and it was an interesting stay.
I discovered overtime, I’m not a Ritz girl, and I’m not a fleapit girl. I like a nice Sheraton if I can find one.
Is <$100 really that bad? Granted if you are in a really large city there could be something wrong with it at that price (I wouldn’t stay in one that cheap in Chicago, NYC, etc), but outside of the largest cities I’ve been in reasonable hotel rooms that were $30-50 a night. Looking at some nearby cities with 20-50k people, it is hard to find a hotel room for over $100 (most are $40-70).
My preferred hobbit-hole will have a walk-in pantry, fireplace, hot tub, ice machine, wi-fi, in-room movie selection, exercise equipment, a fan in the bathroom, and 24 hour room service thank you very much!
I hate not getting any sleep when I’m on vacation. For this reason, I like thick walls, quiet air conditioners, and firm beds with cotton sheets. Unfortunately only costlier hotels come with these amenities. I’d be perfectly happy to do without all the other fancy items like stocked mini fridges, mints on the pillows, etc., but I do want to be able to get some sleep. And that’s worth a bit of extra money to me.
Most of our travel is to amusement parks and while we usually go cheapest local, there are times when we splurge. When the CoasterCon was at Cedar Point we went for the Breakers. Because we were with the convention we got 50% off the room rate (and it was still double other options a couple miles away) and there were activities planned as early as 8am and as late as midnight. Having the room right there allowed us to go crash out after a short walk when the lines got bad or the weather rough.
I don’t think I’ve ever stayed at a place that was more than $200 a night. So I can’t answer the question since I don’t know what I’m missing.
I’m currently staying in a £65 per night hotel in London. It’s a single room, definitely small, but has free wifi, sky tv, and an in room kettle for coffee and tea. In Manchester, I paid £50 for a premier inn in the city centre. It was a spacious double room, with free, although slow, wifi, free tv, and in room kettle.
I like to try to control hotel room costs, and these were both advance booked, paid in advance rooms. I found trip advisor to be quite helpful in doing research.
One of the things people get out of expensive hotels is they don’t have to deal with the riff raff that stays in the cheaper hotels. You aren’t likely to have kids running down the hallways, you can’t hear the drunk couple fighting, you’re not likely to overhear racist or homophobic remarks. People like that don’t tend to see value in higher priced rooms.
I do like staying in expensive hotels, except for the fact they are expensive. So baring an unexpected windfall I tend to stay in the 200-300 price range if I plan to spend time in the hotel. I’ll go cheaper if my room time will be limited to sleeping.
“What good is an expensive [hotel room | car | guitar | work of art | TV | computer | house | airplane seat | dinner]? To me, all a $1 is for is [a place to sleep | basic transportation | thing to look at | shows to watch | to play video games | a place to sleep | a place to sit | something to eat].”
You can make this statement about anything that you can buy. Some people like to spend money for comfort or luxury, some people have simple needs.
When we travel on vacation, I like a basic, clean, comfortable hotel room with space, as a place to park at night. I am going to spend 70% of my hotel room time with my eyes closed. My wife sees the hotel as part of the destination and likes to feel pampered.
I wish there were a way to search for hotels purely on cleanliness and bed quality. I don’t give a damn about the business center, concierge, mints on pillows, or even room service/breakfast availability as long as there is somewhere nearby to get a meal. I generally don’t care about a huge room, either; I’m generally in town to see the sights or attend some event and don’t plan on spending a ton of time in the room. But I am at a point in my life where I do want a comfy bed, and I want quiet. Give me half the space, but a nice cushy mattress and decent sheets, and I’m a happy camper. A mini-fridge with somewhere to store my won refreshments instead of buying overpriced minibar crap is bonus if I’m staying more than a day or two.
On a business trip, my company put me up at a fancy “business suite” hotel room.
I offered to stay at a Motel 6, and split the cash difference with the company, but the guy handling expenses said no.
I got absolutely zero joy out of that room beyond what I would have gotten from a much cheaper place. A bed, a toilet, a shower…what the hell else do you need?
Yeah but at the cheap hotels you have to deal with you classist snobs
??? Thanks for the insult, but… Context?
You don’t like what he likes.
To be clear, I’m not traipsing through the heart land when I travel. I usually travel to big cities and/or tourist destinations (National parks, Sedona, Hilton Head, Caribbean islands). Even the non-tourist destinations that I’ve visited (for funerals or college visits) usually have a Holiday Inn Express, and that’s normally over $100/night.
Unless it was the ONLY option, I’d never book a place that cost $50/night and most certainly not $30/night. I just don’t believe that there’s enough profit margin to keep it up to my moderately low standards.
If it was available, I’d rather pitch a tent and camp. I love camping and I know my sheets are clean.
I’ve always wanted to stay a week at Jeffrey’s Auto Supply and Fantastic Guesthouse in St Martin. It is a hotel located above a large auto parts store. It is very cheap, and includes breakfast (donuts and coffee in the auto parts store). Right next store is Skanki Bar (The family’s last name is Skanki).
Is it possible that a company has this policy because they don’t want you (and ultimately them) to deal with the snafus that often happen when individuals pick their own cheaper accomodations?
There’s also safety matters to consider. It is in your employer’s best interest to have you stay at the fanciest “name brand” hotel, where security is top-notch and they don’t have to worry about you rooming next to someone who’ll steal your laptop when you step out for ice.
IMHO, it makes good HR sense that an employer wouldn’t allow employees to make their own accomodations and “split the difference”. There are always going to be employees who don’t mind camping out in a crack alley somewhere just to save a few bucks. And those employees aren’t likely to be the ones who care a lot about their personal safety or maintaining a certain professional look (the kind that requires sleeping with hair rollers, let’s say). The latter shouldn’t have to worry about being perceived as “too costly” to the company just because they have some personal standards.
Sure…but how does that make me a classist snob? If you don’t like anchovies on your pizza, does that make you a classist snob?
I didn’t get any actual utility out of my stay in a top-end business-suite hotel. (monstro has a valid point about security, but, really, the security in a Motel 6 is not going to be very much worse.)
To me, the whole idea of having two rooms – a living room and a bedroom – was a total waste of resources. It might be different if I were having people over for sales talks or other negotiations, but I wasn’t.
It isn’t “classist” to want resources to be appropriate to needs. City taxicabs shouldn’t be Rolls Royces or BMWs. I still don’t get why I was singled out for an insult.