wouldnt you be paying the same resort fee even if not using points and paying for room?txags92 said:
It is mostly a way for the hotels that get a high proportion of guests using points to screw those guests over. Sure, you got 7 free nights with your points...but we are going to hit you with a $150/ night resort fee. It would be the same as the airlines hitting every fare (including points fares) with a fuel surcharge that was half the price of the original ticket.
because you are being told its a "Free" room when in fact you pay $150.62strat said:wouldnt you be paying the same resort fee even if not using points and paying for room?txags92 said:
It is mostly a way for the hotels that get a high proportion of guests using points to screw those guests over. Sure, you got 7 free nights with your points...but we are going to hit you with a $150/ night resort fee. It would be the same as the airlines hitting every fare (including points fares) with a fuel surcharge that was half the price of the original ticket.
So how is that screwing you over?
Is it really hard to understand that 'fees may apply'? Just like when redeeming flight points. At least not all hotels have resort fees. Some are 100% free when using points.BMX Bandit said:because you are being told its a "Free" room when in fact you pay $150.62strat said:wouldnt you be paying the same resort fee even if not using points and paying for room?txags92 said:
It is mostly a way for the hotels that get a high proportion of guests using points to screw those guests over. Sure, you got 7 free nights with your points...but we are going to hit you with a $150/ night resort fee. It would be the same as the airlines hitting every fare (including points fares) with a fuel surcharge that was half the price of the original ticket.
So how is that screwing you over?
Did you really not understand that?
how many have a $150 resort fee per night? That seems overly excessive to help your argument.txags92 said:
When you spend a bunch of money to "earn" enough points to exchange them for "free nights", it is a bit of a buzzkill to then find out you are still going to have to pay a $150 "resort fee" for each "free night". So maybe screwed over is a bit strong, but bait and switch probably isn't...
you can also call them and say you don't want to pay it. Apparently people have had luck doing this. Try doing that with the cost of the room though.txags92 said:
My point, regardless of whether it is $35 or $150/ night, is that if it is a fee that applies to every reservation, then why not include it in the room rate? And the answer to that question is because then you wouldn't get to charge people paying with points. The reason the resort fee is separate from the room rate is so that they can squeeze more money out of people booking with points.
http://killresortfees.com/vegasJMac03 said:
From what I understand, it is currently in the works to have the resort fees eliminated or done in another manner. Not sure if it is state by state, but so many people have complained I think it is in the courts now. I cannot remember if one state recently has done away with them, but I remember seeing something about it in the past few months.
The big ones are Vegas - there are times of the year you can book a hotel room for under $30-$50 a night, and then get popped with a $45/night resort fee. I had clients who with flights and hotel booked for like $450 for 4 nights - their resort fees were half of what it cost them for the overnight trip. It is crazy (I seriously think their room was $20-$25 a night - it was off season, and it was Harrah's or something like that). Their resort fee was double their room cost.
All of those are great reasons for the resort to cost more per night than a typical hotel. None of them are great reasons to need to add a separate fee on top of the per night room rate. If every guest has to pay the fee for every night they stay at the hotel regardless of how much or little they partake in the features of the resort, then the "fee" should be included in the room rate. The only reasons not to are 1) so you can force people who have earned "free" nights through their loyalty to your hotel chain to pay something for each night they stay or 2) to be able to charge the guest more without having to give away 10-30% to local occupancy taxes. It is an obnoxious practice and should not be legal imo. It is the equivalent of selling people an airline ticket and then charging a "pilot fee". Yes, every plane needs a pilot and yes every passenger will pay to have a pilot on board, so there is no reason to make it a separate fee. It is also all about making the resort look cheap to online searches based on nightly rates, when it is not. It is deceptive and shouldn't be allowed.putu said:
it has nothing to do with taxes. in fact, you will pay occupancy tax on your resort fee.
for the most part, these fees are charged due to the high overhead that resorts have. it takes a lot more staff to run a resort than a traditional hotel. you have additional positions, such as landscapers, pool attendants, etc that are in non-revenue generating roles. for the most part, resorts do try to give you a little value add for these fees, such as wifi, bottled water, sometimes parking. varies by resort.
This is utter BS. You must work for one of these resorts.putu said:
it has nothing to do with taxes. in fact, you will pay occupancy tax on your resort fee.
for the most part, these fees are charged due to the high overhead that resorts have. it takes a lot more staff to run a resort than a traditional hotel. you have additional positions, such as landscapers, pool attendants, etc that are in non-revenue generating roles. for the most part, resorts do try to give you a little value add for these fees, such as wifi, bottled water, sometimes parking. varies by resort.
remember, resorts (and Vegas hotels) will offer deals to get you into the hotel knowing you will spend money in other places. dont assume that since you got a killer deal on a room that everything should be deep discounted as well.
A big part of why they are so prevalent now is third party booking sites. Expedia only gets a cut on the advertised room rate, not the resort fee.putu said:
Occupancy tax has little to do with stadiums. most cities have those funds only go toward tourism marketing and sales teams (convention/visitors bureaus), which are vital to attracting additional business to a destination and benefits the entire community.
I think a lot of industries as trying to find ways to grow, and sometimes even just maintain, profits. Resort fees have been around for a long time and arent really hidden from the consumer. Now, we are seeing more urban hotels and non-resorts charging them.
It's no different than ticketmaster is today. 'Look, so and so is only $50 for good seats!'txags92 said:It is the equivalent of selling people an airline ticket and then charging a "pilot fee". Yes, every plane needs a pilot and yes every passenger will pay to have a pilot on board, so there is no reason to make it a separate fee.putu said:
it has nothing to do with taxes. in fact, you will pay occupancy tax on your resort fee.
for the most part, these fees are charged due to the high overhead that resorts have. it takes a lot more staff to run a resort than a traditional hotel. you have additional positions, such as landscapers, pool attendants, etc that are in non-revenue generating roles. for the most part, resorts do try to give you a little value add for these fees, such as wifi, bottled water, sometimes parking. varies by resort.