Marriott Hotels, Pre and Post Cruise.........

[gizmo]

Was this a long time ago, Gizmo?

 

 

It was 4 or 5 years ago. It was a good sized group that cruised every year. The people that kind of "run" the group were furious over the switch. To be honest, I wasn't happy about it myself. The TA was told why the switch was being made and she passed it on. She did argue with Hal, but it did no good.

 

I seriously doubt this group would ever vote for a Hal cruise again. I recall from some conversations with the TA, Pier 66 was the deal breaker. Hal wanted the business and threw in Pier 66 to beat out another line's offer.

 

IMO, this was not a good way to do business.

[cajunpepsi]

Ex smoker here, been quit for 15 years, I do appreciate the smoke free areas in the hotels, but I dont see the reasoning for all the rooms being smoke free.

 

I imagine the costs of maintaining smoking rooms are higher than the non-smoking ones, with drapes and all, it will be interesting to see how long this lasts, I would think Marriott researched the cost benefits/negatives before going ahead.

 

Our first cruise was aboard Carnival Paradise, (at the time a smoke free ship) and it was really nice in the Casino with no smoke.

[sail7seas]

I must admit that is has been several years since we took a Caribbean cruise with HAL since we live on the west coast and it is so much easier just to book a Panamerican cruise or a Mexican Riviera or Riviera/Sea of Cortez cruise, or even Hawaii and points westward (no flying involved). However, I do remember that on one occasion HAL put us up at some hotel in Hollywood, Florida. It honestly was not that bad. If you are only going to spend overnight before the cruise and don't want to do any sightseeing then it really is okay for the night.

 

Valerie

 

I agree, Valerie, in the scenario you give about it being an overnight and straght to the ship. It's merely a place to rest up from your cross country flight and to be ready to board the ship.

 

For others like us, who often spend 2-3 days in FLL both pre and post cruise, (we make it a way to extend our vacation and enjoy some more R & R) , but we do not like to rent a car, so taxi fares back and forth to FLL to dine in our favorite restaurants, to shop at Galleria, walk Los Olas etc.......all the things we like to do in FLL, would be out of the question. We much prefer to not rent cars when we travel. It isn't relaxing to either of us to drive in unfamiliar areas. We drive at home, of course, because we have to but we really don't like it.

 

I just think that if HAL offers a pre cruise hotel for FLL, the hotel should be in FLL....not Hollywood. I know they used Westin (and heard it was a nice hotel) and I think that chain is also totally non smoking. It think they may have been the first to go that way.

[Stevesan]

I seriously doubt that "smoke free" hotel rooms exist. Why would hotel guests be any more rule abiding than cruise passengers?

[kryos]

I wish Mariott every success in their endeavor but I, also, will not be visiting any Marriott Hotel anywhere in North America - heck, there are still lots of hotel/motel chains that have figured out a way to keep everybody happy.

Personally, I think the main reason they are doing it is cost. Plain and simple. Probably smoking rooms get more wear than non-smoking rooms ... i.e., require more intensive cleaning, possibly small burns on the furniture, etc. Mariott may save a few bucks with this new policy, but I think they are also going to lose more than they save with all the guests who will no longer stay at their properties. True, non-smokers outnumber smokers ... but remember, there are a lot of families, couples, etc. where one member is a smoker while the rest are not. Those entire families will now opt to book elsewhere.

 

By the way, I think the Westin chain also went non-smoking a while back. A friend of mine was attending a conference for work that was being held in a Westin and she was dreading it. Luckily she has a co-worker who is also a smoker and the company let the two of them get a room (the company required two per room) at a nearby "no name" property that allowed for smoking. Then they just walked over to the non-smoking hotel for their meetings and whatnot.

 

Guess we'll all have to start keeping a tally of which hotels allow smoking and which do not. I have a feeling, at least for the short term, that several chains are gonna go this route, especially if Mariott and Westin report no loss of revenue as a result of the policy.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[kryos]

I seriously doubt that "smoke free" hotel rooms exist. Why would hotel guests be any more rule abiding than cruise passengers?

Westin says that they will assess guests something like a $250 cleaning fee if they are found to have smoked in the room.

 

I think people would rather book somewhere else than risk being assessed that kind of money.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[kryos]

I'm frankly a little surprised at the number of smokers on this board. In the e-mail, Marriott explained that only 10% of their rooms in NA are smoking rooms, and their occupancy rate is around 50% compared to over 90% for non-smoking rooms.

Then they have some really stupid people in top management. If what they say is true ... that their occupancy rate for smoking rooms is significantly lower, then perhaps they are allotting too many rooms for smokers ... and should simply reduce the number.

 

As for the whole issue of smoking versus non-smoking rooms, this also goes to show that their management is inefficient. If their housekeeping staff was properly doing their job, there would not need to be special "non-smoking" rooms set aside in the hotel. All rooms should be either/or. Then when a guest checks out ... just like aboard a HAL ship ... a thorough cleaning/airing out of the room should have it smelling fresh for the new guest who is assigned that room. That new guest should not even know that a smoker stayed in that room before him. After all, HAL manages to do a thorough cleaning of all cabins within a very, very short timeframe on turnaround day. Why on earth can't hotels do the same with the probably much wider window they have to work with?

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[sail7seas]

We recently stayed at a Four Seasons Hotel. When my DH was booking, they asked if he wished smoking or non-smoking and before he could answer, they said.....Oh, we don't have any smoking rooms. We wanted non-smoking anyway so he didn't pursue the conversation but it sounded to me as though the hotel may 'quietly' be just about non-smoking but hasn't publicized it. They simply tell people, sorry..... we don't have any smoking rooms for the date you need.

 

I think it entirely possible many hotels are doing away with smoking rooms by this quiet method but perhaps for the rare case now and then will allow a guest to smoke in a room if they are heavily insistent (or influential. ;) )

[kryos]

We recently stayed at a Four Seasons Hotel. When my DH was booking, they asked if he wished smoking or non-smoking and before he could answer, they said.....Oh, we don't have any smoking rooms. We wanted non-smoking anyway so he didn't pursue the conversation but it sounded to me as though the hotel may 'quietly' be just about non-smoking but hasn't publicized it. They simply tell people, sorry..... we don't have any smoking rooms for the date you need.

They were probably out of non-smoking rooms just for your dates. I'd bet, though, if you are right and they are just trying to quietly "discourage" smoking by saying there are no rooms available ... betcha if the caller just said "oh, okay ... never mind, I'll book elsewhere," the hotel would come back and say, "wait ... we can do something for you."

 

I know that everytime I book a room, which admittedly is not that often, I specify that I want a smoking room. I make myself very clear on that and have thus far never been turned down for one. Then, a couple of days before my stay, I call the property back ... or email ... and remind them that I want a smoking room. Thus far, I've never been disappointed.

 

These two chains ... Westin and Marriott ... are just instituting a policy that they think is going to save them money. I'd be willing to bet that within six months they'll be reversing the policy, because they are going to find that they will lose more than they will save.

 

I certainly can understand it when hotels go non-smoking in the common areas. Heck, some states even require that by law. But, if someone chooses to smoke in the privacy of their hotel room ... a room they paid top dollar for ... that should be of no concern to the hotel ... and that's why these 100% "no smoking" properties really torque me.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[Scrumpy]

When we first got notification of this a week or two ago, I was very annoyed. I believe our notice said that 92% of their rooms, or perhaps their room requests, were for non-smoking rooms. DH stays at Marriott exclusively to the tune of probably 48 weeks a year. His projects are almost never local and he is a non-smoker. Now, I'm not sure what to do. Most of the points are given to relatives, but when I do travel I have enjoyed staying at Marriott properties (some more than others). We usually stay on the top floors and the idea of going down the elevator and all the way outside to smoke is too much. (I don't imagine me doing it in my robe in the morning or last thing at night would be too appealing to the staff or fellow guests either.) Some rooms have balconies, but many properties don't have that - and they probably wouldn't want folks smoking on their balconies anyway if they are touting all non-smoking properties. It has been about five years since we've travelled to a property that allowed smoking indoors in any area other than the guest rooms themselves. This will definitely impact our future travel plans and I'm very disappointed.

[newmexicoNita]

I just got an e-mail from Marriott (we're in their frequent guest program), stating that all of their U.S. hotels will be smoke free by mid October. All guests rooms, all dining areas, all bars, all employee work stations.......They will provide some smoking area outside for those who wish to smoke.

 

Anyone planning to stay in a Marriott who smokes may wish to reconsider and stay elsewhere.

If I understand correctly the outside smoking areas must be like 25 yards from the building or some such thing. I know, for many this is a long awaited change and will please guests; for me, who btw smokes about a pack a week, it isn't a very happy thought. Usually if I am going to smoke at a hotel I will go to the bar or the pool area. What now? Our hotel chain of choice isn't Marriott by the way. Our choice still allows smoking except in some of their Calif hotels. At least they allow it around the pool area. Again I don't mind the non smoking rooms, it's the entire hotel that is blowing my mind. NMNita

[newmexicoNita]

I received that e-mail too...

...and I for one am not unhappy about it.

We stayed at the Embassy Suites prior to my first cruise out of Ft Laud a couple years back. Nice enough rooms I guess but the stench of the perfume that housekeeping used to mask the cigarette smoke was just too much - had to open all the windows and doors all afternoon to air the place out enough to make it habitable. Of course, when we returned the following afternoon from our day in town, housekeeping had closed the place up and sprayed their nasty chemicals and we had to open the place up again...

...same story when we returned from the cruise and spent the night there again - Ugh. Of course we had requested Non-smoking rooms at the desk but this was all they had left both times, February being high-season for us cruisers.

Im sure that if land-based hotels took as great care w/ their properties as HAL does w/ their staterooms in preventing cigarette smoke from settling into the carpets, etc - we wouldn't have this issue!

We have never stayed at the Embassy suites in Ft Lauderdale but have many others and never smelled the perfume or the smoke as a matter of fact. Of course we have always been able to get a non smoking room. I guess the high season must have made a huge difference. NMNita

[michmike]

I think those who are opting to cross Marriott off their list of places to stay have exactly the right idea. The only thing they will understand is economic impact.

 

Not a smoker myself, but do feel that smokers are treated more like pariahs every year and I don't see a real ground swell from the rest of us demanding that, so where is it coming from?

 

We have a couple restaurants in our area that have a bone headed policy (for which I have yet to be offered a valid reason) that they won't split a check. It's a nuisance when you are out with another couple and each wants to pay their own way. So.... we simply don't go to those places any more. Not sure that the lack of our business will cause them to go bankrupt, but both hotels and restaurants are in what is euphemistically called the "service" industry.... so if you aren't getting service that meets your needs, there are plenty of other options.

[SDHALFAN]

Hi Nita,

 

Like you, I am not a heavy smoker: although I must admit to getting through probably two packs of cigarettes a week. I like a cigarette with my first cup of coffe in the morning, and then will at least have another one (or two) with a cocktail (or two) in the evening.

 

I live in Southern California and we have such an anti-smoking policy in effect here that we have been browbeaten into submission and are probably the most courteous smokers in the world. We have been set boundaries and know them all too well, and I must admit that I rarely, if ever, see anyone breaking the rules here.

 

michmike: Once again, I think I love you (see the cell phone thread) and I agree that the only way to make a point is to vote with your wallet.

 

I must admit that I don't usually patronize the Marriott chain anyway but rather go with one of their competitors (Lord, how many baubles have I paid for so that Paris and Nickie can party in style?) but Marriott is certainly off my list of possible choices - not because of their anti-smoking position per se but because they are practising discrimination, and that's just not right. I can only assume that they don't get much business here in North America from the Asian or Middle European countries where smoking is rampant, and is simply a fact of life - not that I think that's right but that's the way it is.

 

Valerie:)

[elmorejj]

To Valerie, and michmike, As always I love your posts, so sensible without being hostile. And no, Valerie, you can`t have him, he`s mine!!:cool:

[iceman93]

I think those who are opting to cross Marriott off their list of places to stay have exactly the right idea. The only thing they will understand is economic impact.

 

Indeed this is true, and I always encourage people to vote with their wallets.

 

In this case I think your cause is lost, however. Just in my office alone, five people who are Diamond VIPs with Hilton (the top tier in their loyalty program) have already switched all their business to Marriott simply because of this no-smoking policy that doesn't even go into effect for three more months. And as a selfish non-smoker, I'm happy to see smokers go elsewhere so that I don't have to deal with the results of "cheating" around the policy by smoking on balconies and whatnot.

 

To the poster who predicted Westin and Marriott would reverse course within six months, it's already BEEN six months for Westin and they're reporting higher occupancy rates than ever. Marriott's top brass are not idiots--they have studied this from all angles and wouldn't take such a drastic step without being sure of their decision. It will be interesting to see which domino falls next--Hilton or Hyatt--because whoever is left will become "the smoker's chain" which will completely alienate their non-smoking clientele.

[newmexicoNita]

Hi Nita,

 

Like you, I am not a heavy smoker: although I must admit to getting through probably two packs of cigarettes a week. I like a cigarette with my first cup of coffe in the morning, and then will at least have another one (or two) with a cocktail (or two) in the evening.

 

I live in Southern California and we have such an anti-smoking policy in effect here that we have been browbeaten into submission and are probably the most courteous smokers in the world. We have been set boundaries and know them all too well, and I must admit that I rarely, if ever, see anyone breaking the rules here.

 

michmike: Once again, I think I love you (see the cell phone thread) and I agree that the only way to make a point is to vote with your wallet.

 

I must admit that I don't usually patronize the Marriott chain anyway but rather go with one of their competitors (Lord, how many baubles have I paid for so that Paris and Nickie can party in style?) but Marriott is certainly off my list of possible choices - not because of their anti-smoking position per se but because they are practising discrimination, and that's just not right. I can only assume that they don't get much business here in North America from the Asian or Middle European countries where smoking is rampant, and is simply a fact of life - not that I think that's right but that's the way it is.

 

Valerie:)

VAlerie, very interesting: I was born in So Cal and we lived there for close to 50 years (well more like 45 I guess) All 3 kids born in the LA area, went to San Diego State when it was called just that and more than that, our hotel chain of choise also give Paris and Nicki thier partying money. NMNita

[SDHALFAN]

To Valerie, and michmike, As always I love your posts, so sensible without being hostile. And no, Valerie, you can`t have him, he`s mine!!:cool:

 

Oh Jean, in my case it must be that stiff upper lip British upbringing - always be polite, no matter what!;) :D

 

As for michmike - well, I would offer to fight you for him but I have a feeling that he probably already happily "taken", and besides which he's probably too young for either of us anyway (pout).

 

Valerie:D

[SDHALFAN]

VAlerie, very interesting: I was born in So Cal and we lived there for close to 50 years (well more like 45 I guess) All 3 kids born in the LA area, went to San Diego State when it was called just that and more than that, our hotel chain of choise also give Paris and Nicki thier partying money. NMNita

 

Hi again Nita,

 

San Diego State huh? Well, it's still San Diego State and recognised as one of the best Universities in the state, if not the best. However it has given up it's (somewhat dubious) title of "The Party School" To UCSD, although I understand that UCSB is a very close second. Now they are a somewhat staid bunch but at least they have a good education under their belts when they graduate.

 

Valerie:)

 

Valerie

[michmike]

I am SO flattered.. *laffin* Had to show your posts to my wife so that she'd understand the need to treat me better, given the offers I have on the table..

 

Isn't it wonderful when gmta??

 

A young hearted 58 here, but prone to act like an adolescent more often than I should, esp when in my cruisin buddy's presence.. our wives claim that they only come along to provide adult supervision..

 

I COULD provide my address so that you could send cookies my way in order to entice me to lean in your direction (so much more civilized than a cat fight, doncha think?)

 

Always enjoy your posts.. after 4 yrs in the military and 25 yrs working for state govt one does hunger for a common sense approach to things, which you ladies invariably offer..

 

to coin a phrase, I think I'm in love.. *S* Mike

[SomeBeach]

Don't forget that Marriot also owns Renaissance Hotels, Fairfield, Residence Inn, Spring Hill Suites, and some other names I can't recall. These are also included.

Marriot is not doing this across the pond with their properities but will not stop any one that wishes to do so.

[sail7seas]

I can vouch that Michmike is just as great in person as is his 'traveling buddy' and their wives. We had the pleasure to cruise with them on Volendam in January and I always enjoyed a chat and laugh whenever we ran into them.

 

[SDHALFAN]

I can vouch that Michmike is just as great in person as is his 'traveling buddy' and their wives. We had the pleasure to cruise with them on Volendam in January and I always enjoyed a chat and laugh whenever we ran into them.

 

 

He's also quite the sweet talker. Now, let's see what I have in my recipe files in the way of cookie recipes.

 

Valerie:D

[elmorejj]

Valerie, lets send him some good Scottish shortbread, that should win anyone over!!........jean:cool:

[newmexicoNita]

Hi again Nita,

 

San Diego State huh? Well, it's still San Diego State and recognised as one of the best Universities in the state, if not the best. However it has given up it's (somewhat dubious) title of "The Party School" To UCSD, although I understand that UCSB is a very close second. Now they are a somewhat staid bunch but at least they have a good education under their belts when they graduate.

 

Valerie:)

 

Valerie

I guess I should have clarified this: it was SDScollege then. Our youngest daughter went there in the early 80s; party school then, just ask her how long she lasted and what she learned. We won't even go there. Football is our thing and we always hope for the best: living here in NM, with Uiversity of NM in the same league plus our granddaughter graduated from Colo State a year ago we are always defending SDSU.

 

As for getting a good education, well, there is more than just academics involved in an education. LOL

 

Nita