Are Westins usually viewed as nicer than Sheratons?
Are Westins usually viewed as nicer than Sheratons?
Personally speaking, yes.
Officially? It depends on property to property in each city. Starwood category is similar to that of the Marriott, and although fairly consistent, there are the occasional "are you kidding" categories ratings out there. (Westin Excelsior in Rome is one)
In terms of brand existence, Sheraton as a brand is much older, and aside from renovations, they aren't doing anything to expand their presence. Westin on the other hand, is newer, still expanding and often considered the 'heir apparent' in the Starwood portfolio.
I'd put many newer Westin's on par with Ritz Carlton's.Edited: 28 November 2013, 04:20
Thanks. In particular, I am thinking about these Westins:
- Westin Birmingham, Alabama
- Westin St. Louis
- Westin Huntsville
Any opinions on these three properties in specific? Are these considered nicer, similar to Ritz Carlton type of Westins?
Of the three, I've only seen - emphasize 'seen' as I didn't stay, just a business meet - Westin St Louis, and it's not what I would call a standout. Definitely not in the 'Ritz Carlton' styled mould, more similar to the 80's style Sheraton, use of light colored wood rather than many of the more European feel properties.
I can't comment on the other two at all.
Maybe Bk or Geo can comment, as they are much more frequent around the US than I.
This is true in Boston, though the Sheraton isn't bad. The two Westins in town are just a tiny bit nicer, in my opinion. If I had to pick between Westin and Sheraton, I'd look at price and location to help determine which to choose. Not like comparing Westin to Courtyard or Four Points or whatever. Sheraton is okay, still quite nice. In Boston they host tons of conferences and have a great location. Relatives have stayed there and liked it.Edited: 29 November 2013, 19:45
Has anyone seen or stayed at the Hyatt Regency St. Louis at the Arch or Ritz Carlton St. Louis?
Yes, I've actually done a Site Inspection of both the The Arch and Ritz Carlon in St Louis.
The Ritz Carlton a nice but an unusul property.
The public areas of that hotel is really really nice, and very typical of what you expect with a Ritz Carlton. Very plush European styled decor, and wonderful ambience. The rooms is where the consistency is a little hit and miss. The decor looks completely different from their public areas, in that it all of a sudden goes from the warm dark wood, to creams and soft pastel colors. A few of the rooms looked more suited to a private beachside mansion, rather than a city luxury hotel. But that's just my impression. The service was friendly but professional, and I'd say its of decent quality except for the unusual color selection and room furnishings.
The Hyatt Regency at The Arch is very ordinary. It instantly reminded me of some refurbished oversized leftover from the 90's. The service and outlets were absolutely fine, but I saw it as nothing more than like an 'accommodation factory'. Nothing wrong with the hotel, but at the same time saw nothing to make me feel great about it - if that makes sense.
If I had to choose a hotel from the three you've mentioned in St. Louis, I'd definitely choose the Ritz Carlton. But if you were wishing for a more modern feel in a large scale hotel, I'd suggest you look at the Four Seasons.
For hotel reviews, you can check on Tripadvisor's hotel section. Just type in the name of the hotel into the search box at the very top of the page. Once you get to the TA's page for that particular hotel, there are user reviews you can read.
Since you seem to have expertise in St. Louis hotels, have you stayed or visited the Renaissance St. Louis Grand, Renaissance St. Louis Airport, Embassy Suites Downtown, Hilton St. Louis at Ballpark, or Hilton Frontenac? If so, how will these newly mentioned hotels stack up with the Westin, Ritz Carlton, and Hyatt Regency? What are your first and second favorite choices?Edited: 01 December 2013, 05:04
Unfortunately, I don't have expertise in St Louis. I conducted a one week strategy assessments of hotels in similar market set - on behalf of another hotel group.
I've had experience in the previously mentioned hotels (Ritz Carlton, Four Seasons, The Westin, Hyatt Regency) and visited Renaissance St Louis Grand on a famil.
My impression was that it compares very favorably, it's a fusion of east meets west. Mixture of dark warmth and contemporary but regal colors - blue, black and white. The public areas are stunning, and more like an oversized mansion rather than a hotel. The rooms were reasonably well appointed, not modern but comfortable, and overall felt the Renaissance was punching above its weight. The staff were outstanding. Whereas the Hyatt Regency was well below its weight, and well below my expectations.
These are general impressions I reported to my principal, as the rest were technical specifications and assessment of other facilities such as function room size, configuration, front desk, reservations and operator performance, staff to guest ratio etc. - things that aren't disclosed in publically posted reviews.
My first and second choices? Ritz Carlton, then Four Seasons.
But just a word of caution, how I see hotels may not be to your personal tastes, and whilst I can give you as much feedback as you wish, it still may not be what you're after.Edited: 01 December 2013, 06:01
SpaceTravel447: As stated, it's very hard to compare the broad range of properties you've listed. In addition to renovations over the years, I'll share that the 2 Ren's were built under the old Concourse hotels brand, so they are not true Ren's. For St. Louis, I've stayed at both Ren's and the Hilton Ballpark. For downtown, my preference would be based on location, since the Ren is located several blocks from the Hilton - opposite sides of downtown. At the airport, the Ren there is also set out a little further. My preferred property at STL is the Marriott, located very close to the airport.