I am very confused….
In 2006 I start a correspondence catering course ‘Management & Marketing’ with a catering school (I was a student there before) in France. Anyway in June 2008 was the big exam, and I needed to present something catering related. I chose to present ‘the star rating system in England’.
I mention all rules, which you need for different accommodations; 1 star, 2, 5 or B&B’s, guest accommodation etc…. I also read visit Britain, books etc…where it mention that the all accommodations not consider as hotel’s would have to ‘loose’ the word ‘hotel’ in their name & front door, so why is that, we have so many accommodations not respecting the ‘rules’?
Isn’t someone supposed to inspect all this places and give them their correct name and rating?
And yesterday I was browsing trip advisor and came across a nice hotel, in the region (that I didn’t know about) went to check their website and their rating is ‘2 star small hotel’ is there such a thing?
In my opinion is far too many names and different types of accommodation…
Juliana
Today, i saw it again....a B&B, call Hotel....
You are so right to be confused. Let me add to it. To get a rating so that I can be listed in guide books etc., I have to be rated - 3 star. Becasue I do not have a lift, I can not be 4 or 5. Yet I pay for 5 star comfort for my guest. Then today I was networking, met a B&B who is going around promoting the fact that he is 5 star. Bah.
Anthony Lloyd
Fallowfields Hotel and Restaurant, Oxfordshire
www.fallowfields.com
Hi Juliana,
Yes, I agree the rating systems in the UK is confusing and, I think, misleading too.
The very word 'rating' leads one to believe that it is a measure of quality but often I have experienced that 4 star can give you a lot more than you bargained for: Yes, you get the generic pool, but then, add a touch of mildew in the bathroom, some thread bare carpets, lingering aroma of fags left by the previous guest and top it all off with a view of overflowing Grundy bins and hey presto! You get lots for your 4 stars.
I do not go on star rating – I am happy to forgo the lift, pool, gym and room service and pay more for basic, clean rooms in a good state of repair.
Does anyone else share this experience? Or is it just me?
Well I’m not the owner of the hotel, were I work, but it does really, bother me all this ‘favouritism’ to places, that they don’t even put the same effort in their business, and they get some ratings that I’ve never heard about…it seems to me that all of it is in some cases so unfair!!
I work for the hotel, like if was my own…. things like that does get me down, makes me think what’s the point of working hard?
Between the student accommodation that is still call an Hotel, and even taken bookings for guests as well as students living there, and the hotel next door a 2 star hotel, that closed for refurbishment (wasn’t finished) and they open again with a 3 star sigh…. I mean, how? When walking by you can still see the light fittings but no light? The painting and decorating not finished…
It’s all so wrong…..
I completely agree, I would rather have a clean room with clean bathroom and forego the added facilities. I have stayed in a 4* hotel before where the rooms were very very basic, the only reason it was 4* probably was because it have a massage parlour, pool and sauna.
------------
Office Drinks supplies
A massage parlour eh1?...well you always have to pay for extras in those places ! ha ha ;-)
Haha! Hmmmm or did I mean to say Spa?!
Well, I'll give you the benifit of the doubt. But I rest my case: No one really knows what we are gonna get for our 4stars!!
Silentcustomer: : No one really knows what we are gonna get for our 4stars!!
: No one really knows what we are gonna get for our 4stars!!
I think we all agreed, when it comes to hospitality accommodations, NO ONE REALLY KNOWS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO GET full stop.
Not with the system we have now, reading people responses I wonder if even, the owners, don’t really know in which category they should be, or what it really means well, how’s the customers going to know?
I raised this subject at a debate last week among some top hoteliers. Most were very respectful of the star ratings awarded by the AA and, of course, Michelin but these were holders of the highest ratings so we did not get onto the confusion caused by "hotel" and non-hotel classifications. My argument was that brands have started to replace stars as a good way to inform customers what to expect. For example, Best Western, Hotel du Vin, Relais & Chateaux, Pride of Britain, Hand Picked, Travelodge etc etc. Each of these names gives a strong clue as to what sort of experience you will have, irrespective of the star rating.
In my opinion it is wrong for a fully fledged hotel to have to meet harder criteria than B&Bs to achieve the same number of stars.
I am with Peter on this, brands and soft brands (consortia etc) are increasingly important. There is a lot of talk about the validity of paid for guides such as Johansens & Signpost for example, and paid for marketing consortia such as PoB, R&C. SLH etc. However, these appeal to certain markets who know what they like and believe that the organisation provides that. If the marketing organisation does not control its brand properly, which arguably happened to Johansens a few years ago then it loses popularity and commercial reality will make it less significant as people stop trusting it and hotels stop entering it. In the mistaken rush to commoditise hotels, that the industry fell into post 9/11, and sectors seem determined to repeat now (in essence to make them easier to sell on the internet) we have lost track of the ethos, atmosphere, style, passion and all the other fluffy terms that try to express the inexpressible delight of entering a hotel, at whatever level, that does what it does well. This atmosphere is almost impossible to measure (though the AA make a good effort with Red Stars) but is readily experienced and for this reason star rating systems will only ever be a starting point. And remember the best hotels break the rules or some may say re-define the rules. I remember Bob Peyton starting Stapleford Park with his porters in polo shirts in the summer and rugby shirts in the winter, selling burgers and door stop sandwiches. The hotel was undoubtedly at the top end of the market but the AA and RAC had trouble classifying it and wanted to change it to the way they thought a 4/5 start hotel should be run. Bob stuck to his guns This casual luxury style is now common but it wasn't before the brash American lawyer/restaurateur showed the way. Remember Sassacia was only a Vin de Table because the winemaker behind this superb wine did not want to play by the rules. The marketing consortia and guide books referred to at the start capture and express some of the above and with social media the hotels should be doing more of that themselves now. Whilst I agree that it is wrong for a fully fledged hotel to have to meet harder criteria than B&Bs to achieve the same number of stars. I am afraid that it is not worth worrying about and hotels should get out there and in the immortal words of Madonna .... 'Express Yourself' !?!?!?
I am with Peter on this, brands and soft brands (consortia etc) are increasingly important. There is a lot of talk about the validity of paid for guides such as Johansens & Signpost for example, and paid for marketing consortia such as PoB, R&C. SLH etc. However, these appeal to certain markets who know what they like and believe that the organisation provides that.
If the marketing organisation does not control its brand properly, which arguably happened to Johansens a few years ago then it loses popularity and commercial reality will make it less significant as people stop trusting it and hotels stop entering it.
In the mistaken rush to commoditise hotels, that the industry fell into post 9/11, and sectors seem determined to repeat now (in essence to make them easier to sell on the internet) we have lost track of the ethos, atmosphere, style, passion and all the other fluffy terms that try to express the inexpressible delight of entering a hotel, at whatever level, that does what it does well. This atmosphere is almost impossible to measure (though the AA make a good effort with Red Stars) but is readily experienced and for this reason star rating systems will only ever be a starting point. And remember the best hotels break the rules or some may say re-define the rules.
I remember Bob Peyton starting Stapleford Park with his porters in polo shirts in the summer and rugby shirts in the winter, selling burgers and door stop sandwiches. The hotel was undoubtedly at the top end of the market but the AA and RAC had trouble classifying it and wanted to change it to the way they thought a 4/5 start hotel should be run. Bob stuck to his guns This casual luxury style is now common but it wasn't before the brash American lawyer/restaurateur showed the way. Remember Sassacia was only a Vin de Table because the winemaker behind this superb wine did not want to play by the rules.
The marketing consortia and guide books referred to at the start capture and express some of the above and with social media the hotels should be doing more of that themselves now.
Whilst I agree that it is wrong for a fully fledged hotel to have to meet harder criteria than B&Bs to achieve the same number of stars. I am afraid that it is not worth worrying about and hotels should get out there and in the immortal words of Madonna .... 'Express Yourself' !?!?!?