What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Resort Fees - how are these still legal? (1 Viewer)

At what point does one of the big hotel chains use this to their advantage? You know how Domino's constantly runs these ads like "Here at Domino's, we're apologizing for something, we can't even remember why anymore. Here, have 14 medium pizzas for $1.25..."? Why can't Hilton or someone launch a campaign where they say :"We acknowledge that resort fees are a BS money grab used to artificially deflate room rates, so we're swearing them off forever. What you see is what you get on price... " etc. I know I'd be looking at their hotels first anywhere I was going.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's a free market. Take your business elsewhere
Except in Vegas, you can't. They all do it.
I rented a room in Vegas recently. I think I used Google to pick it out. (If you Google for "las vegas hotels" you get a list of hotels with prices and a map.) I booked it through booking.com.

The listing was very clear that "The price you pay is the price listed, not a penny more. No hidden fees." Or something to that effect. I thought it was weird. Isn't that always the case?

I guess it's not weird. Based on the info in this thread, I guess some listings are misleading.

Anyway, the place I stayed at charged me exactly what it said it would, plus tax. So such places do exist, even in Vegas. (It was the Holiday Motel for $50. It was a total dump. When I got there, the bed wasn't made. And the mattress was covered in plastic. I don't think it had air-conditioning, although that didn't matter in January. The wi-fi and everything else was free, though.)

 
Really, wouldn't it be better for the consumer if the price you were given for an item or service were "all in"? I don't get you guys that are taking a hard-line stance on the other side. Sure it happens all the time, but should it?
Better for the average consumer? yes. Better for the savvy consumer who is willing to take the time to research what the real price is and what you are getting for that price and shop around? I don't think so.
So you think that being smart enough and having to dig around for the additional charges allows you to better compare prices than if you know up front you will be paying X? I really have a hard time wrapping my head around that.
Let me explain why I think so. It has to do with the fact that Hotel room prices fluctuate based on supply and demand already.

Take this example. You and your wife are traveling to Vegas and you know you will both be using the internet on your own devices.

Three very comparable Hotels with comparable rooms:

Hotel A: $50/per night for the room + $20 resort fee, including unlimited internet

Hotel B: $45/per night for the room + $35 resort fee, including unlimited internet

Hotel C: $40/per night for the room + $25 resort fee but this only includes internet for one device, the second device is an additional $12 (this is the case for some Vegas Hotels)

All else being equal, Hotel A is clearly the best deal, however most people will book one of the other two thinking they are getting a better deal which in turn causes Hotel A to lower their room price even more to fill their empty rooms. The more people who make the wrong decision, the better it is for the savvy consumer over the long run because of supply and demand.
:lmao: That is some convoluted reasoning. The more likely outcome will be that Hotel A will find a way to better deceive the customer into picking them. If you want to drive down prices, you need full and honest disclosure.
It's not convoluted at all. What you are doing is taking advantage of market inefficiencies. The more transparent the pricing is, the more efficient the market is and they will all end up charging the same price for the same service. Inefficient markets favor the more informed consumer.
I don't think this is true. In an efficient, competitive market, the price will equal the cost of providing the room. Consumers can't really have it any better than that. An efficient market is ideal for the consumer.

A departure from efficiency is generally going to mean higher prices, not lower prices. If Hotels B and C are charging deceptively high prices, that's not going to cause Hotel A to reduce its prices below its own costs. If anything, it will allow Hotel A to raise its prices a bit while still winning over the more informed consumers (since it will still be cheaper than Hotels B or C).

 
I think Spirit Airlines charges extra for carry-on luggage or checked luggage, etc. But, you can show up for a flight with no luggage and avoid those fees. Basically they are charging you for something that most people need, and they justify it by offering a very low ticket price. You cannot book a hotel room and decline the "resort fee" though, even if you have no need/interest in using the amenities that it provides. That seems like a key difference.
I've flown Spirit a few times. The charges are always very clear. They're not in fine print; they're in extra large, brightly-colored print. Checking a bag, or carrying on a bag (beside your one personal item) costs money, and they cost more money if you don't pay until you get to the airport.

This is an example of where you may not like the fees (although it's still cheaper than Southwest), but it's possible to avoid them by not having luggage, and it's almost impossible not to be aware of them. (They do seem to catch some people off guard, but having gone through the booking process with them myself, I'm not sure how.)

 
Yeah, it makes sense on planes, as it's all about weight and they could be using that weight to move freight. Spirit does it and has for years. They also are good about making sure you know it before booking.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top