Reserving hotel rooms: what we're waiting for
 |
A lot of people are wondering when they can start reserving hotel rooms. Here is why we have not opened hotel registrations yet. A problem that has plaqued Anthrocon since the very beginning was hotel room attrition. Because our hotels tend to fill up very early, people rush to reserve rooms even if they are not sure that they will be attending the convention. Inevitably, the day before the convention, there is an avalanche of cancellations. The problem is getting worse every year. Last year we lost 100 rooms on the last day -- 100 rooms that other people would have loved to have stayed in, but had been told for months, "Sorry, the hotel is full." It is understandable that our attendees want to be certain that they won't be caught without a room, but the sheer number of people who reserve rooms on the mere off-chance that they might consider the possibility of maybe attending Anthrocon, or perhaps not, is forcing us to look for ways to cut down on the amount of last-minute attrition. I have tried pleading with people to cancel their rooms early as soon as they knew that they were not going to make it, but that has not worked. Our hotels, of course, are unhappy with such enormous attrition. The Omni was the first to request that it be allowed to charge a one-night deposit at the time the room is reserved; the Westin would like to do the same. Here is what they propose: when a reservation is made, a deposit of one night's fee would be required (room rate plus tax). This would be credited toward your stay as soon as you check in, so at convention time, if you stay for 4 nights, you would only pay for 3, since one was already paid for when you reserved. The catch is that the deposit would be non-refundable if you canceled the reservation prior to the convention. This is the only way that anyone can think of to prevent people from reserving rooms and then canceling them when it is too late to give others a chance to reserve. It is a system that has worked well for suite reservations for the past two years. I know that people will be worried about not knowing for certain if they can attend by the time the hotel fills up, but I believe that the hotel will not fill up anywhere near as quickly as it did in the past, since people will only make reservations once they know that they can attend. We also intend to have rooms available at more overflow hotels nearby, so I am confident that nobody will be left without a room. We are still working out the details with the hotels, and while we are doing so I would like to hear our attendees' thoughts on the matter. If anyone has any better solutions, I am more than willing to run them by the hotels for consideration. |
Delicious
Digg
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Icerocket
Sounds pretty fair to me. I hadn't even been aware that room attrition was an issue, but the notion of putting something more at stake when making a reservation seems like exactly what's needed.
For those of us without a credit card---especially the younger furs---will it be possible to mail in the deposit as a check or money order? Perchance a grace period (say, two weeks) after making the reservation to allow payment to be received?
--
iSKUNK!
Website: [Link]
I was not aware of this problem either, but looking at the statistics from last convention it is necessity that something be done. I have come to love the Westin, and keeping its staff happy is a priority in my book. A mandatory deposit on rooms seems fair to me if it will prevent attrition.
---------------------------
Dear lord, you want me to do what with that hairdryer!?
Nothing new about this, been done for conventions for years. Yes, you'll get a few people who will bitch, but I think it is the only reasonable solution.
-----------------------------------------------
David M Stein, DI
"Not Unlike the Toaster, I Control the Darkness"
-- Abby Normal, "You Suck"
Actually a much more reasonable solution is simply to push out the cancellation deadline. Instead of 1 day, make it 1 week. That should provide enough time for people to find out about these openings and fill them, without forcing people to make a decision 6 or 9 months out that is going to cost them $100. I book a room early because I am pretty sure I am going to attend and I want a room in the conference hotel. In order to ensure I get a room, I have to book way earlier than I can be 100% sure. I haven't had to cancel yet, but it is no unreasonable to expect that something can change in 6 months.
Blog: [Link]
Then we'll get our avalanche of cancellations 1 week out instead of one day out. 1 week is far too little time to let someone else get the room, because by then it is too late for someone to arrange time off of work, book a flight, get a dogsitter, etc.
We are working on a solution that hopefully will cause the least amount of pain for both our attendees and for our hosts.
I agree about one week-which is what I outlined below.
I also posted an idea for consideration.
Without any guarantee it will be used or on the table for negotiations,
do you think it's at least worthy of consideration on the AC end?
If people know to expect cancellations 7 days out, it is more than enough time, however, if that is your concern, make it 15 days. That would allow two weeks to request vacation and would even allow them to purchase 14 day advance airline tickets.
If you require a non-refundable 1 night deposit, you will just guarantee vacant hotel rooms. Given that they have already paid for that first night, people will wait until the last possible moment to cancel so that they can either try to find someone to fill their room or try to find a way to attend. Why should they do anything different?
Website: [Link]
Seems perfectly Fair to me. Honestly I was surprised this wasnt in effect before, I had assumed it was and was surprised when we ended up managing to book the room without any problem or payment.
Of course people will complain, but really, it saves alot of money for the convention and the hotel as well.
Location: Harleysville, Pa, USA
Website: [Link]
I thought all hotels charged a reserve fee? I know when I went to a star wars convention, there was a fee. Oh well... I think its a good idea to charge them a one nights fee when they reserve a room. Unless people have money to lose... it should work.
Location: San Diego, CA
Website: [Link]
Perfectly balanced.
In no way harms the legitimate traffic (you either have the money or don't)
Yet those who skip out are balanced by having to cough up a fee upfront.
Lets get this sucker finalized, =)
___________________________________________________
AnthroCon LIVE countdown
Location: Honey Creek, Iowa
Sounds reasonable, but only one thing troubles me. Will those people fail to cancel even though they are not showing up, because they won't get a refund? I don't want to see empty rooms! Shouldn't there be a cancel-by date to encourage them to cancel if they aren't coming? Like 30 days or something? Or would they just transfer their rooms for the most part?
I am going and will gladly pay in advance if they require it.
Jeefers - Devil's advocate first class
Location: Philadelphia area, PA
For those folks, there's still an advantage to cancelling the room, since if you didn't, you might have to pay for all four nights, even if you didn't show up.
This first night deposit seems pretty fair to me. Certainly it would help out those folks who want to come but can't necessarily say for sure until april or may. My only suggestion, and maybe this would add more complications than it's worth, is to ask if we can add some sort of incentive for cancelling early. For instance, perhaps we might suggest that the refund include half of the deposit if the cancellation happens before april 15th. That way, we encourage furs who think they probably can't go but aren't sure to cancel sooner, which gives a better chance that other furs will get those rooms before they make other arrangements.
So you are not arguing for a 1 night non-refundable deposit, but, essentially making all nights non-refundable. If I have already paid for one night no matter what, I have every incentive to hold out until the last possible minute to see if I can either figure out a way to go or find someone to take my room. If I have a reasonable time frame to cancel (7 days works fine for major resort hotels and should work here), I will do so. Sixty days is way too long, as is 30 days. If people know that the cancellation is 7 days out, then they know that if things are sold out, they can always check that last week and be assured some rooms will have opened.
Location: Philadelphia area, PA
Actually, no, i'm not advocating that all night be non-refundable. What i'm advocating is that, should the deposit go into effect, folks make use of it and cancel rather than just not showing up. One night is, after all, far cheaper than four nights.
I respect the fact that stuff comes up for folks at the last minute sometimes. Still, however, when it comes to setting a time limit on getting your deposit back, i feel that it needs to be early enough to be of use to other registrants. If you cancel only a week out, the room is probably going to sit empty, since by then, very few people are still in the process of settling their room plans, and those that are still making arrangements are usually looking for floor space, not a full room.
Ideally, i'd like to see us come up with a plan that encourages people to quit grabbing a room first thing, before they even know what they're plans are. But in general, i'll settle for a system in which most canceled rooms get booked by other registrants, and canceling furs aren't penalized too harshly.
Agreed. A week isn't soon enough to fill the room since the majority of people have cemented their plans in around three months prior. If there were to be a deadline, I'd say it would have to be at the very least a month.
Consider for a moment the sheer number of people that, on these very forums, talk about their very tight and strict budgets. Looking at this from an economical point of view, there are very few people looking for new rooms for themselves [3 months out], but rather looking for floorspace. Roommasters should already have their rooms by then, and by the 3-month mark there aren't many people still looking for floor space. Remember that plans for people to have off of work and all that such take time, and leniency with requested time off varies wildly per job.
Although we probably won't be granted a cut-off date, I'd say if we were to have one it should be a full three months prior to the start of the convention. Although I don't forsee that many people still searching for rooms by then, I believe it strikes a good balance between giving people enough time to plan, and giving them too much time before the cutoff when they can't cement their plans.
-There is no truth
Location: Philadelphia area, PA
Sounds sensible to me. Wherever we put that cutoff date, i think it needs to fall around the time when we'd expect about half the population has made housing plans.
A suggestion was thrown out on the AC livejournal, tho, that rooms be released gradually, chunk by chunk, rather than in one big burst. That way, we could encourage folks to be a little less frantic about grabbing a room in january, since they'd know that there would be more in april. If that happens, i could see the reservation cutoff maybe being as late as the last scheduled release date of a room cluster.
Actually I believe this is already done. As I recall, Kage made periodic announcements to the effect of "Room block expanded". I had my room already at that point so I didn't read the details of the posts SO I MOST DEFINITELY COULD BE WRONG. It might have been in reference to the overflow hotels.
However I have three roommates set for the foreseeable future, so I will be grabbing a reservation the morning it becomes available, and I will not ever back out of it. Besides three people potentially being very angry with me, I attend the convention religiously myself, and I have not yet found a force able to keep me from it.
-There is no truth
Location: Philadelphia area, PA
To some extent, yes. The thought i heard was that this be done to a much greater degree, with rooms being released in little chunks (say 20 rooms) once every week or two, to help people trust that there will be more rooms later if they don't get one the second they become available.
Blog: [Link]
That was simply one of many suggestions made on Anthrocon's livejournal.
When will they have to cancel to not pay for the remaining three nights? Noon day of arrival as it is now? Two days before? Three days before? If I have already paid for one night, then I have every incentive to wait until the last possible moment to see if I can find a way to go myself or find someone else to take my room. If I have to cancel 7 or even 15 days out, to avoid that penalty, I will. Last year I know of quite a few people who waited for last minute cancellations. If those happened 7 to 15 days before AC, people will fill those rooms.
Location: Philadelphia area, PA
For the remainder of the reservation? I'm not sure; i don't think any changes to that part have been suggested so far. I recognize that once we cross that deadline for deposit refund, folks' drive to cancel the room promptly will drop significantly. That's inevitable, no matter where we put the deadline, though i do hold out some hope that this will help raise at least a little awareness.
The point, however, is to set that deadline at a time when the room is likely to get reserved again. Two weeks before the gather, the vast majority of folks have already made the commitment and found bed or floor space. Those folks, in my experience, generally wouldn't take a room to themselves even if one were available; most of them are living on very tight budgets, and would much rather have cheaper arrangements, even if they don't come with a mattress. If we want cancelled rooms to get reserved again, we need to give people more encouragement not to cancel after everyone has made their housing plans, and right now, people are making housing plans very early.
If we feel it important to add a second tier of deposit refundability to the system, i'm ok with that, but i really feel that that should be in addition to the one most people are playing around with, where you pay for a night if you can't cancel at least a month out. For that matter, i wouldn't mind some sort of rule whereby you skip the deposit rules if your reserve after the deposit is non-refundable--after all, those rooms reserved that late seem like they'd be much less likely to get cancelled.
From what i can see, i think the reasons you give for wanting the refund deadline to be fairly late are precisely the reasons why i want it not to be--that by two weeks before the gather, the vast majority of people ought to know their plans and have everything squared away. I hear that you're concerned about folks' ability to make decisions and commit to plans by the deadline; i, however, am more concerned with folks' tendency to monopolize rooms while they make up their minds.
Location: Chicago, IL
Website: [Link]
I think this sounds MUCH more reasonable! While I agree that a deposit would help stem the last-minute hemorrhaging of Westin rooms... There should be a turn-back point. Things happen, plans change. But I think 95% of attendees should have their travel plans confirmed within 30 days of the con. Charging a fee to cancel after that point makes sense.
Website: [Link]
I'm OK with this in principle, but couldn't they put a deadline on it, i.e., nonrefundable say within the week before the con, but refundable if cancelled earlier than that? That should give people time to jump onto any open rooms w/o excessively penalizing those who reserved in good faith but for whatever reason couldn't make it...
Ron
Location: Philadelphia area, PA
A week? By the time the last week before the gather rolls around, most ppl have already solidified ttheir hotel arrangements, so they're not likely to want to swtich into a room. Let's encourage folks to cancel the room at a time when others can make use of it, like sometime in may at least. I really don't think it's unreasonable to expect ppl to know what they're doing by late may.
Also, i'd like to see us set a firm date, rather than "a week before"; i can see too many questions arising about when the con is considered to have begun, and therefore when that late cancellation rate hits. If we give people a firm date, then there's less room for "wait, i thought that wasn't until tomorrow". And you know people will be taking advantage of this early cancellation rate, right up until the last minute.
Another gather i've worked with set their cancellation rates thusly: you get back everything but $25 if you cancel by the first cancellation date, which is something like 6 weeks prior. after that, you get half your fees back. If you don't cancel before the staff leave for the event, then you don't get a refund, because they've already paid to have the room opened and prepared. In all cases, i think they make some allowance for extenuating circumstances; if your mom suddenly dies and you have to go to the funeral, they won't hold that against you, i don't think. But it generally has to be something that you couldn't have predicted or prepared for.
Location: Ardmore, PA
Website: [Link]
Blog: [Link]
Promoted to the front page so this makes it into peoples' RSS feeds.
--
My LiveJournal - My Website
Location: In a small little box in your small little mind.
Website: [Link]
Thanks Giza. I was happy to see this in My RSS Feed Reader.
Website: [Link]
Blog: [Link]
The idea of requiring a deposit when making the reservation sounds like a good idea to me. However I still think it should be refundable if canceled far enough in advance. Obviously the standard 24-hours notice for cancellation isn't good enough here, but I agree with the idea someone else mentioned.
I think if Anthrocon room block reservations are canceled earlier than 30 days before the convention, then to allow a refund of the deposit. Having no chance of a refund at all will give those who can't make it no incentive to cancel their reservation earlier rather than last minute. I think a month before the convention, anyone should know if they're going to be there or not. And if those rooms are freed up at the one-month-to-go point, that's plenty of time for those waiting for rooms to grab them.
But yeah, no chance at all of a refund on the deposit would see those people not going still hold onto the rooms just as long. What they do need is an incentive to cancel their reservation earlier. And I know a lot of furs are cheap/poor/what have you, so getting back that ~$100 would be a great reason to cancel before it's too late to get it back.
I like this idea best. It should help deter procrastination in cancelling hotel reservations. That or a month and a half at most. I would love to attend AC08, and if I should cancel, I'll know to do it before the due date.
BTW, who drew your avatar? It's too cute!
Website: [Link]
Blog: [Link]
My avatar was done by a friend of mine who goes by the name Speed, but interestingly enough it's actually an unfinished picture. She started it and only got to that point before dropping it and I thought it might look neat as an avatar. I've used it as such ever since.
i had noticed that its just the nose and left eye and around them, gives the affect of your peeking out from under a blanket or something throw it is terribly cute
Location: Long Island, NY
Website: [Link]
I think a drop dead date of no more then 4 weeks before the convention to get that refunded would work. If you cancel before then, you get your deposit back. If you reserve after that date the deposit is non-refundable. 3 weeks before the convention to get the convention rate. Something like that?
Location: Uniontown PA
Website: [Link]
Okay since that problem is addressed next question...When do we start registering for AC 08'? I'm an early planner and I know for sure I'm am going :3
~~~~~~
Celest the Raving Wolf-Jackal
"Candy is Dandy but Liquor is Quicker." -WIlly Wonka
I can see the problem. I can see it needs A solution. I can't see any solution that does not involve leaving a deposit, so at least the generalities, I can see this is the only reasonable solution. There's apparently a LOT of cancellations...
So, everybody wants to prevent the cancellations "the day before the convention."
Moving a cutoff a few days will obviously give us the same problem, only a few days earlier.
The hotels don't want to lose revenue. Empty rooms are lost revenue. They want their entire AC convention hotel block filled. AC attendees don't want to lose rooms. Empty rooms meant others WANTED the rooms but couldn't get them. (That's why the Omni got filled so fast this past year, at least- the Westin block was filled, and, apparently, a hundred of those reservations ended up as empty rooms, which pushed a lot of people over to the Omni for no reason. (Not that it's not a great hotel and some people loved it, but that's not the point.)
So, yes, reservations should only be for the serious.
That having been said, there are 2 issues I can see, and perhaps we can find solutions to them that won't upset too many people.
A) Some people will NEED to cancel who were determined to attend. If there's a possible timeframe within which they can cancel without penalty, that is also plenty of time for others to fill the rooms, then the hotel gets the room refilled, and the convention attendees get to refill the room, and the furry who HAD to cancel at least doesn't lose money on top of the disappointment of canceling out on the convention.
I don't see "a week" as nearly enough time to refill the room- based on the posts from this past year on the room-share forum, there's attendees trying to get rooms in the last few MONTHS, but by the past week, usually they've worked SOMETHING out. In other words, if the cancellation point was only 1 week, or even 2 weeks away from the start of the convention, then MOST of those rooms will remain EMPTY when the convention starts- and the hotel will not be happy. Mind you, if it was likely that we could refill those rooms even 72 hours before, I'm sure everyone would accept 72 hours or thereabouts as a cutoff. Those with experience will NOT consider that an option. Therefore, if we CAN get a timeframe for backing out without penalty (which some congoers will want), it has to be much, much earlier (which the hotel will want.)
So, to attempt to satisfy both, we'd need a deadline for backing out which is much, much earlier.
Therefore, if I was granted the power to set policy that the con and the hotels had to
just accept (which of course I don't have, but humor me for a moment), I might come up
with the following policy:
-Those conventioners who canceled before 90 days (with the exact date and time for a cutoff etched in stone and prominently displayed) would be able to cancel without penalty. (If this resulted in a significant number of rooms that were unable to be refilled by the start of the convention, then I'd move that cutoff date earlier by 30 days the following year to 120 days, which SHOULD be far too early to have that problem, but retain the option of moving it every 30 days until we got a result the hotel and con could live with, supposing it needed to be moved at all.)
-Those conventioners who canceled after 90 days but before 45 days before the convention (again, with exact date and time etched in stone and prominently displayed) would be able to cancel with 1/2 the 1st day's deposit refunded. Emergencies happen, and this is a timeframe where we can expect to fill A FEW rooms completely as people frantically try to get rooms while others face personal tragedy and must cancel (lose jobs, must move, etc.) If the rooms are few, and we can refill them, then the hotel is happy, and the conventioners (who have time to fill them) are happy, and those who HAVE to cancel have a chance to do so without a full penalty (which the hotel gets to keep for the inconvenience.)
-Those conventioners who canceled in the last 45 days before the date of the convention would lose the full first day. A few people would still suffer from last-minute tragedies, but that can't be helped, and their emergencies wouldn't inconvenience the hotel (which is the hotel's concern) and the remaining pool of conventioners trying to get a room last minute is relatively small (which is the conventioners' concern.)
====
B) The other issue (remember, I saw TWO issues) involved, as someone said,
As I see it, issues here are solvable the same way the first question was resolved-
that there's a timeframe BEFORE which the deposit is charged- say, 90 days-
and before that cutoff, we're free to mail in a deposit by check or money order to secure the room, and any deposit will be taken directly from THERE.
==================
I'm not privy to the discussions that have happened between the convention's board and
the hotels, and can only go with the concerns that have been raised, and those I
personally am aware of. To the best of my knowledge, I've addressed all the major
ones, and found a solution that, in theory, SHOULD work, and leave everyone, if not
happy, then equally unhappy, which is one definition of a good compromise.
What does everyone else think?
Is this something that the board can see as practical?
Location: Roseville, CA, USA
So you saw a drop-off of 100 rooms (is that room nights, or is that 100 rooms times 4 nights, for 400 room-nights?) the day before the convention.
Did you see a corresponding drop-off in either pre-reg or projected on-site registrations? Do you suppose that there is a corresponding cancellation rate for airplane seats or train tickets?
I saw 2 hotels, packed to the gunnels with crowds of people, and I bet that the actual occupancy of the hotels was at or very near capacity of bodies allowed. What you describe here is a situation of less-than-full room-block.
I don't think that those cancellations were from people who didn't come; I think they came all the same, but reserved the room - had to reserve the room - to be assured of being able to stay. Maybe they really didn't wish to pay full price for a hotel room, but had to be prepared for that necessity.
I Think what happens is that folks reserve a hotel room as a contingency, then hunt for or wait for friends or others who are willing to share "crash space", and then change their plans to save the room cost. "Crash Space" is much more iffy than a reserved room, but so much cheaper...and it would be interesting to see just what the ratio of "reserved a room" vs. "Crashed with friends and split the cost" of convention attendees is. I think that it is FAR more common in this fandom than other fandoms.
My suggestion? Let the hotels place a restriction on room occupancy. No more than 2 persons per bed per room. You will see your room block filled!
I am really bothered by the "non-refundable" deposit on a room. The hotels have a standard policy of when cancellations must be made, and I see no reason why that should not also apply to us, as it does to everyone else who may use their rooms.
Room reservations have filled the block so quickly in recent years that one must practically rush to get a room 7 or 8 months out. My work can't be planned that far ahead, and my preferred vacation times cannot be guaranteed to me, carved irrevocably in stone.
And to add insult to injury, Ever since my first experience with the business practices of East Coast hotels, while you can make a reservation for a room, that is all that they will assure you of getting - a room. Specifics they will NOT guarantee; you may ask for a 2-bed, non-smoking room, and check back every month before the convention to make sure that this "preference" is listed on your room request, but if you happen to fly in after half the other attendees have checked in, guess what? They may not have a 2-bed, non-smoking room available; all that they can assure you of is "a room". I encountered this at the Adams Mark, and was told to take it or leave it, and con staff said that it wasn't their problem (and admittedly, it isn't), but it certainly makes things stressful when you have a room mate expecting a bed, and someone has to instead sleep on the floor that is carpet-saturated with condnsate from the air-conditioner, cause the hotel doesn't even have enough roll-aways. AND YOU WANT ME TO THROW AWAY $110 (or thereabouts) FOR SUCH A PRIVILEGE?!
That is what you are doing with your "non-refundable" one-night room payment, made 7 or 8 months out. You are locked in to a commitment which the hotel will satisfy as they see fit.
Would the hotels be willing to guarantee our requested acommodations for that First night, "non-refundable" deposit? Or is it still going to be "first checked-in, first choice" on things like rooms with 2 beds?
Getting to AnthroCon from across the country is a stressful enough ordeal as it is. This is just one more straw on an overloaded back.
Will we be able to book a room at the Omni from the get-go, or must we wait for the Westin to be filled first? We seem to have a really, really special relationship with the Westin, with helpful Jaime doing what she could to make our (collective) stay better. When I asked in this forum if we had any such helpful person at the Omni, I was told that - No, all the Omni provides us with is rooms. The nature of the answer implied that it wasn't worth trying to cultivate any such relationship with any of their staff, since we weren't using any of their event space. I found that to be a shame.
Location: Ardmore, PA
Website: [Link]
Blog: [Link]
This restriction has been in place for some years, actually.
Sorry to hear that this won't work with your specific requirements... would it be an option for you to share a room with someone else, and let them handle the reservations? Then you don't have to worry about issues regarding your deposit.
--
My LiveJournal - My Website
That doesn't solve the problem, it just means that instead of committing to the hotel I am committing to a friend and owe him instead of them. If people know that there is a one week cancellation date, then some people will be able to decide much later that they are able to go. One day isn't enough time, but 1 week certainly is.
Location: Hainesville, IL
Website: [Link]
Blog: [Link]
I hope this is not seen as nitpicking, but I wanted to touch on two peripheral points you make here. The first is your your suggestion that the possibility of variability of room type is strictly an East Coast phenomenon. I can assure you that this is not the case. Looking at the Starwood Hotels (Westin, Sheraton, Four Points) Property Reservations General Terms
"Requests for specific features such as bedding type or non-smoking rooms are simply that, and while most Properties will strive to honor Your requests, neither Starwood nor the Property guarantee that Your request will be honored."
You'll find similar wording at many other national chain websites as well. This is unfortunately a fact of life in the American hospitality industry today.
The other point was that you seem to imply that the relationship between Anthrocon and the Omni is not as cordial as with the Westin because Anthrocon has chosen that to be the case. I'll preface this by saying I have nothing to do with Anthrocon's hotel negotiations or communications, but I am intimately familiar with those of Midwest FurFest.
When a convention sets up a contract with a hotel, there are a number of different people involved in the transaction. The contract is negotiated and signed with the a representative from the Sales department. The function space and event planning is handled by the Convention Services representative (and, depending on the event, Banquets and Catering as well). Room reservations are handled by the Reservations Department.
Once the contract is signed, a convention generally typically sees little of their salesperson (though I believe Mikaela, Anthrocon's salesperson whose name I probably just misspelled, has been very helpful). Jaime is with Convention Services, and as such deals with Anthrocon on every detail of functions in the Westin (and does an amazing job of it - Anthrocon is very lucky to have someone as detail-oriented and capable as she is!).
So, to return to the question of the Omni: since Anthrocon does not use any function space there, really the only point of contacts they have are likely the salesperson (who really doesn't much care what happens as long as the contract is signed and fulfilled) and the Reservations Department, who just wants to put people in the rooms. There is no extra profit to be made by the Omni in spending any further resources for Anthrocon, which explains why the close relationship is not there.
---
Tom Brady/Duncan da Husky
Artists Alley and Con Store Manager
For fastest replies to questions about Artists Alley, e-mail me at
Location: Philadelphia area, PA
In this, at least, i believe we agree--a fair chunk of these are probably folks who started by reserving a room, then later found crash space with others and decided to ditch the room in favor of that.
The thing is, though, that i really don't see that as much better.
Right now, the rush to fill rooms in the hotels is, in many ways, a self-fulfilling prophesy--they fill because people think they'll fill, and are afraid that they won't get space. I really feel that any policy that gently encourages people to wait on reservations until they are positive of their plans, and to treat hotel reservations as being an actual commitment, is a good thing. Ideally, i'd like to see people waiting until april or may to put in those reservations unless they're sure that they'll be coming and will be using the room they reserve. Staff and professional artists might fall into this category. I think that a deposit has a chance of doing this to some extent.
Blackjack's outlined plan seems perfectly reasonable to me; it helps people to recognize that if they're going to cancel a room, they should strive to do so at a time when others can make use of it. If we were concerned about pushing this idea one step further (and we didn't mind the added complication), we could add one more little wrinkle:
It seems the rooms that people reserve after a certain date do, for the most part, stay reserved. I think it's probably due to a combination of people being more careful about their rooommate plans and people just having a better idea what their summers look like. We could add a rule that if you wait until that date (90 days out, for instance, with the date firmly and publicly expressed) to reserve a room, then your deposit is half as big. That way, folks have some incentive not to leap into this frenzied dash for rooms in january, only to cancel in june.
I hear what you're saying about setting firmer room residency limits, but i don't see it really having much weight with our folks. More likely, i think we'll have more attendees crashing in the same tightly packed spaces but without room keys. There are a significant number of folks who simply can't afford to attend if they have to pay more than $100-$150 for sleeping space, and i don't want to do anything to make them not come; i'd just like them to calm down a little about reservations.
I'm sorry that you've had such a frustrating time trying to deal with con hotels. I, too, often have a hard time knowing what my schedule looks like more than a month or two in advance, and it does make things difficult when you've made plans based on an expectation of a double room and then suddenly you only have a single.
Location: NJ
Hmm, I too also always thought there was a deposit. Whatever, it doesn't phase me. If there is ever a time I can't make it to Anthrocon, I'll be either dead or dying.
Sleeping on the floor is great! I do that twice a week in the lab to save myself money on transportation.
Of course, I'm mutating from all the chemicals in the air, but at least there's the chance of superpowers. ;P
Website: [Link]
Jumping in here with my ideas...
As I understand it, there is currently a policy that reservations are NOT transferable, is that correct? My suggestion here is that if people will be charged a non-refundable deposit, that the reservation can be transferable to another person with no penalty. Let's say that "Person A" reserves a room on the first day, is charged his deposit, and then in mid March finds out that he cannot possibly attend. If he can transfer that reservation to "Person B", it is to his advantage to do that as soon as possible, and Person A would get his deposit back and Person B would then pay a deposit. People who wait until the last week may not be able to find a person to transfer it to, so they would be penalized for waiting.
I know that this is a bit more work for the hotel to track the names and money, but I think it will produce far fewer unhappy people than just a non-refundable deposit. If the hotel thinks that it is too much work, perhaps Person A could receive his refund, minus a small "processing fee" for transferring, say $10? Still better than losing a whole nights worth, the hotel has a full block, and they are compensated for their effort, I think it is reasonable.
Just my two cents worth.
Jovina
Website: [Link]
I know that this kind of thing IS a problem. and I really can't add anything to what's been said.
but my concern is that yes the cut-off date has been discussed to a great length. but if this deposit is (and probably will) to be added to room reservation. the point is how will those with out credit cards or access to one. pay it or will they be SOL. (sorry out of luck) to reserve a room early?
______________________________________________________________
"A hard-on is not seen as personal growth." -jinx
"is it just me or is there an abnormal about of porn on your hard drive?" -17 (aka ME)
Location: Ardmore, PA
Website: [Link]
Blog: [Link]
The same way people paid in past years: by mailing in a check or money order.
--
My LiveJournal - My Website
Website: [Link]
I'm kind of surprised there wasn't a deposit before...
I don't have any problems with a deposit, but I do have some concerns.
1. Obviously if you cancel a week (or even a month) before, it's not going to be enough time for the hotel to fill the room. But if you cancel sufficiently far in advance (60 or 90 days) then that's more than enough time, I would think. I'm not going to name an exact number of days because I don't have all the facts on the situation, but at some point it stops being about making sure rooms are filled and starts being about fleecing as much money as possible out of the attendees.
2. If this is implemented, reservations need to be transferable. Whether this is through a waiting list system or you can just call up the hotel and do it doesn't matter. But if you can say, "I'm not going to be there but so-and-so is going to take my place," the room is still filled, right?
I would like to voice my concern regarding transfers. Whereas I believe it is a good idea, I would not like to see it abused where persons are reserving rooms and then transferring the room for a profit.
PIRATE
Member: Stuck In The Elevator Club
Ack! Room scalpers! Good catch, LL.
I suppose, since room transfers would be advertised on the forums here (where else?), it would be possible to keep a close eye on that sort of thing.
Hmm. Some transfer of funds would have to occur, so that the original reserver gets back his/her deposit, yes? Presumably this would be done through the hotel's booking system... in which case, the transfer would simply be limited to the original deposit amount. A wannabe scalper could ask for a fee via Paypal to release the room in the first place, but then the potential buyer would have no guarantee of the scalper following through, thereby making the whole venture unattractive.
--
iSKUNK!
Location: Philadelphia area, PA
It occurs to me that the most reasonable way to do transfers would probably be, sadly, through the hotel. That would mean that fur A, the original reserver, would call the hotel and tell them who the room was to be transferred to, while fur B, the recipient, would send the money for the deposit to the hotel (by all the usual hotel means), with a note about whose room they're taking over. Then the hotel would send the original deposit back to fur A. Complicated, but at least it gets everyone what they need.
On this one, i think we'll have to wait on the hotel's thoughts; if they don't have the time and person power to keep track of this added complication, then there's not much we can do about that.
Website: [Link]
As a side issue, this year could BOTH the Omni and Westin blocks be opened simultaneously? I like to book early, but prefer to be in the overflow. Every year there's this wait between the opening of the main hotel and overflow and several years there's claims that "oh, yeah, we won't have an overflow. we have plenty of rooms..." which never happens. But it fuels the panic booking. Which then encourages people to flip out over the room block being full...
The Omni has smoking rooms, the Westin does not, so some people will need to be at the Omni no matter what. Go with something like a 5/1 ratio. 5 at the Westin/ 1 at the Omni and that should cut down on some of the panic booking. The smokers don't panic book rooms at the Westin only to cancel for the Omni (or elsewhere). It should also mean that the fursuitors have a better chance to snag a Westin room since those that prefer the quieter overflow can snag those rooms right off instead of playing room shuffle.
While I agree that some people will need to stay at the Omni (smokers, as you say), the con has an agreement with the Westin to fill a certain block of rooms each night. I feel it's going to be very hard to get the con or the Westin to open up the overflow hotel at the same time the Westin block opens.
Maybe Kage could get the Westin to agree to allow the Omni (and others) to accept reservations for smokers only... but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Website: [Link]
Thus why I was suggesting it be done as a ratio. Around 20% of the US population is supposed to be smokers, depending on what demographic and survey you're looking at. So for every 5 rooms they contract for in the Westin, contract one in the Omni.
If the initial room block is 100 rooms at the Westin, they only book 20 at the Omni to start. If the Omni block fills first, too bad, it won't be expanded until the Westin block needs expanding. Obviously once the Westin no longer has any more rooms to stick in the block, you can expand just in the Omni.
I just happened to look up how many rooms the Westin has. According to their web site, there are 616 rooms, including 22 Jr Suites and 3 other suites which you indicate were all full). Are you saying that almost 17% of the hotels rooms went empty, or just that they were cancelled on the last day? I will say if that is what the hotel is like when it is at about 80% occupancy, I hope they don't every end up at 100% or we will spend our entire stay waiting for elevators, etc.