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

[sail7seas]

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.

[cruznon]

Thanks for info. I hadn't heard that.

 

Westin Bayshore in Vancouver is now also a non-smoking hotel for anyone heading that way.

[iceman93]

Westin started the trend with their NA properties. Marriott took it a step further going with ALL of their brands. Marriott was already my chain of choice, and I'm just that much happier now!

[Candy]

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.

I received the same email, and I'm going to cancel some rez, even though they're pre-October, in protest.

 

Candy <-- 10 years smoke free; DH still suffering

[Bramcruiser]

I got the same email yesterday. I don't smoke but my partner does. As far as I know we are still going ahead with our stay at the hotel in Fort Lauderdale prior to our Dec 2 cruise. No plans to change here.

[venicecruiser]

I usually stay at Renaissance/Marriott properties when I travel. Won't be staying with them again........................

 

Claudia

[elmorejj]

I rec`d the email on Monday, and decided there and then to take the Marriott family of hotels off my list ........jean:cool:

[twinkletoes4445]

I'm not a smoker, and I hate cigarette smoke, but really, I can't imagine why the entire hotel would go smoke free. Surely there are enough smokers and non-smokers to fill the rooms. I've never had to have a "smoking" room in a hotel when I asked for a non-smoking. I would think they are cutting off a good deal of their customers by doing this.

 

Also, when we were in FLL last week, we went looking for the Marriott in Hollywood Beach. It's my understanding that that's where we will be staying (through HAL). I understand that HAL no longer uses the Marriott on 17th. The hotel we found in Hollywood doesn't seem to have much going on around it.

[sail7seas]

HAL no longer uses either Hyatt Pier 66 nor the Marriott on 17th Street Causeway in FLL. Those hotels were bought by an investment group some time ago. The tower at Marriott suffered bad damage in Hurricane Wilma last October and was closed for a while. I haven't heard if it is reopened yet.

 

I find it odd that HAL is putting guests who sail out of Port Everglades in a hotel in Hollywood. There are plenty of hotels in FLL they could use. Why put people so far out? I know it has to be a financially beneficial thing but I would be very unhappy were it sprung on me just how far away we were staying if I did not know the distance in advance. Not convenient IMO for people who want a feel of FLL during their pre or post cruise stay.

 

The Marriot smoking ban extends to all of North America, not just U.S.

 

I'm thankful we are not smokers as it seems to be getting harder and harder to find a place where those who wish to smoke are able to do so.

 

I think the new statistic is something like 21% if the U.S. population. Some companies seem to be willing to lose the business of whatever percentage of that 21% percent ever were or would have been their customers to begin with.

 

As the percentage of people who smoke continues to decrease, the bans on smoking, it appears, increases.

 

[kryos]

I usually stay at Renaissance/Marriott properties when I travel. Won't be staying with them again........................

 

Claudia

Neither will I.

 

I think these hotels are just trying to jump on the bandwagon with this non-smoking crap. Screw over the smokers who now won't even be able to enjoy a cigarette in the privacy of their room. Fine ... then I just won't stay with those hotels. And, I'll bet there are a lot of other people who will do likewise.

 

Look, I have no problem with hotels going "smoke free" as far as their common areas. Understand ... I don't like it ... don't like the fact that I can't walk into the hotel bar and sit in the smoking section ... but I can deal with that. After all, I can just as easily frequent another local bar or restaurant that may allow smoking. I don't have to spend my money in the hotel's restaurants.

 

However, when you tell me that I cannot enjoy a cigarette in the privacy of my room ... a room I paid top dollar for ... that's where I draw the line. I will never stay in any non-smoking hotel property ... even if it means simply not staying in hotels any longer. I rarely take land trips anyway ... with the exception of the occasional trip for work ... very rare ... so staying away from hotels is not that difficult for me to do.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[kryos]

I find it odd that HAL is putting guests who sail out of Port Everglades in a hotel in Hollywood. There are plenty of hotels in FLL they could use. Why put people so far out? I know it has to be a financially beneficial thing but I would be very unhappy were it sprung on me just how far away we were staying if I did not know the distance in advance. Not convenient IMO for people who want a feel of FLL during their pre or post cruise stay.

Money is exactly the reason. HAL has probably found that it is cheaper to put their pre-cruise guests up in these "off the beaten track" properties and then just eat the extra cost of transferring them to the pier for their cruise.

 

They do the same thing with folks who book air through them. Apparently, it must be a lot cheaper to fly people into Miami than Fort Lauderdale ... so that's exactly what HAL does. Then they bus transfer everyone from Miami to the pier in Fort Lauderdale to meet the ship. They also set you up on the most inconvenient connecting flights they can manage. Why? Because no one else wants those inconvenient flights, so HAL can get a great deal on them.

 

I did HAL air once ... never let them arrange a hotel for me, though ... and I learned that I am better off taking care of those aspects of my trip on my own. Let HAL do what they do best ... give me a wonderful cruise ... but keep them out of my air and hotel arrangements.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[twinkletoes4445]

Rita & Sail....

 

Thanks for the info. The Marriott in Hollywood Beach is off the beaten trail. As far as we could see, there's nothing in the area that you could walk to. We're going to be spending two nights, so we have a rental car, but I'd hate to be stuck there without one. We're also are using HAL's hotel service since we are traveling just prior to Super Bowl and I couldn't find a room in that area (no one would book for two nights). I suspect as this date gets closer, many of these hotels will find they have rooms, but I really wanted to have the room thing resolved now. We do have a room booked at a Holiday Inn in Plantation, but I think I am going to let that go. The price was about the same as the one in Hollywood.

[gizmo]

Kyros,

 

Hal's air is no different than any of the other cruise lines. They all do the same thing. There are horror stories about all the cruise lines and air.

 

I did a group cruise once, the hotel, Pier 66 was included with the price. This was one of the reasons the group went with Hal. Shortly before our cruise Hal bumped us all out so they could put a larger group there. The put us in the Marriott North. There were lots of unhappy people.

[sail7seas]

Was this a long time ago, Gizmo?

 

[Tinknock50]

I agree with you Rita. I once booked air with RCCL to Alaska. We paid a deviation fee so we wouldn't have to take a red-eye from Anchorage. So what did they do? Put us back on the red-eye! Thank goodness the Alaska Air rep helped us out and got us on our original flight. She said our res. had us seats on the plane but no ticket!

[bepsf]

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!

[sail7seas]

Phew.....I would have hated that, Brian. I can't stand the heavy smell of too much perfume. Some ladies/gents pour on the fragrance to the point it makes my eyes water. A little goes a looooong way.

 

[Stevesan]

I find it odd that HAL is putting guests who sail out of Port Everglades in a hotel in Hollywood. There are plenty of hotels in FLL they could use. Why put people so far out? I know it has to be a financially beneficial thing but I would be very unhappy were it sprung on me just how far away we were staying if I did not know the distance in advance. Not convenient IMO for people who want a feel of FLL during their pre or post cruise stay.

 

 

 

The Hollywood Marriott on Ocean Drive is 7 miles from FLL, @ $15 taxi ride.

HAL often used the Ft Lauderdale Westin on Corporate Drive which is 12 miles from FLL.

The Marriott is even a bit closer to Port Everglades than the Westin, 4 miles vs 7 miles..

 

I know that we've found the central hotels priced sky high. Many posters report the same.

[SDHALFAN]

I have a feeling that Marriott is going to live to regret this policy. Certainly there will be many happy non-smokers but there are an awful lot of smokers ready, willing and able to fill hotel rooms. Wasn't there some cruiseline (Renaissance maybe?) who went broke and out of business because of their smoke-free policy? And didn't Disney and Carnival introduce two totally non-smoking ships only to find that it was not cost effective?

 

I have to share one interesting story: Back in 2002 my husband and I were booked on the ms Prinsendam's Sydney to Auckland Holiday cruise. We elected to take the three-day pre-cruise stay in Sydney so that we could spend a couple of days with my brother and sister-in-law. We paid top dollar and HAL put us up at the Sheraton on the Park, which is a lovely hotel.

 

Once we got to our room, which quite frankly was just okay. My husband decided he wanted a cigarette but I couldn't find an ashtray anywhere so I called housekeeping and asked for one - no problem, I was told . Well within a couple of minutes I got a return phone call informing me that we were in a non-smoking room, on a non-smoking floor, but we could go down to the lobby and have a cigarette or they would try to transfer us to another room within an hour or so. Well, Ed was not about to go down to the lobby every time he wanted a cigarette so we opted for another room. I got yet another phone call within just a minute or two saying that they had a room available and that the bellman would be up to move our luggage, all we had to do was go down to the front desk and they would give us the keys for the new room. (I have to say that all these phone calls were handled with the utmost politeness and friendliness - I was very imnpressed with their PR.)

 

Well, let me tell you - I opened the door and the first thing that hit us in the face, so to speak, was the wonderful view we had of the Park and the Cathedral, which was directly across from us. I have to say too, in all honesty, that this room was definitely superior to the one we had been assigned originally. It bothered me for a while trying to figure out why a smoking room would be better than a non-smoking room until it finally dawned on me that a great deal of the hospitality industry in Sydney caters to Asians, particularly the Japanese who are often heavy smokers. This was reinforced by the fact that every time I went to the elevator on that particular floor I was usually the only non-Asian waiting for the elevator.

 

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.

 

Valerie:)

[SDHALFAN]

 

I find it odd that HAL is putting guests who sail out of Port Everglades in a hotel in Hollywood. There are plenty of hotels in FLL they could use.

 

 

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

[bepsf]

Wasn't there some cruiseline (Renaissance maybe?) who went broke and out of business because of their smoke-free policy? And didn't Disney and Carnival introduce two totally non-smoking ships only to find that it was not cost effective?

 

Valerie:)

 

Val--

Yes, Renaissance was a totally non-smoking line, but that isn't regarded as the reason they went broke. R bought a fleet of 8 brand-new identical ships too fast and ended up w/ such a heavy debt-load that they could not meet the mortgage payments on the ships as well as their operating expenses in the wake of the travel near-stoppage post 9/11.

Carnival's Paradise was non-smoking as well, but it made for scheduling and deployment difficulties because it would have to be paired with a CCL ship that allowed for smoking to keep from losing business to other lines.

[sail7seas]

It also was years ago....before the smoke free environments became so much more common and more demanded. When the percentage of the population that smoked was higher than it is today. Today, it is a small minority and their influence carries 'less weight' each year.

 

 

[sail7seas]

It also was years ago....before the smoke free environments became so much more common and more demanded. At that time, the percentage of the population that smoked was higher than it is today. Today, it is a small minority and their influence carries 'less weight' each year.

 

 

[iceman93]

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.

 

You'd better believe they didn't make this decision willy-nilly, without a lot of economic and customer goodwill analysis. For every smoker who says "I'll never stay at a Marriott again" there's at least one non-smoker who plans to switch all their business to Marriott.

 

There's a very interesting and heated debate going on about this topic at FlyerTalk, if anyone cares to check it out.

[venicecruiser]

Marriott may have only kept 10% of their rooms for smokers, but I find it hard to believe that only 50% of those rooms were normally occupied. Several times I have tried to reserve a smoking room at various Marriott properties and there were none available.............

 

I will just take my business to other quality hotel chains who still provide smoking guestrooms.

 

Re the Carnival non-smoking ship: I read somewhere that Carnival discontinued their smoke free ship because that ship was NOT generating comparable revenues to their other vessels. Carnival decided that onboard revenues were higher when both smokers and non-smokers were onboard.

 

Claudia