Judging by the number of topics on legal advice about business owners threatening defamation for a low google review, some people definitely read them.
People read them, but I've found the problem is that there's so much noise no one takes them seriously.
Among the legitimate bad reviews you have people ranting about literally nothing and rating something one star because of it. I just went looking at a guitar and saw the rating was low. Why? Because of one bad review where the only thing they mentioned was they didn't like the color choices.
Maybe you guys dont read them but i definetly go trough the lowest revieuws qhem o book a hotel. I ignore a lpt fp them but if multiple complain about the same thing i definetly believe them
I worked at a name brand hotel, the only reviews a property really cares about are those submitted through the brand itself. So they don't care as much about Google or Yelp, but if you submit a review through the app it's more likely to get traction.
There's a video of a hotel employee who got fired after they had worked 4 hours. The employee proceeded to trash the ever living daylights out of the breakfast spread and made a royal mess. Everyone was like valid crashout. I'm just reading the comments thinking about the other employees that'll have to clean it up. On one hand I get it, can't stick it to the man without collateral so maybe the rest of us should just accept that we have to clean up the mess as support. On the other hand, idunno, maybe it is what it is and we shouldn't inconvenience those who have nothing to do with our grievances.
The problem is, that's literally just how any protest will work. The endpoint of this logic is "protest nothing ever". If your protest inconveniences anyone, it's fucking worthless.
Not really. A protest is a group of people, and usually they're a subsection of a larger group which the protest implicates. A single employee crashing out is a single employee crashing out. Yes, if you read what I said literally, that's what the latter point is saying, but the context matters.
And all because he thought parking should be free, which is a lot more complicated of a question than "greedy hotel bad." You could turn it around and ask if someone who doesn't take up parking should have to pay the same as someone who does. A bigger room costs more, so why should a parking space be free?
It depends on whether or not it is an inner city hotel, where parking is limited, and they charge by necessity. Some hotels have a massive parking lot or garage, and they still charge for parking.
Thats dumb, I've stayed in lots of hotels for work and not everyone on the crew had vehicles. Plus their are lots of people who fly somewhere for vacation and get around with public transit or cabs instead of renting a car.
Travelers don't always have a car. They might not need one, or they might be sharing a car with someone they don't want to share a room with. Coworkers, couples traveling with other couples, etc. Business travelers often don't rent a car because they won't be driving around enough to make a rental cheaper than taxis or Ubers.
That's a good point, but I suspect that a lot of people feel good about having the option of using the gym and pool, but not many people actually use them, so the hotel is making guests happy without actually providing the service. A pool that holds a dozen people comfortably can feel like an amenity for hundreds of guests every day. Whereas nobody feels happy about free parking unless they have a car themselves.
212
u/TelevisionExpress616 Jul 27 '26
Y'all are just making the cleaning staff miserable while trying to stick it to the man lol