Hraba Hospitality Consulting

A very informal smattering of data and commentary about the complex debate (for owners) about whether to be a dog friendly property or not.  The below data is objective, and clearly indicates the benefits of adding a pet friendly policy to your hotel.  In fact, this is likely old news, as our whole industry has started “going to the dogs”.  But I compiled this, and thought it might be useful to some people in making their arguments.  There is a long list of subjective points that could be discussed for hours, as the topic of dogs is fiercely emotional and personal, both to pro and anti-dog people.  There are plenty of studies suggesting that dogs increase happiness, reduce stress, reduce depression, and prolong lifespans in human owners, including lower blood pressure and cholesterol - this, however, is not always enough to make a decision in the business world.  Unfortunately, GNP does not mean Gross National Happiness, and business often means bottom line.  Below are some ways to understand the impacts of dogs on the guest experience…..

I)  Thoughts from Paul Burditch, owner of an excellent Luxury Hospitality PR & Marketing company, Burditch Marketing Communications, in regards to hotels in San Francisco, and a decision *not* to allow dogs at a property:

Travelers who come from all over the world know San Francisco to be a dog paradise – it should be given certain treatment so that it is welcoming, & visibly warm & fuzzy feeling.  If dogs are not allowed, we will have a responsibility for a fair explanation of *why* we do not allow dogs, especially in light of the entire industry moving that direction.  Most San Francisco hotels allow dogs, and the national parks and Golden Gate National Recreation Area are one of the most popular places for dog walkers & dog fans in the city.  Dog owners who stay nearby will see many dogs on the trails, or at Crissy Field, and throughout the park system.  This might not only have negative PR implications, but it will be a negative impact on those that see dogs throughout the city, parks, and out our back door.  Almost all hotels in San Francisco allow dogs including the top boutique companies Joie de Vivre (ed note: kaput), Kimpton and luxury properties like Ritz Carlton, Four Seasons, St. Regis and others.  San Francisco is one of the most dog friendly cities in the country, with the parks being a perfect place for dogs and owners to enjoy. To not allow dogs is going against the bigger trend in dog policies here in San Francisco.  A no pet policy is antithetical to the prevailing opinion of most Americans and pet owners in the country today.  There are 78 million dogs in the U.S. and 39% of U.S. households own at least one dog. With the abundance of dogs throughout SF and the parks, a decision to disallow pets will have obvious negative PR implications.  At this point, it’s almost assumed that they are allowed, and “no” is never part of a good guest experience.

II)           FINANCIAL DATA:

At one unnamed property: “We’re at $24,475 in dog fees through October YTD.  It’s a one-time $75.00 fee (most fees are much less, but balanced against the full cost of dog sitter or kennel if guest were to leave them at home), regardless of length of stay.  The audit report only gives posting totals, so no way to track Room Night production.  I’d make an educated guess of 550 – 600 total Room Nights YTD.  The total doesn’t breakdown evenly when divided by $75 because we had a few in there we only charged $50 because their res was already OTB when we changed the fee and a few we charged $100 because they had more than 2 dogs. It is our opinion that these guests would have stayed elsewhere with their pets, and we would have lost the room nights.  This does not account for incremental revenues. [ed note: this is from a peer who doesn't know I am posting this. It's anonymous, but if ANYONE has ANY concern at all re: financial disclosure, I will take this down].

Incrememental revenues = selling branded or logo’d hotel merchandise to dog owners – whether homemade local treats or a rubber ball with your brand stamped on it.

III)          Articles, info, data:

a)    Tripadvisor Pet Travel report.

“In a TripAdvisor survey of more than 1,100 pet owners in the United States, nearly half said they plan to travel with their animal within the next 12 months.”

b)   Pet Friendly Travel  – via Bella Dog magazine, also talks about airline fee frustrations, and more:

The majority of pet owners surveyed (61 percent) said they travel more than 50 mi. (80 km.) with their pets at least once a year, with 38 percent of those pet owners stating that they travel as often as once a month with their pets.  Pet friendly travel still is almost exclusively for dogs, with over half of the pet owners (61 percent) saying that they choose to travel with their dogs (33 percent of pet owners travel with their cats).  (Source:  Bella Dog magazine)

c)    According to the U.S. Travel Association:  “Pets make great travel companions. Over 49 percent of U.S. adult leisure travelers consider their pet to be part of the family and 18 percent of U.S. adult leisure travelers usually take their pets with them when they travel. (Source: travelhorizons^TM, July 2009”)

d)   Forbes: pet friendly hotels were due to market forces demanding it -

Why the change of heart? Travelers with pets are a huge market, and one that is untapped at the luxury level. According to the Washington, D.C.-based Travel Industry Association of America, there are 62 million dog owners in the U.S., and 29 million of those hit the road with their dogs in tow. The latest American Express Leisure Travel survey, released in October 2003, found that 13% of its respondents described an ideal vacation as one that is “pet-friendly.”

e)    Hotels Dogs Travel (via HotelMarketing.com) -

The nation’s pet boarding industry has figured out it doesn’t take much persuasion to get pet owners, often guilty about dropping their dog or cat off at a kennel while they head off on vacation, to pay extra for pampering: In the last five years, spending on pet services including boarding and grooming has more than doubled to $2.5 billion, according to the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association in Greenwich, Conn.

f)     Hotels renting pooches to guests without dogs via Time.com

These days, the coziest hotel trend has nothing to do with plush mattresses or comfy slippers. It’s about catering to guests who had to leave their furry, feathered or finned family members at home. This spring the Fairmont in Sonoma, Calif., added a dog to its staff, a chocolate Labrador named Zeus who is tasked with such things as welcoming guests in the lobby and going on hikes with them — or what is referred to, in corporate jargon, as “interactive guest appreciation.” (I have seen this in many JDV hotels as well. This trend started after studies showed that petting a dog or having a pet around reduces stress and increases health)

g)    Fairmont’s doggy ambassador delights guests (same as above, but more info)

h)   “Top Dog Hotels” via USA Today (same Tripadvisor rankings from above, but a little more about the hotels and amenities)

i)     Recent press release for Bernardus in Carmel Valley via SF Gate PRWire (the fact that someone does a press release is typically because the new amenity has relative strength or equity to the brand and bottom line)

j)      Kimpton’s Argonaut with their “Howl-O-Ween” dog costume contest (something that drives room nights and community around Kimpton property)

k) 15% of people are allergic to dogs (not including the 30% of asthma sufferers who are allergic), while 40% of people own dogs. With stringent cleaning methods (or just normal ones), i have yet to hear of an allergic person with a problem inside a room, let alone ever knowing whether they had been place in a room previously occupied by a dog.  For those truly allergic, they usually mention it, and it’s never an issue to accommodate all those concerned.  What’s more, hotels have been dealing with chemical sensitivity and allergies to things like down, etc, for years.  One more thing won’t be a major impact or operational issue.

l) Dogs that travel with people are typically incredibly well behaved, and often better and more quiet than children.  We also know weight limits are not necessary, because a) most large breed owners don’t travel with their pets, and b) a chihuaha can do as much, if not more, damage as a larger breed.  But if that rare bark is a concern to owners, remember  that acoustics won’t be an issue – a crying baby is louder than a dog in most acoustic tests: http://www.controlnoise.com/storage/dBSoundproofingChart.pdf

IV)         Conclusion

We have seen a lot more conversation on an internal industry level and an external marketing level because it has become so much more popular in recent years.   Opening without a pet-friendly policy, only to allow it later, would create PR issues because it is difficult to recapture initial interest after telling people that you are not dog friendly.

Observing and mulling all the above data and information, it seems pretty obvious what the right choice is for your guests, and your hotel.  Any complications, of which there are few and it’s very rare, is what needs to be discussed further.  I have a couple dog policies I can share, if you need them…. but overall, we feel strongly that a pet friendly policy should be approved for any hotel looking to drive revenues and capture new markets.

Hope this helps guide the decision making process.

And here comes RoomKey… filling an empty space that the OTA’s have bungled.

Here’s an article on Room Key, the hotel brand search engine.

Upshot (summary via TNOOZ):

Choice Hotels International, Hilton Worldwide, Hyatt Hotels, InterContinental Hotels, Marriott International and Wyndham Hotel Group have combined to establish the joint venture under the leadership of CEO John Davis, founder of the Pegasus hotel distribution and technology service.”

And here is Barb Delollis from USA Today with a Facebook post that sparked some awesome conversation.

This is my commentary from that Facebook post (which, as it happens, is by far the most interesting post I have seen on Facebook in years, and no… not because of my response).

I am excited about Room Key for many reasons…. I hope the below is succinct but helpful in understanding why this is an exciting move forward…..

It’s not a better solution, but that’s okay. It’s a flawed solution that has monopolistic traction – and this entry from Room Key is simply the start of their traction. It’s like Google Plus vs Facebook….. just because Facebook has more traction doesn’t mean it’s a better option.

It’s all new tech, and layered diversification coupled with competition in the early decades of online travel distribution means that the booking process is exhausting and varied…. one site has not, and will not, *EVER* serve *every* single on of your needs.

If you can honestly say you book solely on one site, and one site alone… more power to you, and that’s a rare thing – a branded OTA travel consumer. Travelers that use OTA’s are deal shoppers, so the idea that they would use one site and stick with that due to loyalty is odd, when it’s myopic only to consider one site with the scores of other’s available. A real travel consumer isn’t going to stick to one OTA, and that process of shopping around has become somewhat of a liability…. and an exhausting one. In the last 5 years, the only thing that OTA’s have done is to train the smart revenue managers to yield such that the best available rate is *ALWAYS* directly on the brand website…. in this, you maintain as much rate integrity and control of inventory as possible. That being said, the gestapo like extortion and bullying from OTA’s like Expedia has backfired, and savvy travel consumers are starting to be trained that the best deal is ALWAYS on the hotel website. OTA’s know this, and they are losing consumers due to it.

Room Key is a brand new product that is put together by some of the biggest players in the hotel industry ( Hilton Hotels & Resorts, Wyndham Worldwide, Choice Hotels, Marriott Hotel, InterContinental, Hyatt Hotels as well as Pegasus), and it’s a new product that is *BRILLIANTLY* devised, the UI is quite easily the best online booking product that exists, currently (although KAYAK’s mobile app is stellar). It is filling a sorely needed gap in a crowded space – a simple, concise, uncluttered way to easily find hotel rates and book without the pain of being upsold on value ads and overwhelming options. The OTA’s like Expedia or Travelocity are dinosaurs, and this new option is filling the space that travelers are clamoring for.

I understand your comments about being a consumer, and wanting the simplest option – what you are forgetting is that OTA’s had a chance to offer the simplest options for booking, but have failed in an overarching attempt to increase revenues by destroying any functionality or user experience on their sites. This is all new technology, so the best travel experience hasn’t even been developed yet. Just because one of the OTA’s has a monopoly doesn’t mean it’s the best thing for the consumer. This is the first attempt at our hotel industry to create that experience.

Room Key is coming at the right time – it mimics Google in a light user interface that is concise, simple, and clean.

The other side of this is how Google will lay waste to the uneven and disjointed online travel world -

Google Search + Google Travel + Google Flight + Google Hotel + Google Plus (in searches) = dominance & sheer terror for the existing landscape of online distribution.

I read this article today, and to say the least, I reacted. Privacy is a term used far too loosely, and I think people might not really know what they are defining. Whatever privacy is to you, you need to consider how privacy exists in the real world.

A ghostly voice:

Consumer privacy issues are a “red herring.” — “‘You have zero privacy anyway,’ Scott McNealy told a group of reporters and analysts Monday night at an event to launch his company’s new Jini technology. Get over it.’”

That was in 1999.

Subsquently…. resultingly….. These privacy conversations kill me. If one wishes for privacy, one shouldn’t leave the house, nor ever go online.

It is completely within the best interests of a hotel to protect a guest’s privacy… we go to significant lengths to do so. To suggest otherwise is misinformed and ignorant.  It is the hallmark of our success, among other things.

This issue isn’t about a hotel’s sensitivity to privacy. The issue is our current preoccupation with the concept of privacy. No one has any idea what “privacy” means. We have relative freedom, and our lives are relatively unobstructed and we are able to do as we please. But leaving the house – you are subjected to the largest shift in communication history, coupled with modern technological achievements that have, together, completely negated the concept of privacy. It doesn’t exist anymore. In fact… younger generations shed it as a by-product of the lifestyle they seek… a reminder that, shortly, it simply isn’t going to be an issue for people that will be controlling the world soon. How can we really expect any privacy, anyway?

It’s a fun conversation about a word few people really understand…. but whether or not we need to be sensitive (hotels, in fact, are sensitive) is moot. The point is that privacy is ending, and to some extent we are willfully giving it up as a biproduct of being able to access these amazing tools of the internet age.

(more…)

I actually got into a conversation on linked in today!  Go figure… I haven’t used it much as the “professional facebook”, but every once in awhile meaningful discussion about the industry pops up…. even then I typically don’t dive in.  But it is interesting…. so much conversation about the recession being over, and hoteliers, ownership, and properties are popping up their heads to see if they see their shadow.  As real winter looms, our proverbial “winter of discontent” wanes.  But instead of being rife with joy… let’s cast our doom & gloom nets out a bit.  If you look anywhere in media – fear and panic are often confused and countered by (more…)

I have been thinking about the odd hypocrisy with some of these review sites…

They want your money for advertising, but won’t do much to help you moderate untruthful reviews.  What’s more, I note once you are “in” with the sales team, your point of contact makes the wheels turn ever so fast.

Which is fine, but then it limits the low revenue mom and pop’s ability to moderate and creates a gap between the have’s and have nots.  Isn’t there always one somewhere?

We all know the silly owners that lash out with libel suits:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travelbuzz/810335-hotels-contacting-posters-tripadvisor-com-about-negative-reviews.html

But my concern is when owners don’t feel they have an outlet or anywhere to complain about lack of responsiveness to ownership.  I have noted this with yelp too.. that they constantly err on the side of the consumer, while attempting to get ownership’s marketing dollars to bolster their ad model revenues?  This seems like an inherent flaw doesn’t it?

http://www.travelblog.org/Forum/Threads/12462-1.html

people airing grievances about the fact TA’s “get the truth and go” is sort of BS….

http://ideasandthoughts.org/2007/04/25/tripadvisor-as-a-model-of-social-networking-and-critical-thinking/

the positive idealism of the post gets mired in a business owner cruising the internet just looking for help and to vent…

http://blogs.bookassist.com/blogs/industry/2008/05/responding-to-tripadvisor-reviews-of.html

the comments go south pretty quick….

Owners are being ignored, and they are thirsty for help and action… to be able to earnestly and efficaciously resolve complaints, issues, and problems.  Many want to act on social media, but haven’t the foggiest as to how.  What’s more, if sites like Trip Advisor ignore this base for too long, they might lose out on a potential community opportunity.  I am not sure if they could leverage the businesses a bit more like Yelp has done, or strengthen their brand by having people identify with the site from both the content generating side, and the business side.

But whatever the case, this is just a couple of unhappy business owners.  I just saw it all the time, and thought I would bring it up.  Anyone else have stories from ownership end?  Let em fly!