We are taking our first ever trip to Bangkok this November and have narrowed our hotel choice down to these two hotels.
I have read the bangkok hotel messages on the forum and thank all those who have posted but i have
2 questions please....

1. Being our first trip sometimes it is hard to get a feel for a city just from maps and guides so does the location of the Peninsula Hotel make it a better choice than the Metropolitan Hotel for 3 days in Bangkok?

2. This is a special celebration trip so we were planning to splurge on room so, Penthouse Suite in Metropolitan or Deluxe Suite/ Balcony room in Peninsula?

Many thanks

I love the Met and Como Hotels in gen but in Bkk specifically think they are badly located. Most advice on thsi forum will be that you must stay on the river - earlier posts you have pulled up will also have said that. IMO the river is great and the Pen is a FABULOS hotel but if you have an overriding reason to be at a city hotel or in the center of town, choose the Four Seasons.

I also think staying on the river is important as it is part of the experience and also gets you away from the noise and traffic of the city. You can use the hotel's shuttle boat, water taxis or your own longboat to get around and avoid some of the monumental traffic jams. A good bit of your time as a tourist will be spent at spots on and along the river, so do be there already will save you time and stress. Finally, to sit by the river and have a meal or a drink and just watch the life of Thailand float by is one of the great travel experiences, IMO. My favorite time is sunrise when it is cool and there is a lot of activity on the river.

I have not seen the Metropolitan but knowing their other hotels would say that it will be less luxurious than the Peninsula. The Metro chains are more like good 4 star hotels, the Penn is a 5 star luxury hotel. The Metro is brand new so you may not notice s quite as much as you will in a few years, but I think the overall fittings and furnishings will be less luxurious.

Just to confuse things any further - have you considered the Oriental? it is magic. Especially if you stay in one of the suites in the older wing. Second choice would be the Peninsula. As the previous poster said, you want to be on the river.

River, without a doubt. You probably should make your reservations as soon as possible to ensure you can get what you want. We're going 11/19/04-12/04/04 and staying at the Towers in The Royal Orchid Sheraton after reading Kathie's posts.

Gpanda- no no no it must be the Penn- remember its my way or the highway!

Does the Hway run through Thonburi or do you have to take a shuttle to get there?

Hi...I just got back from vacationing in Bangkok. I've been there several times and make it a point to stay at up to five hotels per trip...to compare them all...plus I like to experience different parts of town... I just stayed at both the Peninsula and the Metropolitan and loved the Metropolitan although my all time favorite is the Four Seasons...hands down... where I always make it a point to stay...it's so Thai and absolutely beautiful...the best location for what I personally need to do which is shop...walking distance to 3 big major malls and one sky train stop away from Siam station....and more shopping. If you stay at the Metropolitan there is the Saladang Sky Train station nearby. The Met is fabulous...hip...modern...and a young crowd...I'm in my 40s. Most guests I saw looked in their late 20s and 30s. The room provides a yoga mat. This is a very health consious establishment...which was nice.It's next door to the Sukothai Hotel...which is VERY beautiful...very Thai in style and has a really good Thai restaurant called Celadon. While at the Met I hit it off with the Director of Marketing for Asia who showed me rooms...especially the two-story suite...$420. a night which was fabulous and comes with a 24-hr butler.I had a standard room which was very nice. So if you like modern, then do the Met..if you like traditional Thai then do the Four Seasons...if you have 6 or more days in Bangkok I would split my hotel choice and if you want to do one of the hotels on the river..which I know folks in this forum love, but it's not my personal favorite...then do half on the river and half in town. If you need the name of the Director of Marketing at the Met then let me know and I can post her name. It's at home in my files.Happy Travels!

Just came back from staying at the Metropolitan for 2 nights. WOW!
This is my 3rd visit to BKK, go every year. First time stayed at Hyatt Erawan, 2nd time at Regent (now called 4 seasons), and then the MET. WOW!!
The hippest hotel I stayed in so far. Excellent decor and modern furniture, a real departure form most 'standard' hotels.
You get to watch DVD and borrow music CDs free. Breakfast included and they let you choose between the 2 restaurants GLOW and CYAN. Dinner at CYAN was FANTASTIC, BHT 2500 tasting menu 6 courses.
And you get to go to members only MET Bar. Drinks was very good, very cehap, and hip crowd.
The only problem is that the location is a bit off, nothing around the area, you need to take cab everywhere, but at BHT 50-80 a trip (= USD #1.50-2) you can go anywhere.

Why not weigh in after my first trip? I hedged my bets spending one night at the Oriental on the way to Chiang Mai, with the intention of staying at the Four Seasons on the return (big Four Seasons fan at home). Loved the Oriental so much- and could see I really did want to be on the river and tried to change reservation for the return. Only the Peninsula was available, which we booked, but unlike many, did not like at all. Left Bangkok as a result for Phuket, to return to the Oriental for our last night. Would come back to Bangkok just to stay at the Oriental, but have to agree with the river location being a must!

Price at CYAN seems very high for BKK. Was that for one or two?

You are right, it is for one person.
Price at Cyan is exhorbitant for bangkok, but you are talking about international fine dining. Compared to the same quality, it will cost 1.5 times in Singapore, twice that in Hong Kong, and 2-3 times in France. So it is value for money in my opinion.
My first trip to Bangkok 5 years ago, I headed for the pork knuckle rice at World Trade Centre (opp Erawan Shrine). The cost of that? USD 60 cents. I decided from then that since I'd come all the way, the best value is to go for the top notch restaurants, and have a meal that would have prices unbearable in my home country. I wonder if any of you share my opinion on this?

Kilofoxtrot- sorry value to me is not spending a small fortune on a meal because in the home country it would cost 3 times as much. Value to me is having a good meal at a reasonable cost given where you are at the time. That does not mean stall food- too many risks there- but at a decent restaurant.

Kilofoxtrot- was the dinner at CYAN matched with wines for 2500 BHT ?

Many (most!) people will say that to not be on the river is a huge mistake, but I disagree. The river is very interesting and I highly recommend taking at least one excursion along it on a hired "longtail" boat. However, other than this, a river location places you really no closer or further from other attractions (Grand Palace, Jim Thompson House, Floating Market). The bottom line is that Bangkok simply isn't a good walking city and you'll be using the cheap and plentiful taxi's to go most everywhere ? even if you stay on the river.

Based on this, I would even say the Metropolitan is better located than the Peninsula as the "Pen" requires crossing an often jammed packed bridge or taking a shuttle boat to the "main" side of the river and getting a taxi from there to your onward destination.

Finally, after more than 17 separate trips to Bangkok and multiple stays in virtually every top hotel, I personally prefer the Metropolitan to the Peninsula. Aside from a fabulous river-front Thai restaurant (do go for dinner!) and a very lovely pool, the "Pen" feels too corporate and a bit cold to me. Granted, the Metropolitan is quite minimalist in decor but the materials used are sumptuous and the Penthouse Suites are just fabulous...far more stunning and individual in feel than most suites at the "Pen".

The "Pen" has received many accolades and it certainly is a superbly managed 5-star hotel, but I suspect one reason is that their relatively affordable rates have opened the hotel up to a group of less experienced clientele who have little to compare and instantly vote it as the "best" in the world. Just my opinion, of course!

hi thanks for the Metropolitan info...i'm trying to pick between that and Sukhothai....my concern was that the Met sounded "cold" in its minimalism...what do you think?

BHT 2500 gets you the food and coffee. No wines included. There is a tasting menu with wine for BHT 3200 to match each dish with appropriate wines (I think this is the price, as I am not interested in the wine list)

I think the MET is one of those hotels for a certain type of clientele. Decor is very minimalist, and it took some getting used to the rooms. The style is understated and cool, to almost being clinical. They also play chill out downtempo music all day in the lobby. Frankly, I loved it but it almost drove my wife nuts.

If I took my wife to the Met I think I would be in the dog house for a long time!

Hi Jim0884, The Met is very minimalist but I don't think it's too cold because the materials used are beautiful - honey colored limestone, rich woods, and very luxurious sheets. BUT, there are a lot of "blank" spaces and not much artwork or flowing drapes. It all depends on your personal taste.

The Sukhothai could be a great compromise because although it's along a minimalist line, there is great use of Thai silk wall coverings and lots of beautiful inlaid woodwork. Their restaurant is excellent and the pool is huge and very secluded from the clamor of Bangkok.

I have always been able to get excellent rates there (including suites) from a travel agent in NYC that specializes in that hotel. Let me know if you want the agent's contact details. My e-mail is [email protected]