julie

When visiting England, especially London, remember that the British tourist board and ours differ widely--just having a phone in the bathroom, even if it doesn't work, can qualify a hotel to have a better rating. It's important to understand the criteria for the standards there...hotels just aren't up to our standards, and one should not expect more than just clean, especially if the location is convenient. Realestate is so expensive in the city, that keeping up to a US standard is just not to be expected. For this reason, and to avoid dissapointment, chose a chain, like, perhaps, the Imperial, The President, The Bedford Place, or the Tavistock, as they are central and fairly standard, British standard, that is.

xxx

This has GOT to be a troll.

Michelle

Well I have to admit it gave me a laugh, but unfortunately I don't think it is a troll.

deb

She's right. They rate the 'stuff' that's available in the hotel/room. The crowns are what rate the 'niceness' of the place. If Julie had just taken a bit of time and asked what each was, she would have been happier. I have stayed in wonderful places in England!

pj

Julie - <BR>Are you touting for business for the Imperial hotel group? (all the hotels you mention are part of that group - and, having stayed at a couple of them, I don't think they're particularly great hotels)

A Local

It's plain daft to generalise and say that British hotels are of inferior standard to that of the US (one assumes that's where Julie hails from). A more plausible argument might be that the value for money in the UK is not as good as in the US. Even this is a generality though. I can think of some fairly luxurious country hotels in the UK in the same price bracket as a mediocre bottom end hotel in NYC. <BR> <BR>Yes hotels in London are also expensive but it's all to do with supply and demand. As long as so many overseas visitors, dare I suggest those from the US in particular, are prepared to pay the high prices, then the hotels can continue to charge what they can get away with.

s.fowler

Troll, or not I have to agree that the charm/price/value relationship of London vs. Paris, for example, has Paris winning hands down. It isn't even a matter of cleanliness. It's just that $70-100 US in Paris will buy a night in a hotel that is infinitely less drab and depressing than the same $$$$ will buy in London. It isn't the real estate... I think it's a lack of ability to make anything comfortable or charming. I LOVE England and visiting London BUT I *always* dread the hotel hunt in London, where in Paris any of 20 choices would make me happy. The way I deal with it is to repeat to myself -- "the hotel is not part of the experience" as I get on the plane to London. <BR> <BR>And I would be happy to get a list of clean, charming [in the British sense], well located hotels in London equivalent to their Paris counterparts at that price level.

Judy

Hello Julie, and I think this is a valid thread, not a troll, and s. fowler hit the nail on the head with his candid remarks! One of the worst, perhaps "the" worst hotel experience(which is "relatively" lengthy), I have ever had was at the Elizabeth Hotel in London. What a dump, not "quaintly"(I can deal with quaint)dumpy, but downright threadbare! This hotel was recommended by many differant sources(Fodor's among them). The worst part was the price around 95gbp! I hate to use "all" statements but in taking into account the many differant reponses I have read(and heard)"some" London hotels need new criteria for evaluation, IMVHO, Judy Disclaimer: I am an Anglophile, big time, and I am returning to London in Feb. regardless of the "hotel" experience! <BR <BR>