ethel

Hello everyone!
My boyfriend and I are taking our second trip to Las Vegas in June and staying at the Stratosphere, also for the second time. We are going for 6 nights and while I wanted to try some place different this seemed like the most affordable without having to stay at a dump...I would like to know why the Stratosphere seems to get such a bad rap, besides location. I know the location is awful but we are not against taking the trolley or the bus to get to the strip. I feel that the hotel itself is nice and provides plenty to do if you don't feel like travelling to the strip or downtown that day. But, I was only there for 3 nights last time so maybe there's a lot I don't know about this place. We are coming from upstate New York and for 2 of us to fly and stay here will cost less than $800 (total) for 6 nights. We are on a budget so this seemed like a great deal. I wanted to stay at the Flamingo or MGM Grand but both are easily $200 more so this is quite a savings. Anyway, I'm interested to hear other people's thoughts on the Stratosphere, besides the location.

Dan

I didn't think the hotel was "nice." In fact, I thought it was just slightly nicer than teardown quality.

gotribe

I haven't stayed in the rooms so I can't comment on them. I hear the Buffet is poor, although it was fine a few years ago when we went. I always enjoy visiting the Strat. I found the employees to be very friendly, and I did pretty well on the slot machines. I like their shopping area. But my favorite part is going to the top of the tower.

TedTurner

Ethel, I think the biggest reason Stratosphere is heavily criticized (aside from its poor location) is that time has passed it by. 15 years ago Stratosphere was on par with the average to slightly above average LV hotel.
But the luxury and theme bar has been raised higher and higher (Bellagio, Venetian, Four Seasons, Mandalay Bay etc) and Stratosphere now seems comparatively humble.
Take cars for example. In 1975 a new Chevy Nova was a very respectable car and a good value to boot. But today a 1975 Chevy Nova seems extremely dated and lacking---no power windows/steering, no quality stereo, no anti-lock brakes etc etc.

Time has left the Strat behind. It's the same as it was years ago, and time passes very quickly in LV.

bashfulLV

To TedTurner who inferred that the Stratosphere was better off 15 years ago - you're probably right since it wasn't even built then. That hotel is one of the newer ones - it opened in 1996. It was, however, built shoddily and cheap, unlike the other, brighter stars like Bellagio, Paris, Venetian.

Many of us locals remember the controversy that surrounded the building & opening of the Stratosphere - there was a big to-do about it then because many who worked on the construction teams swore they'd never set foot in it once it opened because of the poor craftsmanship and cheap materials that it was built with. Many of those people said it was unsafe.

As for myself - I went there last October with some visiting friends from Australia because they wanted to see the view from the tower. It was amazing, but that's about the only good thing about the hotel. For me the neighborhood is very important and knowing it's in one of the worst makes me uncomfortable at the very least.

karenvk

Last June my husband and I stayed at the Flamingo (center strip so no car needed) for about $60 per night (about $150 on the weekend). I think we booked the room directly thru Flamingo's website as something called the Pool Party rate. Aside from the $59 room rate, we got coupons for free drinks as well as 2 for 1 on their buffet, which was quite good. Hope this helps.

here_today_gone2Maui

Ethel, count me in the minority here. I am not into grander and glitzier and have better things to spend my money on while in Vegas than the priciest digs. I have stayed at the Strat many times over the years and my favorite slot machines on the strip are still there. I lived in LA and spent many a spur-of-the-moment quick-getaway weekend in Vegas. My husband has worked in Vegas for 30 years, and we've stayed at the glam spots on the strip, but still prefer downtown. For me, the Strat is just fine, but it might be because we never looked at Vegas as vacation destination so much as "Hey, let's run up top Vegas this weekend." They remodeled the rooms at the Strat a few years ago, but it's a place to lay my head basically. We have stayed there when they were offering us $19 or $29 a night rooms.

We can take our money and spend it on food and fun rather making sure we are staying at the latest hotspot on the strip. It's all a matter of personal perference. I'd just as soon stay at Lady Luck and sit at the $5 roulette tables. But that's just me.

TedTurner

Actually, BashfulLV, the ORIGINAL building was Vegas World, which opened in 1979 with a 102 room hotel and casino. Many years later it was sold and transitioned to become Stratosphere.
Regardless, the point is not the timeline, it's that hotels age much more quickly in LV than in most other cities because of the trendiness factor.

ethel

I understand where everyone is coming from. I'm in the same boat as here_today_gone2Maui. Of course, I would love to stay closer to the strip in a swanky hotel but for this many nights it just wasn't feasible because I want money to play. Not to mention we were able to get 3 of the nights for $24.95 each. Plus our reservation is for the premier tower. For 6 nights our stay will be less than $330. I just checked the Flamingo's rates (on their website) and for the same times it's $561. We're getting 3 nights for the price of 1 at the Flamingo. We visited the Flamingo last June and from that visit and reviews I've read the 2 seem comparable in quality. I agree that the buffet is something to be desired but it's not inedible and for the price it's not so bad. My justification for staying this far down the strip was that we'd have a lot of extra money we can spend on fun. I had a great time the last time we stayed there and didn't find anything bad about the Strat aside from the location and the sink outside the bathroom. Yes, the trolley and bus can get crowded but that's an experience in itself. The first time we road the trolley we met 2 nice ladies that had been on it for hours because it didn't stop where they wanted it too. We got a kick out of them...Anyway, I was trying to see if people had specifics of why they didn't like it but basically the consensus seems to be that it's outdated and poorly located. I'm willing to deal with that for this trip.

While I'm here, anyone experience the pool at the Strat?

FainaAgain

If only the location was different... I stayed there for 2 nights, 1 before a tour, 1 after. I liked the hotel itself more then Flamingo! The rooms were nice. And buffet at Stratosphere was much better, service- and selection- wise. I even got coupons for free shows. For me it's only the location. Ethel, a word of advise: the bus is much faster then the trolley.

Little_Man

When I walked thru the lobby to go on rides (which we ended up not doing--lines were too long)last week, I was surprised to see it wasn't all that bad, or at least as bad as I expected!I didn't see the rooms...

ethel

FainaAgain, thanks so much for the advice. We didn't take the bus last time but were planning on it this time because I figured it was faster. Not to mention, probably a hell of a lot cooler. That trolley can get darn hot when it's packed full of people. I can't believe you think the hotel is better than the Flamingo, that makes me feel soooooo much better about our decision. A few drinks and I won't care where I'm staying

FainaAgain

Ethel, I have a different "fond" memory of the Vegas trolley: it has wooden benches for seats, and my bottom got so... ummm... bummed

ethel

FainaAgain, at least you got a seat