Who fills out these surveys?
 

I'm talking about the readers surveys like "Conde Nast" or JD Power.

In my experience, most (but not all) wealthy people (the kind that stay at The Ritz or drive BMW's) don't spend a lot of time on internet chat rooms or filling out surveys. I know, personally, unless I'm compensated (ie. ZAGAT), I won't bother.

Comments?

Coachboy

I've have gotten a few of the CD surveys in the mail and filled them out. It doesn't take very long as they only send you one section, i.e. Asia, Caribbean, etc. You don't get to vote on the entire Readers Choice list.

I don't bother with their online surveys as I never know starting out how long it will be.

Oops that should read "I have" and "CN" for Conde Nast.

I drive a Mercedes and my wife has a BMW and I not only read info in "these chat rooms" but have filled out several questionnaires for CNT, Zagat, JDP, etc. I haven't received any compensation from any of these sources.

Hey Ted, how are the bison ranches doing?

I worked for Conde Nast for a while and it is the subscribers who get the surveys. The magazines (Vanity Fair, Architechual Digest, Vogue, Traveler, etc) cater to a high end clientele and they have a dream demographic.

Lil' razzin', Curt?
That's the OTHER Ted Turner, don'cha know.
The ex-Mr. Jane Fonda.
Southern gentleman and half owner of the state of Montana.
I'm a yankee, m'self.
A survey-lovin' yankee.

Hmmm. I'm nonplussed as well.
I have a BMW and have stayed at several Ritzs (or is that Ritzes?)and have a serious "survey jones."
I spend WAAAAAY too much time on here giving my (some-would-say) helpful opinions on the places I've been.
I suppose I could say it fills the time between the poodle's grooming appointments and my body exfoliation and buffing treatments, but I guess it would be more honest to say I enjoy being of aid. ;)

I thought one of the strangest of these was a number of years ago when the resort at Couer d'Alene (I'm sure I spelled that wrong, Idaho was voted the top resort in the country by the readers of Conde Nast. We went and were surprised it was ok, but the best in the country? Surely they were kidding. Do you think the results had anything to do with the fact that it was from their readers and the magazine had featured this resort three times in the previous year? Here's a thought. Maybe because of their heavy publicity, an unusual number of readers chose that resort that year, and surprise of surprises, those readers (mostly who only stay at one resort a year) then named it the best.

I fill them out, but then I have little time for Fodor's!!!!

I don't count the CN Gold List at all and the reason being is unless you are an advertiser in CN Traveler, you don't get put on the survey. The Survey consists of a list of around 500-1000 resorts/spas/hotels around the world and you answer by shading in the answer circle by the answer. Think multiple choice test. There is a small, very small write in area.

There are some flaws in your simple dismissal of the CN Gold List, though.
This is not a simple thumbs up or down list like Ebert and Roeper. There are scaled numbers.
Look at the actual numbers rating the qualities of the hotels.
See if you agree with these results (all places I've been, so I'm considering myself informed about these places)---

Example for last year:
Room quality:
Coeur d'Alene Resort: 69 (scale of 1-100)
Four Seasons Maui: 89
Hilton Waikoloa Big Island: 73
Four Seasons Chicago: 84
Sonoma Mission Inn: 57
Hotel del Coronado: 58
Ahwahnee: 49
Woodstock Inn VT: 74
The Point, NY: 95
Royal Palms Scottsdale: 62


I have often ranted about the questionable quality (poor value, specifically) of the rooms at places like the Sonoma Mission Inn, Royal palms, Ahwahnee, Hotel Del, Woodstock Inn, etc.
And the numbers bear this out. Those places have low room ratings.

***Just because a hotel APPEARS on the CN Gold List doesn't mean it's a top 10 quality hotel! The actual numbers tell the real story.

Patrick raises an interesting point though.
One major key to understanding the numbers is knowing who is doing the rating. Clientele at a typical Four Seasons will be much more demanding and have higher expectations than visitors to the Couer d'Alene Resort. And you can bank on the fact that if a Ritz or Four Seasons got a high ranking in CN, it should be dependably good.
More out of the way and rural places will have many visitors who don't frequent higher end places so the ratings can be artifactually inflated in many of those places. Doesn't mean the numbers are useless, but they're much less reliable in my experience.

Ted, while I understand completely what you are saying, I worked for Conde Nast and do know how the surveys are put together and who they are sent to. As I stated earlier, Traveler has a dream demographic. The demographic is mostly affluent, 45+, educated, etc.

Let me restate that while I do not completely disgard the list, it isn't my bible.

There are a couple of wonderful hotels I've stayed in that will never make the list. The Beaufort Inn for one. A wonderful B&B in Beaufort South Carolina that has some of the best dining in the southeast. I would much rather stay there than The Woodlands Resort outside of Charleston in Summerville. The Beaufort Inn spends zero dollars on marketing and keeps an almost 100% year round occupancy because of word of mouth.

Have you ever wondered why some of the great NYC hotels are left off the list?

GoTravel: on that point I completely agree. Maybe that's where we view the CN list differently.
It is most definitely NOT a comprehensive list of the best lodgings in the USA.
I guess my point is that the info that IS there is valuable IMO, but you're saying that what is NOT there is important as well. I couldn't agree more.

One of the more impressive places I've ever stayed in terms of attention to detail of the rooms and grounds is the Charlotte Inn on Martha's Vineyard. I don't recall ever seeing it in a CN list. And the Charlotte Inn, being owned and operated by local individuals who obviously are doing quite well for themselves based on occupancy rates, doesn't advertise all that much.

Many smaller, well run places won't ever appear on the pages of CN Traveler, to be sure.
But in order to gather a useful amount of survey info from travelers, the number of surveys sent out would have to be several times larger than it is now in order to find enough people who have stayed at the smaller gems.

Another flaw in the CN list (as with most lists) is the info is not current. I often notice that places which are declining will ride high on past reputation for awhile in lists like the CN Gold List. Great new places often take 2-3 years to appear in the first place.

Ted and GoTravel, you've both made very good points. Perhaps that's what accounts for Sandals making it on the list each year. The advertising gets them on the list and the lower expectations of the clientele inflate the ratings.

Patty, do you ever read the Caribbean board? I'm not sure I've yet figured out why people are willing to pay for places like Sandals (and defend its level of quality) when for the same amount of money much better hotels can be had with money left over for food and activities. Sure, places like Sandals are very convenient since everything's under one roof, so to speak. But the quality just isn't there to justify the exorbitant prices.

travleis,
Yes I do read the Caribbean board and could never figure that out either.

I also find it funny that a place like Beaches Grande Sport can receive a higher overall rating (80.4) vs. a place like Biras Creek (79.7) on the CN list. But in a way, I guess it makes sense because someone who chooses to stay at one of these 2 resorts would never choose to stay at the other. So you have two different groups of travelers voting with very different expectations and criteria.

I do know Sandals has a high occupancy of conference attendees and they specialize in team building things. Maybe that is why they make the list every year? After all, something like 70% of most hotels occupancy is accounted for by the business traveler.