OK, the question is "Why do hotels charge separately for parking?".

The answer is "because they can".

I also believe that hotels charge separately for parking (at least in Boston) because they often do not know where they will have availability. Say they have 40 spaces in the garage next to the hotel but there is a conference in town and all the spaces are gone. They may need to find space 6 blocks away. If they charged everyone for it, they would need to guarantee a space for you.

When did parking "used to be free"? We've been paying for it in hotels for the past 35 years anyway, and I'm sure it pre-dates that!

Well - I've been traveling a lot (from 20 to 50+ trips per year) on business for more than 20 years. And I have rented a car on nor more than 20 or so of those trips. And if you simply look at the number of rooms in the hotels - and the the garage space avaialble - you will see that only a very small percentage of guests have cars.

If you staying at the Holiday Inn by the side of the road and they're trying to charge for parking - I agree - it makes no sense. But for city hotels (and by and large those are the ones that charge for parking - and always did) it makes no sense to raise rates for everyone to provide a free service to very few.

If you look at the answers here - and the market reseach done by the major hotel chains - and I'm sure they've researched this to death - just like they do everything else including which soap to use etc - it;s obvious the suggestion makes no sense to the vast majority of people.

If the OP wants free parking he is free to look for it - but he'll never find it in city hotels.

Hotels charge for parking because they cannot get away with sneaking into the room in the middle of night and emptying your wallet.

ok, seriously - MOST hotels that charge separately for parking do so because of the high price of land and that their customers primarily do not need parking facilities. I think the scenario painted by Shaz60 is another consideration.

And suppose it WAS "simply" part of the room rate. With the high occupancy taxes in many cities, would you want to pay the (for example) extra $8 in taxes on that extra $40 the hotel charges for your room with "free" parking??

I once worked for a large music distributor with retail stores. The charge for EACH ITEM sold it its mall stores was $1 more than the other stores. So people who think parking is free (as in Mall vs downtown) are only kidding themselves. And as someone who walks and takes public transit as much as I can, I wish all businesses would stop providing "free" parking and give me a break on prices. What other big piece of private property gets more preferential treatment than the automobile??

i agree with rb...

parking is a valuable commodity and it's about time the driver pays for it. the cost of building, maintaining, insuring, and patrolling/securing car parks is huge. Nevermind the social costs of paving over half of the world.

businesses for the most part bear this cost because people expect free parking almost as a right...charging by most businesses (suburban stores, shopping centres, etc) would be bad for business so they provide it free and pass the costs on to all customers - drivers or not.

the result is that driving a car is a subsidised activity while taking other forms of transport is generally not. until drivers pay true costs, cars will continue to multiply across the land.

slightly off the main topic but i believe that employees using a company provided car park should be taxed for this company provided benefit...just as an employee must pay tax on public transport subsidies if paid by the employer.

"cute" Tara from Vegas..girlfriend as distiguished from boyfriend..well, you ARE from Vegas. We're a bit more provincial here in Reno, and I could not guarantee "what happens in Reno, stays in Reno" so my "triangle" days are well behind me.

Hi Crefloors, click on Tara_from_Vegas name and that will give you a good chuckle for the evening. Take care dear one, and hope the Reno weather has cooled down a bit although I doubt it. Time for SF and the cool weather again I think!

LoveItaly: I was going to say that I remembered Tara but then people WILL start talking!!!!! Was a little cooler here last night. Now, why is it when you put bacon in a hot pan, it comes out smaller and I've been here in Reno at 100+ degrees and my hips are still the same size as they were last winter? Frankly, I just don't get it.

nytraveler;

I will try one last time to get you to reread my original post. I do not want free parking. I merely wonder why hotels don't build the cost into the price of the room because many many people complain about it, hence a public relations mistake IMO. That's all I'm trying to say here. All those items I listed (shampoo, soap, water, ice) are NO different from parking. Some people use 'em, some don't. Especially breakfast. Why should I have to pay for you to eat a nice hot breakfast when I generally skip it? Why is that different from parking? It is "a standard item that every guest could you. They may choose not to" as you yourself say. The bottom line is the parking lot, like the soap and breakfast food are part of the hotel experience for most people and so everyone should pay for them.

Do you read a single one of the responses.

I don't drive. I fly, or take a train, when I travel. I shouldn't have to pay the high price of big-city parking because you insist on driving. Because parking in big cities is often (a) expensive, (b) run by someone other than the hotel and (c) only used by small number of customers, it isn't fair or efficient to spread out the cost of parking and charge those who don't use it.

If you want free parking, stay in a hotel out near the interestate.

Do read a single one of my posts, MikeT? I DO NOT want free parking!! I brought it up becasue tons of people DO choose a hotel based on free parking.

When I called Embassy suites hotel they quoted me a rate of $170. Then I told them I had a wife and child. Now the rate is $189. So guess what? Breakfast isn't really free at Embassy Suites after all! Now MikeT, couldn't I simply inform them that we would not be needing breakfast, thank you, and get the lower rate? Somehow I don't think so, and neither should non-drivers get out of paying for parking. The analagy fits like a glove.

It doesn't fit at all. Most people who go to a hotel that features "free" breakfast are going to eat the breakfast, but only a small number of people actually use parking, especially in big cities.

I should not have to pay for parking--which would tack on $20 a day or so--just because you need I should help foot the bill for you needing to have your car with you at all times.

Nor should I foot the bill for you feeling the need to eat a hearty breakfast every morning. I stay for the room. These "free breakfast" are moneywasters IMO, so you pay for it. Ya see. The argument just doesn't work.

Or why should I have to pay the "spa fee" when I'm not using it? I have to pay the spa fee so they can pro-rate the expense so they don't have to have a separate, higher charge, for those that DO want to use it. And so it goes...round and round .........I will have to say, regarding parking, up to now I have not had to pay for parking when I didn't have a car, but I HAVE had to pay spa fees and other charges and these charges are NOT negotiable.

Hey Crefloors, love the bacon/hip question, LOL. And don't have a good answer! But it sure is a good question.

Only a small percentage of hotels have "free breakfast" but every hotel has a parking dilemma of some sort.

Part of this comes from the fact that I live in a big city (DC) and generally travel to cities, often for business. Parking is always an expensive proposition, more expensive than tossing some sweet rolls and coffee out on a table and calling it breakfast.

I also think this is a supply/demand issue. By tacking on charges, the hotel is trying to create a disincentive for people to drive. Space is limited in big cities and there is no way that every guest could park at the hotel. Thus, by charging separately, you are creating a disincentive to discourage people from parking.

Let me give an example. If parking were included in the price of my room in NYC, I would maybe drive. But because of the expense of parking, I will take the train instead to avoid two or three nights of parking. Thus the cost has served as a financial disincentive, thus encouraging me from driving (and parking) and saving the hotel from feeling obliged to offer parking to every guest.

So why can the hotels in LV all provide free parking. Because there is TONS AND TONS of empty land. That doesn't exist in big cities.

To make money?

Not sure how much your NYC parking is, MikeT, but EmbassySuites has determined that my family of 3 breakfast will cost them $19 a day. Also, some have mentioned a pool/hottub. I never use it at a hotel and know from experience how expensive these are to maintain. The newspaper I never read. I could go on and on. Again, my only curiosity is why hotels don't merely tack the parking charge onto the total bill like the pool maintenence, newspaper, breakfast, etc. to avoid peopple being angry at the %@! parking fee. Now you will respond that YOU don't park a car...And I will respond that I don't use the pool...

Because there are more people like me than there are people like you. <g>

Business travellers are more coveted than leisure travellers and therefore parking, which is less used by business travellers, is a fee.

Who are these people, btw, who complain about the parking fee at a city hotel? What world do they live in that they believe that parking is going to be free and why are they shocked that they have to pay?