Hacker News Reader

Comment by joosters | Hacker News Reader

I find it ironic that it's always the expensive hotels that charge for wifi while the cheaper places mostly give it away for free. I guess business customers are more happy to pay since they can expense it.

View on HN

I read somewhere (HN, maybe?) that the high-end hotels were the first to adopt, before the market for these things was well fleshed out, and often ended up in absurd, long-term contracts with 3rd party services/providers.

That, combined with the fact that, yes, businessfolk will just expense it, leads to the current situation.

I was the founding CTO and VP of Engineering at Wayport (now AT&T WiFi Services.)

The answer is really, "because they are rapacious".

You're more or less right.

I used to work for a fairly large hotel chain that would charge ridiculous amounts for internet. Thinking back it wasn't too ridiculous (certainly not 10k for 3 days as someone said above) but it was still a high price.

The only people to really use the service were business people, and they'd always charge it back to their companies.

The WiFi itself was merely a luxury we offered to encourage business people to stay in the properties because "WiFi available" made for better advertisements.

The "10k for 3 days" is not the type of charge for a guest using wifi in a room. It's the type of charge for a large event using wifi in the hotel's convention/conference center. And that number is not so far off what a lot of places charge for such things.

Even with multi-day conferences, we never charged rates that high. That is still charging about ~$7.40/person/day for a 450 person conference.

I regularly help run events which have 500-ish people on the extreme low end, and 1000-1500+ and sometimes even larger on the high end. The quoted rates do not sound that far off from what I've seen.

Heck, I know one convention center that charges $1500 just to hang a small banner over the door of the ballroom with your event's logo on it.

This was answered on reddit a few years ago

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/e2uui/why_is_wifi...

Aside from the specifics of wifi, this is the way hotels work. Going higher up the chain means you get more employees, better location, better fixtures, and better amenities. Those amenities might include a real health club, a real restaurant, and a real bell hop instead of a room with a treadmill, a counter full of grocery store pastries, and a cart with wheels on it. In order to stay cost competitive, the fancy hotels don't necessarily charge everybody to use the amenities, they just charge those who use them. (You could substitute "overcharge" in that last sentence depending on how you feel about hotel chains.)

couldn't agree more. When I think of high end, I think of 'all inclusive' and other marketing speak intended to convey a sense of worrylessness, just pay and forget. And then they charge for checking email...I guess they probably know that someone looking to spend twice as much on a room (at least) is probably not bothered by a bit more for internet, but it seems like they should just tack it on to the rate if they are determined to squeeze out that tiny bit more revenue for internet. Granted, I don't know what their margins look like, maybe thats where they come from althought that would be pretty pathetic. I suppose if that is a decent way of adding margin, they can slightly lower their rate but given that most of their peers are probably in the same boat I can't quite reason why they wouldn't just include it.

Because most people shop hotels for the room price, not for the Wi-Fi price. I've been bit by this a couple times simply because I forgot to check and see if the hotel I'm staying at offers free Wi-Fi.

Simply to charge business clients more. The people behind these businesses are really archaic in their thoughts-- typically its the world's worst manager operating on the world's tightest budget and the service staff have to try to hold everything together.

I stayed at a Hilton in the UK and they had a 1L bottle of water on the desk in the room, with a little price tag on it: £3.95 (~$6.50). I thought it was very sneaky - guests are used to paying for things in the fridge but not those left out on the desk.

That's a fairly common practice throughout Europe and even in some part of the US (e.g. Vegas). You can even request certain brands of water be left in your room from their water menu.

As long as they clearly label them as a cost+ and provide you those dinky plastic cups you can drink tap water with, I am happy.

3 euros, 3 pounds sterling, or 3 dollars is common. I guess the US wins in the "over-priced-water-in-your-room" war. There must be something magical about the $3 price tag.

Hm, I assumed it was an American chain or 3-5* hotel thing. I've stayed >100 nights in hotels in Europe and only seen paid bottles of water perhaps a handful of times. I guess we stay at different kind of hotels.

Much more exciting have been the freebies (zero status/independent hotels): chocolates, biscuits, wine, platters of local delicacies, fruit baskets, free non-alcoholic mini-bar replenished daily... :-)

The same over here. I stayed at a DoubleTree (also a Hilton hotel) in Monrovia CA a few weeks ago. They also had a bottle of water on the desk with a $5 USD price tag.

Ironically, they gave me at least $5 worth of chocolate chip cookies when I checked in.

It doesn't seem that ironic to me - it doesn't really follow that a more expensive hotel would be more affordable when you arrive. The bar, restaurant, etc. are all more expensive, too.

That analogy breaks because the bars and restaurants are also much nicer, while the wifi at expensive hotels is no better. The better analogy is with basic toiletries, cots, and similar items of fixed quality where they really are more likely to be comped at a more expensive hotel.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com