02 February 2010

Website's lists of dirtiest hotels under fire

LONDON - The Independent newspaper in the UK has been taking a look at TripAdvisorÃ¢â¬â¢s hotel reviews, and most especially its recent listing of the dirtiest hotels around the world.

Writer Jonathan Brown says the hotel industry is growing increasingly concerned at the power wielded by Internet sites such as TripAdvisor whose anonymous reviews can destroy an establishment's reputation.

It comes after hoteliers reacted with fury, claiming their businesses were damaged, after being included in a list of the 10 "Dirtiest Hotels" in the UK.

Bob Cotton, chief executive of the British Hospitality Association, said hotels across Europe were seeking to persuade the EU Commission to overhaul the rules governing website reviews to ensure that they have been posted by genuine guests and not by rivals or people simply out to cause mischief.

"You can't ban these on-line comments Ã¢â¬' that is like de-inventing the atomic bomb Ã¢â¬' and I am in favour of all these methods of modern communication. But we need a fair crack of the whip," said Cotton

The TravelMole USA newswire last week reported that San FranciscoÃ¢â¬â¢s Heritage Marina Hotel was named by travellers as dirtiest in the US for 2010.

"If you are filming a horror flick or a slasher movie, this is the place for you. If you are a NORMAL person, avoid it like the plague!" one traveller warned about an October stay at the Heritage Marina, which has earned negative marks from 80 percent of TripAdvisor reviewers.Ã¢â¬~¨

In Asia, TripAdvisor named its dirtiest hotel as the Phi Phi Don Chukit Resort in Thailand, followed by the Raj Regency in Chennai and the Goldkist Beach Resort in Singapore.

TripAdvisor maintains that its technology can weed out suspicious hotel reviews.

Post your comment

Your Comments (6)

Trip Advisor Advertising

I am somewhat surprised that the TripAdvisor business model is not known to every hotelier, they are for better or worse, (probably the latter) influential. They started by claiming to be totally independent and even asked me to add hotels on my website into their system, but in return I had to put a link back to their site. I investigated and found they had "affiliate" arrangements with several of the big players like HRN (became Hotels.com) etc. Many naive hoteliers went along with them though, which meant that many were advertising what has now become their worst nightmare. Having built up a lot of traffic that way they were bought by Expedia, who also acquired Hotels.com (at that time all three were part of the Barry Diller Empire). As computers became more powerful they have added a lot of "user" content; reviews, pictures etc. Their safeguards seem to be stopping multiple reviews for the same hotel from the same computer or IP address plus a screening for certain words. If you look at a hotel they list booking agents you can book it through, some of those companies are Expedia owned, some aren't. The common factor is that they all pay commission or CTR (click through) to TripAdvisor. Of course with Hotels.com and Expedia that is just internal accounting. There is no question that some reviews are grossly unfair and are dictated by circumstances far beyond the hotelier's power to control, (you back your car into the hotel sign and so take it out on the hotel syndrome) but I repeat what I said earlier, if there are enough reviews they do tend to reflect the consumer's experience.

By Martin Drew, Thursday, February 4, 2010
One hand feeds the other..

Expedia owns Tripadvisor, so effectively they are paying themselves by advertising on Tripadvisor. Wonder if their competitors can advertise on Tripadvisor or are all other sites including "sponsored links" on Tripadvisor owned by Expedia? Lucrative business model!

By john nicholls, Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Rival reviews

have to agree with Paul re hotels using travel review sites as a vehicle for self inflation and even to contribute negative review for rival hotels!

By marco saio, Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Look at the number of Reviews

First, Expedia own TripAdvisor so of course the advertise on it! Second what needs to be looked at is the volume of reviews for a property. Rivals might post one or two knocking reviews, but they cannot post hundreds unless they tour the country using lots of different Internet Cafes. If a hotel only has one review, good or bad, ignore it because it might be the owner hyping it or somone dissing it, but once the reviews get into double figures the consensus will tend to be a pretty accurate reflection of consumer thinking.

By Martin Drew, Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Holiday accommodation

I can only agree with the last review.One of our guests, smashed a ceramic cooktop ($600 at cost) admitted doing it, refused to pay for it, then put a review on trip advisor, claiming" it was probably broken before we arrived" Trup Advisor happily put up the review. From what I've seen they accept no responsibility for untrue reviews. If they were based in Australia I wouldsurely sue the bastards! My Travel Agent refuses to acknowledge they exist and I can only agree with him. Just bullshit by vested interests. I suggest Virtual Tourist.

By Peter Crymble, Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Trip Advisor

I have already commented about Trip Advisor in two previous comments. Totally agree about the situation with false reviews and more commissions to Expedia who advertise on it. Its a big con!!!

By paul rowland, Monday, February 1, 2010