Another point to bear in mind, which helps to explain the difference, is that for many years the company operating Hiltons in the US (which was an American company) and the company operating Hilton hotels outside (which was a British company) were completely separate, with different ownership and different management. The British company couldn't use the Hilton name in the US, and the US company couldn't use the Hilton name outside it (which is why, incidentally, the US company started the international Conrad brand - so they could compete in the luxury market outside the US using a name associated with the founder of the group). So for many many years the brands diverged, even though the two organisations co-operated on booking sites, rewards programmes and so on which made it look as though they were the same group. The two companies only came together again in 2005 when the US company bought out the UK company.
These things are always subjective, if you stayed at Hilton Cairns or Darwin you would probably think the opposite, poor product and average service, not even a bottle of water in the fridge, just terrible for what they say is 4-5 Stars, they obviously put a lot more effort into their capital city hotels.
I've also stayed at Hilton Cairns. Back in 2012. I found it OK. Lounge was nice enough for me. Also in Adelaide and Brisbane. In USA I've recently stayed at Hilton LAX and Hilton Calver city in LA - both rubbish in comparison to Australia. I've also stayed at Hilton in Seattle, Hilton Bellvue in WA and Hilton in Midland TX plus at George Bush in Houston. All are very poor in comparison to Australian variety of Hilton hotels. As a Diomond member.
Hilton has so many more properties in the US, and so many more brands to differentiate itself ... Waldorf Astoria, Conrad, Hilton, DoubleTree, Hilton Garden Inn, Hampton Inn, Embassy Suites, Homewood Suites etc etc etc.
But also, given the sheer number of hotels in the US, perhaps some of their older properties simply haven't been brought up to or kept at the expected brand standard? I understand most of the hotels are franchised as well, which might lead to further variation?
I have to say, I have stayed in some very lovely Hampton Inns and Garden Inns in the US which are at the bottom of the Hilton pecking order. The ones I stayed in were the newer builds, and they had big rooms, were modern, very clean and comfy, and while missing some of the 'bling' of a 5 star, were arguably better hotels vs some of the older properties that were higher in the brand pecking order.
Can the same the said for the 'Sheraton' and 'Marriott' brands as well? Have a much higher 'status' as a brand in Asia/Australia than in the US?
Hilton has so many more properties in the US, and so many more brands to differentiate itself ... Waldorf Astoria, Conrad, Hilton, DoubleTree, Hilton Garden Inn, Hampton Inn, Embassy Suites, Homewood Suites etc etc etc.
But also, given the sheer number of hotels in the US, perhaps some of their older properties simply haven't been brought up to or kept at the expected brand standard? I understand most of the hotels are franchised as well, which might lead to further variation?
I have to say, I have stayed in some very lovely Hampton Inns and Garden Inns in the US which are at the bottom of the Hilton pecking order. The ones I stayed in were the newer builds, and they had big rooms, were modern, very clean and comfy, and while missing some of the 'bling' of a 5 star, were arguably better hotels vs some of the older properties that were higher in the brand pecking order.
Can the same the said for the 'Sheraton' and 'Marriott' brands as well? Have a much higher 'status' as a brand in Asia/Australia than in the US?
Absolutely. Sheratons in Asia and Australia are MUCH more upmarket than the same brand in the US. And it flows down the chain ladder, as well - Doubletrees in Asia, for example, are always much better than Hiltons in the US, even though Doubletrees in the US are Hilton's downmarket brand.
Last editedby John Phelan at Jan 20, 2019, 11:44 PM.
These things are always subjective, if you stayed at Hilton Cairns or Darwin you would probably think the opposite, poor product and average service, not even a bottle of water in the fridge, just terrible for what they say is 4-5 Stars, they obviously put a lot more effort into their capital city hotels.
I’m curious about your Cairns comment, as I am considering staying there soon. How long ago was your experience? If I can stay at Doubletree for almost $100/n less (4-star), by your comment, I might be better off.
Why is there such a large differance in the product offering between Hilton hotels in Australia and Hilton hotels in the USA? In Australia, I've stayed in Hilton hotels in Perth, Sydney and Melbourne and they're always excellent. Specifically with good lounges (or vouchers for food and drinks) and great breakfasts. In America, Hilton hotel lounges offer really rubbish amenity and charge for drinks. And their breakfast offerings are completely naff. Why so different? I'm asking specifically about Hilton branded Hotels.
The Cairns Hilton has a standard that is lower than any Hilton in the US, if that’s possible!
These things are always subjective, if you stayed at Hilton Cairns or Darwin you would probably think the opposite, poor product and average service, not even a bottle of water in the fridge, just terrible for what they say is 4-5 Stars, they obviously put a lot more effort into their capital city hotels.
I’m curious about your Cairns comment, as I am considering staying there soon. How long ago was your experience? If I can stay at Doubletree for almost $100/n less (4-star), by your comment, I might be better off.
Stay at the Doubletree. Not worth the extra $$$
I agree, go for the Doubletree. The Hilton will have you grinding your teeth!!!
Hilton spawned out of a need in the US which is not as common here in Australia.
Big US companies tend to sign up to Hotel chains exclusively where here in Australia, most companies align to a panel of hotels in each city which may or may not include the big brands like Hilton.
US companies could then reliably dispatch their staff off to just about any destination across the country and be assured a hotel in the chain was there. This had led to a proliferation of standards and service and subsequently having the various sub brands but all aligned to 'Hilton' via contractual agreements, rewards etc.
As a Diamond Member up until last year, I've used them extensively in the US and Australia for 4 or 5 years.
The properties and service are so inconsistent. I tried one of their Curio properties in New York (The Renwick) last year in a last ditch attempt - big fail.
Ironically, the best Hilton property I stayed in last year was one of their Hampton's properties in Chicago (Downtown North Loop) - it was excellent. I'd never stayed at a Hamptons property and I had low expectations but it was excellent..
I've moved on from Hilton now - how liberating and there's a whole lot better out there, even with zero status or perks!
In my opinion, this is normal for the US where the quality of the hotels are some of the lowest in the world. I recently stayed in a Sheraton in Denver and it was awful. The rooms were aged, dark brown and depressing, and the food awful. The two previous Sheratons (Singapore & the Maldives) that I had been to where superb and such a huge contrast. In the US, the better hotels seem to in the holiday regions such as Hawaii.
It's not just Hiltons in the US which are run down and old. Marriott, Sheraton, Hyatt, Crowne Plaza etc are pretty ordinary also. I think it's because most of them were built in the 50s and 60s and there is only so much you can do to these types of properties to keep them up to date. In saying that, the Hilton in Panama City is one of the best hotels in the portfolio. Hilton Auckland is excellent, but the Hilton in Anaheim is one of the worst hotels I've stayed in anywhere.
Ian_from_HKG
Ian_from_HKG
CX
Member since 05 Jun 2012
Total posts 61
Another point to bear in mind, which helps to explain the difference, is that for many years the company operating Hiltons in the US (which was an American company) and the company operating Hilton hotels outside (which was a British company) were completely separate, with different ownership and different management. The British company couldn't use the Hilton name in the US, and the US company couldn't use the Hilton name outside it (which is why, incidentally, the US company started the international Conrad brand - so they could compete in the luxury market outside the US using a name associated with the founder of the group). So for many many years the brands diverged, even though the two organisations co-operated on booking sites, rewards programmes and so on which made it look as though they were the same group. The two companies only came together again in 2005 when the US company bought out the UK company.
drgmarshall
drgmarshall
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 10 May 2012
Total posts 106
I've also stayed at Hilton Cairns. Back in 2012. I found it OK. Lounge was nice enough for me. Also in Adelaide and Brisbane. In USA I've recently stayed at Hilton LAX and Hilton Calver city in LA - both rubbish in comparison to Australia. I've also stayed at Hilton in Seattle, Hilton Bellvue in WA and Hilton in Midland TX plus at George Bush in Houston. All are very poor in comparison to Australian variety of Hilton hotels. As a Diomond member.
andyf
andyf
Virgin Australia - Velocity Rewards
Member since 07 Dec 2014
Total posts 55
John Phelan
John Phelan
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 28 Oct 2011
Total posts 261
Absolutely. Sheratons in Asia and Australia are MUCH more upmarket than the same brand in the US. And it flows down the chain ladder, as well - Doubletrees in Asia, for example, are always much better than Hiltons in the US, even though Doubletrees in the US are Hilton's downmarket brand.
NQflyer
NQflyer
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 02 Jun 2015
Total posts 61
Stay at the Doubletree. Not worth the extra $$$
Lilo
Lilo
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 23 Oct 2015
Total posts 3
The Cairns Hilton has a standard that is lower than any Hilton in the US, if that’s possible!
Lilo
Lilo
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 23 Oct 2015
Total posts 3
Stay at the Doubletree. Not worth the extra $$$
I agree, go for the Doubletree. The Hilton will have you grinding your teeth!!!
BJ01
BJ01
Virgin Australia - Velocity Rewards
Member since 07 Dec 2015
Total posts 57
As a Diamond Member up until last year, I've used them extensively in the US and Australia for 4 or 5 years.
Stephen D
Stephen D
Virgin Australia - Velocity Rewards
Member since 12 Nov 2017
Total posts 42
antkleve
antkleve
American Airlines - AAdvantage
Member since 15 Feb 2013
Total posts 18
It's not just Hiltons in the US which are run down and old. Marriott, Sheraton, Hyatt, Crowne Plaza etc are pretty ordinary also. I think it's because most of them were built in the 50s and 60s and there is only so much you can do to these types of properties to keep them up to date. In saying that, the Hilton in Panama City is one of the best hotels in the portfolio. Hilton Auckland is excellent, but the Hilton in Anaheim is one of the worst hotels I've stayed in anywhere.
Hobart Flyer
Hobart Flyer
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 11 Jun 2018
Total posts 3
Same is trus of Hyatt!