"Madonna" wrote in message
...
Tchiowa wrote:
It bothers
me whenever one of them posts that unless you live on $5 a day you
can't experience the local culture. That, of course, implies that
everyone is poor and that any local who has any level of financial
success automatically loses his culture.

I think the point is more about the Hiltons, Marriotts, ... are more or
less similar all over the world.

That may be true in the US, but, at least with respect to Marriotts, is not
true internationally. Many international Marriotts were formally
individually-owned grand hotels. In Rome, the Marriott is the Grand Flora,
which is quite unique (and quite nice). In London, it's now called
Grosvernor Square -- I don't know the original name -- but it has a
completely unique character. Same for the Champs Elysees Marriott in Paris.
Not only is it the only hotel on the Champs Elysee, but it has a unique
Parisian character not at all like any of the other international Marriotts.
The same is true in Milan. The JW was, to my knowledge, built specifically
as a Marriott, but it is quite spectacular and has nothing in common with
the American implementations except the name.


It's a bit like going to a McDonald's
in Nova Scotia, ordering a McLobster, then saying you've 'experienced
local food delicacies'.

I'm sorry, but I completely disagree. I've stayed in 5-star "local hotels"
as well as the international chains, and there is nothing to distinguish the
two except that one will give me frequent stay points.