First visit to Manila in 15 years

What you considered "odd" was really my attempt to read between the lines
and do some extrapolation. The star system may be fairly consistent in the
US but it tends to break down when you go overseas. A 3-star hotel in the PI
is probably the equivalent of a 1-star hotel in the US. Someone recommended
the Manila Hotel which is supposedly a 5-star hotel and last time I was
there, it is really a 3-star or at most a 4-star hotel when compared to US
hotels. Besides, the hotels you recommended are infamous for renting out
rooms on a "short-term" basis, i.e. by the hour and I'll give you 1 guess as
to what these rooms are being used for. You may check into a room and find
out they didn't even bother to change the sheets after a short-term rental
and God knows what was left behind.

"Chris Blunt" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:26:33 GMT, "punk" wrote:

I would probably recommend Robinsons. Visit their website
http://www.manila-condos.com/robinsons/makati/index.htm

However, this is one area where there are numerous choices in terms of
hotels since it is close to Roxas Blvd. Someone already mentioned the
Manila
Hotel. Some chain hotels on Roxas are the Hyatt and the Westin. I have
stayed at both and the Westin is a bit more plush and correspondingly a
bit
more expensive but the Hyatt is more than adequate and may be more cost
effective.

They're all nice hotels but rather odd recommendations to someone
asking for 3-star hotels. I would assume from what he says that he's
looking to pay less than 2,000 Pesos a night.


"Qansett" wrote in message
u...
I need some information about how to travel safely from the Airport
to downtown Ermita, without being fleeced by Taxi drivers or thieves.

What is the fare in Peso's or US dollars??

I also need some info about any 3 star hotels in Ermita

Any info would be highly appreciated.

punk wrote:

Someone recommended
the Manila Hotel which is supposedly a 5-star hotel and last time I was
there, it is really a 3-star or at most a 4-star hotel when compared to US
hotels.

So I'm curious as to your criteria: What features is the Manila Hotel
actually lacking,
to deprive it for 1 or 2 of its stars ?

MHald

On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:19:07 +0200, Magnus Hald
wrote:



punk wrote:

Someone recommended
the Manila Hotel which is supposedly a 5-star hotel and last time I was
there, it is really a 3-star or at most a 4-star hotel when compared to US
hotels.

So I'm curious as to your criteria: What features is the Manila Hotel
actually lacking,
to deprive it for 1 or 2 of its stars ?

For me, its not so much lack of features as the generally shabby
appearance of the hotel. The lobby is very impressive at first sight,
but when you look closer you see the lack of attention to detail.
Tears in carpets that haven't been repaired properly and things like
that. Walk around the pool area and you can see paving stones missing
and a general lack of quality maintenance. I haven't seen the rooms,
but I would guess that's reflected there as well.

That doesn't seem to stop them charging top prices though.

Chris

Chris Blunt wrote in message . ..
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:19:07 +0200, Magnus Hald
wrote:

So I'm curious as to your criteria: What features is the Manila Hotel
actually lacking,
to deprive it for 1 or 2 of its stars ?

For me, its not so much lack of features as the generally shabby
appearance of the hotel. The lobby is very impressive at first sight,
but when you look closer you see the lack of attention to detail.
Tears in carpets that haven't been repaired properly and things like
that. Walk around the pool area and you can see paving stones missing
and a general lack of quality maintenance. I haven't seen the rooms,
but I would guess that's reflected there as well.

That doesn't seem to stop them charging top prices though.

Chris

I can not second any of your observations, but maybe I simply
haven't studied the carpets thoroughly enough...

And the Makati Shangri-La is twice as expensive as Manila Hotel
€ 240 vs € 120.

hence MH yields considerable value for money

Magnus

Chris Blunt wrote in message . ..
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:19:07 +0200, Magnus Hald
wrote:

So I'm curious as to your criteria: What features is the Manila Hotel
actually lacking,
to deprive it for 1 or 2 of its stars ?

For me, its not so much lack of features as the generally shabby
appearance of the hotel. The lobby is very impressive at first sight,
but when you look closer you see the lack of attention to detail.
Tears in carpets that haven't been repaired properly and things like
that. Walk around the pool area and you can see paving stones missing
and a general lack of quality maintenance. I haven't seen the rooms,
but I would guess that's reflected there as well.

That doesn't seem to stop them charging top prices though.

Chris

I can not second any of your observations, but maybe I simply
haven't studied the carpets thoroughly enough...

And the Makati Shangri-La is twice as expensive as Manila Hotel
€ 240 vs € 120.

hence MH yields considerable value for money

Magnus

On 20 Sep 2004 22:57:01 -0700, (Magnus Hald)
wrote:

Chris Blunt wrote in message . ..
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:19:07 +0200, Magnus Hald
wrote:

So I'm curious as to your criteria: What features is the Manila Hotel
actually lacking,
to deprive it for 1 or 2 of its stars ?

For me, its not so much lack of features as the generally shabby
appearance of the hotel. The lobby is very impressive at first sight,
but when you look closer you see the lack of attention to detail.
Tears in carpets that haven't been repaired properly and things like
that. Walk around the pool area and you can see paving stones missing
and a general lack of quality maintenance. I haven't seen the rooms,
but I would guess that's reflected there as well.

That doesn't seem to stop them charging top prices though.

Chris

I can not second any of your observations, but maybe I simply
haven't studied the carpets thoroughly enough...

And the Makati Shangri-La is twice as expensive as Manila Hotel
€ 240 vs € 120.

hence MH yields considerable value for money

Magnus

I'm not sure where you got those prices from, but according to their
respective web sites, the lowest room rates I can see being offered at
each of those hotels today are as follows:

Makati Shangri-La: "DELUXE ROOM WITH KING 40 SM BROADBAND
INTERNET/VOICEMAIL/IN ROOM SAFE LUXURY AMENITIES-SERVICES INC 24HR
ROOM SVC....... US$156"

Manila Hotel: "Superior Deluxe Park. Cyber Rate.... US$150"

There's not much difference in prices there, but I'd say the Makati
Shangri-La is of vastly superior quality and has far more modern
facilities than the rather tired looking Manila Hotel.

I acknowledge that the Manila Hotel has an old-world historical feel
about it, and for some that may be an attraction. You can just imagine
the hotel being used as a film set for old movies.

Chris

On 20 Sep 2004 22:57:01 -0700, (Magnus Hald)
wrote:

Chris Blunt wrote in message . ..
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:19:07 +0200, Magnus Hald
wrote:

So I'm curious as to your criteria: What features is the Manila Hotel
actually lacking,
to deprive it for 1 or 2 of its stars ?

For me, its not so much lack of features as the generally shabby
appearance of the hotel. The lobby is very impressive at first sight,
but when you look closer you see the lack of attention to detail.
Tears in carpets that haven't been repaired properly and things like
that. Walk around the pool area and you can see paving stones missing
and a general lack of quality maintenance. I haven't seen the rooms,
but I would guess that's reflected there as well.

That doesn't seem to stop them charging top prices though.

Chris

I can not second any of your observations, but maybe I simply
haven't studied the carpets thoroughly enough...

And the Makati Shangri-La is twice as expensive as Manila Hotel
€ 240 vs € 120.

hence MH yields considerable value for money

Magnus

I'm not sure where you got those prices from, but according to their
respective web sites, the lowest room rates I can see being offered at
each of those hotels today are as follows:

Makati Shangri-La: "DELUXE ROOM WITH KING 40 SM BROADBAND
INTERNET/VOICEMAIL/IN ROOM SAFE LUXURY AMENITIES-SERVICES INC 24HR
ROOM SVC....... US$156"

Manila Hotel: "Superior Deluxe Park. Cyber Rate.... US$150"

There's not much difference in prices there, but I'd say the Makati
Shangri-La is of vastly superior quality and has far more modern
facilities than the rather tired looking Manila Hotel.

I acknowledge that the Manila Hotel has an old-world historical feel
about it, and for some that may be an attraction. You can just imagine
the hotel being used as a film set for old movies.

Chris

On 20 Sep 2004 22:57:01 -0700, (Magnus Hald)
wrote:

Chris Blunt wrote in message . ..
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:19:07 +0200, Magnus Hald
wrote:

So I'm curious as to your criteria: What features is the Manila Hotel
actually lacking,
to deprive it for 1 or 2 of its stars ?

For me, its not so much lack of features as the generally shabby
appearance of the hotel. The lobby is very impressive at first sight,
but when you look closer you see the lack of attention to detail.
Tears in carpets that haven't been repaired properly and things like
that. Walk around the pool area and you can see paving stones missing
and a general lack of quality maintenance. I haven't seen the rooms,
but I would guess that's reflected there as well.

That doesn't seem to stop them charging top prices though.

Chris

I can not second any of your observations, but maybe I simply
haven't studied the carpets thoroughly enough...

And the Makati Shangri-La is twice as expensive as Manila Hotel
€ 240 vs € 120.

hence MH yields considerable value for money

Magnus

I'm not sure where you got those prices from, but according to their
respective web sites, the lowest room rates I can see being offered at
each of those hotels today are as follows:

Makati Shangri-La: "DELUXE ROOM WITH KING 40 SM BROADBAND
INTERNET/VOICEMAIL/IN ROOM SAFE LUXURY AMENITIES-SERVICES INC 24HR
ROOM SVC....... US$156"

Manila Hotel: "Superior Deluxe Park. Cyber Rate.... US$150"

There's not much difference in prices there, but I'd say the Makati
Shangri-La is of vastly superior quality and has far more modern
facilities than the rather tired looking Manila Hotel.

I acknowledge that the Manila Hotel has an old-world historical feel
about it, and for some that may be an attraction. You can just imagine
the hotel being used as a film set for old movies.

Chris

"Chris Blunt" wrote in message
...
On 20 Sep 2004 22:57:01 -0700, (Magnus Hald)
wrote:

Chris Blunt wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:19:07 +0200, Magnus Hald
wrote:

So I'm curious as to your criteria: What features is the Manila Hotel
actually lacking,
to deprive it for 1 or 2 of its stars ?

For me, its not so much lack of features as the generally shabby
appearance of the hotel. The lobby is very impressive at first sight,
but when you look closer you see the lack of attention to detail.
Tears in carpets that haven't been repaired properly and things like
that. Walk around the pool area and you can see paving stones missing
and a general lack of quality maintenance. I haven't seen the rooms,
but I would guess that's reflected there as well.

That doesn't seem to stop them charging top prices though.

Chris

I can not second any of your observations, but maybe I simply
haven't studied the carpets thoroughly enough...

And the Makati Shangri-La is twice as expensive as Manila Hotel
? 240 vs ? 120.

hence MH yields considerable value for money

Magnus

I'm not sure where you got those prices from, but according to their
respective web sites, the lowest room rates I can see being offered at
each of those hotels today are as follows:

Makati Shangri-La: "DELUXE ROOM WITH KING 40 SM BROADBAND
INTERNET/VOICEMAIL/IN ROOM SAFE LUXURY AMENITIES-SERVICES INC 24HR
ROOM SVC....... US$156"

Manila Hotel: "Superior Deluxe Park. Cyber Rate.... US$150"

There's not much difference in prices there, but I'd say the Makati
Shangri-La is of vastly superior quality and has far more modern
facilities than the rather tired looking Manila Hotel.

I acknowledge that the Manila Hotel has an old-world historical feel
about it, and for some that may be an attraction. You can just imagine
the hotel being used as a film set for old movies.

Chris

A few years back I stayed in the Manila hotel for about 1/3 the rate of the
Shangri La.
The price difference seemed about right.
The Manila Hotel is OK but run down (assuming it has not been renovated
since.)

I acknowledge that the Manila Hotel has an old-world historical feel
about it, and for some that may be an attraction. You can just imagine
the hotel being used as a film set for old movies.

Chris

Chris, I agree with what you are saying. For frequent visitors and businessmen
I've no doubt the Makati Shangri-La offers the best value.

But for guys like me, who only visit once every couple years, (I lived there
for 6 1/2 years back in the 70s/80s and again for 2 years in the 90s) I prefer
the Manila Hotel if for nothing more than the ambiance. You can damn near feel
MacArthur's ghost roaming the place.

~~~~~
"When a true genius appears in the world,
you may know him by this sign, that the dunces
are all in confederacy against him."

- Jonathan Swift