New York Hotels

[swallows22]

G'day!

 

Being a member in good stead with HHonors, I looked at the Hilton chain at their website first. Bit surprised that the Waldorf Astoria was less expensive than other Hilton hotels. Mind you, the Towers are double what the Astoria is.

 

Having grown up in Ohio before my move to OZ, we always thought that the Waldorf Astoria was the "place" to go. What has happened? Is it all right?

 

Further, I have asked a lad that I intend to see while in NY for a recommendation and he thought the "Out" was it. Being mindful of the discussion on this forum of that hotel, I am at a loss.

 

So any advice for this discombobulated lad [aka dirty old man] would be helpful. Max is $300 per night. Cheers!

[RockHard]

The Waldorf always offers summer specials. They're famous for that. It's a huge hotel (2 hotels actually), and they have many rooms to fill. I have more experience with the Towers because it's a popular place to put famous people.

 

You'll find many complaints on travel boards about some standard rooms at the Waldorf. Mostly, the complaints have to do with plumbing or people getting the worst rooms (no view). Every hotel in NYC has bad rooms. The building is old (although it doesn't look tattered in any way), and the plumbing needs constant care. I hear the rooms in the main hotel have been re-done. It's a project that went on forever. The lobby is very large (from Park to Lexington) and many tourists still think it's grand.

 

If you can get a great deal there, I wouldn't hesitate. Park Avenue is still very high rent. Many consider the Waldorf to be a grand destination, especially if you like brass trimmings and traditional decor. Saks, Bergdorf, Barney's, and Bloomies are all a short walk away. Central Park is a stone's throw. And if you feel the need to pray for your sins, St. Patrick's is around the corner, although it's under scaffolding at the moment.

[Atlantagaguy]

I stayed at the Waldorf a few years ago and it was fine, I had a beautiful room. This was before the remodel, I am sure they updated the rooms but I like a tradition decorated room. I have read a lot of comments about The Out, The only concern seems to be the loud noise from the club and the walls are thin. I also read it was more like a motel than a hotel. So if your one that will stay up all night and party the out could be a great place! I like to go out and then crash in a nice cozy quiet room. Be careful with a lot of the so called boutique hotels, I have stayed at a couple where you could lie across the bed and touch both walls. I tend to stay at the Marriott’s in NY, Mainly because of their rewards program. Never been disappointed, nor have I been disappointed with Hilton properties.

[happyguy2]

I also always stay at Marriotts because I am a Gold Member and the points are important for me. But I did stay at the Waldorf when I brought my mom to NYC and it was in summer and I got her a suite, very elaborate but for a real deal because it was summer. We were treated very well and really enjoyed the food and service especially. So, try to get a deal on a superior type of accommodation there and I think you won't regret it.

[+ sam.fitzpatrick]

I've stayed at the Waldorf many times on business trips (it was a "preferred" location for my former employer) and really liked the nostalgia. Yes, some times I got a room without a great view, but when on business I wasn't there for the scenery. It is always the first place I consider when going to New York.

[jankeedaddy]

In addition to the plumbing problems or rooms with interior light-well views, the Waldorf experience has been accused of having a few other bugs.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/waldorf-astoria-york-hotel-faces-bedbug-lawsuit/story?id=12566844

[citylaw1]

The Waldorf has been out since the '80's. The rooms are mediocre at best, the lobby is grand, the service is terrible, and reeks of "union" more than any hotel I've stayed at.

 

The "Out Hotel" was recommended to me by one of the young guys that works for me; this confirmed to me that I should pass.

 

Since you are only interested in Hiltons this time I'll skip my other recommendations, and suggest that you stay at the Hilton on 53rd and 7th Av. The location is very central and the rooms are fine.

[cany10011]

The Hampton Inn in Chelsea (24th and 6th?) is not a fancy hotel but very well located in the gayborhood and the rooms appear quite clean and tidy. I believe it's also part of the Hilton chain and can be redeemed with points.

[Irtwo]

The Waldorf has been out since the '80's.

 

 

That's being generous. The hotel's heyday was in the 1940's.

 

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_iqde5Op1Cy8/TRdNfQYUctI/AAAAAAAAAjY/AZgJjCSbAkE/s400/weekend+at+the+waldorf+2.jpg

[Kevin Slater]

The Hampton Inn in Chelsea (24th and 6th?) is not a fancy hotel but very well located in the gayborhood and the rooms appear quite clean and tidy. I believe it's also part of the Hilton chain and can be redeemed with points.

 

And they offer a complimentary, make-your-own-waffle breakfast every morning! I love when I get a morning client over there and can drop by the breakfast room afterwards.

 

Kevin Slater

[whipped guy]

It has been a while since I stayed at the Waldorf... the last time I did so I was in the Towers section and had a great room with all sorts of marble... a couple of friends stayed in the main section and their accommodations were "classic old fashioned" at best... no comparison. If you are a HH member the Hilton at 53rd and 6th (Avenue of the Americas) is a nice property... it has been been even longer since I stayed there, but did met an escort there a couple of years ago and it has been remodeled to give it a plush look... so it is worthy of consideration and is in a better section of town as far as accessibility to Broadway and the Arts is concerned... The Waldorf is not exactly located where the action is... I personally would not stay there... unless you might want to see the odd celebrity in the lobby.

 

Incidentally, as a Starwood member I go that route since I have racked up quite a few points.

[Diverdan]

I usually stay at one of the Sheraton hotels or one of the Hyatt hotels.... largely because I have top level status with both groups, so usually get an upgraded room for a lot less than normal. Both chains are "friendly" and I have never had a problem bringing guest to either. Look for deals on their websites, especially close to your travel dates, or sometimes, if you book a long time ahead, you can get some great deals by prepaying.

[+ WilliamM]

I do not travel enough within the United States anymore to make points important. As such, I have been liberated thankfully to try other hotels here and in Europe.

 

In New York, I recommend the Millennium UN Plaza, United Nations. The last time I stayed there I received an upgrade to a beautiful room with views of the Empire State Building, East River and at least five bridges. It was beyond stunning at night, with lights on throughout the city. It's a good deal only when the United Nations is not in session.

[swallows22]

Thanks, men. Much appreciated. Cheers!

[gilbert]

I hope this info isn't too late. I love NYC and when I go I try to stay near Times Square. Most the theaters are right there and there are quite a few attractions within walking distance. The problem is that the hotels in this area are pretty expensive. There are a few cheap places, however when I travel, staying in a decent hotel is an important part of the experience for me. If you are looking for a place that is decent and not too fancy I would suggest the Edison Hotel. It's an older hotel with traditional rooms, many of which are being refurbished. What's nice about this place is its location. It's less than 150 feet off Times Square, and there has to be at least a couple dozen theaters within a few blocks. Actually, go out the front doors and you have three theaters within 100 feet, and go out the back doors and five theaters right there. The rooms I've seen are clean and comfortable and come in a variety of sizes. I keep track of NYC hotels on Expedia and often the rooms at the Edison will be below $200. You can sometimes get a suite for a few dollars more. $170-$200 seems to be the low end of what you will pay for a decent hotel in the Times Square area.

 

I follow Expedia, because it includes all taxes and fees in its prices, and not including the sites where you can make offers for hotels, I usually find the best prices there. However, I have also found that if you go to the hotel's site sometimes the AAA or AARP discounts will get you a better deal than the discount sites.

 

For my next trip to New York City I've zeroed in on the Hilton (I believe it's the Hilton that's close to MOMA and Radio City), and the Renaissance near Times Square. The reason being location, and their rates were at the low end of the decent Times Square area hotels (around $200 a night for the dates I was looking at). Also, both have contemporary rooms which I like, and the Renaissance, I believe, has floor to ceiling windows (or close to it), which greatly appeals to me.

 

Hope you find a great place to stay.

[citylaw1]

That's being generous. The hotel's heyday was in the 1940's.

 

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_iqde5Op1Cy8/TRdNfQYUctI/AAAAAAAAAjY/AZgJjCSbAkE/s400/weekend+at+the+waldorf+2.jpg

 

Very true. The Waldorf has tried on many occasions to revive its heyday, with little to no success.

[maxwellissmart]

Very true. The Waldorf has tried on many occasions to revive its heyday, with little to no success.

 

I've been there once. It was like staying in Miss Havisham's dressing room.

[+ dupontversDC]

While I'm not a big fan of Times Square area, the Intercontinental Times Square is a great hotel. Nice room.

 

Great shower with a separate spray hose, which can come in handy for other pre-fun uses.

 

I had a really good time with four escorts there in February.

[citylaw1]

i've been there once. It was like staying in miss havisham's dressing room.

 

lol

[RockHard]

In full defense of a hotel favorite.

 

I've been there once. It was like staying in Miss Havisham's dressing room.

 

IMO, there's nothing at the Waldorf that looks like a "ruined mansion."

 

I have a lot of experience reading travel blogs. My favorite is a private blog that requires membership to avoid trolls. You have to be invited to join. It's about $100 a year, but you get access to hotel room numbers, which is key if you wish to plan an ideal getaway.

 

Every large NYC hotel gets trashed by someone. No different than Zagat's Top Ten restaurants. For every 100 people who experience delight, you'll find 5 with a horror story.

 

I think the Waldorf Astoria is a NYC gem. And all talk of heyday is silly, since no developer today could afford to build a Waldorf in Manhattan. All NYC hotels have high occupancy rates year round because that's the nature of NYC.

 

There is nothing run-down about the Waldorf. It looks very much like the photos you see on their website. The same is true for the Towers photographs, which is where I have the most experience.

 

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7246/7520863508_b81881d56e_b.jpg

 

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7273/7520867242_aa9f1f0d47_b.jpg

 

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8422/7520867188_94e42ac934_b.jpg

 

No matter what you read, this hotel is no Macy's. I've been doing business at the Waldorf for well over 30 years. Many of my clients from Hollywood and D.C. stay here, request to stay here, and I know what their rooms actually look like, and I'm quite familiar with the service. In the Towers, they still employ elevator butlers, something Saks Fifth Avenue and Bergdorf's eliminated decades ago.

 

IMO, there is no equal hotel in Times Square, nothing even remotely close. If luxury, size of room, and price-point-deal matters to you, I sincerely doubt you could top the Waldorf. Personally, I would never stay in Times Square, although I understand why some visitors think it's a unique experience. If you're lucky to get a room with a view of Times Square, it can be fun for picture taking. But you won't be able to sleep with the drapes open.

 

The Waldorf can provide a Park Avenue residential experience, which is about as luxury a real estate experience as one can get in Manhattan, and it's just two avenues east of Times Square. There's high-end shopping on Madison Ave one-block west, and tons of interesting shopping on Lexington Ave one-block east. Times Square is not known for decent food options, although things have improved since the gays have moved west into Hell's Kitchen. Still, there's nothing glamorous about anything near The Port Authority Bus Terminal.

 

As for bedbugs and lawsuits: Any large institution is vulnerable in our litigious society. The bedbug scourge hit NYC really hard in recent years, and it infected almost every residential building as well. Much has been done citywide to get the problem under control. In my "pristine" building, you are no longer permitted to discard mattresses (they cannot leave your apartment) without fully covering them in sealable plastic. And mattress manufacturers and truck delivery services have changed their rules as well.

 

Since NYC hotels cater to tourists and live or die on reputation, I have a feeling they are far more diligent than residential buildings, especially if their rooms average $1000 a night. I would argue, it's far easier to get crabs in a gay bathhouse than it is to encounter bedbugs in a luxury Manhattan hotel these days.

[citylaw1]

IMO, there's nothing at the Waldorf that looks like a "ruined mansion."

 

I have a lot of experience reading travel blogs. My favorite is a private blog that requires membership to avoid trolls. You have to be invited to join. It's about $100 a year, but you get access to hotel room numbers, which is key if you wish to plan an ideal getaway.

 

Every large NYC hotel gets trashed by someone. No different than Zagat's Top Ten restaurants. For every 100 people who experience delight, you'll find 5 with a horror story.

 

I think the Waldorf Astoria is a NYC gem. And all talk of heyday is silly, since no developer today could afford to build a Waldorf in Manhattan. All NYC hotels have high occupancy rates year round because that's the nature of NYC.

 

There is nothing run-down about the Waldorf. It looks very much like the photos you see on their website. The same is true for the Towers photographs, which is where I have the most experience.

 

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7246/7520863508_b81881d56e_b.jpg

 

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7273/7520867242_aa9f1f0d47_b.jpg

 

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8422/7520867188_94e42ac934_b.jpg

 

No matter what you read, this hotel is no Macy's. I've been doing business at the Waldorf for well over 30 years. Many of my clients from Hollywood and D.C. stay here, request to stay here, and I know what their rooms actually look like, and I'm quite familiar with the service. In the Towers, they still employ elevator butlers, something Saks Fifth Avenue and Bergdorf's eliminated decades ago.

 

IMO, there is no equal hotel in Times Square, nothing even remotely close. If luxury, size of room, and price-point-deal matters to you, I sincerely doubt you could top the Waldorf. Personally, I would never stay in Times Square, although I understand why some visitors think it's a unique experience. If you're lucky to get a room with a view of Times Square, it can be fun for picture taking. But you won't be able to sleep with the drapes open.

 

The Waldorf can provide a Park Avenue residential experience, which is about as luxury a real estate experience as one can get in Manhattan, and it's just two avenues east of Times Square. There's high-end shopping on Madison Ave one-block west, and tons of interesting shopping on Lexington Ave one-block east. Times Square is not known for decent food options, although things have improved since the gays have moved west into Hell's Kitchen. Still, there's nothing glamorous about anything near The Port Authority Bus Terminal.

 

As for bedbugs and lawsuits: Any large institution is vulnerable in our litigious society. The bedbug scourge hit NYC really hard in recent years, and it infected almost every residential building as well. Much has been done citywide to get the problem under control. In my "pristine" building, you are no longer permitted to discard mattresses (they cannot leave your apartment) without fully covering them in sealable plastic. And mattress manufacturers and truck delivery services have changed their rules as well.

 

Since NYC hotels cater to tourists and live or die on reputation, I have a feeling they are far more diligent than residential buildings, especially if their rooms average $1000 a night. I would argue, it's far easier to get crabs in a gay bathhouse than it is to encounter bedbugs in a luxury Manhattan hotel these days.

 

The Mark Hotel on 77th offers a much more rewarding residential experience. I last stayed in the Towers about 10 years ago. The 2 bedroom suite was worn and dated, and the 2 television sets were on dollar store t.v. stands. While the lobby and history is grand, the rooms, service and restaurants are not.

[seeker630]

The Mark Hotel on 77th offers a much more rewarding residential experience. I last stayed in the Towers about 10 years ago. The 2 bedroom suite was worn and dated, and the 2 television sets were on dollar store t.v. stands. While the lobby and history is grand, the rooms, service and restaurants are not.

 

Considering how frequently NY hotels seems to be re-furbished, does a stay 10 years ago enable you to comment credibly on the present state of the rooms?

[RockHard]

The Mark Hotel on 77th offers a much more rewarding residential experience.

 

The Mark Hotel is part luxury residential properties so I imagine you don't need to pretend there. The hotel portion is also a member of "The Leading Hotels of the World" group. You will not find a "deal" at this luxury hotel similar to one that you will find offered by the Waldorf in summer. When comparing hotels, I believe in a fair comparison. I have no interest in travel pissing contests or swaying too far from the OP's original query.

 

The Waldorf is on 50th Street in Midtown, which is much more convenient to Times Square than any hotel on the Upper East Side.

 

I last stayed in the Towers about 10 years ago.

 

I certainly don't mean to be rude but judging a hotel by a singular stay 10 years ago is laughable. Everyone in NYC hospitality knows that 2 years marks the limit for change in decoration, and that doesn't take into account whether the hotel changed ownership or management. I visited a client last month in a Towers suite and nothing you wrote is evident today.

 

Unfortunately, you see these kinds of "trashing" critiques all over the no-fee travel blogs. People who have a bad experience cling to it forever, it seems, and they talk about it as if it happened yesterday. Completely unfair, which is why I refuse to contribute to no-fee travel blogs.

 

I admit, I am an unusual New Yorker: Unlike most locals, I get to see and experience a lot of hotels here in their current state. I also get to experience their food and listen to client feedback, because of the type of business service I perform. I stand by what I wrote in my previous posts about the Waldorf.

[citylaw1]

The Mark Hotel is part luxury residential properties so I imagine you don't need to pretend there. The hotel portion is also a member of "The Leading Hotels of the World" group. You will not find a "deal" at this luxury hotel similar to one that you will find offered by the Waldorf in summer. When comparing hotels, I believe in a fair comparison. I have no interest in travel pissing contests or swaying too far from the OP's original query.

 

Expedia rates checking in next Friday 7/13, and checking out out Sunday the 15th list The Mark at $380 and The Towers at $815.

 

I also believe that there are residential units in the Tower as well?

 

I am basing my review on my stay (admittedly ages ago) combined with family and friends that insisted on trying out the property recently against my recommendation.

[citylaw1]

Considering how frequently NY hotels seems to be re-furbished, does a stay 10 years ago enable you to comment credibly on the present state of the rooms?

 

It does not. I have friends and family that have stayed much more recently and echo my sentiments.