MAYBE someone in the hotel biz can help me out here. Why is it that when local residents decide to take advantage of the kamaaina rate, the hotel's first inclination is to stick them into the crummiest room available? Kamaainas want a
room with a viewOr maybe it's just me.
Last weekend, a bunch of media types staged the Gridiron show, an irreverent satirical review. So I decided to spend the night in Waikiki.
I checked into a hotel, taking advantage of the cheaper kamaaina rate available to all Hawaii residents. The bellhop led me to a horrid cave-like little room with a filthy carpet, a heavy steel door (heavily scratched) leading to a balcony the size of a coffee table, one small window overlooking a gas station, another window so coated with dirt that you could not see out of it and a lamp that didn't work.
Since I was by myself and had to rehearse, I didn't raise a stink.
But the next morning, when daylight did not pour through the dirty window, I called the front desk and asked if I could have another room. My wife and daughter would be joining me for the next night and, frankly, I didn't even want them to see this room.
The front desk folks were nice enough to move me to an identical room on a higher floor that had recently been renovated. Instead of the steel door and little window, it had a big sliding glass door that allowed light in. It had a large lanai and the view was great. The carpet clean. The lamps worked. In other words, it was a perfectly nice room.
So my question is, why did they subject me to that other monstrosity? It wasn't because the hotel was full, because they told me it wasn't.
I think it is just a knee-jerk reaction going back to the time when tourism was thriving and the hotels didn't really need local customers. It's sort of like when Ala Moana Center stores went upscale to cater to Japanese tourists instead of their core local customers.
A few years ago, I checked into a fairly upscale hotel in Waikiki and they gave me a room that looked directly into the side of the building next door. When I say side, I mean side. Solid concrete. I could have played tennis against the wall if the room had a lanai, which it didn't.
When I gently asked if there were another room available, they managed to find a wonderful room with a fabulous view.
What I don't understand is that these hotels obviously have plenty of available rooms. Theoretically, it doesn't cost them a penny to give the kamaaina customer the nice room instead of a crummy one. In either case, one of the rooms will be empty. The difference is that the kamaainas forced to stay in the crummy room will leave the hotel feeling ill-treated and will pass the word around to friends and relatives.
It seems to me that at a time when the economy is down and tourism is weak in Hawaii, attracting kamaaina guests would be a good thing, especially when many kamaainas can't afford to travel to the mainland or other countries for a vacation. If the rooms are going to be empty anyway, why not give the locals the best rooms possible? Then the guests go away happy, urging their friends to take a little local holiday.
It seems to be an almost unconscious decision to stick local residents in the crummier rooms, as if their expectations are somehow less than out-of-state guests. That is exactly backward.
The whole point of offering kamaaina rates is to say "thanks" to local residents who have stuck it out with local businesses through the good times and the bad. While tourists come and go, it's the "lowly" kamaaina who really deserves a room with a view.
Charles Memminger, winner of
National Society of Newspaper Columnists
awards in 1994 and 1992, writes "Honolulu Lite"
Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
Write to him at the Honolulu Star-Bulletin,
P.O. Box 3080, Honolulu, 96802
or send E-mail to charley@nomayo.com or
71224.113@compuserve.com.
The Honolulu Lite online archive is at:
http://starbulletin.com/lite