Priceline Hotel: 3* Honolulu (Waikiki South) Park Shore Waikiki

[ally]

I bid on priceline this morning, before I found this message board and got $50/ night at the Park Shore Waikiki for next weekend May 6-8. I've read the reviews and it doesn't look too good. Reading various postings, does anyone know what the rate was when the hotel was a 2* and is it now worth a 3*? Any input would be appreciated. Thanks.

[txgeekboy]

Thanks for posting. I looked up the dates on PL's packages page, found Park Shore is $21/night less than RWPK. That, and the fact that RWPK almost never goes for less than $58, explain why you got Park Shore. I've been studying the factors that result in RWPK vs Park Shore win in Waikiki South. Confirms some suspicions. When you look at dates that are months away during low occupancy times, RWPK seems to cost less. Park Shore wants to hold their price high, then as time gets really short, they drop way down.

Re: the negative reviews - go and have fun. The hotel is basically a place to sleep. You'll want to spend most of your time on the beach or hiking, swimming, shopping, etc. Saturday and Sunday nights are Sunset On The Beach. They put up a big screen and show first-run movies, preceeded by local entertainers and food vendors. And Park Shore is the closest hotel - so close you can probably see the movie from your room (no sound, of course).

I've read the negative reviews. Honestly, some seem to be written by some fairly snooty folks who don't seem to understand that most Waikiki hotels are 30+ years old, have small rooms with old furnishings, and may have the occasional insect or funky smell (it's the tropics). Plenty of folks have good reviews. Also, on the plus side, you are right on the beach, it's quieter at night than lots of Waikiki areas, and you found an astonishingly cheap rate (way to go). Enjoy yourself.

[thereuare]

Welcome to BetterBidding!

Thank you for sharing your win with the rest of the board.

txgeekboy gives good advice about how to approach the hotel... i'm sure you'll have a good time. There are also photos of this property at our sister site RealHotelPhotos.com that you may want to take a look at.

Enjoy your stay.

[LoneStar]

I've read the negative reviews. Honestly, some seem to be written by some fairly snooty folks who don't seem to understand that most Waikiki hotels are 30+ years old, have small rooms with old furnishings, and may have the occasional insect or funky smell (it's the tropics). Plenty of folks have good reviews. Also, on the plus side, you are right on the beach, it's quieter at night than lots of Waikiki areas, and you found an astonishingly cheap rate (way to go). Enjoy yourself.

I agree. It's going to be worth 50 bucks! You should feel sorry for the folks paying $200 to enjoy the same beach. They may have a slightly nicer lamp and desk in their room, but the overall Waikiki experience will be quite similar. Sure, the Prince Kuhio might have been nicer for 8 bucks more, but such is life. You've still gotten a very good deal.

[ckidder331]

I posted a trip review of this hotel just a few das ago and also posted some pictures of the hotel at RealHotelPhotos.com so you can see where you'll be staying. I was very pleased for my $60.

[LoneStar]

I posted a trip review of this hotel just a few das ago and also posted some pictures of the hotel at RealHotelPhotos.com so you can see where you'll be staying. I was very pleased for my $60.

What does concern me is that, in looking at those photos, you can tell this is not really a 3-star hotel. Maybe the public areas are (the pool deck looks reasonable), but that room is -- at best -- of 2-star quality. If I had a forward reservation at the hotel, I'd send those photos to priceline and ask them if they thought it was 3-star. Their first line of defense (their India email desk) probably won't help, but a phone call might. Those photos are very "incriminating." And the principle is pretty important here -- when you bid on a 3-star, you should get a 3-star. You paid for it, after all, and that's what they're supposedly "guaranteeing."

[thereuare]

in looking at those photos, you can tell this is not really a 3-star hotel

And there-in lies the entire concept behind RealHotelPhotos.com :)

[ckidder331]

I guess it depends on what a 3 star hotel room really means or is defined as

Don't get me wrong, I have not stayed in many nice hotels in my life (the best being the Essex House in NYC) so 3 star means average for me if we are talking out of 5 stars. Size of the room was small but so are the ones in Europe and they are just as nice as the Hawaii room.

[thereuare]

And that is the 'problem' with star ratings... they're quite subjective. A small room may bother someone who doesn't care about 'tacky' furniture; while somebody else couldn't care about the size of the room but insists on furnishings that are contemporary.

The idea of RealHotelPhotos is that users can see for themselves what the property looks like and then decide if it is acceptable to them or not... regardless of star rating.

[LoneStar]

Many factors come into play, but the size of the room, upkeep of the room (including those large stains) and quality of the furnishings in those photos do not equate to a 3-star property. Obviously, it's comparative. Most Marriotts, Hiltons and Sheratons are 3-stars. That room would not pass muster under their standards.