I believe this is widespread. There are plenty of hotels who have 100 rooms, yet only 6 are occupied on any typical night, yet they still price the rooms at $150/night.

Any sane manager would discount the rooms to $75/night, pulling in all the guests from neighbouring hotels, filling the place, and raking in a tidy profit.

Yet 'head office' says discounts aren't allowed, even if it increases revenue. Presumably because the CEO is mates with the competing CEO's and they all decide not to undercut eachother.

> Presumably because the CEO is mates with the competing CEO's and they all decide not to undercut each other.

"Presumably" meaning what? Do you have some evidence or are you presuming it because it "feels right" as an explanation?

Presuming that the price fixing mentioned in this article is also applied to hotel prices (which the FTC and DOJ are also looking into right now).

I really hate this anti-skeptic rhetoric that's becoming so popular on HN right now. It's like you can't even be suspicious of something without having evidence of it happening. But if you had evidence, you wouldn't be suspicious in the first place!

But the person I'm replying to didn't say "the price fixing mentioned in this article might also be applied to hotel prices". He/she said "Presumably because the CEO is mates with the competing CEO's and they all decide not to undercut each other" which is a pretty specific presumption. One can be suspicious of something without having any actual evidence of course, but if you're going to share your suspicions on Hacker News I think it's reasonable to expect to ask be asked to substantiate them.

You see things like this on planes. Some folks pay a lot, some pay a little. Once the flight's cost is paid for and it's absolutely going, then even $1 is additional profit.

Any sane manager will know there's a too-low amount at which point you start to lose money on the room, because you had to pull in an extra housekeeper, a certain percentage of people pee on the bed or break a chair, sheets need laundry, fees to the corporate franchise, there's a $10 food credit for anyone with Gold status, etc.

Any sane hotel manager knows that not all hotel clientele have the same level of risk, so you don’t just lower the price until every last room sells. Just one person can cause a disturbance that results in having to refund multiple other hotel guests. One factor of a nice hotel room is nice hotel guests that keep rooms nice and don’t cause issues.

Also, outside of money laundering or something, no hotel is operating on 6% occupancy.

In the case of hotel-casinos however I don't know if I believe in the posted prices at all as a lot of people are getting comps. My mother-in-law has a moderate gambling habit at the local casino and she gets free rooms all the time.

They opened a new hotel-casino near the Catskills that I was thinking about using as a base camp but I thought the posted room rates were insane but I'm sure if you were gambling you'd get a better deal.

Also they end their data in 2022 when the effect of the pandemic was still there to push occupancy down. I remember going to Buffalo a lot around that time and having Priceline put me in various Marriott group hotels at great rates.

"Free" isn't exactly free. The casino would not be comping rooms if they weren't more than making up for it on gambling losses from those getting the offers.

Of course. If you gamble today, particularly on the video slots, it all goes on your loyalty card so they know exactly what they can afford to give you in comps.

Comps or not I think the casino is going to look very differently at people who gamble vs people who don't. I mean, paying $140 or $180 for a room makes very little difference if somebody is losing $200 a day and, compared to other properties, the casino has an incentive to fill the hotel completely with gamblers.

(Myself I think about going to Las Vegas for a conference or event like CES but the casinos wouldn't like me because I won't gamble unless the odds are in my favor.)