[ncallaway]

> The only winning move seems to be stay private and accept there's a near-term cap on your revenue growth, after which you will grow much more slowly (at the natural supply expansion rate).

Or go multi-brand, and introduce cheaper brands for the lower quality properties, to maintain the goodwill for the higher quality brands. Many hotels do this with many different brands under the same organization that segment their customers on price and quality expectations.

I always thought that Uber/AirBnB etc should be more aggressive in creating more brand separation between their cheaper options and their higher quality options.

[vel0city]

I recently stayed in a hotel that was an example of how extreme the brand split of various hotels was. It was one building with three different brands operating out of it. One check in counter, one guest lounge, one gym, etc. Three different elevator groups though; one for each brand. Ultimately all the rooms were practically the same, but the trim was a little different between the brands.

But hey, if you feel that attached to a Hampton Inn as opposed to a Home2 or a Hilton Garden Inn I guess it makes sense. It's all the same to me though and seems like just a waste of paperwork and administrative tasks to continue the facade of three brands in the same building.

[ghaff]

I just saw that for the first time with a Residence Inn I booked where they said to check-in at the adjoining Moxy. In that case though the rooms probably are different.

[ethbr0]

Uber and Lyft essentially did that (Black/Lux).

AirBnB absolutely needs to, given the vast quality range of their current supply.