3 ms·

It's probably also worth noting that the majority of these hotels and Airbnbs are also designed to accommodate two or more travelers. Thus the complaint isn't r

It's probably also worth noting that the majority of these hotels and Airbnbs are also designed to accommodate two or more travelers. Thus the complaint isn't really "single-person rooms are priced that same as two-person rooms," but rather "single-person rooms don't exist, which means I have to pay for more space than I need." In this sense it's not really any different than any other product that you wish was sold in smaller quantities.

ghaff 1y ago
It's probably a bit of a mixed bag. Beds are reasonable for two people (Usually a queen/king or a couple queens). But there may be only one sitting chair. Two people can manage but hotels split the difference a lot of the time.
TheOtherHobbes 1y ago
The difference in costs between accommodating one person and two people is pretty minimal. Even things like breakfasts are prepared in bulk. Most single people own and sleep in double beds, so there's no sense in which a double bed is "designed to accomodate" two travellers. The issue is more that discounted single room rates would encourage unofficial double stays, which would lose significant income.
- tshaddox 1y ago
  I doubt the difference is minimal. Forget the size of beds, the point is that a hotel with 200 single-person rooms has twice the beds, twice the bathrooms, roughly twice the walls, etc. than a hotel with 100 two-person rooms.
  - chgs 1y ago
    A hotel hosting 100 single people will be roughly the same size and operating costs as a hotel hosting 100 couples, even if the rooms had a 3’ bed rather than a 6’ bed And thus could be 3’ smaller
    - tshaddox 1y ago
      Right, but the former hotel has half the capacity as the latter.
eCa 1y ago
At least here in Europe there are plenty of hotels with solo traveller rooms (<=120 cm beds). But still not uncommonly priced at 80-95% of a double occupancy doublebed-room. I often book a double for myself (often for the same price or €10 more) for a bigger bed.
- chgs 1y ago
  The room will be about the same size as a room with a double bed in, so 80% seems a massive difference

ghaff 1y ago

It's probably a bit of a mixed bag. Beds are reasonable for two people (Usually a queen/king or a couple queens). But there may be only one sitting chair. Two people can manage but hotels split the difference a lot of the time.

TheOtherHobbes 1y ago

The difference in costs between accommodating one person and two people is pretty minimal. Even things like breakfasts are prepared in bulk. Most single people own and sleep in double beds, so there's no sense in which a double bed is "designed to accomodate" two travellers. The issue is more that discounted single room rates would encourage unofficial double stays, which would lose significant income.

tshaddox 1y ago
I doubt the difference is minimal. Forget the size of beds, the point is that a hotel with 200 single-person rooms has twice the beds, twice the bathrooms, roughly twice the walls, etc. than a hotel with 100 two-person rooms.
- chgs 1y ago
  A hotel hosting 100 single people will be roughly the same size and operating costs as a hotel hosting 100 couples, even if the rooms had a 3’ bed rather than a 6’ bed And thus could be 3’ smaller
  - tshaddox 1y ago
    Right, but the former hotel has half the capacity as the latter.

eCa 1y ago

At least here in Europe there are plenty of hotels with solo traveller rooms (<=120 cm beds). But still not uncommonly priced at 80-95% of a double occupancy doublebed-room. I often book a double for myself (often for the same price or €10 more) for a bigger bed.

chgs 1y ago
The room will be about the same size as a room with a double bed in, so 80% seems a massive difference