3 ms·

The story is interesting but clearly lacks the most useful parts: - interview and feedback of people actually using it (since the author says they are not the t

The story is interesting but clearly lacks the most useful parts: - interview and feedback of people actually using it (since the author says they are not the target audience at the end) - experience with the shower: does it feel private enough, was it clean, ... - experience related to other people staying there: could you hear them? were they nice? socializing? - feeling regarding the small space

ljf 10mo ago
When I was commuting back to London for work I tried a hostel in Central London, I think it was about £25 a night 9 years ago. The room itself was clean and 'only' 6 people in it. The main lobby was nice and a pint was a reasonable price - I sat there after having dinner at work, and read a book, which felt pretty nice to be honest. The bed was comfy, with clean good smelling sheets. But there were three issues that meant I went back to relying on friends and family until I got a local job. 1. Someone's feet smelt terrible - so bad it was hard to sleep 2. Someone snored loadly - it was even harder to sleep 3. The shower was grimy. I was lucky to have a ThirdSpace membership so showered there instead It was a bargain and saved me traveling after a long day of work and having to be social after a very early start to get to London on the Monday. But the better option for me was to find a suitable local job and not do the extra long week commute. (I was also missing my family loads too, so it was never a longer term option for me).
- ageitgey 9mo ago
  I love that you were living in a hostel while having a £300+/month premium gym membership.
alisonatwork 10mo ago
I can't speak for this one, but I've stayed in a bunch of these over the years and they're exactly as quoted in the article - better than a hostel, worse than a hotel. Because the rate is higher than a hostel, it prices out the bottom rung crowd, and because the architecture explicitly prioritizes privacy over socialization, the visitors tend to be more respectful of one another. As such, it's quiet and clean enough, although obviously if you are sleeping next to a bunch of other people you may hear some snoring, farts, sleeptalking etc. Some of these are better sound-proofed than others. Some even have little TVs or radios inside, but I've never found that worse than traffic or construction noise if you're anyway in the city. There's always earplugs. Shared bathrooms suck, especially if you need to be out during "rush hour" when everyone else also needs to be out, but for a saving of $100+ per night there's plenty of people who would gladly accept holding their pee for a few minutes and/or getting into an already-steamed-up and damp shower cubicle. Most people gotta work 4 hours to make that kind of money back.
LooseEquipment 10mo ago
I stayed at this exact location earlier this year. The showers are in individual stalls (felt private enough to me) and quite clean. You could hear other people occasionally but there wasn't any socialising and there's no space for it anyway. Spaces felt safe/cozy (unusually good light/sound design helped a lot I felt), although the lack of any storage/work space makes it less practical than a hotel room for longer stays. The audience was probably 80% tourists and 20% working poor.

ljf 10mo ago

When I was commuting back to London for work I tried a hostel in Central London, I think it was about £25 a night 9 years ago. The room itself was clean and 'only' 6 people in it. The main lobby was nice and a pint was a reasonable price - I sat there after having dinner at work, and read a book, which felt pretty nice to be honest. The bed was comfy, with clean good smelling sheets. But there were three issues that meant I went back to relying on friends and family until I got a local job. 1. Someone's feet smelt terrible - so bad it was hard to sleep 2. Someone snored loadly - it was even harder to sleep 3. The shower was grimy. I was lucky to have a ThirdSpace membership so showered there instead It was a bargain and saved me traveling after a long day of work and having to be social after a very early start to get to London on the Monday. But the better option for me was to find a suitable local job and not do the extra long week commute. (I was also missing my family loads too, so it was never a longer term option for me).

ageitgey 9mo ago
I love that you were living in a hostel while having a £300+/month premium gym membership.

alisonatwork 10mo ago

I can't speak for this one, but I've stayed in a bunch of these over the years and they're exactly as quoted in the article - better than a hostel, worse than a hotel. Because the rate is higher than a hostel, it prices out the bottom rung crowd, and because the architecture explicitly prioritizes privacy over socialization, the visitors tend to be more respectful of one another. As such, it's quiet and clean enough, although obviously if you are sleeping next to a bunch of other people you may hear some snoring, farts, sleeptalking etc. Some of these are better sound-proofed than others. Some even have little TVs or radios inside, but I've never found that worse than traffic or construction noise if you're anyway in the city. There's always earplugs. Shared bathrooms suck, especially if you need to be out during "rush hour" when everyone else also needs to be out, but for a saving of $100+ per night there's plenty of people who would gladly accept holding their pee for a few minutes and/or getting into an already-steamed-up and damp shower cubicle. Most people gotta work 4 hours to make that kind of money back.

LooseEquipment 10mo ago

I stayed at this exact location earlier this year. The showers are in individual stalls (felt private enough to me) and quite clean. You could hear other people occasionally but there wasn't any socialising and there's no space for it anyway. Spaces felt safe/cozy (unusually good light/sound design helped a lot I felt), although the lack of any storage/work space makes it less practical than a hotel room for longer stays. The audience was probably 80% tourists and 20% working poor.