InsideFlyer.com [English] United States InsideFlyer.uk [English] United Kingdom InsideFlyer.de [German] Germany InsideFlyer.no [Norwegian] Norway InsideFlyer.se [Swedish] Sweden InsideFlyer.dk [Danish] Denmark InsideFlyer.nl [Dutch] Benelux
Discussion in 'General Discussion | Travel' started by uggboy, Nov 25, 2012.
|| The Aria Resort in Las Vegas Is a Five-Star Rip-Off ||
Now, that's an amazing experience!
I stopped reading this rant when the "seasoned travel writer" seemed surprised about the $25 resort fee (first time in Vegas, Mr. Snotty, sorry, Crotty?)
Indeed... I just booked Aria last week and the step following you choosing your room tells you there's a $25 daily resort fee that will be added upon check-in. And they even say they'll add the taxes to that
MGM websites show the resort fees/taxes during the reservation process but a few OTA's don't make it easily visible which leads to many complaints since a lot of reservations are made on OTAs nowadays.
What's the motivation for writing this sort of review? The Aria is every bit a part of Vegas - expensive, exclusive, luxurious, and completely over the top. I found Aria to be stylish, exciting, well run, and a new, modern resort experience. Everything you could want is right on the premises - some of the best rooms in the country, some of the best restaurants, and some mighty fine shopping. Plus, while the casino allows smoking they have the most amazing ventilation system so you can hardly notice it.
I completely agree. It is almost the epitome of what Vegas stands for today.
I think that's going to be par for the course from now on... I think from the late 90s when the Bellagio opened (although some would argue that even before then) new properties in Vegas have been trying to outdo each other on a consistent basis. Wynn/Encore and now Aria and the entire CityCenter complex is just the continuation of that trend.
The old "resorts" and renovated/rebranded properties just can't compete in terms of new features, amenities and the overall "feel" of the new stuff, so they compete on price and freebies. God knows I wouldn't stay at Excalibur for $50 a night if I could stay at MGM for $100, and I wouldn't do MGM if I could do Aria for slightly more.
I agree, though I would never stay at the Excalibur.
i'd like to see ol' buddy's review of Imperial Palace
I knew this guy was an idiot after reading "one of the reasons to visit Las Vegas was the buffet... "
Me.... twenty years of visits and not one buffet.
Seems all you need is a two month old laptop and you become a " seasoned travel writer"
I won't stay at any MGM/Mirage property in Vegas due to the resort fee, I stayed at Harrahs a couple weeks back , certainly not luxurious in any way, but decent room with a view of the strip and location was great in center of the strip.
None of the Bally's/Caesar's properties charge resort fees.
They are gutting the place completely and re-naming it the "The Quad". It was a real mess when I was in LAS. This will be their gateway to Bally's new entertainment "district" called "The LINQ".
how do you know the buffets aren't good if you've never tried it, tho?
regardless, some of the buffets are a good value for the money either by itself (Gold Coast, Main Street) or with B1G1
yeah i was around three weekends ago. to my knowledge, tho, the rooms aren't getting a makeover.
NYNY and Mirage can be had VERY cheaply if you sign up for the montly newsletters. 29, 35, 39, 45, 49, 55, 59, 77... all are room rates i've seen very often at both places. i don't mind paying resort fee if i can get rates like that
True enough actually I havent got anything against buffets... its just not my style.
But to say that one of the main reasons to go the Vegas are the buffets is pretty silly IMHO.
yup. too many of the newer ones are just too pricey. the only reason we did Bellagio buffet earlier this month was due to $50 food and bev credit we got. I can't imagine paying full price for it. food was good, but it's still a buffet. i don't like loading up my belly and feeling miserable for several hours after, either.
if he just went to Aria recently, maybe he was p'd because Aria buffet is currently closed, and couldn't eat at it?
I think it all depends on what you're in Vegas for and how jaded you are about the whole thing. If you're not there very often and you want the "Vegas experience" then you probably don't mind the high prices, resort fees and the like. I find that to be the case with most of my friends when they go once a year, plus getting there from the East Coast they kind of make it "a big deal" -- either celebrating something or a yearly trip, etc.
But I find that -- just like any other place -- after you've been there enough time, when you make a trip to Vegas "just because" -- really cheap airfare, short trip from California, etc -- then you just have a different mindset about the whole thing.
I personally hate Harrah's... mostly because the casino is dated and crowded compared to some of the other properties, but it's hard to argue with the comps or the prices.
For me, I try to go somewhere I can get the best deal or a property I can somehow earn points at -- I agree that Harrah's is OLD for sure, but it was the right price.
Seeing how the Trop/Doubletree deal goes through, since I like getting HHONORS points , most likely I'll go over to the Tropicana next time I'm in Vegas.
CET properties for the most part are horrible compared to MGM's. Caesar's Palace which is CET's best property in Vegas has a lot of bad rooms.
The best properties in Vegas charge resort fees including the MO.
I've stayed here. While by no means over-the-top, this is a nice enough hotel.
With the size of the hotels in LAS, I struggle with how any can earn a five-star designation. Service nearly always falls to a four-star level once you get over 500 rooms. Even Wynn/Encore/Bellagio suffer this fate, IMHO. Aria is no exception.
This hotel doesn't have as many "hot clubs" or shows as some of the other nearby strip hotels, so it is a bit weaker in that category.
Full review here: http://upgrd.com/sitinfirst/aria-resort-and-casino-las-vegas.html (lots of photos)
I've stayed at a lot of places in Vegas in the past (MGM, Luxor, TI, LVH, Monte Carlo, Harrah's) and will for the most part agree, for me though, I'm not going to Vegas for the room. Location is important and a clean decent room. Harrah's met that bill for me last time and it was cheap and the room was clean. Plus I like not having to pay a resort fee for things I don't/won't use.
Once Trop get's to be a Doubletree in January, my next trip probably will be there.
why would they put the towel and slippers at the end of the bed? shouldn't it be in the middle, since your butt rests towards the middle and acts as the pivot?
Just got back from Vegas yesterday, Casino guest rate of $49/night for a King Jr. Suite at Mandalay (The old tower, not THEHotel). Resort fee didn't bother me in the least. That said (in echoing a previous poster) location is key.
actually spent some time there for the first time in 7 trips there a few weeks ago. i like it, but it sucks that it's THE furthest of the big casinotels on the Strip.
it does help that there are several restaraunt.com establishments there, tho
Yes, we did like the tram service direct to the Excalibur however, made the walk less of a chore. Good selection on places to eat, and the pizza joint there has gluten free pizza and pasta which was great for my wife.
oh s***. really? My fiance has Celiac so she can't have gluten, either. If we hadn't destroyed some StripSteak, I definitely would have taken her there. thanks for that info!