Hotels you like to stay at while on the road

[US71]

You're also more likely to encounter a couple of rude chatterboxes just outside your room at 2:00am at a hotel with exterior corridors.

And sometimes interior corridor. But you can usually ask them to go to their room or GTFO. Only once did that not work and the manager dealt with them the next day.

[empirestate]

My own preferences on this topic will be somewhat different than others'...I often spend many months at a time in hotels all over the U.S., but they are selected and paid for by my company, so while I don't have a say in what brand hotel I'm in, I have experienced a wide array of choices and formed a fair number of personal preferences. To wit:

-Location: Ideally, the hotel will be centrally located to the city I'm in and the place I'm working...assuming, of course, that there's anything going on in that city as far as food & drink, retail, and general cultural and commercial activity. In general, I'd rather be in a city than its suburbs, though in some cases the core city has lost pretty much any value, beyond the fact that any place I haven't been is worth seeing (recent example: Florence, SC). Walkability is paramount, since I don't usually have transportation at my disposal, which make location a problem when it's your typical cluster of hotels around an Interstate exit along a high-speed divided highway. Then again, these locations often have lots of dining/retail choices nearby, but then again again, some hotels seem to build in complete isolation from almost anything else around!

-Interior/exterior: Each has its benefits...but exterior corridors are more likely to mean no elevators, which is a problem when you have 6 months worth of luggage. Then again, interior corridors often means more interior doors and sometimes steps through which you have to haul all of that. Holiday Inns tend to be an interesting mix, with some being purpose-built as interior hotels, while others have the exterior design but with an extra windowed wall built around the "exterior" corridors. My preference for the HI brand is similarly rangy...sometimes they're really nice, sometimes they seem pretty dumpy. As more of them are refurbished the scale will seem to tip upward.

-Amenities: I am always a fan of the hotel bar, especially if there's nothing in the neighborhood! This comes at the 3-star level and up, of course, and thus excludes some otherwise reliably comfortable brands like Hampton or HI Express. I have found I enjoy Red Lion hotels for their uniqueness, variety and generally good food/drink options. Sticking to the advertised hours for the bar/restaurant is also crucial...it's become a running joke that the closing time for the hotel restaurant is always "15 minutes before you got there," which is usually half an hour before the scheduled closing. We now routinely ask upon check-in whether the bar/restaurant will be open when we get back from work, and if not, would they keep it open knowing that a bunch of people will come in later?

For breakfasts, I'm pretty much over the whole thing...the free continental breakfasts at 2-2 1/2 star brands are often worth little more than their cost, while those places that have a buffet usually charge $10-$11 while I usually eat about $4 worth of food (buffets are not cost-effective for me). So unless I can order ala carte, I'd just as soon head next door to McDonald's or Bob Evans or Sheetz or whatever there is, relying on the hotel breakfast only where necessary.

Wifi should be free, period. There are enough brands offering it that there's no excuse for any competing brand to charge (and the free ones usually provide better connectivity anyway). Of course when you get to 3-stars and up it's going to cost...the more they charge, the less comes free...but I've found that I can often get the wifi comped just by mentioning to the front desk that it didn't work properly (which is rarely a lie).

Those are my generalities...if I have a minute I'll put together some further thoughts on specific brands.

[formulanone]

I carry an RJ45 cable for the times the Wi-Fi is particularly weak. My work also gives me a 3G/4G modem card, but surfing via 3G isn't much help. There's not much consistency, but sometimes rooms in the middle of the building versus the ends of hallways gathers a better signal.

That said, some of the fancier places that do charge for Wi-Fi, tend to have a good level of bandwidth; rack up enough stays with some places like Hyatt, and they'll comp it.

[hbelkins]

-Location: Ideally, the hotel will be centrally located to the city I'm in and the place I'm working...assuming, of course, that there's anything going on in that city as far as food & drink, retail, and general cultural and commercial activity. In general, I'd rather be in a city than its suburbs, though in some cases the core city has lost pretty much any value, beyond the fact that any place I haven't been is worth seeing (recent example: Florence, SC). Walkability is paramount, since I don't usually have transportation at my disposal, which make location a problem when it's your typical cluster of hotels around an Interstate exit along a high-speed divided highway. Then again, these locations often have lots of dining/retail choices nearby, but then again again, some hotels seem to build in complete isolation from almost anything else around!

I dislike staying in the downtown of any city, primarily because of accessibility and safety concerns.

I have to attend conferences in Louisville and invariably they are held downtown, and I am not fond of the dining choices nearby. Parking is also problematic with parking in garages, often at great distances from the entrance. The parking situation and difficulty in getting to the interstate makes it hard to be able to drive out to where there are better food choices. (I do prefer fast food or places like Cracker Barrel or Bob Evans over the expensive places usually found in downtowns.)

The most miserable stay I had was five nights at the Renaissance in Washington, DC in February several years ago. Driving for meals was obviously not an option. I didn't think there were a lot of choices that were within walking distance, and since it got dark at 5:30 I was even more hesitant about walking to some of the places down the street or one block over. The hotel restaurant wasn't great, and I wasn't impressed with the fare at the hotel's sports bar. I had prepared by taking a bunch of lunch meat, cheese and bread and mostly subsisted on that for evening meals  -- and sometimes for lunch if the lunch the conference supplied wasn't very good.

In summary, give me a suburban motel out by the interstate with Arby's or McDonald's or Bob Evans nearby, and a Walmart Supercenter or other department store in the area, and I'm a happy camper. Put me downtown where it's either impossible or a pain in the ass to get in the car and drive, and I'm miserable.

Which is why every year I lobby for one of those Louisville conferences to be held out on Preston Highway or Hurstbourne Lane.  

[empirestate]

I dislike staying in the downtown of any city, primarily because of accessibility and safety concerns.

What about when you're in a city where the downtown is safer and more accessible than the surrounding areas?

This also brings out the difference between lodging choices for those with cars versus those without...obviously safety becomes a much greater issue in the suburbs or at rural interchange areas, when you have to walk across an array of frontage roads, on and off ramps, drainage ditches, and often many-laned arterials with highly channelized intersections. Some places are better than others at accommodating pedestrians, of course, with proper sidewalks, crosswalks and ped signals...but sometimes it's pretty much a jungle safari to walk from the hotel to any nearby dining or shopping.

As for safety and accessibility downtown, well...a lot of the venues I work are located in downtown districts, so obviously they're more accessible to me if I stay downtown (and if they're located outside of town, they're usually on a college campus and thus not walkably close to anything else). Furthermore, in most cases if the downtown district is of the type than can support the existence of such a venue, that typically means there is enough commercial and cultural activity in the area that safety is of no abnormal concern. (Not always though...while I don't usually feel unsafe in the downtown districts, my recent gig in downtown Florence, SC felt much sketchier than usual. Then again, I didn't get a whole lot better vibe from the suburb where my hotel was!)

So, again in summary, though I tend to need and prefer the opposite of what H. B. does (we're probably not likely to cross paths too often at the hip coffee joints and brewpubs on Main St.!), I will say that months on the road can give one a certain appreciation for those few optimal suburban experiences (lots of familiar choices walkably close, in a well-equipped and safe area).

[hbelkins]

So, again in summary, though I tend to need and prefer the opposite of what H. B. does (we're probably not likely to cross paths too often at the hip coffee joints and brewpubs on Main St.!)

No, because I don't drink coffee and am not a beer connoisseur. 

[Ned Weasel]

It is certainly true that architecture is unimportant if motel management is willing to turn a blind eye to the guests' sexual carryings-on, as I suspect is the case for high-class call girls even in good-quality motels.

In regard to the HVAC issue, I also remembered that motels with exterior corridors open directly on the outdoors, so the rooms can get quite cold in winter if the room doors aren't tight in their frames and properly weather-stripped.  I can remember having to get an emergency blanket out of my car trunk so I could pack it at the bottom of my door when I was staying in one of those cheap (sub-$25 at the time) motor lodges in Lordsburg; the gap between door and sill was at least half an inch wide.

I actually worry more about the HVAC itself than I do about the corridors.  I once stayed in a pretty decent-looking Days Inn in Santa Fé (interior corridors, about $45 a night, Cerrillos Road motel strip) but discovered that it had no working humidification.  As soon as the heater had been on for about twenty minutes (freezing temperatures outside), the static built up to such an extent I felt like I was restarting my heart every time I touched metal.

I've been wondering specifically about this two-year-old topic for a long time, and I figured I might as well ask, since I don't know of a better place to pose this question:  Does anyone know of any sources for conclusive or more-concrete information regarding the merits and detriments of exterior corridors versus interior corridors in hotels?  I'm disappointed that three of the most prominent hotel companies--InterContinental, Hilton, and Marriott--banned exterior corridors in recent years, and I would like to see more research to determine whether interior corridors have truly made exterior-corridor hotels obsolete.

From what I gather, the two main areas of concern seem to be safety and energy efficiency.  I don't know of any empirical evidence showing interior corridors to be safer than exterior corridors, but a study to determine this would not be prohibitively difficult to conduct, and it would be both possible and necessary to control for other factors such as neighborhood crime rates.

Energy-efficiency may be easier to demonstrate, but I haven't found anything that demonstrates whether and how the energy savings of interior corridors outweigh the other material costs, which are mainly (1) increased maintenance and cleaning costs for the interior corridor, (2) energy used to heat and cool the interior corridor, and (3) extra pipes to carry plumbing across the interior corridor (in contrast to exterior-corridor hotels, where the bathrooms are usually back-to-back).

If anyone knows of any studies or journal articles that address one or both of these main issues, I would love to read them.  I feel like I've Googled the topic to death, but most of what I can find are generalized hospitality industry articles that talk about higher consumer preference for interior corridors but don't address the material performance measures of the two respective building types.  If there's really nothing else out there, then I suppose I'll let this thread rest in peace.  This would make a great topic for a thesis, but I'm not really in college anymore.

[Jardine]

If it is just me, I am easy to make happy, less expensive but a good location is fine.

However,

three college friends wanted to meet up with me in Chicago for a 3 day weekend.  They INSISTED on the Palmer House, and I thought what the heck, and went along.


It really was a blast.  I'd never go by myself, but these old friends were great.  We had 2 connecting double rooms and enjoyed the sights, the food, and caught up on all our lives since college days.

Big surprise was the Chicago River architectural cruise.  I know, it sounds dull as toast, and for some folks it would be.  But it really was an amazing tour of downtown and the buildings are all different and grand.  I lived in Wisconsin and Illinois in the late 70 and the latter 80s and had visited Chicago then.  Well, they have erected MANY 80 story buildings since then and the tour gave great views.


Also, most of you here would love this part:

you go underneath all those amazing bascule bridges!!!!



Nice views of LSD from the large ferris wheel at Navy Pier too!

We asked 2 cabbies to take us thru Lower Wacker but neither would do it.  Phooey.

[Duke87]

Word from an ex of mine who worked up there is that Sullivan County uses the no-name motels in Liberty, NY as places to house sex offenders who need an eye kept on them. I wonder how common this practice is. Something to think about when deciding where to spend the night.


I've become personally rather fond of Super 8... pretty much by chance. The first couple times I grabbed a room for the night that wasn't reserved in advance they were something slightly more upscale (I think one was a Fairfield Inn), and they were nice but not cheap. At some later date I found myself in a Super 8, with a reservation, having read the reviews and gone for it... and decided that the price and the quality were both satisfactory. So now I tend to gravitate towards them because I'm unadventurous with this stuff - I tend to stick with the first thing I find that I like, rather than rolling the dice with more unknowns.

[corco]

Man, my preferences have changed a lot since I first posted in this thread.

I still stick to Wyndham quite a bit, but also try to throw some business towards Hilton (I spent two years working for them since I first posted here and learned a lot about the hotel industry and like them).

Since I make a bit more money now, I'll stay at Hamptons/Hilton Garden Inns if the rates are somewhat reasonable- I typically look at both the Wyndham properties and Hilton properties in town and weigh accordingly. I'm taking a trip this weekend, for instance, and am staying at the Days Inn in Billings, the Super 8 in Ogallala, NE, and then the Hilton Garden Inn in Laramie. My last overnight trip had me at the Super 8 in Lethbridge, the Days Inn in Edmonton, and the Hampton Inn in Calgary.

I actively shoot to earn rewards with both chains and have a branded Wyndham credit card I use for Wyndham stays, and am planning on getting the HHonors Reserve card in the spring to replace the Chase Sapphire Preferred I use right now. When I went to the Wichita Meet, I spent four of six nights in Wyndham hotels because they were doing a double point promotion, so that was a no brainer.

Where I geographically want to stay depends on my objectives. In the last year or so, I've felt less inclined to just drive from sunrise to sunset several days in a row, and enjoy finding a nice town/city and staying in the middle of it, giving me time/energy to explore it. If I'm just passing through, I'd rather stay out in the suburbs where rates are typically lower.

In larger, unfamiliar cities I pretty much shoot for Hilton chained (Hampton/HGI/etc) hotels these days because those tend to be in better neighborhoods. If I'm out in the middle of Nebraska, I'm totally cool with the cheap Wyndham hotel. I did stay at the Days Inn in downtown Edmonton a couple months though, which would be an exception. In that case it seemed like a decent hotel and had (free!) garage parking so I felt like the car was safe. The hotel was clean and in a decent but not posh part of downtown, though the internet was basically non-functional. I'd stay there again for the price. The thing with Wyndham properties is that they're wildly inconsistent- a Hampton is a Hampton is a Hampton, so sometimes it's worth paying more to know I'll be staying at something decent.

But yeah, I weigh rate:location:what i want to do that night:reward points:reviews roughly equally when choosing a hotel. I don't do third party bookings anymore- I've been on the hotel side of that enough now to know those are a disaster if anything goes wrong, plus no reward points. My rate ceiling is probably $120 now- I won't willingly spend more than that unless I just have to, and my preference is to keep it to around $100 in a city, $70-80 in a rural area.

[realjd]

It is certainly true that architecture is unimportant if motel management is willing to turn a blind eye to the guests' sexual carryings-on, as I suspect is the case for high-class call girls even in good-quality motels.

In regard to the HVAC issue, I also remembered that motels with exterior corridors open directly on the outdoors, so the rooms can get quite cold in winter if the room doors aren't tight in their frames and properly weather-stripped.  I can remember having to get an emergency blanket out of my car trunk so I could pack it at the bottom of my door when I was staying in one of those cheap (sub-$25 at the time) motor lodges in Lordsburg; the gap between door and sill was at least half an inch wide.

I actually worry more about the HVAC itself than I do about the corridors.  I once stayed in a pretty decent-looking Days Inn in Santa Fé (interior corridors, about $45 a night, Cerrillos Road motel strip) but discovered that it had no working humidification.  As soon as the heater had been on for about twenty minutes (freezing temperatures outside), the static built up to such an extent I felt like I was restarting my heart every time I touched metal.

I've been wondering specifically about this two-year-old topic for a long time, and I figured I might as well ask, since I don't know of a better place to pose this question:  Does anyone know of any sources for conclusive or more-concrete information regarding the merits and detriments of exterior corridors versus interior corridors in hotels?  I'm disappointed that three of the most prominent hotel companies--InterContinental, Hilton, and Marriott--banned exterior corridors in recent years, and I would like to see more research to determine whether interior corridors have truly made exterior-corridor hotels obsolete.

From what I gather, the two main areas of concern seem to be safety and energy efficiency.  I don't know of any empirical evidence showing interior corridors to be safer than exterior corridors, but a study to determine this would not be prohibitively difficult to conduct, and it would be both possible and necessary to control for other factors such as neighborhood crime rates.

Energy-efficiency may be easier to demonstrate, but I haven't found anything that demonstrates whether and how the energy savings of interior corridors outweigh the other material costs, which are mainly (1) increased maintenance and cleaning costs for the interior corridor, (2) energy used to heat and cool the interior corridor, and (3) extra pipes to carry plumbing across the interior corridor (in contrast to exterior-corridor hotels, where the bathrooms are usually back-to-back).

If anyone knows of any studies or journal articles that address one or both of these main issues, I would love to read them.  I feel like I've Googled the topic to death, but most of what I can find are generalized hospitality industry articles that talk about higher consumer preference for interior corridors but don't address the material performance measures of the two respective building types.  If there's really nothing else out there, then I suppose I'll let this thread rest in peace.  This would make a great topic for a thesis, but I'm not really in college anymore.

I think it's mainly consumer preference. I doubt you'll find much hard info on safety or energy efficiency.

IHG and Hilton have absolutely not banned exterior corridors; they banned old style low rise motels. I know of many Hilton and Holiday Inn brand hotels with exterior corridors. They tend to be high rises, often beach front or resort locations, or multiple building apartment type layouts. Here's a list of ones off the top of my head that I've stayes in the past year:
Doubletree Melbourne FL
Doubletree San Diego Golf Resort
Holiday Inn Resort Las Vegas
Holiday Inn Resort Fort Walton Beach, FL
Holiday Inn Resort Kissimmee, FL (Disney)

[corco]

IHG and Hilton have absolutely not banned exterior corridors; they banned old style low rise motels.

In fact, I worked at a Hilton for two years (until December 2012) that had about 150 (of 426) exterior-entrance rooms.

[Scott5114]

It is certainly true that architecture is unimportant if motel management is willing to turn a blind eye to the guests' sexual carryings-on, as I suspect is the case for high-class call girls even in good-quality motels.

In regard to the HVAC issue, I also remembered that motels with exterior corridors open directly on the outdoors, so the rooms can get quite cold in winter if the room doors aren't tight in their frames and properly weather-stripped.  I can remember having to get an emergency blanket out of my car trunk so I could pack it at the bottom of my door when I was staying in one of those cheap (sub-$25 at the time) motor lodges in Lordsburg; the gap between door and sill was at least half an inch wide.

I actually worry more about the HVAC itself than I do about the corridors.  I once stayed in a pretty decent-looking Days Inn in Santa Fé (interior corridors, about $45 a night, Cerrillos Road motel strip) but discovered that it had no working humidification.  As soon as the heater had been on for about twenty minutes (freezing temperatures outside), the static built up to such an extent I felt like I was restarting my heart every time I touched metal.

I've been wondering specifically about this two-year-old topic for a long time, and I figured I might as well ask, since I don't know of a better place to pose this question:  Does anyone know of any sources for conclusive or more-concrete information regarding the merits and detriments of exterior corridors versus interior corridors in hotels?  I'm disappointed that three of the most prominent hotel companies--Intercontinental, Hilton, and Marriott--banned exterior corridors in recent years, and I would like to see more research to determine whether interior corridors have truly made exterior-corridor hotels obsolete.

From what I gather, the two main areas of concern seem to be safety and energy efficiency.  I don't know of any empirical evidence showing interior corridors to be safer than exterior corridors, but a study to determine this would not be prohibitively difficult to conduct, and it would be both possible and necessary to control for other factors such as neighborhood crime rates.

Energy-efficiency may be easier to demonstrate, but I haven't found anything that demonstrates whether and how the energy savings of interior corridors outweigh the other material costs, which are mainly (1) increased maintenance and cleaning costs for the interior corridor, (2) energy used to heat and cool the interior corridor, and (3) extra pipes to carry plumbing across the interior corridor (in contrast to exterior-corridor hotels, where the bathrooms are usually back-to-back).

If anyone knows of any studies or journal articles that address one or both of these main issues, I would love to read them.  I feel like I've Googled the topic to death, but most of what I can find are generalized hospitality industry articles that talk about higher consumer preference for interior corridors but don't address the material performance measures of the two respective building types.  If there's really nothing else out there, then I suppose I'll let this thread rest in peace.  This would make a great topic for a thesis, but I'm not really in college anymore.

I would suppose that if consumers prefer interior corridors, hotels are being built with them for that reason above any having to do with energy or construction costs. Even if the corridor costs $100 to maintain per month, you only need to sell two extra $50 rooms per month due to that corridor to make it worth it, and then any extra rooms you sell because of it are profit. You can easily justify the added cost.

[hbelkins]

There's a Hampton somewhere along the I-75 corridor in the southern part of Tennessee (Cleveland, perhaps) that has exterior corridors. Or at least it was a Hampton when I was researching possible places to stay in that area at one time in the not-too-distant past. It may have changed brands by now if Hilton's trying to get away from exterior-entrance motels/hotels, as someone said upthread.

A number of Comfort Inns with exterior entrances have converted to Quality Inns in recent months. Both are Choice Hotel brands; I was told at one last year that had converted that Choice is pushing all exterior-corridor facilities to switch to Quality and keeping Comfort Inns as interior-corridor properties. (The Comfort Inn at Weston, WV, hasn't changed yet and it's an exterior-entrance motel).

I still prefer exterior entrance motels, especially if I can park right in front of the door. This allows me to keep an eye on my vehicle, and makes it a lot easier to get my stuff into the room.

I'm a member of both the Choice and Wyndham reward programs and try to stay at the one that offers the best points promotion whenever possible. I've also joined Best Western, IHG, Marriott and Hampton because I occasionally have to stay at one of those properties for work and I might as well earn points if I can. I'd earned enough Best Western points to get two free stays on my trip to Dubuque for the meet there earlier this year.

I still like cheap; I cringe at the thought of spending more than $75 a night for a room, and actually I think that's too high.

[realjd]

For hotel prices, it really is location dependent. $75 may be a lot of money for some place like Dubuque but would be an excellent value for a hotel in San Diego.

A good gauge of hotel prices is the GSA Per Diem rates:
http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/104877

That lists the maximum amount that the government will pay for a hotel in a given area and is followed my many corporate travel policies as well. It usually pays for a Hampton Inn level hotel.

[roadman65]

You are right about location as $75 in Florida is a lot of money, yet in New Jersey it would be ideal.  If you could find anything less than that in the Garden State, it would be a roach motel.  However, the Motel 6 at Exit 4 off the New Jersey Turnpike shocked me at $38 a night back in 2000 that surprised me and it was not a bad room for the money.  I think that one was either the exception to the rule or parts of South Jersey do have cheaper overhead.  Then again this is over 13 years ago.

[formulanone]

Geez, my per diem rates are on the low side by comparison. I tend to eat on the thrifty side anyhow ($15-20/day, less if breakfast is included, more if stuck in an airport), which gives you a little managerial goodwill on the few times a year when you really want a $30-50 dinner and drinks.

Every now and then, someone doesn't do the research and puts us in a overpriced hotel which has few nearby amenities, serves breakfast too late for us crack-of-dawn risers, is loaded with hundreds of meeting room/convention-goers, et al.

[roadman65]

When Hampton Inns started they had reasonable rates.  I remember my dad got a room for $40 back in the 80s and it included a somewhat of a breakfast.  Then in Miami on 36th Street near the Miami Airport it was about that as well. Back in 92 when I stayed at the one on Old Route 66 in Countryside, IL it was not too expensive then either and even in 97 when a friend of mine stayed at another one near MIA, it was just starting to go up, but there were two of us who could afford a somewhat expensive room. 

Back in the 80s forty dollar rooms were considered real good for the times, and I cannot remember what I payed in the 90s in Illinois, but it was cheap as I would have never picked it.  Now they are over $80 at least these days.

[Big John]

One recent problem i have had are certain chains are purposely putting in curtain rods which make it impossible to close the curtains at night, meaning a huge gap between the ends of the travel rod.  Then with the outdoor lighting, it is impossible to fall asleep with all the light travelling through the window.

[jeffandnicole]

Word from an ex of mine who worked up there is that Sullivan County uses the no-name motels in Liberty, NY as places to house sex offenders who need an eye kept on them. I wonder how common this practice is. Something to think about when deciding where to spend the night.

When a train derailed in Paulsboro, NJ a year or so ago, some of the town was evacuated to a nearby Motel 6 off Exit 17 of I-295.  A few people with children found out a sex-offender was living there.  They were not too happy about the situation.

An aside - this motel used to be the Dutch Inn, with a large windmill out front.  Used to be a very nice place to stay at, or for a formal dinner/reception, etc.  For whatever reason it went out of business many years ago.  Today, the banquet hall side is completely closed, and it's rather run down now.

[jeffandnicole]

Since this thread has reopened...

My preferences are Hilton or Marriott branded hotels. And rarely will I not have a hotel picked out beforehand.  Even when I just on the road looking for a place to stay, I'll glance at my phone to see the hotels coming up based on how much further I'll be traveling, and see what's either reasonably inexpensive or doesn't require a lot of points to stay at. 

I even sat outside a Days Inn one time to use their public Wifi (when I had a laptop) to locate and book a Marriott branded hotel about 15 minutes down the road!

[realjd]

When Hampton Inns started they had reasonable rates.  I remember my dad got a room for $40 back in the 80s and it included a somewhat of a breakfast.  Then in Miami on 36th Street near the Miami Airport it was about that as well. Back in 92 when I stayed at the one on Old Route 66 in Countryside, IL it was not too expensive then either and even in 97 when a friend of mine stayed at another one near MIA, it was just starting to go up, but there were two of us who could afford a somewhat expensive room. 

Back in the 80s forty dollar rooms were considered real good for the times, and I cannot remember what I payed in the 90s in Illinois, but it was cheap as I would have never picked it.  Now they are over $80 at least these days.

$40 in 1980 = $114 today. A $90 room today is actually cheaper than you were paying back then. Yay inflation!

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

[realjd]

Geez, my per diem rates are on the low side by comparison. I tend to eat on the thrifty side anyhow ($15-20/day, less if breakfast is included, more if stuck in an airport), which gives you a little managerial goodwill on the few times a year when you really want a $30-50 dinner and drinks.

Every now and then, someone doesn't do the research and puts us in a overpriced hotel which has few nearby amenities, serves breakfast too late for us crack-of-dawn risers, is loaded with hundreds of meeting room/convention-goers, et al.

My company pays flat per diem at the GSA rate for meals and incidentals regardless of what I spend. Ate cheaply? Pocket the extra. Ate expensive? You're still only getting the per diem back. It's nice not having to save receipts for meals though.

[formulanone]

We just get an AMEX card, tie it into the software, and manage the bills quite easily. Problem is that it's not a per diem, it's more of a spending limit. There's very few cases when I have to save receipts; usually just office supplies and non-AMEX expenses.

[hbelkins]

My company pays flat per diem at the GSA rate for meals and incidentals regardless of what I spend. Ate cheaply? Pocket the extra. Ate expensive? You're still only getting the per diem back. It's nice not having to save receipts for meals though.

I get actual reimbursement for lodging, and a flat-rate per diem for meals if I'm "in travel status" during the entire specified period. For an overnight trip to Frankfort, that usually means the evening meal the night of my stay, and breakfast and lunch the day of my class/meeting/whatever. Per diem is not allowed if the hotel serves a hot breakfast, so I try to avoid the Hampton and Holiday Inn Express in Frankfort to make a little extra money. (Per diem is $7 for breakfast, $8 for lunch and $15 for dinner). If I'm in Louisville, it usually ends up costing me money to eat dinner because it's hard to find something under $15 that's close to the downtown convention hotels. And lunch always costs me money if I'm in Frankfort because the cafeteria at the KYTC building is overpriced.