Hotel Congress, Tucson, Money

OpinionWell's Blog

Home » United States » Arizona » Tucson Destinations » Tucson Hotels » Hotel Congress

OpinionWell
Rank

45th

Out of 278

Hotel Congress	Average Price: $99 Check Rates

Hotel Class:

311 East Congress Street

Tucson, 85701 View map

2-Star Hotel Rank: 10 of 58
Average review rating: 3.26

OpinionWell Value Index: 2

Traveler reviews analyzed: TripAdvisor (76) , YahooTravel (13)

SAFE TO BOOK ? (1/5 issues found)

Is this hotel safe to book? See the trends in negative comments below to find out the real deal before you commit:

Construction:	No recent comments about construction were found.
Noise:	Recent comments complained about noise.
Room Smell:	No recent comments about room smell were found.
Parking Fees:	No recent comments about parking fees were found.
Bed Bugs:	No recent comments about bed bugs were found.

Search reviews for other problems

Keyword Cloud

The hotel review keyword cloud displays the words commonly used to describe the features and services of this hotel. Select a word and explore.

All Positive Negative

Keyword Search

amenity (4) bar (52) bath (2) bathroom (13) bathtub (2) bed (23) breakfast (24) charge (6) check in (2) check out (5) closet (1) concierge (1) cost (3) deal (1) decor (6) dinner (6) downtown (11) fee (1) food (15) front desk (10) highway (1) hotel (166) housekeeping (3) lobby (15) location (27) lunch (2) manager (5) money (8) neighborhood (2) parking (7) patio (7) pillow (3) price (10) rate (1) recommend (14) refund (1) restaurant (24) room (161) service (12) sheets (3) shower (21) staff (34) street (24) towel (2) tub (1) value (5) view (7) walk (4) water pressure (4) wireless (2)

Money

Appears in 8 comments.

50% wrote positive comments about money

The following words were used in comments with Money:
affordable (2) breakfast (2) cafe (2) dinner (2) eat (2) historic (2) hotel (2) problem (2) shared (2)

Users can vote for helpful comments, which are saved in the Most helpful section.

Sort by:

1. Later that night, my friend asked me to order her a drink, so then she gave me the money for her order.

"Poor Customer Service! " Read full review on TripAdvisor 2/3/2012 Vote

2. For the money I spent, we did not get much.

"Not Worth the Money " Read full review on TripAdvisor 12/28/2011 Vote

3. We travelled around Arizona/Nevada for a month and both agreed that this hotel was the worst value for money of all the places we'd stayed.

"Great website suckered us in! " Read full review on TripAdvisor 6/20/2010 Vote

4. They have not updated the piping in the building which I thinks shows that they are not so much interested in keeping the hotel 'historical' as much as they are trying to save as much money as possible.

"Older hotel, great character, location, and food " Read full review on TripAdvisor 6/17/2010 Vote

5. I understand bands need money, but if we have to listen to it all night anyway, at least let us have a look, right?)Historical charm is nice, but when it comes to things like mattresses and plumbing, maybe 'history' is being used as an excuse for 'to cheap to make improvements'.

"Charming, Loud and Uncomfortable " Read full review on TripAdvisor 12/29/2009 Vote

6. If eating dinner in their cafe be prepared to spend a little money, breakfast is more affordable, but definitley gets packed and you are forced to share booths with complete strangers and if you're not much a people person that can be a problem.

"A good place, if you're room is not by the train tracks " Read full review on TripAdvisor 2/29/2008 Vote

7. If eating dinner in their cafe be prepared to spend a little money, breakfast is more affordable, but definitley gets packed and you are forced to share booths with complete strangers and if you`re not much a people person that can be a problem.

"A good place, if you`re room is not by the train tracks " Read full review on TripAdvisor 2/29/2008 Vote

8. They refunded our money for the remaining nights, and were very apologetic.

"If you don't enjoy sleep or comfort, stay here " Read full review on TripAdvisor 3/2/2010 Vote