Roger Williams Hotel, New York City, Lack

OpinionWell's Blog

Home » United States » New York » New York Destinations » New York Hotels » Roger Williams Hotel

OpinionWell
Rank

121st

Out of 676

Roger Williams Hotel	Average Price: $393 Check Rates

Hotel Class:

131 Madison Avenue

New York City, 10016 View map

3-Star Hotel Rank: 40 of 154
Average review rating: 3.94

OpinionWell Value Index: 3

Traveler reviews analyzed: Expedia (41) , MyTravelGuide (3) , Travelocity (17) , TripAdvisor (455) , YahooTravel (17)

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

a bit pricey (4) a bit small (6) annoy (5) avoid (4) awful (5) awkward (3) bad (23) bare (3) bed bugs (3) broken (4) claustrophobic (3) complain (20) complaint (9) cramped (8) difficult (6) dirty (4) disappoint (17) downside (6) expensive (23) hard (11) hardly (5) hate (7) hectic (4) horrible (5) inconvenient (4) issue (11) lack (5) loud (15) mad (3) negative (7) nightmare (3) noise (30) noisy (13) outrageous (3) overpriced (7) poor (5) pricey (7) problem (27) ridiculous (5) rude (5) slow (6) smell (5) terrible (6) tiny (36) too small (5) unacceptable (4) uncomfortable (7) unfortunate (8) unpleasant (3) wrong (6)

Lack	Appears in 9 comments.

The following words were used in comments with Lack:
area (2) bar (3) coffee (2) hotel (4) lacking (9) not (2) room (4) service (2)

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

Sort by:

1. My only criticism would be the lack of coffee making facilities in the room, although there is a very convenient Italian deli/corner shop on the corner of Maddison and 31st that seemed to do the best coffee on the row and had a self service selection of pastries and is great for things like bottles of water, bags of chips or beers for the room.

"Great location, decent sized rooms (for manhattan) " Read full review on TripAdvisor 5/8/2011 Vote

2. The food was cooked to precision (even at 1015pm) and Melissa and her team demonstrated a standard of service typically lacking in hotel restaurants/bars.

"Perhaps one of the best non-chain hotels in the US " Read full review on TripAdvisor 12/9/2010 Vote

3. The rooms lack closet space but are clean and comfortable.

"OK hotel with a lot to cover " Read full review on TripAdvisor 9/28/2010 Vote

4. Downsides: Exercise area is small and lacks light.

"Attractive choice in lower Midtown " Read full review on TripAdvisor 12/13/2009 Vote

5. If I had wanted a UK Travelodge style hotel this would have been fine but I didn't and it was also a bit futher down from where we were orginally mean't to be staying and lacked bars in the immediate area for a nightcap.

"Beware UK Travelodge " Read full review on TripAdvisor 9/26/2009 Vote

6. There was nothing the room lacked.

"Wonderful boutique hotel with very courteous staff " Read full review on TripAdvisor 6/19/2009 Vote

7. Me and my friend had 4 suitcases with us and it had to be left just on the sides of the bedroom, due to lack of storage space.

"Good but not great! " Read full review on TripAdvisor 9/20/2008 Vote

8. While I have no real complaints, I would probably not go back to this hotel due to the location and lack of value.

"Great place but overpriced " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/2/2008 Vote

9. If you are keen to get out to restaurants and bars then the lack of these at the hotel should not worry you.

"Great base for exploring Manhatten " Read full review on TripAdvisor 1/12/2004 Vote