Marriott San Francisco, San Francisco, Complain

OpinionWell's Blog

Home » United States » California » San Francisco Destinations » San Francisco Hotels » Marriott San Francisco

OpinionWell
Rank

47th

Out of 493

Marriott San Francisco	Average Price: $304 Check Rates

Hotel Class:

500 Post Street

San Francisco, 94102 View map

4-Star Hotel Rank: 25 of 37
Average review rating: 4.29

OpinionWell Value Index: 2

Traveler reviews analyzed: BedBugRegistry (1) , Expedia (41) , MyTravelGuide (301) , Travelocity (19) , TripAdvisor (468) , YahooTravel (45)

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 small (3) annoy (3) avoid (5) awkward (4) bad (26) bug (2) claustrophobic (2) complain (7) complaint (8) cramped (5) dated (3) delay (3) depressing (2) difficult (5) dirty (3) disappoint (22) disgust (3) downside (3) expensive (38) hard (11) hardly (3) hate (5) horrible (7) issue (19) lack (4) loud (6) mediocre (3) mold (3) negative (11) noise (58) noisy (11) outrageous (2) overpriced (5) pricey (5) problem (26) ridiculous (6) rock (2) rude (5) shock (3) slow (10) smell (7) terrible (3) tiny (4) unacceptable (5) uncomfortable (3) unfortunate (7) weird (3) worst (7) would have liked (3) wrong (14)

Complain

Appears in 12 comments.

The following words were used in comments with Complain:
bathroom (2) construction (2) exceptional (2) night (2) noise (5) not (2) room (4) sleep (2)

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

Sort by:

See all

1. Our only issue was being awakened early every morning by a bull horn by union workers complaining about non-union workers on Union Square.

"Great stay " Read full review on TripAdvisor 5/17/2012 Vote

2. One tip: I was sleeping on the 12th floor and slept like a baby but a colleague sleeping on 7 complained of noise all night long.

"Great hotel - but improve the WiFi " Read full review on TripAdvisor 3/11/2012 Vote

3. Reviews on Tripadvisor complained about small bathrooms, but all marble bathroom was sufficient in all respect, bed was comfortable and noise problem was not an issue.

"away from tourist congested hotels! " Read full review on TripAdvisor 1/19/2012 Vote

4. Colleagues staying at the nearby Hilton complained of a great deal more noise.

"Very Nice Luxury Hotel with Great Service " Read full review on TripAdvisor 1/22/2011 Vote

5. 00 for a couple R&C's while watching the setting sun in SF when everything else was free, I'm not complaining.

"If only I could afford this " Read full review on TripAdvisor 7/13/2010 Vote

6. I have nothing to complain about except I wanted more 'glamour' for my families' vacation.

"Nice digs, just no 'special' vibe " Read full review on TripAdvisor 8/24/2008 Vote

7. I have nothing to complain about except I wanted more `glamour` for my families` vacation.

"Nice digs, just no `special` vibe " Read full review on TripAdvisor 8/24/2008 Vote

8. We went back down and complained to the manager and suddenly they found an appropriate room for us.

"Confirm your room with the hotel " Read full review on Travelocity 6/1/2008 Vote

9. We complained, but they put us in a king room with a horrible cot and an old worn out blanket, and a promise to move us the next day.

"Confirm your room with the hotel " Read full review on Travelocity 6/1/2008 Vote

10. My husband also complained that he could hear noice from other rooms.

"Good Location, Decent hotel " Read full review on TripAdvisor 9/9/2005 Vote