New Orleans Royal Sonesta, New Orleans, Disturbing

OpinionWell's Blog

Home » United States » Louisiana » New Orleans Destinations » New Orleans Hotels » New Orleans Royal Sonesta

OpinionWell
Rank

5th

Out of 427

New Orleans Royal Sonesta	Average Price: $230 Check Rates

Hotel Class:

300 Bourbon Street

New Orleans, 70130 View map

4-Star Hotel Rank: 2 of 37
Average review rating: 4.26

OpinionWell Value Index: 6

Traveler reviews analyzed: Expedia (81) , Travelocity (2) , TripAdvisor (856) , YahooTravel (84)

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 (8) annoy (12) avoid (22) bad (49) big deal (7) broken (7) complain (30) complaint (30) dated (6) difficult (11) dirty (9) disappoint (48) disgust (6) disturbing (8) downside (10) errors (7) expensive (38) gross (7) hard (30) hardly (6) horrible (12) inconvenient (14) issue (48) lack (13) loud (70) mad (6) negative (20) noise (211) noisy (65) outdated (9) outrageous (6) overpriced (9) poor (11) pricey (17) problem (87) rowdy (9) rude (27) sadly (6) shame (6) slow (17) smell (29) terrible (11) tiny (14) ugly (6) uncomfortable (8) unfortunate (16) weird (7) worn (11) worst (9) wrong (30)

Disturbing

Appears in 11 comments.

The following words were used in comments with Disturbing:
floor (2) hotel (2) maid (2) never (4) night (4) noise (3) not (6) room (2) sleep (3) street (3)

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

Sort by:

See all

1. The 7th floor proved to be a very quite floor and we were never disturbed by outside noise even the evening we turned in early.

"Best Place to stay in New Orleans " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/17/2012 Vote

2. The room maids respected the do not disturb sign so we could sleep in each morning.

"Great Hotel " Read full review on TripAdvisor 1/3/2012 Vote

3. Even though there is a lot of loud music on the street nearby, somehow I was not at all disturbed by it at night.

"The place to be " Read full review on TripAdvisor 10/16/2011 Vote

4. I've been more disturbed by elevators and ice machines and soda dispensers at other hotels so this was far from terrible.

"Clean, good condition, got what I expected " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/8/2011 Vote

5. After a night/early morning out on Bourbon Street, hubby and I found our sleep being disturbed by not one, not two but atleast three hotel maids knocking on the door before noon between the hours of 8AM and 11AM, when I called to request a sign from the conceirge after the first wake up, it never arrived.

"Don't believe the hype " Read full review on TripAdvisor 12/24/2010 Vote

6. However, having a 'do not disturb' sign would have been greatly appreciated.

"Don't believe the hype " Read full review on TripAdvisor 12/24/2010 Vote

7. It was disturbing that no one seemed to care at all to do anything.

"Royal Sonesta - DON'T STAY HERE " Read full review on TripAdvisor 9/29/2010 Vote

8. and we have never been disturbed by noise).

"A great hotel in the centre of everything... " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/11/2010 Vote

9. I understand this is the oldest profession in existence, but I do not like it thrown in my face on vacation or disturbing my sleep at night.

"Whore House " Read full review on YahooTravel 12/4/2007 Vote

10. Our room was very nice and overlooked Bourbon Street, although we were there mid-week and were never disturbed by noise.

"Beautiful hotel " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/27/2006 Vote