Monarch Hotel San Francisco, San Francisco, Pleasant

OpinionWell's Blog

Home » United States » California » San Francisco Destinations » San Francisco Hotels » Monarch Hotel San Francisco

OpinionWell
Rank

163rd

Out of 493

Monarch Hotel San Francisco	Average Price: $102 Check Rates

Hotel Class:

1015 Geary Street

San Francisco, 94109 View map

2-Star Hotel Rank: 49 of 119
Average review rating: 3.06

OpinionWell Value Index: 2

Traveler reviews analyzed: BedBugRegistry (3) , Expedia (43) , TripAdvisor (109) , YahooTravel (10)

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

above average (1) accommodating (2) adequate (2) affordable (4) best (9) better (5) big (10) cares (6) clean (61) comfortable (16) convenient (15) decent (10) delicious (1) excellent (7) exceptional (1) fancy (4) fantastic (2) free (15) fresh (2) friendly (16) generous (4) good (47) great (40) happy (4) helpful (13) huge (2) liked (28) loved (3) luxury (2) new (5) nice (30) perfect (5) pleasant (7) pleased (3) plenty (5) plush (2) positive (2) quiet (8) reasonable (5) reasonably (2) responsive (1) roomy (1) secure (4) spacious (2) spectacular (1) spotless (1) stunning (1) superb (1) well appointed (1) wonderful (2)

Pleasant

Appears in 12 comments.

The following words were used in comments with Pleasant:
arrival (2) employee (2) expectation (2) guest (2) manner (2) not (3) older (2) personable (3) problem (2) staff (3) surprise (3)

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

Sort by:

See all

1. I did not expect anything but was pleasantly surprised really.

"Good to explore Frisco " Read full review on TripAdvisor 3/21/2012 Vote

2. When we arrived at the hotel the front desk person greeted us with a smile and was very pleasant.

"Better than expected " Read full review on TripAdvisor 10/27/2010 Vote

3. I rolled the dice on this stay, and was expecting the worst, but was actually pleasantly surprised.

"Not as bad as expected " Read full review on TripAdvisor 8/6/2010 Vote

4. Only one person, an older male employee in his 50s, was regularly pleasant to me, chatting away merrily and taking an interest in the guests.

"Staff need to be more hospitable and friendly " Read full review on Expedia 11/17/2009 Vote

5. Perhaps my problem is being too pleasant to people, or simple manners escaped him.

"Staff need to be more hospitable and friendly " Read full review on Expedia 11/17/2009 Vote

6. Only one person, an older male employee in his 50s, was regularly pleasant to me, chatting away merrily and taking an interest in the guests.

"Pretty average hotel, but staff need to be more hospitable and friendly " Read full review on TripAdvisor 11/13/2009 Vote

7. Perhaps my problem is being too pleasant to people, or simple manners escaped this knucklehead.

"Pretty average hotel, but staff need to be more hospitable and friendly " Read full review on TripAdvisor 11/13/2009 Vote

8. Overall very pleasant, clean and safe.

"Overall very pleasant, clean and safe. " Read full review on Expedia 9/23/2009 Vote

9. The staff was pleasant and our room was comfortable.

"cant wait to go back! " Read full review on Expedia 5/19/2009 Vote

10. Having said this it is certainly not in a pretty San Fran district and if you`re looking for a relaxing stay in a pleasant neighbourhood with staff who bend over backwards for you, do not stay here.

"Absolutely fine for the price " Read full review on TripAdvisor 6/6/2007 Vote