would be nice if they took that green scaffolding at the top down, sometime soon, like maybe in this millenium...they sure aren't rushing that's for sure.
 
Say what you want about the exterior up close, I'm not the biggest fan either, but from a distance it provides some much needed variation to the otherwise flat-top-dominated skyline we have, as well as added tall-building density and the interior and service is fantastic. I would much rather have it here than not.
 
Somehow, referring to the Trump's lobby as "more sophisticated" than the Royal York's says everything one needs to know about coolcanadian's judgment call.
 
Trumps lobby has been done with a lot of money but unfortunately it suffers from necessity of design. The fact that they have an enclosed entrance which is just a room and then you have to go to the elevators and upstairs is predicated on the small palate with which they had to work.
The materials which make the arrival area dark and just a room with some desks at the end with the Czech glass work in my view does not hold a candle to the Royal York which is expansive with seating and much more architectural detail.
That said, taste is individual.
I am sure there will be some seating arriving to the "lobby" of Trump but it is what it is, a downtown hotel on a small palate with little natural light.

For what it is worth, in my view the Ritz lobby is much more inviting and more worthy of arriving at a "5 star hotel".

We will have to see the final product of both the SL and 4S. Once the 4 are completed, perhaps we can make a judgement with "comparable" 5 star hotels and decide whether Trump is an overwhelming success, run of the mill or a failure.
 
Last edited:
interested said:
Trumps lobby has been done with a lot of money but unfortunately it suffers from necessity of design. The fact that they have an enclosed entrance which is just a room and then you have to go to the elevators and upstairs is predicated on the small palate with which they had to work.
The materials which make the arrival area dark and just a room with some desks at the end with the Czech glass work in my view does not hold a candle to the Royal York which is expansive with seating and much more architectural detail.
That said, taste is individual.
I am sure there will be some seating arriving to the "lobby" of Trump but it is what it is, a downtown hotel on a small palate with little natural light.

For what it is worth, in my view the Ritz lobby is much more inviting and more worthy of arriving at a "5 star hotel".

We will have to see the final product of both the SL and 4S. Once the 4 are completed, perhaps we can make a judgement with "comparable" 5 star hotels and decide whether Trump is an overwhelming success, run of the mill or a failure.
Click to expand...

The lobby at trump is smaller, more private, quieter. VIPs staying in the city would prefer this exclusivity than the grande, classic Royal York. The rooms at the Royal York are not even comparable to Trump's. Ritz's lobby may be nicer, but the service level at Trump is better,
 
I can't comment about the service level as I simply do not know.
The lobby as it now stands (at least when I saw it) had no seating. So basically it is get out of the car, walk in to the counter and check in. There really is no lobby atmosphere.

I am quite sure you are probably correct suggesting the rooms at the Royal York are not comparable but it is after all a 4 star and not a 5 star hotel. The rooms at Trump should be larger and the bathrooms larger and more luxurious....otherwise why are you paying 50-100% more for a room.

As I said, Trump's competition will be 4S to a degree, though less so as it is in Yorkville....SL and Ritz. We will see once they are both up and running for a year and things have settled as to who offers the best service.

One can improve the service level but I am doubtful Trump can improve its lobby much. Anyhow, hopefully all the 5 Star hotels will offer service worthy of the designation. That just improves the city. Also, when there are functions, I can see all the hotels being booked. It will depend on the individual's preferences as to which will be best. I suspect SL will be more "relaxed". Ritz as the name suggests "Ritzy". Trump will be presumably "over the top" as one expects with the Trump name.
 
adma said:
"Nicest hotel in the country" *harrumph* the Royal York, the Chateau Frontenac, etc etc etc
Click to expand...

The Royal York seems to have seriously declined in service levels in the last few years. Too high a number of guests I talk to staying there only complain about simple things being wrong.
 
SP!RE said:
Okay enough of this nonsense. You're going on my Ignore list.
Click to expand...

I thought vatche made a good point about the blank & white, all or nothing, success or failure mentality of many commentators on the forum. Yes it was a sarcastic response, but still a valid point. There are many commentators more worthy of the ignore list.
 
wmedia said:
I thought vatche made a good point about the blank & white, all or nothing, success or failure mentality of many commentators on the forum. Yes it was a sarcastic response, but still a valid point. There are many commentators more worthy of the ignore list.
Click to expand...



I couldn't care less about whose ignore list I go on. it's the last of my worries!!
After reading some of the comments written on here, I just can't help it but write something sarcastic. they're just too ridiculous.
 
thedeepend said:
ugh, the name--the moment we've all been dreading.
so embarrassing having a tower named after a washed-up reality tv personality
maybe he'll go bankrupt again and we can name it after someone more important,

d6ddcec4.jpg
Click to expand...

Jealous much?
 
coolcanadian said:
Don't get me wrong, The Royal York is a classic that will never be replaced.

The service and design of the Trump (interior at least, such as rooms) makes it one of the best hotels in teh country, above Royal York.
Click to expand...

It'll be interesting to see the clientele it attracts. The Royal York just had actual royals. And it's still the go-to place for visiting dignitaries, etc. since they're familiar with how to deal with high-security clients. Plus it has history going for it, which may actually allow rooms to use an older style than the very modern Trump. (I did not find the RY room "in desperate need of a reno", but done in a more traditional style than Trump)

This is actually a question that would apply to all three of Toronto's new high-end hotels--what niche will they stake out? What will they become known for? It might be service, decor, food, or all three.
 
Just because the Royal York is frumpy like Camilla doesn't mean that a Diana is preferrable.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top