[HN Gopher] Guests ejected mid-stay from bankrupt hotel chain So...
___________________________________________________________________
Guests ejected mid-stay from bankrupt hotel chain Sonder
Author : onemoresoop
Score : 52 points
Date : 2025-11-13 21:44 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
| CSMastermind wrote:
| Why wouldn't they just let people finish out their stay?
|
| Sending an email to people saying you need to leave by noon seems
| crazy.
| jahnu wrote:
| Legal requirements to provide food, services, security that
| suppliers will no longer provide. Not to mention staff.
| Waterluvian wrote:
| Also insurance, maybe?
| fukka42 wrote:
| What about their legal requirement to deliver what was paid
| for?
| pessimizer wrote:
| The "hotel" they booked with has ceased to exist. They're just
| creditors now.
| Ninjak8051 wrote:
| Let's say you own and operate a small independent hotel, some
| techies from San Francisco offer to perma-book every room for
| the next three years solid for some fraction of your normal
| room rate. You keep operating your hotel, the techies send you
| regular guests (and handle all payments), and at the end of the
| month you get the same guaranteed income whether business was
| bad or good.
|
| All goes well for a while but the techies start slipping on
| payments. First it's a few days, but sometimes they miss by a
| few weeks, so you schedule a call with the VP to straighten
| things out. Eventually they get a few months behind, you're fed
| up and demand immediate payment or you will stop lodging their
| guests (who have paid the techies, but somehow the money has
| not made it to you). CEO calls to straighten things out,
| promises to wire the money by Friday, just please please please
| don't evict any guests. You agree, but Friday comes and goes
| with crickets, and on Saturday morning you kick everyone out.
| fukka42 wrote:
| Good way to trash your reputation.
|
| Just stop accepting new guests and work things out with the
| techies.
| moralestapia wrote:
| There has to be laws protecting guests against this.
|
| I would be extremely surprised if hotels can just do this with no
| consequences, even if you somehow signed into it on their T&C.
| ozim wrote:
| How would it work if hotels are bankrupt?
|
| what consequences can you put on a bankrupt company?
|
| I guess that guests might have claims for not used part of the
| stay but that's going to be handled by bankruptcy process and
| there are rules who get money back in which order I guess
| employees get their paychecks first or something.
| dwattttt wrote:
| A solution would be to require hotels to carry insurance for
| this event.
| onraglanroad wrote:
| How would it work? If any of the management knew the
| bankruptcy was pending and were still allowing bookings, they
| are personally responsible for the costs.
|
| If they can't afford it, they face prison time.
|
| I bet that would fix the issue damn quickly.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| There are _soooo_ many issues that would be fixed by
| holding the C-Suite (and maybe even the Board and /or
| shareholders) personally responsible.
|
| Won't happen in this timeline, though.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| That would kind of destroy the whole rationale for
| corporations to exist.
| viraptor wrote:
| Sounds good? I mean, we tried the whole corporation
| without responsibility for quite a while. It doesn't seem
| to work very well and especially on HN there's at least
| one post reminding us of that every day.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Prison doesn't fix every issue. It fixes very few of them
| actually, except the public's demand for punishment.
|
| Personal financial liability would probably be more
| effective.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| > How would it work if hotels are bankrupt? what consequences
| can you put on a bankrupt company?
|
| Force them sign a special type of insurance, or something
| else where other companies can temporarily pick up the pieces
| until the current stays are over. Make the company pay into a
| fund to pay for that before they get their license to operate
| the hotel, and make it a legal requirement that the fund
| needs to be able to cover all the currently active stays for
| N days. Consequences can be put on the people who run the
| company, that if they don't fulfill their legal duties they
| get fines or even prison.
|
| Of course, this is just me brainstorming ideas in two
| minutes, I'm sure with a proper legal system and actual
| professionals they could work something out to protect guests
| and works better than "Sorry, we're bankrupt, you need to
| leave in one hour or sooner".
| pkaye wrote:
| From what I can lookup in the US the order it is:
|
| 1. Secure creditors (like liens on specific assets)
|
| 2. Administrative expensive post bankruptcy
|
| 3. Priority unsecured claims like employee wages
|
| 4. General unsecured creditors like suppliers and customers
|
| 5. Shareholders
|
| I think customers who paid by credit card or have travel
| insurance might be able to make a faster claim with those as
| the legal process is slow especially since it involves
| multiple countries where they do business.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Some credit cards that cater to travelers might actually
| have that benefit. Would be worth checking if you travel a
| lot and like to stay at quirky boutique hotels that might
| turn out to be insolvent.
| TrackerFF wrote:
| People should check their travel insurance, if it covers things
| like this. Travel insurance doesn't cost a lot, and comes with
| a ton of benefits.
| thewebguyd wrote:
| Yeah, seems wild to me that the hotels can just straight up
| kick people out immediately like that. Why not let them finish
| out their stay? Like, it wouldn't have killed Marriott to just
| eat that cost and generate some goodwill and gain some
| potential future customers.
|
| Are they really operating on such slim margins that it would
| have been a threat to their business/chains if they didn't
| immediately evict and re-book the room(s) out?
| gruez wrote:
| >There has to be laws protecting guests against this.
|
| If you paid by credit card, just start a chargeback?
| 650 wrote:
| Their CEO, Francis Davidson, Forbes 30 under 30. Strikes again.
|
| Unicorn status (1 billion) in 2020, to bankrupt in 2025. Another
| Zero Interest Rate Phenomenon.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonder_(company)
| https://www.linkedin.com/in/francisdavidson/
| parpfish wrote:
| was this a case where a 1bil valuation in 2020 was increased
| because of covid (people wanted hotels that didn't require any
| human interaction) OR they were valued at 1bil pre-covid and
| covid killed their momentum when travel stopped?
| projektfu wrote:
| They IPO'd in 2021 and were worth about 22 billion until Jan
| 2022. Then a precipitous fall to about 2.2 billion in 2023,
| 220 million in 2024, and now 22 million.
| ryandrake wrote:
| > Forbes 30 under 30
|
| Really amazing how much of a reliable indicator this has
| become.
| api wrote:
| Time Man of the Year is even worse. That's like being led up
| a ladder into a big wicker man.
| dabluecaboose wrote:
| TIME naming everyone Person of the Year in 2006 is really
| what started us down this twisted timeline
| embedding-shape wrote:
| To be fair, Person of the Year is a prize that is more
| "This is a person who impacted the world", not necessarily
| "This is a good person that deserves praise". Both Stalin
| (twice!) and Hitler been Person of the Year.
|
| Forbes 30 under 30 seems to be a bit more interesting for
| narcissists, as it really focuses on their "great
| achievements".
| mirekrusin wrote:
| Dude ejected himself 4 mo ago to "work on something new"? Nice
| one.
| jacquesm wrote:
| He's just hoping to be the next Altman.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| I was at some Forbes 30 under 30 party a couple years ago - as
| in, I started noticing a large number of guests were that - and
| I started offering myself up as a future character witness
| nandomrumber wrote:
| Sounds like something Michael Malice might say. Or P.J.
| O'Rourke.
|
| If you haven't heard of him, check him out in his podcast
| 'Your Welcome', spelling intentional.
| jacquesm wrote:
| That's such a red flag by now. That and a Softbank investment.
| And I'm not sure which is worse.
| balamatom wrote:
| _Now_ you 're experiencing
| https://www.thedictionaryofobscuresorrows.com/concept/sonder!
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Cool link!
|
| Reminds me of this song:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5Ye8fBEkcc
| ryandv wrote:
| Nice track.
| ryandv wrote:
| > founded in Montreal, Canada
|
| Shameful. Given the choice between integrity and money, it seems
| they chose money.
| malexw wrote:
| What does being founded in Montreal have to do with integrity?
| ryandv wrote:
| You're right - nothing at all, I suppose.
| gip wrote:
| I was staying in a apartment in London a long time ago and a
| Sunday(!) bailiffs came and kicked everyone in the building out
| in 3 hours. The reason was that the rent hadn't been paid to the
| building owner by the management company. Most people just left
| and lost the rent they had paid. These things happen and there
| are no protection for tenants unfortunately.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| And there was no prior warning? That seems unreasonable but
| maybe it happened that way.
| vkou wrote:
| This _is_ unreasonable. In any just society, the bailiffs
| would be slapping cuffs on the owners of the management
| company, while the tenants would get notice.
|
| You can't throw someone out of their home without notice
| because you have a business dispute with _some third party._
| gruez wrote:
| >In any just society, the bailiffs would be slapping cuffs
| on the owners of the management company, while the tenants
| would get notice.
|
| ...for leasing to a hotel chain that later went bankrupt?
|
| >You can't throw someone out of their home without notice
| because you have a business dispute with some third party.
|
| It's a hotel. Hotels typically have less tenant rights than
| long-term accommodations.
| Electricniko wrote:
| The UK government just enacted a law last week that gives
| tenants in England a lot more protection against that kind of
| thing.
|
| https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-the-rent...
| krisoft wrote:
| Sonder is the noun for the realization that each random person
| you see has a life as vivid and complex as your own.
|
| I guess the company lived up to its name by reminding every guest
| that the company itself has(had?) a "life" as complex and
| eventfull as the guest's own.
| Animats wrote:
| The specific Sonder hotel mentioned in the article is still
| listed on the Mariott web site.[1]
|
| "A stay you can count on. Experience travel without the
| guesswork. While every space is unique, you can always count on
| the Sonder Standard. All stays feature designer details, keyless
| entry, fast free WiFi and our 24/7 digital concierge."
|
| Trying to make a reservation returns "Your session timed out, but
| you can start a new hotel search below."
|
| This badly hurts Mariott's brand. Their page reads as if they
| stand behind Sonder. Marriott supposedly has about 30 brands, and
| now you have to ask which of them are fake fronts.
|
| [1] https://www.marriott.com/en-us/hotels/nycho-the-merchant-
| hot...
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Incredible, given the hurdles Marriott asks franchisors to jump
| through.
| vkou wrote:
| A good franchise will bring in X million in profits and a bad
| one will bring in XYZ million in reputational damage.
|
| A good unicorn will bring in XYZ billion[1] in profits and a
| bad one will bring in XYZ million in reputational damage.
|
| Which is exactly why franchise operators get put through the
| wringer, while 'pod hotel but with an app' startups get the
| red carpet treatment.
|
| ---
|
| [1] Yes, I know that is bullshit, but I'm not an exec, I
| don't get paid to be wildly optimistic.
| MattGaiser wrote:
| I get a big red popup saying that Sonder is no longer
| affiliated with Marriott?
| Animats wrote:
| Not getting that here, but some images are returning 404
| errors. Somewhere, someone is probably trying to scrub the
| Mariott site manually.
| robofanatic wrote:
| apparently guests were literally fired that day.
| jen729w wrote:
| Terrible look for Marriott. We've been considering joining either
| Bonvoy or HHonors and discussing the merits of either chain.
| Mostly just for something to talk about, as we're too poor to
| stay at either for significant amounts of time, but nevertheless.
|
| Marriott took the route of spreading out their brands. Sheraton,
| oh that's Marriott? I see. Westin? Huh. Le Meridien, never heard
| of ... oh, Marriott.
|
| Whereas Hilton seem proud enough to stick their name in a thing,
| even if it's a trailing '...by Hilton'. I wonder how this
| affects, say, bringing in a new brand.
|
| 'Sonder': anonymous. Never heard of it, until now. Gives Marriott
| some distance. Goes to hell? Cut it. How hard do you _really_
| need to try to onboard that brand?
|
| 'Sonder by Hilton': I know who owns that. I know which brand to
| blame when it goes to crap. Directly affects the core offering.
|
| I just made up my mind whose scheme I'm joining.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Hotel standards have gone way down since covid. Hilton or
| Marriott don't mean as much, and recent reviews from a source
| you trust are about as good as it gets for predicting quality.
| jen729w wrote:
| 'A source you trust' no longer including _any_ of the major
| booking sites, alas.
|
| You know what we do now? We get the Lonely Planet.
| selectodude wrote:
| You can always just join both. It's not an either/or.
| jen729w wrote:
| Well yeah but this was a hypothetical about which one you'd
| actually _use_. Far better to pick a horse when it comes to
| earning loyalty status.
| patall wrote:
| Fun fact: Swedish 'sonder' (with umlaut) means 'broken'
| razingeden wrote:
| this is why i read this site
| pjdesno wrote:
| Bankruptcy can be a bitch.
|
| I remember a case (maybe 30 years ago?) where a local health club
| chain went bankrupt, and anything anyone had left in their
| lockers was stuck there until the judge ruled on the case.
| pjdesno wrote:
| Here's the case - a judge froze the company's assets, which
| meant that if you had any of your personal property on the
| premises, you were SOL.
|
| https://www.upi.com/Archives/1991/03/28/Court-freezes-assets...
| bilbo0s wrote:
| > _She said there was a sharp decline in revenue "arising from
| Sonder's participation in Marriott's Bonvoy reservation system"._
|
| This will be an interesting case study to piece together. What
| were the factors that lead revenue to go _down_ on _expansion_ of
| your marketing and access reach?
|
| I have my own suspicions, but the backstory with this is probably
| way crazier than I'm even thinking. Like, "Why would anyone ever
| sign that?" level crazy.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-11-13 23:00 UTC)