The Boutique Bait-and-Switch, part 1: The Webbs didn’t even try…

October 31, 2011
By David M. F. Schankula

Dudley Webb says one of the reasons Jeanne Gang didn’t work out is because no one wanted to build a boutique hotel in downtown Lexington. His evidence for this is that he asked the owners of the 21C Museum Hotel in Louisville.

Webb said he and Gang both talked with the owners of 21C Museum Hotel in Louisville, trying to recruit them to open a hotel in Lexington.

“When that didn’t work, … we went back to our original design for a convention hotel, which is much larger,” he said. Webb said the hotel would be a J.W. Marriott. “The design with the bundles wouldn’t work.”

This is ridiculous.

First of all, there is already a group of investors who have looked at creating a boutique hotel in the heart of Lexington’s downtown. They exist. They’ve studied it, want to do it even. And this was well after the economic collapse. The deal fell hasn’t happened, it’s on hold or being re-thought, it’s on hold, last I heard — but they wanted to do a 21C-style boutique.

So it’s not true that no one is interested.

Putting that aside… people with money are putting money into boutique hotels:

  • $3.5 Billion in Stamford: “By next summer it expects to open a boutique hotel and two residential buildings, including a 22-story high rise.”
  • $22 Million in Wichita: Which is being protested by Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity. Where ya at, Lexington Tea Party? Let the Webbs hear your voices!
  • Charleston, SC: “Because of wetlands and the narrow configuration of the three smaller parcels, a boutique-style hotel would most likely be the option there, Hofford said. If the study calls for a hotel with a convention center and exhibition halls.”
  • Boulder Junction, CO: “Plans to build a transit hub, a 140-room upscale boutique hotel and a 71-unit affordable apartment complex at Boulder Junction are moving forward.”
  • Miami, FL: “Neighborhoods all over Miami are getting big residential and retail makeovers. The 56-acre Midtown Miami developments second phase, which will start next year, will include a boutique hotel, a movie theater and 100,000 square feet of retail.”
  • Tampa, FL: “So far, Buckhorn has talked to four or five developers about the potential for redevelopment and consulted with urban planning experts through the Mayors’ Institute on City Design. The possibility he thinks is strongest is a “boutique hotel” with 100 to 120 rooms.”

The point here is not that anyone’s getting anything done. The point is that people are interested.

The point is that Dudley Webb says he asked one investor if they wanted to fund a world class architect’s vision and when they said they weren’t able to at that moment… Dudley Webb gave up.

Perhaps, you say, all those projects bullet-pointed again were misguided, that they are as fantastical as Gang’s and that Webb made the shrewd decision, looking at the hotel market, to step away from the Boutique Hotel game.

That’s a fine point.

But if that’s what Dudley did, then Dudley’s not listening to the very industry he’s trying, desperately, to insert himself into.

Just this past weekend, industry muckety-mucks gathered in Miami for the ”the third annual Lifestyle/Boutique Hotel Development Conference.”

And what did conference goers learn?

Said Steve Rushmore, head of Hospitality Valuation Services:

He said now is the time to buy a hotel. But he would wait until 2013 or 2014 to sell, particularly in Albuquerque, New Mexico; Norfolk, Virginia; Nashville, Tennessee; St. Louis; or Buffalo—markets “that will not show as great increases” as others. He also suggested independent boutiques with food and beverage do better than brand affiliates and/or foreign boutiques. Among the reasons: no franchise fees, lower administrative costs and marketing fees.

So, in fact, the Webbs have a better chance of funding a non-Marriott hotel… and not just that, a boutique one.

But Dudley asked one group and they said no.

None of this should suggest that funding any hotel development would be easy in this environment.

In fact, Rushmore made clear that to get funding for a successful project, you need to pick your market well:

To minimize volatility, developers should pick safe cities like Orlando, Florida; New Orleans; Seattle; Tucson, Arizona; and Minneapolis. They should avoid high-volatility spots like Jacksonville, Florida; Philadelphia; Charlotte, North Carolina; Houston; Anaheim, California; and Detroit.

You’ll note that each of those “safe cities” cities is a destination already . The idea of trying to create a destination hotel in a non-destination city, let alone a mid-sized one without a major airport hub is not a safe bet and makes funding much more difficult.

The point here isn’t that Dudley can’t get his mammoth Marriott funded. People make bad investments all the time.

And it’s not that he could have necessarily gotten the Gang-design paid-for either… but that he didn’t even try.

And the takeaway from that is that he never really intended to.

He spent the past three months misleading the people of Lexington, just as he’s spent the past three years and, for that matter, the last three decades.

****

  • Coming Tuesday: How Woodford Webb wooed me but never won my heart.
  • And Wednesday: The Boutique Bait & Switch, part 2 — the Marriott Myth.
Share

8 Responses to The Boutique Bait-and-Switch, part 1: The Webbs didn’t even try…

  1. The Lexington Streetsweeper on October 31, 2011 at 4:03 pm

    How so is this a “bait and switch” on the part of Dudley Webb?

    We have a customer (Webb) willing to borrow money with which to buy a Hummer (its an auto in this case) and park it in a prominent spot. Most of the locals think that a Hummer is quite ostentatious and a waste of valuable funds along with really overpowering the lot, thereby crowding out the usual folks livery. The design police step in and urge the customer to reconsider/downsize to something more practical (a nice Ferrari perhaps) or something sporty and flashy.

    The customer then stops and looks at other options with maybe a test drive or two. There is also an interested party wishing to plaster his name all over said vehicle and he likes the Hummer idea.

    So, back we go to the search for a Hummer like vehicle and working out the paint color and options. It may be wrong for the parking spot but it is what the customer ordered.

    I do not see the “bait and switch” to which you allege. Have I missed something?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2

    • Strangeite on October 31, 2011 at 4:55 pm

      BTW, Streetsweeper, your blog is now being flagged by both Google and Firefox as containing malicious code.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      • David M. F. Schankula on October 31, 2011 at 5:19 pm

        strangeite is correct… your site’s screwy, carto. if you bait thousands of people into a process that you claim you are serious about and you weren’t actually serious about it and then take it away from them, that’s a bait and switch. if lucy puts a hummer in front of charlie brown and he runs up to grab the keys, then she pulls them away, that’s a bait and switch. your quaint laissez attitude, while perhaps admirable, does nothing to quiet realities. dudley’s able to build anything he wants there, sort of, and in that sort of is a tangle of questions you routinely gloss over, least of which is anyone’s ability to question his motivations, intentions, qualifications or vision. done another way, i can’t stop the president from taking us into needless war, though there are checks and balances and, if they are ignored, i cannot sit silent but instead can, though all market forces may be to the contrary, point out the uselessness of it.

        btw, when is that spanish money coming in? (seriously, curious, not snark.) what have you heard?

        and, less curiously, you wrote two years ago that i didn’t understand the market, the business, the financing, the developers ability to do what he likes regardless of the city he lives in, etc. i’m not saying he can’t get it done or won’t. i’m saying it doesn’t make sense, shouldn’t make sense to an investor, and the way he is treating the people, and has always treated the people and the city, is wrongheaded and counterproductive. for a moment, he seemed to realize that… then he switched. but by all means, get your pompoms out of the closet.

        • The Lexington Streetsweeper on October 31, 2011 at 5:43 pm

          Dudley NEVER baited the folks into a boutique hotel. He has never wanted a Boutique hotel. If you think that the citizens of Lexington are Charlie Browns that are wanting a Hummer then you are wrong.

          The Spanish money is still out there and Dudley is just not talking about it.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

          • L on October 31, 2011 at 7:47 pm

            He baited by making a big public deal out of a Gang design that was only appropriate to a boutique hotel.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

          • Dmfs on October 31, 2011 at 11:59 pm

            So dudley *never* wanted a boutique hotel. We’ll agree to agree.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • The Lexington Streetsweeper on October 31, 2011 at 5:38 pm

        I know. I’m working on it.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  2. Cletis on November 1, 2011 at 10:47 am

    David, your penchant for detecting bullshit at a thousand yards is quite remarkable. Regarding the Webbs, I just uswe The Bard as my guide, “Oh what a tangle the Webbs have woven skulking around Lexington on feet that are cloven.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

VOTE! May 22

Kentucky Election Central! KentuckyElection.org
Candidate Questionaries
Election Information
Voter Info

Archives

Search

Social Networking Crap

Shop at the Barefoot and Progressive Store!

Help support B&P! DONATE!

Free Ad Space

Free Ad Space

Share Barefoot & progressive

Winner Winner Chicken Dinner

Stop SOPA

Switch to our mobile site