Elaine,

I think the luxury market is here to stay. I remember that during the last prolonged recession in the U.S., large boats and yachts and expensive automobiles continued to sell. It was the lower-priced products and services that suffered from the economic downturn.

The rich are relatively (emphasis on relative) unaffected by downturns, and while they may not choose to spend $100 million on a new home until the economy recovers, $30,000 is a small sum to the wealthy.

Thanks for commenting, Lewis. Doesn't it seem that the super-wealthy are ubiquitous these days? After the crash of '29 and well into the pre-war years, American wealth seemed to have been the monopoly of a handful of families, like the Vanderbilts or Hunts. Today, the very wealthy can be found in most major centers, and as a result, high-end products and services are proliferating exponentially.

Elaine, it is here to stay for sure. As one who has lived in Silicon Valley since 1979, i have seen the uber wealthy come out of the tech industry. Google is now making the real estate market happy despite the mortgage crisis. Lots of people here who could spend 30k on a night and do.

A fool and his money are soon parted, but some people have a deeper well than others. :)

You said it Cam. I guess it's difficult for us working folks to understand spending so much on a night's sleep!

Even if I had the dough, I wouldn't practice this type of ostentatious behavior. I think I'd be more like "old money" and play it down while practicing more philanthropy.

American wealth seemed to have been the monopoly of a handful of families, like the Vanderbilts or Hunts.

Elaine and Capacitors - From a global perspective, we working folk in America are doing okay for ourselves.

Not $30k/night okay, but okay nonetheless.

If the superwealthy are inclined to spend that much money per night on a hotel room, I'm sure there are plenty of people willing to take it from them.

I might even consider boarding one or two at my house for a week or so for $30k per night. I'll let them sleep on my couch.

Pass the word. ;)

Elaine,

It depends how you get this money. If you have inherited a big fortune from mam and dad or a pipe of green dollar from the petrol then you can spend 30k on a room.
I cant really tell you how sweet is what u gain from ur sweat and feel the same way as an occupant of a mulitmilliondollar mansion while we are in our 300m square apartment dowtonwn.

Hey, Cam. Do meals come with the couch? :)

I do agree with you, Cam. We are so much better off than previous generations. Please don't misunderstand. I feel blessed and am not complaining, nor am I envious. I just found it difficult to comprehend.

Kadar, the manner in which the uber-wealthy acquire their money won't affect the marketplace, but it may affect the respect they gain from the have-nots.

"Do meals come with the couch?"

For $30k, my honored guests can expect the finest Ritz crackers money can buy from the local supermarket.

For an additional grand, I'll even throw in the Cheese Whip of their choice (provided it's available at the same said supermarket). ;)

If I may say so, these comments sound more like a socialist convention than a marketing forum! Shouldn't we be asking if the features and benefits justify the cost, in relation to the needs of the target market? It seems to me from the information about the suite that they probably do. There is a high level of security, convenience, practicality for work at any time, instant high quality service, the opportunity to entertain and impress contacts, quite apart from relaxing, winding down after deals, etc. These things are useful and necessary when dealing in megabucks. And it looks fabulous!

"If I may say so, these comments sound more like a socialist convention than a marketing forum!"

That's surprising. Here I was offering my services to those willing to spend the money to sleep on my couch and eat Ritz crackers.

The offer is good for you, too, Michael. And in the spirit of capitalism (which I treasure), I won't even offer you a discount. :)

In all seriousness, it's an important question to ask, if the benefit is commensurate with the cost, but even if it isn't, it's their money and they are free to spend or waste it as they please.

If they waste it, I'm glad someone is available to give them something they want at a price they're willing to pay.

Despite what others say: Money CAN buy you love, sex, beauty, fame, power, happiness, health, youth, and... wow what an idea ... more money! So what's wrong with envying those who have it?

Woah, Michael. Now I feel slapped on the wrist! :) This started out as a discussion on the high-end marketplace as it proliferates. I guess a few social comments entered the fray.

Joachim, you're right. Money can buy a lot. However, it can't buy your health - just your health care. And in my books, love is out of this equation.

Oh, one more thing. Money's nice to have but I, for one, don't envy those who have it. That's not a marketing observation, just a personal comment.

Thanks for your participation!

In my long association with Robb Report magazine, I've learned that a remarkable number of people are likely willing and able to spend $30,000 on a Four Seasons sleepover.

But I'd say this Ty Warner Suite (a name that conjures the horrific image of rooms cluttered with Beanie Babies...) is about more than providing ultraluxe accommodations for the very rich.

It's a marketing bonanza. The hotel gets plenty of breathless editorial coverage that positions it as New York's ne plus ultra destination and lends a glamorous halo effect to the rest of its rooms. Even if it fails to achieve 100 percent occupancy -- a distinct possibility if no discounts or comps are offered -- the Four Seasons image still wins.

So, yes, it's part of an on-going trend of conspicuous consumption, but it's also a little like putting a Corvette Z06 next to an Impala in the Chevrolet showroom.

Interesting comment, Christian. It makes sense in one way, but how can they justify spending $50 million on a room that isn't getting a high occupancy rate? That's the question.

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Hey Elaine. I have to say I'm skeptical of the $50 million figure -- I get the feeling some publicists indulged in a fair bit of rounding up to make a bigger media splash.

But, assuming it's the correct figure, even if occupied half of the time and taking 9 years (instead of 4-5) to recoup the investment, the suite still does a lot to bolster the image of every other room at the Four Seasons. Hence the hotel's strategy of pitching stories to USA Today and the New York Times, a very wide demographic net. Because of that halo effect, I'd be surprised if the suite's income-generating impact isn't felt well beyond its 4,000-odd square feet.

Good point, Christian. I agree that the room is bolstering the hotel's media coverage and reaffirming its upper-end brand image. The way you've positioned the amortization makes sense, too. Thanks for your insight.