Singapore Airlines A350

OMG SHE IS BEAUTIFUL.

SQ's New A350 leaving the paint hangar.

MH17: Investigation Outcome (VIDEO)

If you remove the politics of what happened, the fundamental truth is that close to 300 people lost their lives.

Following this report, anyone with a vivid imagination can visualize what it might have been like on board.

At cruising altitude, the pilots might have been addressing the cabin, giving them details of the flight. Crew members would have been fully activated to do the first rounds of service. For the business class section, this could be the post take off drinks and nuts. Passengers would have taken off their seat belts, some would have been in the lavatories. Some watching the inflight entertainment.

The impact was sudden. The pilots must have, for a split second, noticed a streak go past the nose of the aircraft followed by a blinding flash of light. They must have experienced a force that jolted them to the right side of the cockpit. Then the fragments that sliced through the fuselage would go through their bodies and kill them.

In the seconds after, the force of the impact would also tear the cockpit right off. The report said at one point that the cockpit and business class sections separated from the rest of the plane. At another point it only mentioned the cockpit.

Either way, the crew members would have been sucked out as they were not belted down. The frigid cold and thin air would have shut their breathing down fast. Passengers in the lavatories would have had the same fate. Passengers in their lie flat seats would have witnessed the separation of the front of the plane. Many would have been tossed about like crumpled paper, causing critical injuries. But they would have been able to register in their heads that they were about to die. But death was not as immediate for them as it was for the technical crew.

The people at the back of the bus would have had slightly more time to react, although the report does not mention this. The report does not take into account a previous news story about the body of a passenger that was found strapped to his seat with an oxygen mask around his face. Some passengers had time to put the mask on them. They knew they were in trouble. There would have been screams. People desperately grabbing each other before being pulled apart. People unbelted violently falling into each other. For them though, the free fall, the smashing of the trolleys and other things within, fire, all would have made it impossible for them to survive.

All the safety videos they have watched through years of flying would have done no good.

There is no dignity or sense in dying like this. And worse yet there is no accountability. The report hints to the fact that the Ukrainians did not warn of the safe flight levels within the conflict zone. The carrier also may not have taken extra precaution over an area that had in the previous week, seen planes downed. 

I really feel for MH because I have always found their staff to be outstanding. And I have family that works for the airline. They knew some of those that died in the tragedy. They witnessed how some coffins were so small because they only had a single body part of what used to be someone they ate, laughed and had conversations with.

This should not have happened.

#MH17 #malaysiaairlines #boeing #777

Hotel Review: Hotel Vagabond Singapore

Hotel Vagabond Singapore

There was a BBC documentary shown in the United Kingdom last year about British Airways. It tracked the people and business of the airline with reality style behind the scenes footage. In one episode, a country manager addressed his staff saying: “It takes the right kind of person with the confidence to guide one of those (premium) customers around. They guide a company with 20,000 employees and then one of our team (members) has to guide them around in an area they are not familiar with.”

In service oriented industries, this rhetoric is not uncommon.

The prosperity of a company, whether it is food and beverage, airline, hospitality, retail etc, rely heavily on its customers loyalty. While it is easy to identify demographics, it is less obvious in practical terms to spot by sight who they are, what they look like and how they behave.

If Alibaba’s Jack Ma was not such a photographed industry leader, you may not know he has a net worth of $25 billion.

You never make assumptions about who is coming through your door.

Unfortunately, for a new hotel in Singapore’s Syed Alwi Road, their policies seem to be about assumptions.

The Hotel Vagabond is the latest offering by Satinder Garcha, an Indian born dot com entrepreneur turned luxury real estate developer and hotelier who is also the 48th richest man in Singapore, with a net worth of $440 million according to Forbes.

His three level boutique hotel set in a conserved shophouse has retained its old world charm, keeping the original facade similar to other boutique hotels in the Chinatown district.

But the charm of the brand ends there.

On a visit last weekend, at the invitation of a visiting colleague, I discovered that the well earned reputation for less than stellar service in Singapore was being perpetuated by the staff of this newly opened hotel.

I went there suitably dressed for a proper dinner. I was met by a suited man at what seemed to be the sole entrance to the property, and initially welcomed cordially while still standing outside. He did not identify himself, yet he asked me what my purpose was for the night.

I said I was there for dinner, and I was asked if I had a reservation. I replied yes I believe so but I was going to my colleague’s room first, as requested by him, to confirm. Then I was asked for my colleague’s name, which I gave. Then I was asked for his room number. I was puzzled about the line of questioning. And even more perturbed that he was clearly not going to let me in. I looked around to see if there was an alternative entry point. I asked him where the lobby and reception was. The man in the suit pointed to the one single doorway to my right without any offer to let me go inside. He then said that I had to wait while the staff called my colleague.

I was being questioned while being kept outside close to the street.

I thought this to be incredibly rude. I have never been disallowed entry at any fine establishment anywhere in the world, much less a newly opened boutique hotel. I let myself in, and was followed closely by this man in the suit. He told me that every house guest would need to give front desk a invited guest list, presumably as a means to authorize entry to the upper floors. This was a curious practice, not entirely unusual, but a little unreasonable and high handed, especially since the house guest was not informed at check in of this policy.

Later, my colleague and I got intercepted on our way to the restaurant by this man and an unknown Caucasian lady.

My colleague, who was previously told by a member of the senior management that he was the first paying guest to check into the hotel, was immediately recognized and warmly greeted by this man in the suit. We took the opportunity to relay our grievances.

As frequent travelers who fly premium, and stay in and work with premium hospitality brands, we are not entirely clueless to how they operate and what happened afterwards was a textbook account of service failure.

I recounted from my point of view about what had happened and how it made me feel. How I felt was disregarded. This was followed by the man again speaking about the policy that he had to carry out. 

I understand security protocols and the need to protect the safety of hotel guests and staff. I also know in hospitality, a high level of discretion is required to forge ties rather than offend your target demographic. Clearly this hotel has set in place procedures to prevent undesirables with questionable intentions from entering its premises. But I had made my intentions clear, and I was puzzled what I had done to project the impression of being an undesirable.

The Caucasian lady did not identify herself to either of us. When we inquired, she said she was a ‘Salonaire’. There was indeed a restaurant on the premises called The Salon, and we wondered if she was a wait staff, a manager or something else. Only when we asked further did she say she was in charge of the entire ground floor. Still, we were not sure if she was a Front Office manager or a Duty Manager or something else. Apparently this hotel created titles for certain roles that frequent hotel customers could not possibly understand without the benefit of being taught what these titles meant in real world and industry terms.  We were not guided.

Still, one would assume if someone was ‘in charge’, that this person would have the training, experience and authority to manage crisis and disputes. This was not evident.

Not only did she spout policy again, she had the audacity to say that this policy of vetting people was a hotel industry ‘practice’ (and I quote her here). She did not defuse the situation, she did not manage guests’ expectations, she did not offer any solution. Just policy.

We were at an impasse.

We later spoke to a gentleman who was part of the hotel’s holding company, presumably from Garcha’s Singapore registered Elevation Developments that built the hotel, who said he would ‘speak to them’. But afterwards there was no follow up. No service recovery. Nothing.

In spite of better judgement, my colleague decided to still have dinner at the restaurant, 5th Quarter. While I will reserve a separate review of the outlet, I found what happened at the end of the meal noteworthy and consistent with this discussion regarding service.

Executive Chef Drew Nocente

The Executive Chef, an Australian named Drew Nocente, came by to offer some complimentary cookies. 

There was the obligatory light banter, mostly between my British colleague and the Australian chef. I, a local Singaporean, tried to engage him in some conversation. I do that in every restaurant I visit worldwide primarily with the intention of showing appreciation for someone’s work. He was polite. But he hardly looked at me. His attention was squarely on my colleague.

I felt invisible.

I am not fragile and self entitled that way. But my travels have taught me what is acceptable conduct in the service industry. This was just unacceptable.

It bordered mildly on racism.

Later I saw him bypass a table of local Chinese men. He went over to a Caucasian couple with the same cookies and again engaged in conversation with them.

This is not to say that he did not eventually speak to everyone in the room, which was at best at 50% capacity. I did not have the benefit of seeing that while we were there. However, if perception is reality, the impression given was not a pretty or healthy one.

The last and only other time I encountered a similar incident was at a hotel in Bangkok. It was a fairly large Thai hospitality brand and we were corporate clients. We learned that our Thai contact was not allowed to go up to our rooms as requested because he was, well, Thai. He was not given the option to call the rooms. They assumed he was up to ‘no good’. Caucasian colleagues could walk right to the elevators. We were not informed at check in of any policy requiring prior submission of guest lists. Regardless of our protests later, there was no apology or service recovery. We felt there was an odd sense of reverse racism, mandated by a policy that was executed to a level it even disrespected the hotel’s paying customers: Us.

Needless to say, we never gave that hotel our business after that. We pulled our account.

The disappointment with Hotel Vagabond transcends beyond what happened during the initial point of contact. There seems to be a lack of customer service training, even with the ‘Salonaire’ / manager who seems to have assumed the people she was talking to did not understand or work with the industry or the very least, know how a hotel operates. As for the Executive Chef, if one was to give him the benefit of the doubt, perhaps it was not by intention that he hardly looked at an Asian that was addressing him. However, it would be beneficial for him to understand the current climate within this country regarding how home proud Singaporeans are. Being guests in a hotel or restaurant does not mean we are guests in our own country. There are many things to say about 5th Quarter but again this will be reserved for a separate review.

I am not one that believes the customer is always right.  However, you do not feed an angry customer policy right at the beginning when they feel that they have been disrespected or unfairly treated. The point is not about who is right or wrong, but about finding solutions that would hopefully generate positive after thoughts and business.

So, what could have the staff and management done?

• Defuse the situation
• Separate warring parties even if it requires moving to a neutral location
• Manager should assume ownership of the problem henceforth
• Listen and Empathize with no presumptions or assumptions 

• Offer solutions and / or gestures to regain and potentially retain brand / product confidence
• Provide acts of kindness 
• Be sincere
• Speak of the values and aspirations of the property

• (If necessary and only after the customer has calmed down) provide knowledge about company practices and procedures
• Give insight into the rationale of procedures
• Continue to validate the experience of the guest
• Use the situation as a learning point and assure the guest of such

Customers will always have choices. So with this service experience, what else can be said about this property?

At a starting rate of SGD300 ++ a night for a basic room, this boutique hotel is ranking itself closely to the price points of some of the larger players in the country. 

Cozy, compact, comfortable

Art on sliding divider walls

Room amenities

While the room that I got to visit and inspect was charming, it was small and compact. Read: you can’t stretch your arm out from the right side of the bed without hitting the wall. The windows overlooking the street were not tinted and pedestrians below could look into the room. 

Etro Bath Amenities

A common strategy of boutique hotels to include luxury bath amenities to increase their value proposition was followed here, with Etro branded toiletries in the bathroom. The other inclusions did not immediately scream luxury. For example, one would not expect Philips to be the brand of choice in terms of hotel TVs. Brand affiliations must be consistent with the intentions of the property. Hotels basically either create experiences or try to replicate the lifestyles that their intended customers are used to. In this case, from the tech in the room, to the cutlery in the food outlet, the hotel appears schizophrenic in projecting a throwback to the glamorous days of travel, without actually being one.

Seat detail outside elevators

Darkened hallways

While the hotel has only been opened for less than a week, the wood veneer panelling within the room was already showing visible wear and tear, and lighting fixtures in the hallways had misaligned nuts and bolts.

Animated collage in the elevator: Yes all those elements move

The hotel was designed by Jacques Garcia and it appears Garcha gave him carte blanche.  As expected from boutique hotels that aspire to be categorized favorably for clever design, ‘art’ was everywhere. From the animated collage on a flat screen TV in the elevator to the framed photos of old world travel that was anywhere from the rooms to the public spaces. I understand and appreciate the theatricality of it all but was not sure if this was meant to give you a sense of a safari styled lodge or an uber chic design hotel. They were pretty certainly, but good design for a hotel is not just about the pretty. 

So did the design communicate the brand message of the hotel?

No.

I did not understand the correlation between the name of the hotel and the design, the choice of amenities and the collective story they were supposed to tell me.  The symbiosis between the different aspects of the hotel was lost on me.

OTT elements like a giant gold elephant in the room, how can you not notice? Referencing a colonial past?

I will offer however that the hotel is comfortable. However, one needs to balance the price to value ratio, especially in a marketplace that may offer better amenities for a similar price point. Depending on your travel budget, corporate or otherwise, I am not sure this hotel offers proper value to business and leisure travelers, especially when one considers its location and inclusions.

Hard product aside, no one gives their business or loyalty if their expectations of good service are not met.

And unfortunately, for now this hotel did not meet ours.

We may not be in the same caliber of Jack Ma at $25 billion or Satinder Garcha at $440 million but this is all relative, and everyone deserves to be treated compassionately as human beings regardless.  

If Garcha’s intention is to turn his hotels into ‘social and intellectual hubs’ as reported in the media, it will be a challenge if the policies don’t reflect this honorable goal.  To be social requires a congregation of people. And you cannot, nor can you appear to, discriminate against anyone if you want them to gather at your premises.

In the end, this may just be a storm in a teacup. Perhaps by the time they officially launch, many of these issues would have been sorted out. I hope to one day return and review the entire property and F&B outlets when they are operational although I suspect I would not be welcomed back. But to borrow a line from the BBC documentary, Hotel Vagabond currently just does not have the right kind of person with the confidence to guide their customer around areas they aren’t familiar with.