trailerkid wrote:
from a marketing standpoint...i don't think it's silly whatsoever. there really are "indie rock" hotels in other cities so turning it into a national concept is just expanding upon that.
I mean I don't think it's necessarily going to struggle, because like I said, if it's price-competitive with other hotels, people are going to stay there regardless of its theme. Hell, I stayed in a rock and roll-themed hotel in Zurich because it was substantially cheaper than anything else in the city (and with good reason, but I digress). People in this thread keep throwing around the word "hipster" and it does feel like the hipster market is the market they're trying to tap here and I can pretty much promise you that hipsters are going to laugh at this. From a marketing standpoint, it's absolutely silly -- it's trying to capture an ephemeral sense of "hipness" and bottle it for mass consumption, making it by definition no longer "hip." I don't feel like there's much of a demographic out there that will choose a hotel because it comes with a "playlist" of Kings of Leon. I think whatever success this hotel has is going to be because it's a quality, competitively-priced hotel in a good location, not because of its gimmick. Like ignatius, I'm glad to get a new hotel downtown regardless of its theme, but that doesn't necessarily mean it isn't still a stupid theme.
I love Portland and Austin, but I really don't want KC to become like those cities in EVERY way. I would like Portland's transit and urban infill, but I like the fact that black people live in KC and there is African American history in this town. I like the grittiness that this city has. Lets not forget that this is a midwestern city, and while it may not be as dramatically depressed as, say, Cleveland we still have a lot of baggage (both good and bad) that comes with being a city that has seen WAY better days. I like that KC has a bit of Detroit and Cleveland in it. I would hate this city to become as white washed as Portland (not that Portland doesn't have some grit)
Lets not forget that we have a strong northern midwestern identity that should not be forgotten. We were a city that was shaped by the great migrations of Blacks from the South to the North. We, in many ways, AREN'T like Denver, Portland, or Austin based on that fact alone. There are many other reasons we will never become an "it" city. This is not to say that I don't welcome certain aspects of "it" cities to creep in.
I don't really get the obsession with these self-consciously hipster cities. I'd also like to have the positive effects they enjoy (like the transit and density that you mentioned, although even in Portland transit only has about a 12% share of commuters), but am I the only one that finds these cities (or, more specifically, the kinds of people they attract) really obnoxious? Any kind of in migration is good, so I'm not saying I'd rather hipsters not move to KC, but do we really want to build KC into a specifically hipster mecca? Hell, it doesn't even seem like the real hipsters even go to Portland or Austin anymore, it seems more like it's the aspiring hipsters (even more obnoxious than the genuine article) who place these cities on pedestals. Maybe I get more annoyed by this kind of stuff than the rest of you since I spend a great deal of time on a college campus.
