This document discusses the branding strategy of Rosewood Hotels & Resorts. It shows the company's room and hotel numbers from 2001-2003. It then discusses competitors like Aman Resorts that had strong branding. Rosewood realized guests were unaware of it as a brand and returns visits were low. To improve, it decided to emulate Aman's branding strategy of specialization while maintaining each hotel's uniqueness. This led to advantages like increased loyalty and cross-property usage. Challenges included not compromising uniqueness and large marketing costs. Results showed increased annual visits per guest with branding, though many metrics were still to be calculated. Customer and agent feedback emphasized raising brand awareness. Recommendations included subtle branding, PR, travel

4. 2001 2002 2003
Number of Hotels
(Year beginning) 11 13 13
Number of Hotels
Added 2 2 0
Number of Hotels
Lost 0 2 1
Total Number Of
Hotels (Year End) 13 13 12
Total Number Of
Rooms (Year End) 1859 1714 1513

5. COMPETITORS
Group of Luxury Hotels

6. COMPETITORS
INDIVIDUALLY BRANDED
UNIQUE HOTELS

7. “SENSE OF PLACE”PHILOSOPHY
EACH HOTEL
IS UNIQUE
EACH HOTEL
REFLECTED
LOCAL CHARACTER
FEATURED
ARCHITECTURAL
DETAILS
FEATURED
INTERIORS AND
CULINARY CONCEPT
CORE VALUES OF ROSEWOOD HOTELS AND RESORTS

9. WHY?
People were unaware
Of Rosewood As a
Brand
Cross Property Usage
Was As Low As 5%
Return Visits Were
as Low As 40%
Matrices were not
typical of a
Luxury Hotel Chain

10. HOW?
EMULATE THE MODEL OF
AMAN GROUP OF HOTELS AND RESORTS
500 ROOMS, 15 RESORTS – 2003
1,00,000 REPEAT GUESTS
SPECIALISATION
1. Asian Themed Spa
Treatments
2. Uncannily Attentive
Staff
3. Healthy Food
Offered

11. ADVANTAGES
•COLLECTIVE EXPERIENCE
•CONSISTENT SERVICE – IN ALL ASPECTS
•CROSS PROPERTY USAGE
•HIGH CUSTOMER LOYALTY
•BETTER BRAND RECOGNITION
•CROSS SELLING RATES WERE 10% BUT FOR
OTHER LUXURY HOTELS IT WAS 10-15%

12. CHALLENGES
• Distinctiveness of each of the premium properties
could not be compromised.
• Risks Of Alienating some Loyal Guest
• Huge Marketing Investments – $1 Million/Year
• Need Of Other Brandings. Ex. Spa Branding
• Private Owners of Carlyle Hotel Were Reluctant

13. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?
WITHOUT
BRANDING
WITH
BRANDING
TOTAL NUMBER OF UNIQUE GUESTS 115,000 115,000
DAILY SPEND(AVG) $750 $750
NUMBER OF DAYS AVERAGE GUEST STAYS 2 2
GROSS MARGIN PER ROOM(AVG) 32% 32%
VISITS PER YEAR PER GUEST(AVG) 1.2 1.3
MARKET EXPENSE PER GUEST(AVG) $130 TO BE
CALCULATED
NEW GUEST ACQUISITION EXPENSE(AVG) $150 $150
TOTAL REPEAT GUESTS 19,169 TO BE
CALCULATED
GUEST RETENTION RATE(AVG) 16.67 TO BE
CALCULATED
GROSS PROFIT PER GUEST(AVG) TO BE
CALCULATED
TO BE
CALCULATED

14. CUSTOMER PERCEPTION
•Used various properties across the world but could not
realize they belong to the same chain
•I did not know until my travel agent mentioned it
•Brand Rosewood means nothing
•Rosewood as a brand does not encourage me to try
different properties

15. AGENTS PERCEPTION
•Clients know about Rosewood when we educate
them about it
•We book the Hotel not Rosewood
•It is known only by individual hotels and brands
•The brand is not as strong as it was in the past

16. THINGS IT SHOULD DO
•SHOULD NOT LOSE INDIVIDUAL BRAND PERSONA
•SUBTLY ADD ROSEWOOD LOGO ACROSS PROPERTIES
•SHOULD GO FOR PR
•PARTNER WITH TRAVEL AGENCIES
•SHOULD LAUNCH CAMPAIGNS OVER
•SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS
•BUILD EXCLUSIVE MEMBERSHIP PLANS

17. THANK YOU