“Travelers who use iPhones are more willing to splurge on their vacations. Apple users were willing to spend $32 or nearly 25% more per night on accommodation than an Android user, according to a survey of consumers using the Trivago app over the last 12 months,” Quentin Fottrell reports for MarketWatch. “The average hotel price selected by users with iPhones and iPads was $166 per night. For Android users, the average price was $134 per night.”
“Finding a bargain was also a priority for Android users with 52% selecting hotels costing less than $100 per night, the survey found, compared with just 39% for those with Apple devices,” Fottrell reports. “And American travelers with Apple products are willing to fork over much more for a hotel, with 20% of iOS users selecting rooms between $200 and $250 per night, compared with 12% of Android users.”
“While 40% of both Apple and Android users first selected three-star properties when searching for hotels,” Fottrell reports, “29% of Android users opted for two star properties after first searching for a three-star hotel, the survey found, while 36% of Apple users favored hotels with four and five stars.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take:
Android settler: Your place got a pool?
Hotel clerk: We have a pool and a pond… Pond’d be good for you.—
As we explained nearly three years ago:
Google made a crucial mistake: They gave away Android to “partners” who pushed and continue to push the product into the hands of the exact opposite type of user that Google needs for Android to truly thrive. Hence, Android is a backwater of second-rate, or worse, app versions that are only downloaded when free or ad-supported – but the Android user is notoriously cheap, so the ads don’t sell for much because they don’t work very well. You’d have guessed that Google would have understood this, but you’d have guessed wrong.
Google built a platform that depends heavily on advertising support, but sold it to the very type of customer who’s the least likely to patronize ads.
iOS users are the ones who buy apps, so developers focus on iOS users. iOS users buy products, so accessory makers focus on iOS users. iOS users have money and the proven will to spend it, so vehicle makers focus on iOS users. Etcetera. Android can have the “Hee Haw” demographic. Apple doesn’t want it or need it; it’s far more trouble than it’s worth. – MacDailyNews, November 26, 2012
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “David E.” for the heads up.]
SEE ALSO:
Study: iPhone users are smarter and richer than those who settle for Android phones – January 22, 2015
Why Android users can’t have the nicest things – January 5, 2015
iPhone users earn significantly more than those who settle for Android phones – October 8, 2014
Yet more proof that Android is for poor people – June 27, 2014
More proof that Android is for poor people – May 13, 2014
Android users poorer, shorter, unhealthier, less educated, far less charitable than Apple iPhone users – November 13, 2013
IDC data shows two thirds of Android’s 81% smartphone share are cheap junk phones – November 13, 2013
CIRP: Apple iPhone users are younger, richer, and better educated than those who settle for Samsung knockoff phones – August 19, 2013
Twitter heat map shows iPhone use by the affluent, Android by the poor – June 20, 2013
iPhone users smarter, richer than Android phone users – August 16, 2011
Study: Apple iPhone users richer, younger, more productive than other so-called ‘smartphone’ users – June 12, 2009
Interesting statistic, but at the same time 75%+ of the young adults travelling the world staying at Hostel International accommodations are using iPhones.
Color things how you want.
See the related articles. There’s no “coloring” anything. If those youth are travelling the world, they likely have disposable income (means to have the iPhone in the first place and the ability to take extended period not working in order to travel). When you’re young, you don’t stay a 5-star hotels when backpacking through Europe. You’re the one trying to “color things.”
I don’t know about paying more being by choice. A couple years ago it was revealed that travel sites like Priceline show higher prices if they detect the customer is using a Mac.
I pay the least amount possible on hotel rooms that I can find and I don’t care if I have my iPad on me or a cheap android phone.
I don’t stay in hotels because I like em’, i stay in them because I’m far from home and just need a place to crash!
You may be generalising quite a lot.
Cheapest hotel means different thing to different folks. You can stay at Rodeway Inn for $30, but you’d get a room with very old furniture, old paint, it is a cheap motel with possibly bugs and insects and dirty bathroom. If you pay the least amount possible, this is the type of hotel and room you get.
I will always find the cheapest possible price for my hotel stay, but I will never stay in anything remotely like Motel 6, Motel 8, Days Inn, Rodeway Inn or similar (I used to, in my 20s, when I had no money). The cheapest prices for the types of hotels I will accept tend to be around $150 per night (depending on the location). They tend to be 4-stars (Marriott, Wyndham, Hyatt Regency, etc), and generally are much more appealing, cleaner, newer, with more room amenities. I still look for the best deal, only my bottom isn’t the same as yours.
I stay in hotels because I’m far away from home and I need some place to rest and relax. The quality of the hotel experience is a major contributor to the quality of my rest and relaxation. This especially applies to vacations.
And I have an iPhone…
The survey results are inline with everything we have heard before, as well as with common sense. There are no iPhones for less than $450 (new). There are many people who can’t afford $450. They buy Android. This basic price difference will, automatically identify two classes of users: those with modest means and those with ample means.
I agree.
Having worked Oilfield Service for over 10+ years and having stayed in 100s of hotels we always stayed at the places that were half ass clean and reasonably priced, even though the company was paying the bill. These hotels always get filled up first and the overflow has to stay at the dives and the higher priced hotels.
If a new hotel opens up and if it is reasonably priced it gets filled first. NIn 50 years when the dive gets knocked down and rebuilt new, it becomes the busiest hotel once again and so on and so on.
We use whichever phone the company gives us.
It can be argued that people booking hotels sight unseen, with higher disposable income may be cautiously picking higher priced options based on the fact that they are unfamiar with the accomodations and they can afford to play safe, so the do.
My guess is if they could get the same clean room across the street for less $ they would chose it instead.
What constitutes “Value” varies.
I’m not opposed to saving money, but by the same token, when a place doesn’t have hot water (or is in an unsafe neighborhood/etc), I’ll be choosing to move “upscale”.
And yes, “no hot water” was an actual experience.
-hh
I carry an iPhone and an iPad on my travels.
Having said that, I usually pay most of my hotel bills by the hour.
I have a van. In the aggregate, it’s cheaper.
Hey there.
There have been articles showing how Apple users don’t get the best deals because the apps are smart enough to know Android users are cheaper, on average, that Apple users.
Bottom line, if looking for cheap flights or hotel rooms, use Android.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304458604577488822667325882
http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/11/03/if-you-use-a-mac-or-an-android-e-commerce-sites-may-be-charging-you-more/