[Default] On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:03:36 +1000, Alan S
offered the following words of wisdom:
>On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:24:40 +1200,
>seaeagle_invalid@invalid.com wrote:
>
>>[Default] On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:11:22 +1000, Alan S
>> offered the following words of wisdom:
>>
>>>I also found the hard way that the star ratings on
>>>http://www.check-in.com.au/ are self-rated.
>>
>>Great advice that I've taken onboard. I also understand from a travel
>>agent that the entire star system in Australia is flawed. Apparently,
>>five star equates to four and so on.
>
>I can't quite agree with that one. Depends where you're
>coming from. I would put our RACV/NRMA/AAA star standards a
>bit below most of the USA but a long way above most of
>Europe.
I haven't seen those particular star ratings (RACV/NRMA/AAA), but what
I was told was the Australian star ratings are not equivalent to the
"Qualmark" ratings given out in New Zealand and used by the New
Zealand AA. The way it was explained was to me was that a four star
Qualmark accommodation rating is equivalent to a five star rating in
Australia.
BTW - the agent was referring to online ratings and those contained in
the glossy brochures given out by the agency. The RACV/NRMA/AAA
standards might be different and I'll check if our Automobile
Association has a reciprocal agreement with their Aussie counterparts.
http://www.qualmark.co.nz/
|