| by Patrick Quek, February 1999
Given the current climate of constrained financing and reduced development
plans, hotel companies are now looking at their existing operations to
increase profits in the near-term. In light of this situation, we
have looked into our Trends in the Hotel Industry database of 2,800 financial
statements and identified the “most profitable” full-service, limited-service,
and all-suite hotels. We then examined these top performers in an
attempt to distinguish common operating characteristics.
Multiple Measurements
There are many ways to measure profitability for the purposes of analyzing
property-to-property performance. Comparisons of total profits, profits-per-available
room, and of course, return-on-investment can all be employed in an effort
to determine “best performers”. Each method carries with it certain
advantages and disadvantages.
For this analysis, we have decided to compare the profitability of different
hotels on a contribution margin basis. Best performers were defined
as those hotels in the top 10 percent of their property category in terms
of achieved profit margin. Profits were measured after management
fees, real estate taxes, and insurance, but before capital reserve, rent,
interest, depreciation, amortization, and income taxes.
Like the other methods, measuring performance by comparing profit margins
has its drawbacks, the first of which is the age-old argument that, “you
can’t take percentages to the bank.” However, the ability of management
to drop as many dollars to the bottom-line as possible is clearly a meaningful
measure of performance.
To Feed Or Not To Feed
As would be expected, the extent of food and beverage service at a property
significantly affects the overall profit margin of a hotel. Simply
put, those properties that derive less of their revenue from food and beverage
achieve the higher profit margins.
Obviously, this is not a blanket endorsement for the elimination of
food and beverage service. As noted in our article in the October
1998 edition of Lodging, profitability in hotel food and beverage departments
is currently at an all-time high. However, the conventional belief
that food and beverage service is an absolute necessity has been challenged
and frequently proven to the contrary. Properties have either leased
out their outlets or reduced their level of food and beverage service,
while still maintaining high occupancies and rate premiums. In fact,
the top performing full-service hotels all had minimal food and beverage
revenue, yet were still able to achieve occupancies and ADRs greater than
their respective property-type averages. The message is not to automatically
eliminate food and beverage from your hotel. Instead, developers
and managers should thoroughly exhaust all the implications of varying
degrees of food and beverage service on property performance and profits.
Quality, Not Quantity
Across the board, the average size of the top performers was consistently
smaller than the average property profile for each category studied.
Be it the ability to manage a smaller operation, or reach economies of
scale at a lower threshold, smaller properties do appear to operate more
efficiently.
As might not be expected, the hotels achieving the highest profit margin
in each category achieved total revenues (measured on a per available room
basis) less than the average for all hotels. While the lack of food
and beverage revenue would explain this occurrence for full-service hotels,
it can not be the reason for limited-service properties and several all-suite
properties.
Controlled, Undistributed, And Unspent
According to the Uniform System of Accounts for the Lodging Industry,
the expenses associated with the direct generation of revenue are classified
as departmental expenses. In general, these expenses tend to be more
variable in nature, and therefore, more controllable.
Across the board, all the top 10 performing hotels were able to hold
their departmental expenses under the average for all hotels. This
was especially noticeable in the full-service category. The top performing
full-service properties bettered the overall average profit margin by 15
percentage points. Ten of these percentage points were gained by
controlling their departmental expenses.
To be profitable, any business must also watch their overhead expenses.
Frequently, these expenses do not directly contribute to the generation
of revenue for the business, and therefore, are difficult to measure in
terms of payback.
In the hotel industry, administrative and general expenses cover such
costs as the salary and wages for the general and manager and their staff,
accounting fees, security costs, credit card commissions, and human resources.
Across the board, the top performing hotels in all categories were able
to control their administrative and general expenses. Measured as
both a percentage of revenue and on a dollar-per-available room basis,
the top performers achieved administrative and general expense margins
well below the overall averages.
Marketing expenses are also classified as an undistributed item.
But most managers would gladly spend more, rather than less, on marketing.
Once again, the achievements of the top performers appear to be counterintuitive.
Marketing expenditures by the top performers, measured as a percent of
revenue, were all less than the overall averages for all property types.
Even when measured on a dollar-per-available room basis, marketing expenditures
for the top performing full-service and limited-service properties were
short of the overall average expenditures. Apparently, the top performers
were more efficient in the marketing of their properties. Remember,
these hotels also achieved occupancies and ADRs greater than the overall
averages.
Creativity Counts
What brings success to any individual hotel is a wide variety of controllable
and uncontrollable factors. Some are internal, while others are external.
And, as stated before, return-on-investment is the ultimate measure of
success, and control on the investment side is just as critical as any
operational techniques.
The lessons to be learned from this analysis is that hotel operators
need to challenge conventional wisdom. Do you really need those extra
rooms? How are you spending your marketing dollars? What level
of food and beverage service do I really need to offer my guests?
Creativity is often the catalyst of success in business. In the
hotel industry, we often rely on tried and true methods of operation.
How many hotel rooms look alike? Do your organizational charts carry
the same titles as all other hotels? Maybe it is time to be different.
To put down the cookie-cutter. Maybe it is time to be more profitable.
What
Makes a Hotel Profitable?
Top Ten Percent Profit Margin by Property
Type
|
Number of Rooms |
Total REVPAR |
Profit* PAR |
Profit* Margin |
Rooms Revenue as a % of Total Revenue |
Occupancy |
A.D.R. |
| All-Suites |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Top 10% |
131 |
$32,036 |
$17,011 |
53.1% |
93.9% |
77.2% |
$106.70 |
| All |
185 |
34,415 |
15,831 |
46.0% |
87.0% |
75.3% |
109.98 |
| Limited-Service |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Top 10% |
80 |
19,012 |
10,818 |
56.9% |
95.1% |
74.1% |
67.79 |
| All |
109 |
27,785 |
10,836 |
39.0% |
94.0% |
68.0% |
58.48 |
| Full-Service |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Top 10% |
226 |
38,526 |
16,258 |
42.2% |
75.4% |
75.7% |
106.03 |
| All |
250 |
40,648 |
10,975 |
27.0% |
63.0% |
70.7% |
100.09 |
Note: * Income before capital reserve, rent, debt
service, income taxes, depreciation, and amortization.
Source: PKF Consulting
--
Patrick Quek is president and CEO of PKF Consulting, an international
hospitality consulting firm headquartered in San Francisco. |