BROOMFIELD, Colorado—While most hotel markets experienced record-setting profits in 2015, it was a decidedly bleaker picture in two major metropolitan areas: Houston and New York City. In 2016, both markets have continued on a downward trajectory and are victims of different diseases.
In New York, a mixture of plagues weakens average daily rate: massive amounts of new supply, a strong dollar, a lowering of the total demand ceiling and the continued concern over alternative accommodations. In Houston, the problem is simple: plunging oil prices.
So how did hotel profits fare in these two markets in 2015?
The short answer is: not well. But these are discrete markets with non-overlapping challenges, and each warrants its own look. Using profit-and-loss data from STR's HOST program, we were able to dig into the numbers for each market. (STR is the parent company of Hotel News Now.)
New York
The New York market is massive and comprises about 110,000 hotel rooms. A total of 107 hotels reported HOST data to STR for both 2014 and 2015.
The sample of New York hotels reporting to HOST actually fared a bit worse in rate loss compared to the market as a whole, as ADR decreased 2.5% overall and RevPAR fell 2.4%. In terms of segmentation, group revenue fell more than twice as much as transient revenue. Perhaps it was the lack of groups that led to a decline in beverage revenue, though food revenue decreased marginally. Other Operated Departments—which represents about 1% of total revenue—plummeted more than 20%.
In terms of departmental expenses, even though rooms revenue was down 2.3%, rooms expenses grew 1.9%, including a 5.6% increase in taxes and benefits. Food and beverage followed a similar, albeit harsher reality, as overall expenses increased 3.4%, including a jarring 12.9% increase in salaries and wages. This perhaps most visibly demonstrates the realities of operating hotels in a strong labor market like New York.
Declines in revenue yielded no significant ease of expenses in the undistributed categories with the exception of utilities (down 5.3%), which was likely more due to declining energy costs. IT costs soared in 2015, and marketing—a significant overall cost—increased nearly 12%, a sign that each New York hotel poured everything it could into getting its own fair share of market revenue.
Overall, the New York hotels reporting HOST data realized a per-available-room profit loss of 9% on a 1.5% decline in total revenue. Increases in payroll and marketing costs were key contributors to the profit declines.
Houston
The Houston market is also significant and accounts for more than 80,000 hotel rooms. A total of 113 same-store Houston hotels reported HOST data to STR for 2015 and 2014.
In Houston, RevPAR declines were more dire than in New York, and came at the expense of occupancy rather than rate. In another contrast to New York, transient revenue fell markedly, while group revenue only slightly decreased. With the overall occupancy declines, other revenue components likewise decreased in 2015.
Departmental expenses showed more control in Houston than in New York, as most expenses decreased but by not as much as revenue. One exception, however, was F&B salaries and wages, which increased 2.1% in 2015.
Houston hotels' undistributed expenses also were kept more in check than similar expenses in New York hotels. IT costs—a small portion of the overall expenses—shot up similarly to what was seen in New York, though marketing costs—the only other such costs to increase—did so only marginally in Houston.
As expected, Houston's gross operating profit declined in 2015 by nearly twice the rate of the decline in total revenues.
Outlook on New York and Houston
It's interesting to note that although profits declined in both New York and Houston in 2015, the extent to which they did differed.
Houston, having suffered losses in occupancy but not rate, saw profits decline by about twice as much as total revenue. In contrast, New York, which realized rate losses and occupancy gains, experienced profit declines nearly eight times that that of total revenue declines. Clearly, New York features a challenging labor market for operators, making it difficult to impossible to cut staffing costs when rate falls. Taking the Houston and New York markets out of the equation, total RevPAR growth for the U.S. as a whole would have been 40 basis points higher through April.
The differences in these two markets seems to underscore the belief that losses in rate are more harmful to the bottom line than losses in occupancy. Operators would be well-served to look at these two markets as examples of what could happen if and when the next downturn arrives.