Our Marketing Spend Is Not Working
in Hotels & Hospitality

The short answer

Most marketing spend that fails in independent hotels either reaches guests who do not move occupancy or ADR enough to cover fixed costs, or cannot be traced to the RevPAR and GOP contribution that actually reaches private shareholders. What makes this harder for independent hotels is structural: £11.4 m capex need against £2.3 m annual free cash flow with fixed costs at £41.2 m. Any credible answer therefore has to hold £124.75 and 67.8 % in the same view, which is exactly where most internal analysis stops because the two live in different systems.

Two different failures produce the same complaint. The channel fails to bring guests who book at rates that lift RevPAR above the £124.75 level required by £41.2 m fixed costs, in which case extra budget widens the gap between £11.4 m capex need and £2.3 m free cash flow. Or the channel does bring those guests but the measurement system never links the booking to the resulting occupancy and ADR, so the spend is judged only by volume that does not appear in GOP.

Separating the two failures starts with whether contribution to the £72.4 m revenue can be stated by channel. Without that link, decisions on how to allocate spend across 1,980 rooms rest on whoever claims the largest share of the 67.8 % occupancy, and no change in creative will resolve the dispute.

The second test is speed of payback against the 25.0 % margin. A channel that raises RevPAR but returns cash inside the quarter can be funded from the £18.1 m that supports cash flow; a channel that shows low cost per lead yet takes years to offset fixed costs cannot, regardless of the lead count reported.

How to tell this is actually your problem

These three together are the signature. One on its own usually points somewhere else.

✓ RevPAR and occupancy figures cannot be broken out by the channel that produced the booking
✓ Weekly reports defend spend with impressions or leads while GOP and cash flow remain unchanged
✓ The channel credited with the highest occupancy shifts each month depending on which department compiles the numbers

The move that usually makes it worse. Changing creative and targeting before RevPAR and GOP can be attributed by channel, which locks budget allocation to numbers that do not connect spend to the fixed-cost coverage private shareholders require.

Who this is for — and who it is not

It is for you if you run or finance an independent hotel and cost per acquisition cannot be stated by channel. It is the situation where the numbers are available but nobody has put them in an order that produces a decision.

It is not for you if Percision is the wrong tool if you already know the answer and only need execution capacity, or if the business is pre-revenue — then the constraint is evidence about the market, not analysis of your own figures. Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library. Also wrong if you need facilitation, politics, or someone to sit with a lender or buyer. Those are human jobs.

Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library.

What this looks like when the analysis is actually run

Below is an excerpt from a real run of this analysis on an independent hotel. It is a sample profile rather than a customer, and it is unedited engine output — this is the format you get, on your own numbers.

The subject is Aldermere Hospitality Group, a sample company profile used for testing rather than a customer — £72.4 m total revenue from 1,980 rooms.

This is one move out of a full analysis. Read a complete report — every page, no email required.

What the engine does with this question

This question routes to Go-to-Market & Commercial Strategy, one of 29 engagements the platform runs. For independent hotels it works through £124.75, 67.8 %, 25.0 % and £18.1 m, then produces the sequence rather than a list of options — which move first, what it funds, and the observation that would say the sequence is wrong.

You watch the analysis get built before paying anything. Read a complete report here if you would rather see the depth first.

Questions people ask about this

What is a good customer acquisition cost?

The only meaningful test is against lifetime value and payback period, both of which are business-specific. A cost that is excellent in one model is ruinous in another with the same revenue.

How long before I judge a channel?

Long enough to cover your sales cycle plus one payback period, and no longer. Judging early kills channels that work slowly; judging late funds channels that never will.

Should I cut marketing when cash is tight?

Cut the channels you cannot measure first — that is where the risk is concentrated. Cutting uniformly removes the channel that was working alongside the ones that were not.

Is this different in hotels & hospitality than in other industries?

Materially, yes. £11.4 m capex need against £2.3 m annual free cash flow with fixed costs at £41.2 m — which changes both the diagnosis and the order of the fixes. The metrics that decide it here are £124.75, 67.8 %, 25.0 %, and an answer built on industry-general benchmarks will usually point at the wrong one first.

What data do I need before this analysis is worth running for an independent hotel?

Less than most people expect. Your last twelve months of revenue and cost split the way you already split it, plus whatever you hold on £124.75 and 67.8 %. The analysis is explicit about what it is assuming where your data stops, which is more useful than waiting for numbers you may never have.

When is Percision the wrong tool?

Percision is the wrong tool if you already know the answer and only need execution capacity, or if the business is pre-revenue — then the constraint is evidence about the market, not analysis of your own figures. Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library. Also wrong if you need facilitation, politics, or someone to sit with a lender or buyer. Those are human jobs.

Does Percision replace a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, or AI implementation team?

Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library.