Responses about hotels are good, if are written by users.
What for responses are necessary?
Each resource of a tourist orientation, whether it be the guide on sights, responses or the system of booking of hotels, tries to solve a problem of a content which should be qualitative and authentic simultaneously. The choice, usually, is necessary for making between the user responses about hotels, airlines, cities and resorts and the responses written by professionals. And, likely, there is nothing surprising that the narrow-minded point of view on sites of tourist subjects calls more trust, than articles written by experts (copywriters, journalists, seo-specialist).
Responses of ordinary tourists are more valuable than statements of experts!
Though the reasons of why the expert opinion calls travellers of less trust, than experience of other users, – purely psychological property, proofs more than is enough this statement: the largest sites of booking of hotels frequently have no other content, except unique user responses, thus their audience is estimated in millions. In a human nature so strongly to identify desire of with certain group that the professional estimation of those or other advantages of hotel can call mistrust whereas the response about hotel of the user which other users perceive as equal, is defined at private experience level. Reading a response «the usual person», users tries on a situation on itself, and can easily answer a question, whether the advantages/lacks of hotel described in a response are essential personally for it. It is necessary to consider also that travel is a special experience; Acquisition of everything that is connected with it, in particular – room reservation in london hotel, or Kiev apartment from conditions and which level of comfort general impression about rest substantially depends, bears in itself certain expectations. The future traveller counts on positive emotions, and fear of that its expectations can not justify, forces to trust the user responses in a greater degree, than the expert point of view.
