The Bloggers
Subscribe to this Blog

EasyHotel: Easy on the Wallet

Christina Talcott

Everyone knows about EasyJet, the low-cost European airline with a penchant for the color orange that's giving major carriers a run for their money across the pond. But what about EasyHotel? The good news is that it's run by the same folks, the bad news is that the rooms have orange walls, and the better news is that you can get rooms in London, Zurich and other places for a steal.

A standard room at the EasyHotel at Lexham Gardens in London. (easyGroup)

But first, a caveat: Just as EasyJet has made its money by offering a no-frills experience where each extra perk costs, well, extra, EasyHotel rooms have redefined the postage stamp accommodation experience. The best-priced rooms are window-less and a minuscule 64 to 75 square feet (basically enough room for a double bed and an open suitcase), plus a phone booth-size private bath. Flat screen TV's hang from the walls (you'll need 5 pounds a night to activate one) and housekeeping, if needed, will run you another 10 pounds.

But before you say you'll die of claustrophobia, just remember this number: 65. Dollars, not pounds. That's about how much a room costs total for two people at the EasyHotel in Earls Court at present. (Rooms at the chain's Heathrow property start at a rock-bottom $37.50 and there are other properties throughout London as well as a few other cities in Europe.)

Sure, it'll be like sleeping in a tangerine, but hey, the Hilton Olympia not far away starts at a hundred bucks more than a postage stamp of one's own. And you don't get any orange walls.

That we know of.

By Christina Talcott |  February 12, 2009; 7:08 AM ET  | Category:  Budget Travel , Europe , Hotels , Scott Vogel
Previous: All Aboard: $1 Bus Tickets to New York | Next: Forbes Magazine Names America's Most Miserable Cities

View or post comments


Please email us to report offensive comments.

I've stayed at the EasyHotel in Victoria in London and it was a very good deal. We had a windowless room, but it was perfect for just sleeping in. The only thing I didn't like was that you had no way to control the a/c in it and it got a bit stuffy.

Posted by: inlogan | February 12, 2009 8:55 AM

It's tempting, but I think the windowlessness would set off my claustrophobic tendencies. Orange walls, no TV, tiny shower are all fine. I'd have trouble with no windows.

Posted by: csdiego | February 12, 2009 9:57 AM

Windowless? How about egress? In the US, you can't have people sleep in a room that doesn't have a secondary egress. I couldn't stay there for that reason. Being in the safety field, I'd be too paranoid of a fire.

Posted by: rubytuesday | February 12, 2009 10:14 AM

For that price in those cities, I could deal with that for 1 or 2 nights. But I would have to splurge for more comfort at the next location. Also I don't think I could share a room that was that small, at least for more than an hour :).

Posted by: rja112 | February 13, 2009 4:49 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.


© 2010 The Washington Post Company