Raffles Boston (40 Trinity Place) | 426 Stuart Street | Back Bay

elemenoh said:
The shiny new Four Seasons and Ritz-Carlton are the key competitors for Raffles in the Boston market, so it seems to make sense for them to build a shiny new tower here.
Click to expand...
This property is going to be pretty great for Boston.
The building that's going is a loss to a point--
But, there's really not a great argument for a podium.
The build site is more or less the top of the heap
that will allow many people to enjoy some of the best views of the City.

What do you all think about the club terrace up on the 18th floor?
Anyone wondering if it oft might be on the receiving end
of the high winds off the Hancock?
 
Last edited:
George_Apley said:
Lmao keep it in your pants, boys.
Click to expand...


Coo coo ca choo............

1578178946865.png
 
"The Hurricane Bar is so named
for the hurricane force winds that frequent the 18th floor terrace...."
 
kmp1284 said:
Let's not get carried away. Raffles as a chain has only existed since the late 1990s. It's merely one luxury brand within the giant Accor portfolio, much like what Ritz and St. Regis are to Marriott and Waldorf is to Hilton. They have a few amazing historic and iconic properties but at least half of their properties can be described like 40 Trinity as modern mediocrity.

Raffles is such a small and geographically limited chain that unless one only travels to the same few places they cannot be the kind of fussy brand loyalist that you describe.
Click to expand...

Carried away? Okay. I'll try not to. The brand, yes, like many highend brands, was purchased. And - like the RITZ and others I won't mention - perhaps diminished in lesser, more egalitarian, hands.

RAFFLES had something of a sordid start in the 1880s. It was a curious blend of a British royal, an Armenian business family and a Singapore/Middle East enterprise of questionable ethics that created what we know today. There was nothing bottom-line about it. The former beach house of ten rooms became an institution among the well-traveled, well-healed few who were lucky enough to be in the know. Statesmen, Generals, authors, on and on. It did not become a chain until the 1980s. By that time, however, it was already registered as a national monument in Singapore. It has been a mimicked and sought after destination for decades.

I won't bore you with further details, except to say - yes, it has had its ups and downs, but its place in history, in Singapore and beyond, is doubtless. To diminish it as just another "geographically limited chain" is an unfair, uninformed, appraisal.

I love that it is coming to Boston. It reflects well on our city. I simply wish we were providing a more stately (singular?) home for the new Long Bar, where the Singapore Sling was first created.
 
Last edited:
kmp1284 said:
And the Mandarin and the Four Seasons on Boylston, which I suspect will remain the preferred Four Seasons in Boston in the way that Park Lane has in London and 57th Street has in New York.



Let's not get carried away. Raffles as a chain has only existed since the late 1990s. It's merely one luxury brand within the giant Accor portfolio, much like what Ritz and St. Regis are to Marriott and Waldorf is to Hilton. They have a few amazing historic and iconic properties but at least half of their properties can be described like 40 Trinity as modern mediocrity.

Raffles is such a small and geographically limited chain that unless one only travels to the same few places they cannot be the kind of fussy brand loyalist that you describe.
Click to expand...
There are few stand-alone, old institutions left. The Paris Ritz (or has it been bought by a consortium?) comes to mind. The only other unique, standalone, expensive hotels that come to mine immediately belong to Disney.
 
I simply wish we were providing a more stately (singular?) home for the new Long Bar, where the Singapore Sling was first created.
Click to expand...

I have nothing to add, except that during a business trip in the early 2000's, I had the pleasure of having a Singapore Sling at said bar. I remember the bar/hotel itself far more than the drink.
 
so cautious, painstaking, conscientious, heedful, meticulous--
not one piece of brick would fall, striking down upon where it would be found undesirable to land itself,
to the last and final brick,
Amen.
 
nm88 said:
Carried away? Okay. I'll try not to. The brand, yes, like many highend brands, was purchased. And - like the RITZ and others I won't mention - perhaps diminished in lesser, more egalitarian, hands.

RAFFLES had something of a sordid start in the 1880s. It was a curious blend of a British royal, an Armenian business family and a Singapore/Middle East enterprise of questionable ethics that created what we know today. There was nothing bottom-line about it. The former beach house of ten rooms became an institution among the well-traveled, well-healed few who were lucky enough to be in the know. Statesmen, Generals, authors, on and on. It did not become a chain until the 1980s. By that time, however, it was already registered as a national monument in Singapore. It has been a mimicked and sought after destination for decades.

I won't bore you with further details, except to say - yes, it has had its ups and downs, but its place in history, in Singapore and beyond, is doubtless. To diminish it as just another "geographically limited chain" is an unfair, uninformed, appraisal.

I love that it is coming to Boston. It reflects well on our city. I simply wish we were providing a more stately (singular?) home for the new Long Bar, where the Singapore Sling was first created.
Click to expand...

I’m not disputing any of that but the fact remains that it’s a small chain that doesn’t operate in most of the major global business/travel markets and as such only has limited appeal and likely relatively few hardcore loyalists who are going to get bent out of shape if all of their properties aren’t the local equivalent of what the original in Singapore is.

Life Coach Mike said:
There are few stand-alone, old institutions left. The Paris Ritz (or has it been bought by a consortium?) comes to mind. The only other unique, standalone, expensive hotels that come to mine immediately belong to Disney.
Click to expand...

Not sure there’s anything particularly unique about Disney’s hotels(the one I stayed in on a family vacation ~1993 was a cartoon of the Coronado) but there are still a good number of historically significant luxury properties that remain independent.

To name a few ...

London ... The Goring
Rome ... Hassler
Zurich ... Baur au Lac
New York ... Sherry Netherland
Miami ... Fontainebleau(50s but still iconic)
Palm Beach ... The Breakers
Scotland ... Gleneagles
Boston - Ritz/Taj/Newbury is independent once again but the clean sheet renovation underway will likely zap whatever character might have remained under the Taj brand
 
it's painful to see that. yeah, yeah i recall all of the arguments for why this particular building wasn't all that "special," but it was special enough to save imho.
 
It's definitely surreal and sad to see this torn apart like that; I walked through there on my lunch break running errands and it looks like a war zone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top