Park Shore Waikiki, an Aqua Hotel, Honolulu, Helpful

OpinionWell's Blog

Home » United States » Hawaii » Honolulu Destinations » Honolulu Hotels » Park Shore Waikiki, an Aqua Hotel

OpinionWell
Rank

24th

Out of 165

Park Shore Waikiki, an Aqua Hotel	Average Price: $127 Check Rates

Hotel Class:

2586 KALAKAUA Avenue

Honolulu, 96815 View map

2-Star Hotel Rank: 3 of 51
Average review rating: 3.92

OpinionWell Value Index: 5

Traveler reviews analyzed: Expedia (64) , MyTravelGuide (199) , Travelocity (32) , TripAdvisor (572) , YahooTravel (35)

SAFE TO BOOK ? (3/5 issues found)

Is this hotel safe to book? See the trends in negative comments below to find out the real deal before you commit:

Construction:	There are recent comments about Construction, Remodeling, Renovation.
Noise:	Recent comments complained about noise.
Room Smell:	Recent comments complained about room smell.
Parking Fees:	No recent comments about parking fees were found.
Bed Bugs:	No recent comments about bed bugs were found.

Search reviews for other problems

Keyword Cloud

The hotel review keyword cloud displays the words commonly used to describe the features and services of this hotel. Select a word and explore.

All Positive Negative

Keyword Search

accommodating (19) adequate (22) affordable (19) awesome (65) beautiful (70) best (179) better (107) big (71) cares (47) clean (359) comfortable (139) comfy (19) convenient (81) cool (23) courteous (19) decent (24) enjoyable (14) excellent (93) exceptional (20) fabulous (18) fancy (28) fantastic (61) free (113) fresh (18) friendly (296) fun (33) generous (14) good (286) gorgeous (14) great (648) happy (50) helpful (256) huge (31) liked (199) love (60) new (87) nice (264) perfect (108) pleasant (30) pleased (18) plenty (32) positive (19) quiet (65) reasonable (46) reasonably (18) spacious (18) spectacular (27) stunning (20) welcoming (26) wonderful (80)

Helpful

Appears in 278 comments.

The following words were used in comments with Helpful:
beach (10) clean (17) desk (56) extremely (17) friendly (112) good (11) great (29) hotel (50) lobby (13) local (8) location (22) most (9) need (20) nice (22) not (27) room (36) service (12) staff (204) view (11) walking (10)

Users can vote for helpful comments, which are saved in the Most helpful section.

Sort by:

See all

1. The front desk was extremely helpful and pleasant.

"Good Budget Hotel and Location " Read full review on TripAdvisor 5/22/2012 Vote

2. When ever I needed help,they were prompted,professional and courteous.

"Awesome stay " Read full review on TripAdvisor 5/21/2012 Vote

3. Lulu's on the second floor had really great service and the front desk as well as the concierge was really friendly and helpful as well.

"Graduation gift/vacation for my boyfriend " Read full review on TripAdvisor 5/17/2012 Vote

4. All the hotel staff were very friendly and helpful.

"Great Location, Friendly Staff " Read full review on TripAdvisor 5/14/2012 Vote

5. The hotel staff was great, Nick was very informative and helpful.

"Great location, friendly, helpful staff, and affordable. " Read full review on TripAdvisor 5/9/2012 Vote

6. VERY attentive and helpful staff to all our needs including our 4 mo.

"Fabulous 5 night Stay " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/27/2012 Vote

7. Staff were helpful and rooms were very clean.

"Fantastic value for money " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/22/2012 Vote

8. The maids kept the room very clean, hotel staff were quite friendly (they always greeted us as we went out every day and valet staff were also helpful in calling for a cab when needed.

"Perfect Location " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/8/2012 Vote

9. No, it's not a 5 star hotel, so if you're looking for luxurious accomodations you should probably look elsewhere, but it's clean, the views and location are great, and the staff is friendly and helpful at all times.

"Great location, service & views " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/8/2012 Vote

10. All of the staff we spoke with were very helpful and pleasant.

"3.5 stars " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/3/2012 Vote