flaneur/reports/flaneur_vs_ho36_gm_report_2026-01-03.md

Lyon Hostel Footprint Report (HO36 vs Le Flaneur)

Date: 2026-01-03 (UTC)

Scope and method (what is and is not verified)

• Public, no-login sources only (no CAPTCHA or paywall bypass).
• "HO36 full vs Flaneur empty at New Year" cannot be verified directly after-the-fact because booking engines do not allow querying past dates. This report uses a proxy stay window to compare current demand signals and conversion drivers.
• Proxy pricing/availability window used: 2026-01-03 to 2026-01-04 (1 night).
• Review theme analysis uses Hostelworld reviews from the last 12 months (public API observed via browser network traffic; no login). Google Maps review text was not collected (only rating + review count).

Executive summary (what likely explains the gap)

1. Cleanliness/facilities perception is the strongest gap.

• Flaneur: 11 negative Hostelworld reviews (<= 65/100) in the last 12 months, with repeated hygiene/bathroom complaints.
• HO36: 1 negative review in the last 12 months; high cleanliness and facilities averages.

2. Booking.com channel traction appears materially stronger for HO36.

• Similar rating (HO36 8.2 vs Flaneur 8.1), but HO36 has far more Booking reviews (1,356 vs 502), which usually correlates with higher visibility and stronger conversion on that channel.

3. Price is not the primary driver.

• In the proxy window, Flaneur is cheaper and more flexible (refundable) yet shows materially higher availability than HO36.

4. Flaneur has a product advantage (full kitchen) that is not currently compensating for the trust gap.

• Kitchen/self-catering is a differentiator vs HO36 (microwave-only), but it needs to be paired with visible cleanliness and sleep-comfort improvements to convert.

Side-by-side comparison (high-signal metrics)

Category	HO36	Le Flaneur	Evidence
Booking.com rating (reviews)	8.2 (1,356)	8.1 (502)	data/ho36/screenshots/ho36__booking__listing__20260103.png, data/flaneur/screenshots/flaneur__booking__listing__20260103.png
Hostelworld rating (reviews)	8.86 (1,587)	8.1 (2,332)	data/ho36/screenshots/ho36__hostelworld_listing__20260102.png, data/flaneur/screenshots/flaneur__hostelworld__20260102.png
Google Maps rating (reviews)	4.1 (1,447)	4.3 (855)	data/ho36/screenshots/ho36__google_maps_embed_iframe__20260102.png, data/flaneur/screenshots/flaneur__google_maps__20260102.png
Instagram followers	3,247	2,296	verify/results/ho36_googlebot_audit.jsonl, verify/results/flaneur_googlebot_audit.jsonl
Direct booking engine	Mews (www.mews.li)	RoomRaccoon (booking.roomraccoon.fr)	data/ho36/evidence.json, data/flaneur/evidence.json
Proxy min dorm bed EUR (availability)	28.00 (3 beds)	22.88 (10 beds)	data/ho36/screenshots/ho36__mews__pricing__20260103_20260104__20260103.png, data/flaneur/screenshots/flaneur__roomraccoon__pricing__20260103_20260104__20260103.png
Proxy min private room EUR	55.00	50.88	data/ho36/screenshots/ho36__mews__pricing__20260103_20260104__20260103.png, data/flaneur/screenshots/flaneur__roomraccoon__pricing__20260103_20260104__20260103.png
Kitchen (Hostelworld facilities)	Microwave only	Full self-catering	verify/results/hostelworld_facilities_ho36_270217.json, verify/results/hostelworld_facilities_flaneur_100844.json

Pricing and availability (proxy window 2026-01-03 to 2026-01-04)

This is a like-for-like snapshot from each hostel's direct booking engine (not an OTA), used to compare relative demand and conversion constraints.

Hostel	Cheapest dorm bed	Cheapest private room	Cancellation signal (proxy window)	Availability signal (proxy window)
HO36	28.00 EUR ("Lit en dortoir mixte")	55.00 EUR ("Chambre single RDC")	Non-refundable	3 beds available on cheapest dorm
Le Flaneur	22.88 EUR ("Dortoir mixte 16 lits")	50.88 EUR ("Chambre Privee 4 personnes")	Refundable until 15:00 day before	10 beds available on cheapest dorm

Interpretation: Flaneur is cheaper and more flexible, yet shows higher availability. This points away from price/policy as the root cause and toward trust (cleanliness, comfort, safety perception) and channel visibility.

Product/amenities - what is different (observable)

Area	HO36	Le Flaneur	Why it matters
Kitchen	Microwave only	Stove + utensils + fridge + self-catering	Kitchen is a strong value driver for budget travelers; it can be a conversion lever if paired with cleanliness trust.
Bar/cafe	Yes	Yes	Both compete on "social + bar/cafe"; differentiation needs to be sharper (events, atmosphere, review narrative).
Coworking / meeting	Not clearly listed in Hostelworld facilities	Listed (meeting rooms, coworking space)	If Flaneur targets remote workers, the offer must be visible on OTAs and reflected in reviews/photos.
Accessibility	Not listed in captured Hostelworld facilities	Wheelchair friendly + accessible bathrooms	Can widen addressable audience; should be highlighted consistently across channels.

Review themes (last 12 months - Hostelworld)

Source: verify/results/hostelworld_review_themes.md

HO36 (12m)

• Reviews (12m): 16
• Mean score: 84.4/100; median: 89/100
• Positive/Neutral/Negative: 12 / 3 / 1
• Biggest positives: cleanliness, staff; consistent "feels safe" despite some neighborhood concern mentions.
• Main negative (low frequency): occasional check-in / keycard / process issues.

Le Flaneur (12m)

• Reviews (12m): 51
• Mean score: 78.3/100; median: 83/100
• Positive/Neutral/Negative: 25 / 15 / 11
• Recurring pain points (seen in multiple reviews, not single outliers):
  • Cleanliness issues (especially bathrooms, odor)
  • Safety/neighborhood discomfort framing (more frequent than HO36 in negative reviews)
  • Reception availability / staff process issues (distinct from "staff friendliness", which is often praised)
• Recurring positives:
  • Staff friendliness
  • Kitchen/self-catering
  • Value for money

Ranked hypotheses (evidence-backed)

1. Cleanliness + bathroom trust gap reduces conversion (HIGH).

• Evidence: Flaneur has repeated negative cleanliness/bathroom mentions and lower cleanliness/facilities averages; HO36 has far fewer negatives and higher cleanliness averages.

2. Booking.com visibility gap (MED-HIGH).

• Evidence: Similar rating, but HO36 has ~2.7x the review volume on Booking (1,356 vs 502). Review volume generally correlates with ranking and click-through.

3. "Safety in the neighborhood" narrative is hurting Flaneur more than HO36 (MED).

• Evidence: Safety/neighborhood appears as a repeated negative theme for Flaneur in the last 12 months; for HO36 it appears more as a neutral/positive reassurance theme.

4. Sleep comfort and dorm UX issues compound the cleanliness narrative (MED).

• Evidence: Flaneur has recurring mentions of sleep/noise and dorm comfort in neutral/negative themes; this matters disproportionately around peak periods when guests compare options quickly.

5. Flaneur's differentiators (kitchen, coworking, "tiers lieu") are not driving enough demand because they are not turning into social proof (MED).

• Evidence: Kitchen is praised but does not dominate the overall review narrative; Booking review volume is relatively low for the category.

Action plan for Flaneur (10 concrete, fast experiments)

1. Bathrooms: 14-day deep clean + odor elimination sprint; publish proof (photos, short reels) and push it to OTAs as new images.
2. Housekeeping QA: introduce a visible checklist and nightly spot checks; track defects; respond to every cleanliness review with a specific fix.
3. Sleep product upgrade: add curtains where feasible, tighten bunks, improve lighting; then message it as "better sleep" on Hostelworld/Booking.
4. Reception reliability: ensure real 24/7 coverage or clearly communicate the actual hours and self-check-in; reduce "process" complaints.
5. Safety perception: improve lighting/signage at entrance; add clear guest guidance for late arrivals; emphasize lockers/security features on listings.
6. Reposition the kitchen: run 2-3 weekly communal cooking nights (cheap, high-UGC) and push as a reason to stay during winter.
7. OTA listing optimization: refresh top-fold photos (bathrooms, beds, common areas, kitchen), and align amenity lists across all channels.
8. Review ops: QR code at checkout; staff asks happy guests for reviews; target +30 Booking reviews and +50 Hostelworld reviews in 60 days.
9. Pricing tests: keep dorm prices, but bundle value for privates (late checkout, breakfast voucher, bar credit) to drive higher ADR.
10. Local partnerships for NYE-like periods: bar/event partners + "stay and go out" packages; create a dedicated landing page and social cadence.

Evidence index (quick links)

• HO36 evidence: data/ho36/evidence.json, data/ho36/evidence.csv, data/ho36/profile.md
• Flaneur evidence: data/flaneur/evidence.json, data/flaneur/evidence.csv, data/flaneur/profile.md
• Pricing snapshot JSON: verify/results/pricing_window__20260103_20260104__20260103.json
• Review theme summary: verify/results/hostelworld_review_themes.md
• Hostelworld facilities JSON:
  • verify/results/hostelworld_facilities_ho36_270217.json
  • verify/results/hostelworld_facilities_flaneur_100844.json