What the reviews show

Positive wifi mentions appeared in 1.53 percent of analyzed Google Maps reviews and 1.7 percent of analyzed TripAdvisor reviews. The absolute gap is 0.17 percentage points. These are unmatched review samples, so the gap does not rank the platforms or establish a cause.

The practical question: Does this wifi pattern appear in recent local reviews?

  • Wifi praise: 141 reviews across 66 businesses.
  • Wifi complaints: 93 reviews across 55 businesses.
  • One review described the experience this way: “Rooms were comfortable — beds slept great, clean, decent size for Manhattan (not tiny), flat-screen TV, good Wi-Fi/AC, and everything in working order.”
  • One review described the experience this way: “The wifi was as awful as the staffs cleaning skills.And I can assure you that it is worse than horrible.”

Evidence

Wi-Fi evidence

Google Maps reviews show how this topic splits between complaints and praise.

Topic share
Complaint share
1.07%
9,456 reviews across 89 locations · 95% interval 0.9–1.3%
Praise share
1.55%
9,456 reviews across 89 locations · 95% interval 1.3–1.8%
Market context · Praise share
Service
45.05%
Location
41.38%
Room
40.4%
Cleanliness
23.3%
Wi-Fi
1.55%
Complaint share
1.1%
Praise share
1.6%
Reviews analyzed
9,456
Locations
89
Praise example
77 Alley the restaurant connected to the hotel was top notch.

Google Maps

Complaint example
$40 per night for Internet that I didn’t even use.

Google Maps

Why this matters to an operator

The market figures are a benchmark, not a diagnosis. Compare recent wifi mentions by location and period; a local cluster is more useful than the market percentage when deciding where to investigate.

What to compare in your reviews

Start with recent wifi mentions in your own reviews. Compare positive and negative experiences by business and period before changing procedures.

  • Filter recent reviews for wifi references.
  • Compare positive and negative examples by business and period.
  • Use local operating records before changing operations.

Confidence and limits

These figures describe unmatched platform samples, not every business in the market. Use them as context, then confirm any local concern with recent reviews and operating records.

  • Google Maps and TripAdvisor may attract different reviewers and cover different sets of hotels.
  • Reviews describe guest experiences; they do not establish what caused them.
  • The pattern will not apply to every hotel in New York.
  • Positive and negative examples both appear, so compare both with your own reviews.

Coverage and recency

The broader coverage contains 344 hotels and 785,908 reviews in New York, United States. The topic comparison uses 30,141 distinct reviews from October 15, 2015 through July 31, 2026: 9,192 from Google Maps and 20,949 from TripAdvisor.

Evidence

Evidence snapshot

The article uses this Google Maps dataset scope before interpreting review themes.

Google Maps rating distribution
5-star
53.33%
5,043 reviews
4-star
14.52%
1,373 reviews
3-star
8.5%
804 reviews
2-star
6.44%
609 reviews
1-star
17.21%
1,627 reviews
Rating benchmark by geography
New York
4.08
New York
4.08
United States
4.04
Locations
120
Published reviews
154,933
Reviews analyzed
9,456
Reviews with ratings
9,456
Average rating
4.08
Review period
March 11, 2008 to August 12, 2026

Methodology

How Reviato Insights measures market signals.