Is your hotel relevant enough to be chosen?
Is your hotel relevant enough to be chosen?
Authenticity stopped becoming standard and started becoming scripted
Phillip Schaetz
https://www.costar.com/article/451299580/is-your-hotel-relevant-enough-to-be-chosen?
CUBE
A single question is quietly disrupting one of hospitality's most comfortable assumptions. It's not whether your hotel is beautifully designed. Not whether your team delivers warm, genuine service. Not even whether your brand story is compelling.
The question is simpler and more demanding than that: Are you relevant to the specific person making the decision, in the specific moment they are making it?
This is important because relevance — not authenticity, not uniqueness — is what drives choice.
The problem with authenticity
"Authenticity" became hospitality's favorite word for good reason. It pushed back against the sterile, transactional hotel experience. It said: We are human, we have a story, we stand for something.
That instinct was right.
But somewhere along the way, authenticity stopped being a standard and became a script.
Scroll through hotel websites across markets and segments today. The language is remarkably consistent. Everyone uses phrases like "authentic experiences," "curated journeys," or "bespoke service." Every brand, from budget to ultra-luxury, speaks in the same register.
The problem is not that these claims are false. The problem is that they are indistinguishable.
Authenticity, as the industry now uses it, is self-declared. It describes intent. It says nothing about whether that intent lands differently for different guests. And in a market where everyone is authentic, the word has ceased to mean anything at all.
Guests do not choose intent. They choose what feels right for them.
The real gap is relevance
Here is one of the clearest commercial truths in hospitality: When price becomes the dominant point of comparison, value is never made visible.
This is not a pricing problem; it is a relevance problem.
When guests can clearly see why a property fits their specific needs — their trip type, their priorities, their moment — rate becomes contextual. It sits inside a framework of understood value. But when the offering is generic, or communicated generically, price becomes the only available filter.
Commercial performance, then, is not primarily a function of yield management or distribution strategy. It is a function of how clearly and specifically the value is communicated to the right person at the right time.
Which brings us to the real structural issue:
USPs are the wrong game
The industry has spent decades building and marketing Unique Selling Points. The assumption is straightforward: Identify what makes you different, communicate it clearly, and win the booking.
But look at the modern hotel landscape honestly. What is truly unique?
Rooms, spas, dining, wellness facilities, and local experiences — these have largely converged. The gap between a well-run four-star and a premium five-star, in terms of physical product, has narrowed significantly. Competing on uniqueness, in a market where assets have standardized, is a game most hotels cannot win.
The differentiation that actually drives conversion is not about what no one else has.
It is about what matters most to this guest, right now.
From USP to RSP
The shift that commercial and marketing leaders need to make is from Unique Selling Points to Relevant Selling Points.
The distinction is not semantic. It changes how you build content, how you segment communication, and how you measure whether your messaging is working.
Consider a quiet beachfront property. For a honeymooning couple, that stillness is the entire reason to book. For a group looking for energy and social atmosphere, it is a reason to look elsewhere. The asset has not changed. The meaning has changed entirely, depending on who is evaluating it and why.
A family program converts one guest and creates noise for another. A design-led aesthetic inspires one traveler and alienates a different one. Features do not carry inherent value. They carry potential value, activated by context and relevance.
RSPs require hotels to stop asking "what do we offer?" and start asking "what does this matter to, and to whom?"
That means sharper segmentation. It means content built for specific moments in the guest journey, because the way you inspire an undecided traveler is not the way you close a booking, and neither is the way you retain a repeat guest. Consistency of values, yes. But an expression that adapts to context.
The AI complication
This is where the stakes get significantly higher.
AI is already reshaping how guests search, compare, and make decisions. And it introduces a specific risk that the industry has not yet fully reckoned with.
AI is built to be helpful. When information is incomplete, it fills the gaps, drawing on patterns, categories, and assumptions. A five-star resort is assumed to offer certain things. A boutique city hotel is assumed to provide a certain experience. The model completes the picture, whether or not that picture is accurate.
For hotels with vague, generic, or poorly structured content, AI does not amplify their story. It replaces it with a plausible approximation — one that looks like every other property in the same category.
The sameness problem, already significant, accelerates.
Storytelling alone will not solve this. What AI rewards is structured, specific, and verifiable content -- signal clarity rather than narrative warmth. Not broader claims, but sharper ones. Not more content, but content that is precisely matched to context and audience.
The question is worth asking
Authenticity is a comfortable standard. It asks us to be true to ourselves.
Relevance is a harder one. It asks us to be right for someone else -- in their context, at their moment, for their specific decision.
Guests do not reward consistency of voice. They reward being understood.
In a market where AI fills every gap we leave behind, and fills it with something generic, the properties that will outperform are those that have defined their value with enough precision to be irreplaceable.
Not just authentic.
Chosen.
Philip Schaetz is the founder and managing director of CUBE. Prior to establishing CUBE in 2018, Philip enjoyed a long career in revenue management, distribution expertise, and sales and marketing strategy in senior global positions for some of the world’s largest hotel & resort brands. This column is part of ISHC Global Insights, a partnership between CoStar News and the International Society of Hospitality Consultants.
Experts prioritize master planning to reinvent hotel restaurants and bars
Local flavor is key in standalone restaurants
Mimi Kakushi is one of several new restaurant concepts recently debuted at Delano Miami Beach. (Delano Miami Beach)
https://www.costar.com/article/86454232/experts-prioritize-master-planning-to-reinvent-hotel-restaurant-and-bars?
WASHINGTON — Food and beverage outlets can either be a money pit or a difference maker on property for hotels.
During a panel at the 2026 spring meeting of the Hospitality Asset Managers Association, experts said hoteliers don't have to accept food and beverage being a loss center on property, but a level of thought and planning is needed starting at the concepting stage.
How that concept fits in at the hotel and into the surrounding community is vital.
"We always encourage an overall master plan of the food and beverage and to just do a quick analysis of all the players on the property and what the opportunities are," said Jennifer Johanson, CEO and president of EDG Design.
She added that early planning "always yields more revenue potential."
Understanding where a restaurant fits not just on the property but in the surrounding community is key.
"A hotel restaurant needs the local market to survive and thrive," said Omri Green, vice president of business development and consulting for Union Square Events. "If you're going to treat the restaurant as an amenity to the hotel, that's great, but then you really cap the potential of what you can do at the restaurant. When you draw the market and create something special, you build that buzz, you eventually end up creating a great restaurant that happens to be in a hotel."
When reworking existing spaces, it's important to define the scope of the work, said Carson Schroeder, chief development officer for APICII. This includes whether it's as simple as a regular refresh to bring new life into a working restaurant or food-and-beverage outlet, a repositioning to evolve the existing concept with the same name or branding, or developing a whole new concept.
"Whatever you're doing, it's dictated by a number of things like how much capital is available and what the revenue opportunity is," he said. "That underwriting exercise should be done very early in the process."
Those early stages of reworking a space should also involve full collaboration among stakeholders, including ownership and the hotel operations team, to make sure it's meeting everyone's needs.
"We really want to collaborate with operations teams to do a deep dive and understand how we can solve problems and help improve," said Marion Emmanuelle Bullot, partner at AvroKO Hospitality Group and managing director at Brand Bureau.
Expectations for food and beverage within hotels have evolved over the years, and restaurants need to evolve in tandem, she added.
"You're now seeing hotels performing tremendously through F&B and F&B being one of the key decision points for guests choosing a property," she said.
When reworking spaces, hotels have something that "was designed, conceptualized and developed 20 years ago, when behaviors were just so different," Bullot said.
Experts on the panel agreed that one of the keys to success is the flexibility of a concept, and Bullot said having outlets that can have pop-ups and seasonal activations on the property gives hoteliers an advantage.
"We really see activations in public spaces as a way to solve issues in the future," she said.
Another aspect of future-proofing is considering that Gen Z is drinking less than previous generations, so going forward, there might be less focus on alcohol, Bullot said.
"They will become the core consumer within hotels, and their behaviors and expectations are changing drastically," she said.
Green said it's key to be able to tie together on-property F&B functions — such as restaurants, in-room dining, and banquets — and it's important to keep employee dining in mind, as well.
"It's really a full-spectrum approach," he said.
While loyalty is a big focus in the hotel brand world right now, Schroeder said there's not enough focus on building guest loyalty for on-property restaurants. And that doesn't mean building earn-and-burn points programs, but programming in a way that gives guests a reason to come back.
"Whether that's creating a bourbon-tasting program that people can sign up for ... and we've had a lot of success using CRMs to create birthday programs," he said.
AI, strategy, and the future of work: Oxford economist Jean-Paul Carvalho
https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/ai-strategy-and-the-future-of-work-oxford-economist-jean-paul-carvalho?
Jean-Paul Carvalho is a professor of political economy in the Department of Economics at the University of Oxford and director of Oxford Elevate. Robin Nuttall is a partner in McKinsey’s London office and a business fellow in the Department of Economics at the University of Oxford.
Professor Jean-Paul Carvalho explores how AI is reshaping cognitive work, organizations, and where business leaders can capture value at scale.
Jean-Paul Carvalho is a professor of political economy in the Department of Economics at the University of Oxford and director of Oxford Elevate, the department’s executive education portfolio. In this episode of the Inside the Strategy Room podcast, he speaks with McKinsey Partner Robin Nuttall about what makes AI different from past waves of technology and shares the latest data on its implications for the nature of work, organizations, and business leadership.
The following transcript of their conversation has been edited for clarity and length. For more discussions on the strategy issues that matter, follow the series on your preferred podcast platform.
Robin Nuttall: How has your own interest in AI developed as the technology has advanced, and how did the topic become a part of your programs at Oxford?
Jean-Paul Carvalho: I’m naturally interested in AI because technology is the main engine of economic change. This began in the 1700s, with the Industrial Revolution bringing the ability to manufacture goods cheaply and at scale. That revolution led to cars, suburbs, advertising, consumerism, and much of what we associate with modern life today. With that, most of us have lived through an unusually stable environment.
That’s changing now, and it’s taken a while for people to come to grips with it. In April 2023, Pew [Research Center] did a survey that showed that while 62 percent of respondents believed AI would majorly disrupt the workforce, only 28 percent believed their own job would be affected. So there has been this kind of trepidation with AI; we were forced to pay attention to AI in November 2022 when ChatGPT was released, but some heads remained in the sand.
If we go back further, in 2012, the transition from symbolic AI to the deep neural nets we see today was starting to happen: Driverless cars were being trialed on the roads, AlexNet was out, and software engineers were starting to train AI agents to code. AI-based online job vacancies skyrocketed around 2015. By 2018, I was incorporating AI into my graduate course in political economy. Now, in our executive education program, Oxford Elevate, the leaders we interact with all want to know about AI—it’s front and center for them.
Robin Nuttall: Do you think the AI revolution is novel, or just another milestone in the long history of automation?
Jean-Paul Carvalho: I think there is a combination of novel factors that could mean the consequences of the AI revolution are far more wide-reaching and profound. First, AI automates cognitive tasks, not physical tasks. Cognitive tasks are what humans are good at; our cognitive skills set us apart from everything else on the planet—we’re unique in that we can build knowledge, generation after generation. With AI, that’s potentially not the case anymore.
Second, AI is a general-purpose technology, whereas the Industrial Revolution automated very specific tasks. Third, AI is globally scalable. Tech companies can be concentrated in very small areas, like Silicon Valley, and still service the whole world. Finally, AI will generate new knowledge and new capabilities that are both offensive and defensive, with national security implications of the magnitude of nuclear energy.
This combination of factors makes AI unique and its implications quite different from previous technological revolutions.
Robin Nuttall: We can think about the advancement of AI in waves: first, the emergence of machine learning and predictive technologies; then generative AI; and most recently, agentic AI. Across this development, how is AI impacting labor markets?
Jean-Paul Carvalho: It’s clear that AI systems can improve productivity at an individual level. Erik Brynjolfsson and coauthors looked at a staggered rollout of AI voice chat assistance among customer support agents at a Fortune 500 firm. They found that customer support agents with access to this AI technology resolved about 15 percent more cases per hour. We see similar productivity improvements when it comes to coding and software development.
With AI agents, the technology becomes increasingly substitutable for human labor; there’s already evidence of full substitutability in certain tasks. Brian Jabarian and Luca Henkel conducted a field experiment of 70,000 job applicants who were randomly assigned to an AI voice recruiter or a human recruiter, with a third subset given a choice. The AI recruiter did better than the human recruiters in terms of job offers, job starts, and 30-day retention.
Again, while there’s a high level of substitutability, it’s at that individual or task level. At the firm or industry level, it’s more complicated.
There are several competing effects that will determine the overall aggregate effect on employment and wages. How substitutable is the technology for human labor? How much of a productivity boost will firms receive? If they’re more productive, they produce more and will hire more human labor, even if there’s some substitution—that’s the productivity effect. Then, how quickly will new tasks be generated that employ displaced human labor, where humans outcompete AI? It’s too early to talk about the latter, but current evidence suggests that the substitution and productivity effects roughly offset each other.
Daron Acemoglu and coauthors have looked at the aggregate effects of AI adoption in the US and found little change at the occupation or industry level in employment or wages. They do find a reduction in non-AI-related hiring, but that’s offset by other types of hiring. In Denmark, [Anders] Humlum and [Emilie] Vestergaard looked at changes in firms with widespread adoption of gen AI. They found very little change in hours worked and earnings but noted changes in occupational switching and organizational restructuring. That’s really what’s going on: a big shift within organizations.
You can see it with Gustavo de Souza’s work on the adoption of industrial software in Brazil—software that uses real-time sensor data to predict machine failures, optimize maintenance, and help workers use the machinery. These jobs were formerly done by white-collar workers in factory offices. After the adoption of this software, there is a reduction in hiring these workers, but there is actually an increase in hiring manual workers because the machines can be operated more continuously and efficiently.
Robin Nuttall: We’ve seen scenarios where these dynamics have the consequence of compressing wages among white-collar workers, impacting spending and, therefore, growth. Do you think these scenarios are credible? And what are the implications for the talent pipeline?
Jean-Paul Carvalho: Of course, wages go down because of the composition effect, but the results are really mixed. Where we have clear results is in junior versus senior hiring. Again, Erik Brynjolfsson and coauthors examined US workers aged 22 to 25 and found a 16 percent reduction in employment in AI-exposed occupations. That’s a large drop and is especially prevalent in areas and occupations where AI substitutes for, rather than complements, human labor. It’s not actually about firing; it’s about a reduction in the hiring of junior workers.
This creates a big challenge in how we educate and train workers. How do you develop senior employees whose role is to oversee the decisions and work of AI agents when a limited number of new employees are being hired? You’re breaking the pipeline. Firms will have to hire and train people despite short-term incentives not to, if they are to get the right senior management to oversee the AI agents working within their corporations in the future. That’s not something managers and CEOs have had to think about to date, but this is a clear pipeline challenge they will now have to grapple with. What I do see is that humans are going to be in the loop for the foreseeable future.
CEOs of established companies will need to be almost as nimble and innovative as start-ups.
Robin Nuttall: What other key disruptions or implications should CEOs and business leaders be thinking about?
Jean-Paul Carvalho: There will be massive disruption, I think. There are new issues of trust in organizations that haven’t arisen before. I was speaking to a tech founder whose new employees are being sent deepfake videos of him asking them to click on links for training, but these links are not training links, as you can imagine. Or you have a divisional manager with a lot of AI agents—where before they were managing a thousand employees, and now it’s a million. How do they cope with that? You don’t want to wake up and find that your AI agents have signed a million pages of contracts that you now have to unwind. You need very trusted systems to deal with the new technology.
Then there’s market disruption. Market power can disappear more quickly because AI produces cheaper substitute goods and services that outcompete you. We’re seeing this with enterprise software, where the market is really thinking through which firms will be outcompeted by substitutes generated by AI. Even where substitute goods and services aren’t generated by AI systems, [the technology] can still enable disruption within the value chain itself. For example, new entrants can scale much more quickly than in the past because they don’t face the same labor constraints. CEOs of established companies will need to be almost as nimble and innovative as start-ups—and willing to radically restructure.
There’s some evidence that early trials of gen AI in corporations have mostly failed. I don’t think it’s a matter of the technology; it’s a matter of strategy and execution. About 50 percent of AI budgets go to sales and marketing, but the true value creation comes from restructuring, changing workflows and processes, and slimming down the bureaucracy. This is where enormous value can be created, and hedge funds today are trying to pinpoint the companies and start-ups best placed to do so.
Robin Nuttall: Would you say the ability to scale AI as a large incumbent enterprise will be a new source of competitive advantage?
Jean-Paul Carvalho: I think that’s one area where there will be value creation. But it’s the trillion-dollar question: Where will the profit lie in the AI value chain? If we go back to the earlier dot-com boom and the internet revolution, where was the value created? People initially thought it was a pick-and-shovel play—you wanted to own the servers and routers. Companies like Sun Microsystems’ stock price went up 6,400 percent from the summer of 1994 to early 2000, and then it crashed by 90 to 95 percent. What emerged from the ashes of the dot-com crash were the companies that have shaped our world today: big platform players that build market power through network externalities and various lock-in effects.
It was thought that AI labs would enjoy such market power—that they would have a large moat because it required such large capex and various algorithmic “secret sauces” to train these models. However, that was somewhat blown up in late 2024 with the release of DeepSeek’s LLMs [large language models]—V3 in December 2024 and R1 in January 2025—which developed frontier capabilities on a shoestring budget. As we progress toward AGI [artificial general intelligence], it could be that massive capex and algorithmic secrets are again required to train these highly advanced models so the moat can reappear.
It could be that the platforms really benefit from this AI revolution, as they did from the internet revolution. Existing digital ecosystems could be supercharged by AI, or new platforms could disrupt the existing digital ecosystems—we don’t know yet.
What is clear is that significant efficiency gains will be made by scaling AI within companies. Some companies may be better placed to do so than others; some may be more willing. It really depends on management and how they make this transition, but that is going to be a huge source of value creation.
Robin Nuttall: What do you see as the core elements of the “playbook” for organizations to make that transition and scale AI successfully?
Jean-Paul Carvalho: It’s going to depend on individual companies and industries. In healthcare, there’s a massive amount of back-office work, but it depends on the context—for example, the US is very different from the UK. The US healthcare system is extremely complicated, and new, very nimble healthcare providers are well placed to simplify the whole process. And that’s going to cut costs significantly. In education, a large percentage of increases in the wage bill is due to administration. Finding ways to eliminate the inefficiencies that crop up in large organizations will be key. What is the silver bullet? It’s a difficult question to answer in general. It depends on the specific industry.
Robin Nuttall: A choice business leaders face right now is automation versus augmentation. Do you think labor augmentation is a false hope, and that automation is just too alluring for organizations?
Jean-Paul Carvalho: The current path of technological development around AI is about substituting for human labor. If you look at the release of any AI model, the benchmark is beating 99 percent of humans in a particular task. It’s not about making humans 99 percent faster at the task, or making humans plus AI 20 percent better at the task. There was an alternative approach developed by Norbert Wiener, who posed the question: How do we develop technology that best complements human productivity? I think this is a very important point. Not only do you get a much more humane type of organization, but you also solve some of the problems of training humans to be in the loop at a senior stage.
Moreover, at a much earlier stage, at the level of education, problems start to incubate. Think about the incentives for investment in skills. Fifteen years ago, if I were learning how to code, I would have had a 99 percent chance of beating a computer system. Today, I would have very little chance—so what is my incentive to invest in those skills? What happens if others stop investing in them? Those skills can then affect the accumulation of other skills across the economy that are required for various tasks.
And how do I learn from people? Where do I get my role models from? A lot of our knowledge is tacit and gained in person. How do I acquire skills of punctuality, diligence, and grit? At this earlier stage of human skill formation and productivity, the human complementary approach to AI—human-oriented AI—is going to be hugely important.
Robin Nuttall: As you look at the development of AI, are you fundamentally optimistic or pessimistic?
Jean-Paul Carvalho: I see different optimistic and pessimistic scenarios. We have to ask ourselves: Why are we doing this? As a society, why does this make sense? The optimistic scenario is that AI frees humans from mundane work and unlocks human creativity, allowing us to devote our time and energy to things we really value. That could be work, but it could also be many other things. That’s what John Maynard Keynes thought would happen, and it’s what a lot of people aspire to.
It is possible, but it depends on how political institutions adapt to the AI revolution. If political institutions remain inclusive and egalitarian norms remain in place, then the productivity boom that could be generated from AI could be channeled into a state in which individuals have that freedom. But if political institutions don’t adapt in an egalitarian way, then it could go in a different direction. The optimistic thing is that there is a positive path forward, and which way it goes is really up to us.
Saying, ‘I Do’: Why small, personalized weddings are driving demand in 2026
https://hotelsmag.com/news/why-small-personalized-weddings-are-driving-demand-in-2026/?
Personalization, intention, curation: three words driving wedding demand in 2026—and hotels are all too well aware of it.
Alt weddings are in; traditional weddings are out, and a move toward “micro weddings” with fewer guests and smaller venues allows couples to reallocate their budgets toward experience-driven elements that aim to reflect their personalities and stories rather than logistics. “Bold color palettes, dramatic floral installations, and more immersive décor make an elevated visual impact,” said Allie Hobbs, director of events and planning at the Tides Inn hotel in Irvington, Va. “There is also a departure from long-standing traditions, such as pie or ice cream in place of the traditional cake.” Hobbs said that even beachfront resorts are moving away from the obvious “beachy” look by minimizing décor and highlighting natural elements and scenery instead.
Like any event, cost is an issue. Couples might choose one photographer rather than two, for instance. With this, there has been a shift toward more flexible and customizable packages to design a celebration that reflects their priorities while maintaining a high level of quality and service. “This means offering a well-defined and strong baseline package, but, at the same time, offering curated add-ons that allow couples to tailor their experience within a budget,” said Hobbs.
Couples are reallocating their budgets toward experience-driven elements that aim to reflect their personalities and stories.
Food and beverage is getting its own unique twist—think coffee bars with unusual syrups and enhancements; interactive dining that includes making your own key lime pie; or standout photo moments, such as a tiramisu champagne tower, noted Abe Liao, VP of operations at EOS Hospitality.
More specific preferences have shifted toward locally sourced seasonal ingredients, more casual dining experiences, and fewer upgrades to premium proteins. “Guests may still order the fish, but the less expensive fish,” Liao added.
At the Tides Inn, customized menus, signature cocktails, expanded hors d’oeuvres selections and experiences like oyster roasts are some examples of popular add-ons. “These not only enhance the guest experience but also create a strong sense of place, which is especially meaningful in a destination setting,” said Hobbs.
Locally-sourced seasonal ingredients and casual dining experiences are increasingly popular at modern weddings.
BEHIND THE BIG DAY
One of the biggest obstacles with hotel weddings is maintaining privacy, as regular hotel operations, of course, go on. The Tides Inn offers options that include a partial or full resort buyout, which provides a greater level of privacy and allows for a more immersive and customized wedding experience, which in the end allows couples more flexibility in how they utilize the space and structure their events throughout the weekend.
In addition, Liao commented that there’s more resistance to guaranteed room blocks. “We’ve shifted to offering courtesy blocks to take the pressure off couples,” he said. Resort fees can also give couples pause. “They want to know what they are and what is included. But once we walk through everything and show them the value, they get it. It just requires a conversation,” he said.
Even at beachfront resorts, couples are moving away from traditional “beachy” décor.
Another common challenge is cost perception. At first glance, hotel venues can appear more expensive compared to standalone venues. However, much of that comes from the fact that hotels offer a comprehensive, full-service experience, inclusive of food and beverage, furnishings, linens, table settings, bar setup, and professional staffing. “A key part is setting clear expectations early and educating couples on overall value,” Hobbs said. “By walking them through what is included and how it contributes to a seamless, elevated experience, we’re able to reframe the conversation from cost to value.”
Ultimately, success comes down to how well hotels balance creativity with clarity. Couples are willing to spend, but they expect the outlay to feel intentional, personalized, and worthwhile. For hoteliers, that means leaning into flexible design, transparent pricing, and experience-led offerings that resonate on an emotional level while still driving profitability. Those who can deliver both meaning and margin will be best positioned to turn today’s highly curated celebrations into long-term business growth.
DUHC&S | Strategic Hospitality Consulting & Advisory
We transform hospitality and tourism businesses through strategic solutions, operational efficiency, and comprehensive renovation. With over 40 years of experience working with brands like Hilton, Hyatt, Sheraton, and Sonesta, we enhance asset value and profitability through:
*Operational excellence and brand standards (GSI +90%)
*Market penetration and commercial strategies
*Key partnerships and disruptive innovation
*Hotel openings and repositioning
Proven results :
✅ 48% GOP |
✅ +120% asset valuation growth
✅ Successful projects across 6 Latin American countries
🔹 Let's connect :
📩 Email: diurugeles@gmail.com
📱 WhatsApp: +57 3153259968
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/diur_2000/
https://viajes-noticias-duhospitality.blogspot.com
https://viajes-duhospitality.blogspot.com
https://travel-duhospitality.blogspot.com
Disclaimer
DUHC&S shares this information for educational and informational purposes only. The news articles reproduced here are sourced from public and recognized media outlets. We are not the original authors of this content but rather its distributors. All credits go to the original sources cited in each article. If you are the legitimate owner of any material and wish to have it modified or removed, please contact us immediately at diurugeles@gmail.com, and we will address your request promptly.
Comments
Post a Comment