Do you divide up the cost per person or per rooom?

Per person. Otherwise the single people are being penalised for being single like they always are

Basically single people want to treat a couple sharing differently to how they treat two singles sharing. That's selfish and expecting the couple to subsidise them, and seems to be rooted in some kind of desire to punish couples and charge them more for less because they happen to enjoy each other's company

Couples who live together sharing a room is completely different to two single people sharing, especially if they live together - would a couple going to hotel typically book one room or two?

Two people in a couple will typically have two incomes, so can each pay their own way, rather than selfishly think that because they have the option of pooling funds that a single person should subsidise them by 50%.

The couple aren’t getting less, most couples are getting exactly the same as they would do at home and it’s grabby to think single people should cover their holiday.

Sure, ok then. Your freeloading partner doesn't have to pay.

I assume then you are happy with a single person rocking up first and nabbing the best room with the king-sized bed and ensuite? Because they've paid exactly the same as you?

I assume also that your DH is going to stay in your twin room with no bathroom for the full trip without using any of the other facilities, water or power, given they haven't contributed towards the cost of all those things at all?

Yep? All good then.

Just because a person in a couple is OK only having half a shared room (and actually, not all do prefer that, plenty sleep in separate rooms at home for many reasons) it doesn't mean that they shouldn't benefit from the savings that are made by only having half a shared room each rather than a whole double private room each.

I'm prepared to share with my snoring DH to benefit from cheaper accommodation on holiday - but if I'm not going to get any discount for sharing, I'll have two rooms please and a better nights sleep. Just as I'd imagine that some singles would be happy to bunk up together in order to save on their accommodation costs, but would rather have a room each if the cost was no different.

Basically single people want to treat a couple sharing differently to how they treat two singles sharing. That's selfish and expecting the couple to subsidise them, and seems to be rooted in some kind of desire to punish couples and charge them more for less because they happen to enjoy each other's company.

If the cost is per person, then the same expectation of sharing should be put on everyone and a place should only be booked on a 2 people per room basis.

People with a whole private double room to themselves should pay more than people who have only half a shared room, regardless of their relationship status.

Two people sharing one room should not have to pay the same price as two people who have two private double rooms between them. That's really obvious.

If I book a place for a holiday, the rate goes up the more people who are staying. So per person seems fair.

Relationship status matters because most partners want to sleep together. That's a requirement, not a hardship. So it's rather bogus to claim that they are worse off than solo people.

Well no they don't receive the same. Couples (or 2 single people sharing) get half a shared room with one bed space each, and non sharing singles get a whole private room with two bed spaces each. And singles demanding private rooms necessitates hiring a bigger, more expensive villa, and significantly pushes up the price for everyone.

Singles are benefitting both in space per person and in terms of getting the luxury of privacy that the sharers are not. The luxury of double the space and complete privacy comes at a cost which needs to be paid for by the person benefitting from them.

Relationship status doesn't come into it. Two singles sharing a double room wouldn’t expect to pay double for a room, three singles sharing a triple wouldn't expect to pay triple for their room. They'd expect a discount for sharing over the luxury having a whole double or triple private room to themselves. Rightly so, they should pay less per person because they're getting less per person.

You are not "paying double".

Each person is paying exactly the same and in return receives a room and access to all the facilities of the villa. Perfectly fair.

What isn't fair is the suggestion that couples get a discount.

Nah.

Two equal rooms.
One room, one price.
Half the room, half the price.

Two people sharing have half a room each, so they pay half the room price each.

One person, not sharing, has the whole room to themselves, so has to cover the whole room cost themselves. They get twice the space to themselves and privacy. It's selfish and greedy to expect to get twice as much for the same price.

If everyone is sharing then fine. But people choosing not to share need to understand that luxury they are choosing comes at a cost. They can't expect a 50% discount because they're single. Nor should they expect a couple to pay a 100% uplift for the same thing just because they're in a relationship.

No one would expect 2 single people sharing a twin room to pay the same per person as two married people taking two separate rooms. It works the same in reverse.

Relationship status is irrelevant. It's cheaper to buy half of something than it is to buy the whole. It's a simple as that.

That’s completely the wrong way round, by your reasoning a couple expect the room for half the cost rather than the price per person, and their trip is substantially subsidised by the single people paying twice what they are.

I have just arranged a weekend away for a group. I split the costs per person, mainly because the couples did have better rooms and the people who came without partners are a mix of having their own rooms or sharing with someone.

It meant the couples (I am one of them) pay double per room but some of the 'single' people had no choice but to share or have a smaller twin bedded rooms.

No-one questioned this. Everyone was happy with the arrangement.

A single non sharer wants the same room for half the actual cost. Thats expecting to be subsidided (heavily) by the sharers (single or otherwise).

They're welcome to share and pay exactly the same for the room as the couple.

Per person is fairer.

But put it this way, if you pay per room, then what if one of the single people gets there first and claims the master king sized bedroom, leaving one of the couples with bunk beds? They have the same right to it.

In your case that you were expecting to be given a double room for your dh joining you for one night, when other singles would have to take the single/smaller rooms, wouldn't they? Does that sound fair? Win all round for you: a double room and only sharing for one night.

Why do you think £800 divided by two people less affordable than expecting a single person to pay £800 for a room?

Honestly some people in couples seem to conveniently forget they normally have two incomes, why should the single people subsidise the trip.

You should pay per person. Cost it all out without your DH going. If he then can come, even if for one night, he pays the same and puts it into a holiday kitty. £400 between you all will buy some nice drinks our.

In terms of this holiday, OP, would £650 (room cost) really make that much difference over £800 (per person cost) if your DH is only going for one night? They both seem pretty extortionate to me for DH go go for just one night.

Unless you agreed that kind of budget in advance, I'd just drop out entirely based on it being out of budget.

As it stands, if just you go, and not your DH, you're actually quids in on the per person split they're suggesting.

No - single people subsidise couples’ use of
kitchen
sitting room
any shared bathrooms, lavatories
all other shared living spaces

Plus quite often couples can be a bit niggardly about food and drink rounds etc etc

I would assume per person if a group were going away / getting accommodation together.

Though I think it is a bit much to ask people to pay out £400 plus flights, and then presumably + spending money, to celebrate someone else's birthday.

I suppose it might be more 'normal' if you are all loaded.

If it's all double rooms of similar standard then it's reasonable to charge per room. If it's small rooms or sofa beds then those should be cheaper ( but not necessarily half price)

13 people going at £400 pp is £5200. If it's a 8 bed villa per room would be £650 so the couples would pay £325 each .

I have been on holiday with same group when I was single and found myself paying same and I was on a sofa bed in the sitting room!

In our wider family we charge half the room cost for any sofa-bed rooms - and even then, only if its a side room that can be used 100% privately. Any sofa beds in public rooms are not counted at all as beds.

I don't think it's unreasonable for there to be some banding of rooms to reflect number of occupants and sharing status.

So say 3 bands

Middle band is (for ease of maths) £100 per night for a standard double.

Lower band is -30% so £70 per night for a single room.

Higher band is +30% so £130 per night for a Premium double.

Each person (regardless of relationship status) chooses from a per night cost of:

£50 - shared standard double
£65 - shared Premium double
£70 - private single
£100- private standard double
£130- private Premium double.

Share the formula in advance, so a villa with the right number of single/double/Premium rooms can be booked.

I think it sounds a fairly pricey villa which isn’t helping either.

Have you messaged back and asked her to send the link to the accomodation? Who pays 800quid blind for anything.

Also, a couple going on a 4 night break would be paying £800 for communal living, plus flights, plus any food and drinks etc. It's too much.