I believe that companies are pro-consumer until something happens that they have to make a change in their company or a policy comes up that does not support the consumer, but I don't think it is done with malice. I understand if a person has to be there at a certain place because it will disrupt other consumers then what is best for the company can make sense to make the company not consumer friendly. I work for a hotel company and there are times that we have to put a room out of order because it is not to our satisfaction and we may have to walk a guest, so it can disrupt the consumer, but for our hotel, we were doing what was best for our portfolio, doesn't mean that we were not consumer friendly, we had to make sure that everyone had the best product and if it was not then we do inconvenience guests. There were times that we had a group that brought more people than expected and we had to move other guests to other hotels instead of moving the entire group. So sometimes it is what is best for the organization, not the consumer. 

Do you agree?