Case study

How Michels and Taylor saved £206,000 a year across 20 hotels

One calendar.One tender.One record.

Case study

One calendar.One tender.One record.

The account

A managed group of twenty hotels, each with its own supply arrangements and its own contract end dates. Buying happened site by site as each renewal arrived, which meant the group was never in the market as one buyer and never in it at a time of its own choosing.

Client: Michels and Taylor
Sector: Hotels and hospitality
Sites: 20 hotels in a single managed group

The result

Each figure is shown with what it is measured against, the document it is taken from and the date that document carries.

EV-01 / Procurement
£206,000 a year saved on procurement
The competitive procurement saving alone, from aligning the hotels onto common contract end dates and securing supply 13 months in advance. Kept separate from the EV funding and capacity figures rather than blended into one headline.
Client value summary, Michels and Taylor
27 August 2026
EV-04 / Consumption
16 per cent reduction in non-required consumption
Taken from metered consumption after energy monitoring was rolled out across the estate, with more than £100,000 of further saving identified separately from agreed capacity (kVA) audits. Guest-facing operations were not altered.
Client value summary, Michels and Taylor
27 August 2026

What we examined

The work starts with the records the client already holds. Nothing is estimated where a document exists.

Every signed contract, with its end date, rate structure and any commission disclosure.
Recent invoices for each supply, checked against those contracts line by line.
Half-hourly and AMR consumption data for the metered sites.
The agreed capacity (kVA) figure held at each site, against recorded demand.

What the reading showed

Contract end dates were spread across the year, so the estate could not be tendered as one volume.
Buying was reactive, with each renewal handled as it fell due rather than secured ahead of the market.
Consumption outside required operating hours had not been separated out and costed.
Reserved capacity had not been tested against a full year of recorded demand.

What was done

Each step was recommended in writing and agreed before it was carried out.

01
The hotels were aligned onto common contract end dates so the group could be tendered as one buyer.
02
Supply was secured 13 months in advance of the term starting, rather than at the renewal date.
03
Energy monitoring was rolled out across the estate, and consumption that was not required was identified and costed.
04
Agreed capacity was audited site by site, which identified further saving separately from the procurement figure.

How to read the figure

The £206,000 is the competitive procurement saving on its own. It is held apart from the EV funding and the capacity figures rather than blended into one headline, so the number means only what it says. The 16 per cent is taken from metered consumption after monitoring was rolled out, with more than £100,000 of further saving identified separately through the capacity audits. Guest-facing operations were not altered.

The source document is named above and released on request with the account holder's permission. Reviewed 18 September 2026.

The work behind it

The services this account used, and the sheets that explain the detail.

Read the detail

All case studies