Slashdot Mirror
Google Works With Hotels To Hurt Travel Competition (wsj.com)
An anonymous reader shares a WSJ report: More than 100 million Americans are expected to travel during the holidays, and many will search for lodging online. But travelers may unknowingly pay more and fail to see all of their options because some major hotels have ganged up with Google to undercut competition (The link may be paywalled). Online travel agencies like Expedia, Priceline and Travelocity have replaced brick-and-mortar agents by offering consumers more choice and convenience at a lower price. These OTAs purchase inventory from wholesalers and then market rooms at a discount to consumers in addition to flights, rental cars and travel packages. Many also have agreements with companies like American Express, Costco and Delta to market their inventory. OTA websites let travelers sift through hotel offers based on price, brand, location, amenities and guest rating, among other search filters. OTAs earn a roughly 20 percent commission from hotels for each reservation they book, which covers their cost of marketing, inventory acquisition, customer support and payment processing. As hotels get squeezed by Airbnb and home rental sites, they have begun complaining that OTAs are eating into their profits. Several major hotels are now trying to use Google as a counterweight, while Google is exploiting its search dominance to steer consumers to its travel service. Some 60% of travelers begin trip-planning on Google.
But travelers may unknowingly pay more and fail to see all of their options because some major hotels have text.
Someday Slashdot will develop a publishing system that let's you edit articles in draft mode ...
If hotels stopped selling to wholesalers then they wouldn't have this problem. Google isn't at fault here, the hotels are for undercutting their own business.
I often get better pricing booking directly through the hotel company website. I just did that an hour ago and got a better price that way than what Expedia was offering.
The whole premise was that hotels wanted help to move their excess inventory of rooms. Now that there's an ecosystem around collecting and marketing that inventory, the hotels have decided they want to claw back more control (and profit) from the process. I'm not sure I see the issue here. Why not just stop selling rooms at a discount to these 3rd parties and become better at selling the capacity themselves?
shrug
I have found the Google prices the same as the travel site prices the same as the hotel's website every time I've searched (within a few percent one way or the other).
Google doesn't hide the other sites either, they let you book through them if you desire (it even shows you all of their prices in the results).
And of course people start with Google's flight and hotel search, it is significantly better than any of the other sites (includes Southwest flights, smarter warnings and notifications about when a slight change would alter price, quicker and less cluttered).
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Eat to the Beat!
Google OWNZ you!
Now that you know, Deal with It!
I guess "Don't be evil" is now completely by the wayside.
Oh, yeah, I guess it is, at least for Alphabet.
Many private hotels and motels will accept less than their published rates, and lower than the Travelocity/Expedia/Hotels.com rates if you're willing to pay cash. You might still need to put a deposit or give a card as security against damage.
You win, the hotel wins (no fees from the room resellers, no swipe fees).
That's how I've booked hotels in areas that are "hot" like beach towns -- pick up the phone and negotiate.
As hotels get squeezed by Airbnb and home rental sites, they have begun complaining that OTAs are eating into their profits.
Let me ask:
In America, is eating into a competitor's profits a crime?
Mismash mostly posts about Russia, so since a ctrl+f could not discover that place in this text, I must remind you that the founders of Google are from Russia.
Used to be travel agents took 10 percent. Travel agents are gone. Have been for 10 years. Online now. Airlines et al. loved this. But now, 20 percent OFF THE TOP. Better than Apple's 30 percent, but then they aren't Apple, now are they!
To answer the submitted question. What's it to you, comrade? Go fuck with facebook why don't you, and don't come around here no more. No more!
1. The OTAs are selling unused rooms at a discount.
2. They are getting them because the hotels are selling them nights at a discount.
So what are the hotels complaining about, exactly? If they don't want OTAs to sell these rooms, they should stop doing step 2. Of course, then they wouldn't be getting *any* money for these rooms, as they are *unsold rooms*
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
I registered a hotel stay on one of those sites now. A very nice hotel but downtown, and valet parking came as part of the 'bundle'. The front desk refused to give this to us. They said we didn't have the right text in our record. We fought and lost. We talked about what we wanted to do and decided we didn't have much of a choice and took their 5% off 'sucks to be you' deal plus paying for valet parking. When I stood in line to get our room, I heard the exact same argument happening at another booth. I guess if I really wanted to raise a stink I should have pulled aside the other person and stood there waiting as our group got bigger, but I was there for vacation with my family.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Maybe the searchers trust Google to have what they need, Plain and simple. I do and can enter gibberish and expect Google to produce. An example a movie I've see once and no clue of it's name, input: movie beach ball monster - results, top (first) hit was it: "Dark Star", which youtube had available (I didn't say it was a good movie).
Would the other search engines done as well? I've no clue, I have only used Google cause it's working for me.
Just another day with the need for another story.
People use google because it just works, plain and simple. If google start presenting unwanted results for financial gain. Over time people will start using alternatives, plain and simple.
In America, is eating into a competitor's profits a crime?
Companies will certainly try to make it one. See car dealerships vs Tesla if you need an example. Car dealerships in many states have managed to make themselves a mandatory middle man (with attendant markups) even though there is no discernible benefit to either the customers or manufacturers. When Tesla wanted to sell direct they managed to make doing so literally a crime though lobbying their cronies in the state legislature.
It is when you inhabit a privileged position in the market. If we don't have such rules, then the markets fail and nobody wins
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Is it just my imagination or are they confusing "hurts competition" with "lowers retailer margin"?
They're creating a race to the bottom, and then complaining about their falling margins. That's going to be the result when you play that game. I suppose you might look at it as "bad for competition" if you're a vendor looking for better margins, and ultimately it may end up driving some vendors out of the market and lowering competition, but in a free market economy a Race to the Bottom will usually fix itself. Sometimes it crashes the market a bit hard and it takes awhile to rebound, but when it does, the remaining vendors are usually more careful to avoid a repeat occurrence.
And as for their handing out blocks of inventory for resale, that's just another angle they're trying to exploit to squeeze a little more out of their inventory. Iin the case of hotels, those few vacant rooms every day, they're just playing the "half of something is better than all of nothing" game, and the resellers getting their margin is usually okay as long as they're not selling at a loss. If they're stupid and dumping larger than necessary blocks of rooms to the resellers, which is then resulting in a drop in traditional direct sales, that's their own fault for overdoing it. It's no different than using sales to attract customers, and making the mistake of making too many, too frequent, or too heavily discounted sales. Don't DO that, the customers will take advantage of it and the outcome is your own fault. If you don't know how to play that game, you shouldn't be playing it at all, not complaining when you lose.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Is it really news if an organization that makes their money selling advertisements makes certain that people see said advertisements instead of competitors who undercut the people who bought advertisements???
Of COURSE hotels will buy search placement from Google, just like their competitors (the poor "victims").
In this case it often is. The crime is tax evasion. Hotels frequently need to pay a tax on rooms rented, and adhere to various safety regulations that Airbnb ignores. They've been ruled an illegal business in a couple of places because of this.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
What? An advertising corporation (Google) abusing its monopoly? Who'd a thunk it? So are we not to trust Google's search results anymore?
I gave up when I heard that they took a big chunk of cash from BP during the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster to promote pro BP results and hide negative coverage of the spill and the so called cleanup as much as possible.
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
That isn't a report, it's an editorial.
It's Rupert Murdoch being pissy at Google...
Seriously try harder OP here trying to sound all ominous. I have seen better.
I would rather play dealers against each other and get a good deal than paying MSRP every single time, because that is what you are doing when buying from Tesla. Don't like the price, tough shit.
If you think you are getting a better deal by having a middle man involved you are dumber than a rock. You aren't playing them off against each other because it doesn't matter which one you go with you still are paying a substantial markup on the cost of the vehicle. The MSRP has ZERO relationship to the actual cost of the vehicle. Remember what the S in MSRP stands for. ("Suggested") It's an arbitrarily chosen markup dealers like to pretend has some importance.
If you buy through a dealer you are simply adding to the cost of the vehicle for zero benefit to you.