Sales & Marketing

I am a firm believer that rate parity for publicly available rates benefits hoteliers in the current “one-to-many” revenue management practices in hospitality, in which hoteliers come with pricing tiers for different categories of guests: corporate transient managed, corporate transient unmanaged, corporate group, SMERF, leisure transient, weekend, etc.

We can certainly ask if rate parity is good or bad for hoteliers, but do we wonder how customers feel about it? Is there a more annoying thing than researching online for an upcoming trip and seeing 8 different rates come up...

Rate parity benefits no one and should have been euthanized a long time ago. Enforcing it ignores each channels' cost of distribution; causes ill-feeling between distribution partners and limits competition resulting in unwelcome scrutiny from competition authorities.

Despite the many questions about its operating procedures and even its added value, OYO is challenging the stagnant thinking that has characterized hotel chains for nearly a generation. Despite claims about their innovativeness, hotel chains, and in particular their outdated, non-performance related, business models have stifled both creativity and change.

OYO Hotels' meteoric rise resembles a great extent the hyper-growth of WeWork. The question is: Is this rapid growth a good thing, especially in a traditional industry like hospitality? I believe Oyo's growth came at the expense of cutting corners, some big corners at that.

Is there a magic bullet out there for hoteliers? is there some sort of techno-wizard that will in a 'poof' eliminate your need for multiple (often futile) integrations and IT resource back-ups? The answer is NO, and thank goodness!

There are easily more than half a million hotels around the world, so there are naturally thousands and thousands of hotel tech suppliers servicing them. At the lower end of the scale, under 50 rooms, there are several suppliers who do indeed provide an 'all-in-one' solution, as defined by the basic requirements of that market segment.

This is not a question about one vendor or multiple or one stop solutions. Hoteliers are confused because everyone tells them a different story about how they are more important than the rest. On top, it is about the inconvenience and extra charges when dealing with multiple vendors.

When I've started to work in the online distribution in 1999 by my boss and guru Pancho Mazza (r.i.p.) told me: the customer on the Internet is transitional. This is still THE thing. Online customer goes where it's better for it, and nowadays it's pretty easy to get informed and compare.

The new arrangement between Marriott and Expedia is very much like the arrangement Marriott has with the GDS like Sabre, Amadeus and TravelPort i.e. as with a technology distribution platform. If you are a travel agency or a TMC, talk to the GDS how to access Marriott's inventory, availability and retail pricing.

If anything, the deal is another step to dismantle the (dangerous) "Them vs. Us" mentality that most hotels still maintain towards online travel agencies. On the other side of the table, Expedia's move confirmed that the OTAs' model is definitively shifting towards the B2B's realm and, as I've been saying over and over again for the last five years, I won't be surprised to see Expedia and Booking shapeshift to SaaS companies in the near future.