Hacker News Reader

Comment by untog | Hacker News Reader

All these sites seem to use the exact same backend services, so it's difficult to care. About the only site I use regularly is hotels.com because they have a loyalty scheme (book 10 nights, get 1 free) - and even then I'm sure there's some catch I'm not aware of that makes them the same as everyone else.

View on HN

This is true in general terms, but the reality is that these sites are charged to use backend services, so they cache results. So how smart the cache invalidation and refresh process is matters a lot to a user, especially during times when there is a lot of contention (think pre-christmas). If there is anything that makes a user bounce, it's telling the user that there exists a ticket for a given price, and the user discovering otherwise after clicking through or starting the payment process.

Then there are a lot of providers who have APIs but are not part of a large backend service. Hotels especially are notorious here.

Furthermore a lot of providers still don't have APIs (yes, in this day and age) and need to be scraped, and will agree to doing so - the better you scrape the more alternatives your users get.

But yeah. In an ideal world what you're saying would be true. And I agree that this is probably a userbase acquisition - market consolidation move rather than a tech one.

disclaimer: used to work at kayak.

It's actually a big deal in the travel industry. Yes, for the most part they are all the same. Online travel sites have negotiated contracts with the hotels that prevent them from selling their inventory at lower prices to anyone else, so you're not going to get a much better deal where ever you book.

The big thing here is this makes the Expedia umbrella by far the largest distribution channel for online hotel reservations. It gives them quite a bit of leverage when negotiating contracts with the hotel chains in the future. Especially when they are responsible for something like 35% of all the hotels' reservations.

While the rates are generally the same because of the rate parity agreement these OTAs have with hotels. One way you can get a better deal is booking direct with the hotels. Hotels can offer loyalty rewards, which is not covered by the rate parity agreement, as well as additional on property benefits. My company, https://universalpoints.com offers a 5% cash back that you can earn on your first stay at participating hotels for booking direct with the hotel. We are also working on adding a service where you can use the cash you've earned for reduced room rates and upgrades.

If the no lower prices thing is true, how come comparison engines like triage have such wildly varying prices? Are different bookers taking hits on their margins to drive business?

When a hotel signs a contract with an OTA (Online Travel Agency), it is (was) a common practice to include a 'price parity' clause, i.e. the hotelier cannot send different prices for the same offer to different websites, and the OTA agrees on not modifying the final price specified by the hotelier.

But the reality is that: - Not all the hoteliers update all the rates simultaneously (through a channel manager, for example) - Some the hoteliers are not selling the same rooms or rates (breakfast, cancellation options...) in all the OTAs. - Certain OTAs that are just re-selling inventory from wholesalers and the commission applicable to an offer can be modified by the OTA at its will.

There are more 'shady' tricks that can lead to different prices for the same hotel, but it would be too long to write all of them in a post.

> There are more 'shady' tricks that can lead to different prices for the same hotel, but it would be too long to write all of them in a post.

I'd love to see a blog post on this, and would gladly send beer/coffee money your way to see it!

I am currently working in an OTA and I am not in a position where I can openly share certain things, so I am sorry that blog post wont see the light soon.

But, I can share some pricing strategies that I've noticed that our competitors are doing, for example:

1) Different prices for different countries, example:

http://www.amoma.com/hotel.php?id=30800&key=2015022020150221... and open it again in english, using an incognito window (important): http://www.amoma.com/hotel.php?id=30800&key=2015022020150221...

2) Most of the hotels set the price using their local currency, and when the prices are converted to the customer currency, every OTA can decide to be optimistic or pessimistic. They could even decide to use a different conversion rate depending on the booking windows (number of days to checkin).

3) Price parity clause can be avoided if the price is not 'public' (http://www.osborneclarke.com/connected-insights/blog/hotels-...) so now most of the OTAs are trying hard to get the users logged in before booking. Once the user is logged in, the prices are not 'public', so the OTA can lower their commission slice of the price.

4) Some hotels have a specific (cheaper) rate for 'package bookings' i.e. the room is booked together with another service (flight, car rental...). But some OTAs decided that a flight booked earlier was enough to offer a 'package rate' to the customer. See: http://www.tnooz.com/article/expedia-playing-hardball-hotel-...

Thanks for the beer, we may have an opportunity to drink it together in the future.

Most large hotel chains have a best price guarantee which states the hotel's official website will have the lowest advertised price you can get anywhere else (e.g. expedia).

But, non advertised prices can be lower such as on Hotwire, where you don't know which hotel you are reserving, you only get to choose the price and have to stay wherever Hotwire makes the greatest margin.

If you do find a lower advertised price for a specific hotel, you can usually call their 800# and get it price matched and something extra.

http://www.marriott.com/hotel-prices/travel.mi

http://www.starwoodhotels.com/bestrate/index.html

http://hiltonworldwide.hilton.com/en/ww/ourbestrates/guarant...

http://www.hyatt.com/hyatt/specials/offers/offer-details_hot...

https://www.ihg.com/hotels/us/en/customer-care/lowest-intern...

The catch, in my anecdotal experience, is that third parties have terrible integration with the hotels. In some cases, they fax a reservation using a company credit card, to pay on your behalf. End result is some percent of the time, this gets messed up and you end up dealing with an annoyed person on check in that sometimes ends up having to get the agency on the line to sort it out.

Same for flight bookings. I've never found the attraction of booking through third parties; it only adds a failure point. Maybe small or specialized agencies are the exception, like Amex's travel service (which, I think, used a platform like Expedia's, but they had fantastic phone options and would always go figure stuff out on my behalf.)

I agree in many cases, but two cases in which I book through the third-party sites:

1. For hotels, where the hotel itself doesn't actually have an online-booking system. Not very common in the U.S., but common among smaller hotels in Europe. Often a third party (most often booking.com) is the only way to book these hotels online.

2. For flights, where Orbitz or Expedia are able to put together a multi-airline itinerary that I can't get those airlines' own sites to return. The last time I used Orbitz was for this reason: it was able to come up with a round-trip ATL-CPH with Delta one way and KLM the other way, with a good price and times that were convenient for me. The fare rules work because they're partner airlines (so it ends up billed as a round-trip, not two one-ways), but I couldn't manage to get either the KLM or Delta websites to offer me that combination, despite quite a bit of fiddling.

Indeed, the only thing I use the third-party sites for is search. For example, to get a quick overview of which airlines have flights to the place I'm going to, or what the available hotels are and their relative prices. And then I go and book directly through the airline or hotel. The price difference is usually minimal or non-existent, and it drastically reduces opportunities for problems.

> The catch, in my anecdotal experience, is that third parties have terrible integration with the hotels. In some cases, they fax a reservation using a company credit card, to pay on your behalf.

I know for a fact Hotel Tonight does this, as I've seen the fax from the front desk clerk with their corporate mastercard number (partly redacted) on it.

As a world traveler the only time I've ever had with booking a hotel is when I used a hotels own website. One advantage of using a third party site is better ui. And if you use a large enough site, they have their own customer support

I've always found that if I know and book ahead of time I can get a massive deal on hotels simply by calling the front desk. It's usually 10-30% cheaper than booking with any service online. I'm not sure why this is the case but if there's a service that can get me front desk rates, I'd be more than happy to switch.

Hell, even if the direct hotel booking is a little more expensive, I still go that route. I've been burned by hotels referring me to Expedia when problems arose. They can't do that when you're direct booked. I still use the travels sites for shopping purposes, then visit the hotel's site directly when I've made a decision.

(Maybe I should be staying at better places)

hotels.com is owned by Expedia

Yes, all the sites use the same backend. But customers just like you are fiercely loyal to their brand.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com