OTA Discussion in UK

[gillumhouse]

I met Chris & Annie on Bedposts - the UK version of this. Thanks Cambs for telling me about it. It is as lively as here - but a closed forum so only innkeepers van get on it.
This link was posted today - a good article telling the PUBLIC like it is http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/11571349/Online-hotel-booking-agents-accused-of-bullying-practices.html
Then a now retired innkeeper posted this to the others about OTAs:
The issue here, I think, is that whilst the OTAs ought to be your booking agents, which is how you and any right minded person would expect to view them, the Contract you all have with B.com is not an Agency Contract, it is a Partnership Contract, and indeed, B.com themselves use the term 'partners' for hoteliers.
In a partnership, they are not working for you, you are working together, each taking control of one part of a project. Finding guests and filling bed spaces is B.com's part of the project and looking after guests when they arrive is your part of the project. You are not expected to be involved in any part of the booking process (the OTA's domain) until the guest crosses your doorstep.

The Contract you have all signed up to is worded on the the basic premise that the guests are guests of B.com. This being the case, I don't think you can claim that B.com is intercepting mail between you and your guests. It stands to reason that B.com has a duty to pass on any information from hoteliers that guests need to know, for example, you might want to write to advise guests about roadworks outside your door on the day they arrive. B.com would have a duty of care to their guests to pass this information on, and B.com enables this to happen via the new extranet process.
I feel that any ulterior motive for introducing this scheme is irrelevant from a legal standpoint, although I don't doubt that B.com has had a good chuckle.

Sadly, back in the day when I was in business and we all discovered the advantage of using OTAs, ie., pay a bit of commission and get ourselves better noticed than our competitors, we could play the game, I played it too, I closed out my rooms to online booking when I was sure I could fill my rooms myself and used them extensively in the quieter periods. This was not good for the business of the OTAs but they obviously trusted their long term plan.

As more of our competitors felt forced to sign up to the OTAs in the quieter times, we found that filling our rooms ourselves became much harder, and the OTAs were able to dominate in Search. We were lucky, we were in business when I could play the game, but that game is over.

The very sad fact is that so many of you have signed up to the OTAs, that the level competition playing field of personal advertising, reputation and word of mouth has almost ceased to exist. It raced towards extinction when I and most of you 'courted' the private playing fields owned by OTAs, and we did this to gain an advantage over our competitors.

The free playing field is still there, badly neglected and poorly signposted, so guests unless they are seasoned travellers often don't know where to look for it.
The level playing field is back now although it is no longer free, it is the one that is wholly owned by OTAs who monopolise the booking process. The only difference between competition now and over a decade ago is that there are no games left to play and profit has been slashed.

As one of those who played the game and left the business before we got to this position, I think I owe you all an apology.

 

[Morticia]

Things that bother me include ta doing the bullying by stating very clearly on their website that they have no price information about your property if you don't sign up with one of their partners
That's negative advertising.
If they don't have it, lose that section of the listing.
Booking states you have no availability once you sell out of the rooms you allotted to them to force you to give them all of your rooms.
They also claim 'lowest prices on the internet' and may knock a dollar off your actual price. And yes, if you have a seasonal price change, they do show the price for the higher season and draw a line thru it and show the actual price as a discounted rate. (I have to find out if I can do that on my own booking engine.)
Do they bring in guests who might not have found us? Yes. Are these guests the best fit? Maybe not.
The article is absolutely correct that if you book thru one of those sites you get the worst room available. It's happened to us several times. (No, I don't use those sites to book but someone does.)

 

[Morticia]

Maybe you should remove the innkeeper's comments. I just realized you said the other forum is password protected. Maybe they wouldn't want their comments in the wild. Even without attribution.

 

[Generic]

Things that bother me include ta doing the bullying by stating very clearly on their website that they have no price information about your property if you don't sign up with one of their partners
That's negative advertising.
If they don't have it, lose that section of the listing.
Booking states you have no availability once you sell out of the rooms you allotted to them to force you to give them all of your rooms.
They also claim 'lowest prices on the internet' and may knock a dollar off your actual price. And yes, if you have a seasonal price change, they do show the price for the higher season and draw a line thru it and show the actual price as a discounted rate. (I have to find out if I can do that on my own booking engine.)
Do they bring in guests who might not have found us? Yes. Are these guests the best fit? Maybe not.
The article is absolutely correct that if you book thru one of those sites you get the worst room available. It's happened to us several times. (No, I don't use those sites to book but someone does.).

You know there are other games you can pay. For example, don't give them your cheapest room and instead of having the lowest price room... you have one that is cheaper. Or give a different minimum stay. Or sell your rooms as run-of-house and not a specific room.
When we put ourselves back on the OTAs (we changed from Rezo to Reskey and had to get our own contracts) we decided to put our rooms as hotel style on some of the sites, so we can choose what room they get and we can move them around. It's a flexibility we don't always have with our own reservations which are specific to room.

 

[souslechene]

I am not so sure about what is said.
Booking's terms & conditions (for visitors) mention:
"From the point at which you make your reservation, we act solely as an intermediary between you and the accommodation, transmitting the details of your reservation to the relevant accommodation provider and sending you a confirmation email for and on behalf of the accommodation provider."
On owner's side:
"2.5.2 By making a reservation through the Platforms a direct contract (and therefore legal relationship) is created solely between the Accommodation and the Guest (the "Guest Reservation"). "
From this, we should conclude that data about the customer belongs to the hotel (as said after a deep study by hotel journalist here in France)

 

[Morticia]

Things that bother me include ta doing the bullying by stating very clearly on their website that they have no price information about your property if you don't sign up with one of their partners
That's negative advertising.
If they don't have it, lose that section of the listing.
Booking states you have no availability once you sell out of the rooms you allotted to them to force you to give them all of your rooms.
They also claim 'lowest prices on the internet' and may knock a dollar off your actual price. And yes, if you have a seasonal price change, they do show the price for the higher season and draw a line thru it and show the actual price as a discounted rate. (I have to find out if I can do that on my own booking engine.)
Do they bring in guests who might not have found us? Yes. Are these guests the best fit? Maybe not.
The article is absolutely correct that if you book thru one of those sites you get the worst room available. It's happened to us several times. (No, I don't use those sites to book but someone does.).

You know there are other games you can pay. For example, don't give them your cheapest room and instead of having the lowest price room... you have one that is cheaper. Or give a different minimum stay. Or sell your rooms as run-of-house and not a specific room.
When we put ourselves back on the OTAs (we changed from Rezo to Reskey and had to get our own contracts) we decided to put our rooms as hotel style on some of the sites, so we can choose what room they get and we can move them around. It's a flexibility we don't always have with our own reservations which are specific to room.
.

What I noticed last week after I reloaded my rooms for the season was booking shows the guest A room photo when they book. It may not be THE room the guest gets and that may be why I've had a bunch of grouches stay here.
Of course the guest assumes that's the exact room they're getting. Then they go to the website and look up the details.
My confirmation includes a statement that says the room is assigned day of arrival and may be on an upper floor, no elevator. It also includes information that breakfast is NOT a menu, but cooks choice.

 

[2cat_lady]

Things that bother me include ta doing the bullying by stating very clearly on their website that they have no price information about your property if you don't sign up with one of their partners
That's negative advertising.
If they don't have it, lose that section of the listing.
Booking states you have no availability once you sell out of the rooms you allotted to them to force you to give them all of your rooms.
They also claim 'lowest prices on the internet' and may knock a dollar off your actual price. And yes, if you have a seasonal price change, they do show the price for the higher season and draw a line thru it and show the actual price as a discounted rate. (I have to find out if I can do that on my own booking engine.)
Do they bring in guests who might not have found us? Yes. Are these guests the best fit? Maybe not.
The article is absolutely correct that if you book thru one of those sites you get the worst room available. It's happened to us several times. (No, I don't use those sites to book but someone does.).

You know there are other games you can pay. For example, don't give them your cheapest room and instead of having the lowest price room... you have one that is cheaper. Or give a different minimum stay. Or sell your rooms as run-of-house and not a specific room.
When we put ourselves back on the OTAs (we changed from Rezo to Reskey and had to get our own contracts) we decided to put our rooms as hotel style on some of the sites, so we can choose what room they get and we can move them around. It's a flexibility we don't always have with our own reservations which are specific to room.
.

What I noticed last week after I reloaded my rooms for the season was booking shows the guest A room photo when they book. It may not be THE room the guest gets and that may be why I've had a bunch of grouches stay here.
Of course the guest assumes that's the exact room they're getting. Then they go to the website and look up the details.
My confirmation includes a statement that says the room is assigned day of arrival and may be on an upper floor, no elevator. It also includes information that breakfast is NOT a menu, but cooks choice.
.

I was able to link the room with the right picture. I had to since I have three different prices. I didn't want any surprises for guests when they got here, although some of them only read want they want to read.

 

[Morticia]

Things that bother me include ta doing the bullying by stating very clearly on their website that they have no price information about your property if you don't sign up with one of their partners
That's negative advertising.
If they don't have it, lose that section of the listing.
Booking states you have no availability once you sell out of the rooms you allotted to them to force you to give them all of your rooms.
They also claim 'lowest prices on the internet' and may knock a dollar off your actual price. And yes, if you have a seasonal price change, they do show the price for the higher season and draw a line thru it and show the actual price as a discounted rate. (I have to find out if I can do that on my own booking engine.)
Do they bring in guests who might not have found us? Yes. Are these guests the best fit? Maybe not.
The article is absolutely correct that if you book thru one of those sites you get the worst room available. It's happened to us several times. (No, I don't use those sites to book but someone does.).

You know there are other games you can pay. For example, don't give them your cheapest room and instead of having the lowest price room... you have one that is cheaper. Or give a different minimum stay. Or sell your rooms as run-of-house and not a specific room.
When we put ourselves back on the OTAs (we changed from Rezo to Reskey and had to get our own contracts) we decided to put our rooms as hotel style on some of the sites, so we can choose what room they get and we can move them around. It's a flexibility we don't always have with our own reservations which are specific to room.
.

What I noticed last week after I reloaded my rooms for the season was booking shows the guest A room photo when they book. It may not be THE room the guest gets and that may be why I've had a bunch of grouches stay here.
Of course the guest assumes that's the exact room they're getting. Then they go to the website and look up the details.
My confirmation includes a statement that says the room is assigned day of arrival and may be on an upper floor, no elevator. It also includes information that breakfast is NOT a menu, but cooks choice.
.

I was able to link the room with the right picture. I had to since I have three different prices. I didn't want any surprises for guests when they got here, although some of them only read want they want to read.
.

I was able to link the room with the right picture. I had to since I have three different prices. I didn't want any surprises for guests when they got here, although some of them only read want they want to read.

I have one room 'type' on booking. Queen. That covers 4 different rooms but I only sell 2 on booking. I've had to remove 1 of those rooms because booking guests can't walk up stairs. (I say that jokingly, but it's true. They constantly complain about the stairs. Even tho the confirmation states there are stairs.)
I don't want guests knowing what room they get because I reserve the option of moving booking guests if a 'full price' guest wants that room.

 

[Copperhead]

I am not so sure about what is said.
Booking's terms & conditions (for visitors) mention:
"From the point at which you make your reservation, we act solely as an intermediary between you and the accommodation, transmitting the details of your reservation to the relevant accommodation provider and sending you a confirmation email for and on behalf of the accommodation provider."
On owner's side:
"2.5.2 By making a reservation through the Platforms a direct contract (and therefore legal relationship) is created solely between the Accommodation and the Guest (the "Guest Reservation"). "
From this, we should conclude that data about the customer belongs to the hotel (as said after a deep study by hotel journalist here in France).

Wish Booking.com would believe that. Now that they have removed direct email contact with a guest and force us to use their system to exchange with the guest, the messages are not going through. I get a notice that the system failed, try again later.
What I find most interesting is they used the security issue to protect both guest and lodging. Yet they give us the guests CC information.

 

[souslechene]

I am not so sure about what is said.
Booking's terms & conditions (for visitors) mention:
"From the point at which you make your reservation, we act solely as an intermediary between you and the accommodation, transmitting the details of your reservation to the relevant accommodation provider and sending you a confirmation email for and on behalf of the accommodation provider."
On owner's side:
"2.5.2 By making a reservation through the Platforms a direct contract (and therefore legal relationship) is created solely between the Accommodation and the Guest (the "Guest Reservation"). "
From this, we should conclude that data about the customer belongs to the hotel (as said after a deep study by hotel journalist here in France).

Wish Booking.com would believe that. Now that they have removed direct email contact with a guest and force us to use their system to exchange with the guest, the messages are not going through. I get a notice that the system failed, try again later.
What I find most interesting is they used the security issue to protect both guest and lodging. Yet they give us the guests CC information.
.

What I find most interesting is they used the security issue to protect both guest and lodging. Yet they give us the guests CC information.

This is what I argued with them. If they can ensure credit cards are given seculely in clear, why not the emails.
This is all Bullsh-t. The commercial interest of this is fabulous for them and their market position allow them to impose this on us. We loose the link with the client except with significant efforts from us. They own our communication with clients (what happens when you quit Booking ?). Last but not least, they can spy on our conversations.
As a side note, most medias in France recently hailed hotels for winning a battle against Booking on the price parity question. In detail, though, the government competition authorities just approved price parity on all Internet, just removing it on other medias (phone, ...). How are people booking, today ?

 

[gillumhouse]

Maybe you should remove the innkeeper's comments. I just realized you said the other forum is password protected. Maybe they wouldn't want their comments in the wild. Even without attribution..

I will ask if she minds - I can always delete it if she does. I thought it was an interesting statement from one who had done it - and regretted it.
She told me I could even claim ownership - I declined, it is hers.
The discussion there about b.com reminds me of the bandb discussions - we will not be able to make it without them. B.com does not have a foothold here - yet, just a toehold. It is not too late for us.

 

[Generic]

You know that Air does this. Won't let you correspond directly, only through their system. Of course, there are an enormous number of scams running through them.The "Hell" website has loads of them, discussions all around the newspapers, etc.
I would simply add to any reply via Booking or Air that email that is not directly to/from our domain should not be considered confidential as third-parties have access and can read these emails at any time.
If Air or Booking don't like that, then don't do it. It's the truth and people we correspond with should realize it, as such.

 

[anniesguesthouse]

Just to say you are all welcome to come and join the closed forum, (BedPosts) it is UK based but all innkeepers are welcome (not aspiring innkeepers though, just those of us who are already in it up to the neck! )

 

[anniesguesthouse]

You know that Air does this. Won't let you correspond directly, only through their system. Of course, there are an enormous number of scams running through them.The "Hell" website has loads of them, discussions all around the newspapers, etc.
I would simply add to any reply via Booking or Air that email that is not directly to/from our domain should not be considered confidential as third-parties have access and can read these emails at any time.
If Air or Booking don't like that, then don't do it. It's the truth and people we correspond with should realize it, as such..

Oddly enough I don't mind that AirBnB don't share emails, they take the deposit, they can deal with the "oh but I want to cancel..." requests.

 

[gillumhouse]

This was posed on BedPosts as a way to get b.com to LISTEN to us, at least about the withholding of e-mail addresses. Oh, now a new wrinkle - as of May 5, 2015 they will not longer be asking for CVC codes.
One idea that has been posed is a 24-hour shutdown of using b.com and this was posted today -
I go back to my previously-floated idea of a 24-hour strike or day of action. Thoughts or ideas please. If we did come up with something really good, well it could be leaked to the travel media! Kathleen, how about joint action both sides of the pond?
Thoughts? Responses?

 

[2cat_lady]

I'm game. I've called and complained about the alias email addresses. Deaf ears. I do include a message on my reservation template that asks all Booking.com customers to email me directly so that I know they've received my response to their reservation. So far, 2 out of 5 have done that.
No CVC code? Come on, that's ridiculous. If I don't get them from Booking then I'm calling the customer directly by phone. And, if I don't get a response, I'm cancelling the reservation and letting Booking know why. I already had one customer that I had to call twice because I couldn't accomodate her requests (in her emailed alias message). She said she had changed her mind anyways and didn't know how to cancel. After waiting two weeks, I finally called Booking and told them to call her themselves because I had already put the room back to being available.
Will they listen? Who knows, but it's worth a try.

 

[Morticia]

This was posed on BedPosts as a way to get b.com to LISTEN to us, at least about the withholding of e-mail addresses. Oh, now a new wrinkle - as of May 5, 2015 they will not longer be asking for CVC codes.
One idea that has been posed is a 24-hour shutdown of using b.com and this was posted today -
I go back to my previously-floated idea of a 24-hour strike or day of action. Thoughts or ideas please. If we did come up with something really good, well it could be leaked to the travel media! Kathleen, how about joint action both sides of the pond?
Thoughts? Responses?.

I've never gotten the code.
Let me know what date everyone decides to pull their listings.

 

[Lee2014]

This was posed on BedPosts as a way to get b.com to LISTEN to us, at least about the withholding of e-mail addresses. Oh, now a new wrinkle - as of May 5, 2015 they will not longer be asking for CVC codes.
One idea that has been posed is a 24-hour shutdown of using b.com and this was posted today -
I go back to my previously-floated idea of a 24-hour strike or day of action. Thoughts or ideas please. If we did come up with something really good, well it could be leaked to the travel media! Kathleen, how about joint action both sides of the pond?
Thoughts? Responses?.

One idea that has been posed is a 24-hour shutdown of using b.com and this was posted today -
I go back to my previously-floated idea of a 24-hour strike or day of action. Thoughts or ideas please. If we did come up with something really good, well it could be leaked to the travel media! Kathleen, how about joint action both sides of the pond?
Thoughts? Responses?

24 hours? Too short. b.com will just blink their eyes and think about it. Try at least a week.... Day three they will start to worry especially if more start to pull out as the days go by.

 

[Flower]

I am not so sure about what is said.
Booking's terms & conditions (for visitors) mention:
"From the point at which you make your reservation, we act solely as an intermediary between you and the accommodation, transmitting the details of your reservation to the relevant accommodation provider and sending you a confirmation email for and on behalf of the accommodation provider."
On owner's side:
"2.5.2 By making a reservation through the Platforms a direct contract (and therefore legal relationship) is created solely between the Accommodation and the Guest (the "Guest Reservation"). "
From this, we should conclude that data about the customer belongs to the hotel (as said after a deep study by hotel journalist here in France).

Wish Booking.com would believe that. Now that they have removed direct email contact with a guest and force us to use their system to exchange with the guest, the messages are not going through. I get a notice that the system failed, try again later.
What I find most interesting is they used the security issue to protect both guest and lodging. Yet they give us the guests CC information.
.

I wonder if they are stopping us from contacting people as a way to make sure one they get their commission
Two that we do not chat with customer so nothing bad we might say to customer about there booking system. they are scared we might charge a lower rate with customer coming to us directly . they would lose such large commissions. Darn it any way just charge customers 50.00 for use of there directory. that way they would get their cost up front, and so would we.
Why do they not charge customer for using them as their booking guild.? Why take the money from us as commission. I say charge the guest for using there system. Not us we work hard behind the lines while they sit behind a telephone and book. take our money or make us drop our prices for there gain. I often feel if we don't play there game we will be forced out. They all treat us as hotels .
When we sure are not! Our BB Canada charges the customer a cost of $ 6.oo and up when customers call them to book. So we don't have to lower our prices Our price stays the same but customers are charge a small fee for using them. To simple and easy. they book B&Bs through their office and charged for their service . when customer comes to us we charge them for room. I hope that is what I am understanding how BB Canada is working.

 

[Copperhead]

CVC codes were changed a while back. You must request to get them, then they are only available the first time you pull the CC data, then it is lost.
After several attempts to send the first email through their system it seems it went through now several times. - Bet that made the guest thrilled! Well that is if they even got it. I had a question about their dietary request. No reply as of yet.