Hospitality eBusiness Strategies

HeBS digital Blog

Posts Tagged ‘hotel online distribution’

Will the Hospitality Industry Tango with Tingo?

Monday, April 9th, 2012

By Max Starkov

The following article is Max Starkov’s latest contribution to the “Successful eMarketing” blog on HOTELS magazine’s website.

On March 21, 2012, TripAdvisor subsidiary Smarter Travel Media launched Tingo.com, a new hotel-booking site. This new OTA site is an affiliate of Expedia.com, which means the site uses Expedia’s inventory feed and pricing and receives part of Expedia’s booking commissions. Tingo’s main value proposition and big selling point is that it will refund the difference to customers if the price of the room they have booked on Tingo.com actually drops after booking.

The press release announcing the launch of Tingo.com had the provocative title: “Travelers Overpaid Millions for Hotel Rooms in 2011: Tingo Comes to the Rescue.” It further proclaimed that “In 2011 alone, Americans could have saved nearly $314 million if they had had access to a site like Tingo.com.”

How anti-industry is a statement like this one? It makes the industry look like a bunch of corporate thieves who are cheating and overcharging the traveling public to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Tingo.com to the rescue, indeed!

Back in February of this year I published an article on HOTELS Magazine, “Can TripAdvisor Transform Itself From an Industry Foe to an Industry Friend?,” in which I argued that after its “divorce” from Expedia, TripAdvisor still remained a foe of the industry and that TripAdvisor had to make a clear choice: Continue its anti-industry, pro-OTA, and one-sided pro-travel consumer policy and business model; or dramatically change its corporate attitude toward the industry and its business model.

I argued that TripAdvisor needed to overhaul its business model and make the site industry- and advertiser-friendly. It needed to dramatically improve its perception in the industry and invest in online self-serve campaign management technology to enable micro-campaign management for the highly-fragmented hospitality industry, including opening the “Show Prices” functionality to smaller and mid-sized hotel companies, independent hotels and resorts.

I warned that if TripAdvisor failed to do that, it would end 2012 more like a 600-pound gorilla from its current 800-pound gorilla status, and by 2014 would be reduced to mere 400-pound-gorilla status.

My old business friend Frances Kiradjian, Founder & Chair at The Boutique & Lifestyle Lodging Association, provided the following feedback to my article: ”Agree with your synopsis and hope that TripAdvisor takes your suggestions seriously. This was actually very generous of you to point them in the right direction.”

 

So how does Tingo.com fit into TripAdvisor’s strained relations with the hospitality Industry?

With the launch of what de facto is another OTA website, it is clear that TripAdvisor has not paid any attention to my advice and continues on its path as a pro-OTA and anti-industry player.

I truly expected that after its “liberation” from Expedia, TripAdvisor would try everything possible to repair its strained relations with the industry and try to embrace the industry and send a strong, unequivocal message to hoteliers: “I am no longer an OTA subsidiary and I am an industry friend. I am now part of the direct online distribution channel and I am on your side. I will work with you to understand your need periods and help whenever possible. I am unbiased and will work with you to improve the quality and credibility of customer reviews and help you address customer concerns. I will help you reach travelers interested in your destination and in your hotel.”

None of the above happened and TripAdvisor has continued conducting business as usual. Now comes Tingo.com, an affiliate of Expedia, TripAdvisor’s former master. This is it? Who advises this newly independent public company?

 

Let’s analyze the viability of Tingo.com

To begin with, Tingo.com has no unique content, pricing or inventory of its own. Its only value proposition – refunds when and if a lower hotel rate becomes available – is based on factors that are at the mercy of the other OTAs and the travel marketplace as a whole. Expedia could replicate Tingo’s offering within five minutes or less. Orbitz already offers and widely publicizes similar automatic refunds.

Tingo.com’s business model does not take into consideration the following:

  • Hospitality is experiencing rising travel demand and miniscule new supply, which results in increases in all three performance metrics. As reported by STR, in February 2012, which by default is the lowest of the low seasons for most of the country, the U.S. hotel industry’s occupancy rose 3.5, its ADR was up 4% and RevPAR increased 7.7%.
  • With travel demand rising, how many hotels will lower their rates to begin with? Increasing rates over time as occupancy rates rise is the prevailing trend today, not the other way around.
  • In addition, booking windows, i.e., how well in advance people book hotels, have shrunk to their lowest point ever, due to the full transparency of the online channel and the exploding mobile channel, where 65%-80% of all mobile hotel bookings are made for the same day!

In other words, Tingo.com’s main selling point – that it will refund the difference to customers if the price of the room they have booked drops after booking – is practically mute and irrelevant.

There is a bigger picture here that involves the fierce battle of the industry with the OTAs. Rising demand means that the OTAs’ merchant commissions are already shrinking due to fierce push back from the major hotel brands and the industry as a whole. Contracts with the OTAs are up for renewal this year and the major hotel brands will be pushing for commissions below 15%. Hilton has already suspended its merchant agreement with Orbitz over commissions, last room availability, etc. Independent hoteliers would not be willing to pay merchant commissions above 20%.

Sooner or later, to counteract decreased merchant commissions and the growth of travel demand as the economy improves, OTAs will be forced to re-institute booking fees that were dropped back in 2009.  How would the Tingo.com business model work when there are non-refundable booking fees involved?

I am not even discussing how the paltry 7%-8% affiliate commission would allow Tingo.com to be a sustainable business venture. The cost of establishing a new travel consumer brand is staggering! In my view, Tingo.com will most probably not “explode” as a new travel site, but linger out there.

 

Tingo.com is another wrinkle in TripAdvisor’s confused business model:

As discussed, the launch of Tingo.com is a direct affirmation of TripAdvisor’s continued anti-industry and pro-OTA business model. Analysis of this business model clearly shows how confused and misguided TripAdvisor is as a company:

Focusing on a handful of big OTA and Hotel Brand Advertisers

The vast majority of current advertisers on TripAdvisor are big OTAs and a handful of major hotel brands. More than 80% of TripAdvisor revenues come from the “Show Prices” CPC program, which is exclusive to major OTAs and hotel brands.

TripAdvisor’s requirements for minimum advertising spend practically exclude all of the 52,000 U.S. hotel properties from display advertising and the “Show Prices” CPC program on the site. There is no online self-serve campaign management technology to enable micro-campaign management for the highly-fragmented hospitality industry. Compare this to Google AdWords, where any hotel can become an advertiser and launch live paid search campaigns within 1.5 minutes!

At the same time, more than 95% of advertising dollars in hospitality are controlled by the property and at the property level. You can do the math: at a typical 4% from room revenue spend on marketing and advertising and $107.2 billion room revenue in 2011 for the U.S. hospitality industry, the annual advertising budget controlled at the property level is in excess of $4.3 billion! Yet 52,000 U.S. hotels and more than 300,000 hotels worldwide are practically excluded from the main advertising formats on the site.

 

Focusing on “Show Prices” CPC Program

Over the past few years TripAdvisor has turned its “Show Prices” CPC program into the centerpiece of the website. The “Show Prices” availability/pricing widget dominates the website and is smacked right in the center of any property page on the site. As mentioned, more than 80% of TripAdvisor’s advertising revenue comes from the “Show Prices” CPC program.

There is no doubt that TripAdvisor has carved a niche for itself in the “last mile” of the online travel consumer’s travel planning process. But exactly what portion of this “last mile” does TripAdvisor occupy? Is TripAdvisor considered a hotel pricing/availability research tool like Expedia, Kayak.com, etc. by the traveling public? NO!

TripAdvisor is the largest hotel customer review site: This is how travel consumers have perceived the site since its inception in 2000; this is how TripAdvisor describes and promotes itself. Typically traveler consumers visit TripAdvisor after they have selected the hotel or hotels at which they are planning to stay to read what their peers have said about the hotel or hotels they have already selected.

Let’s face it: TripAdvisor is poorly equipped to handle any of the three main criteria in hotel search and hotel selection: hotel location, price and availability. The mapping capabilities of the site pale in comparison to Google Maps or Expedia’s hotel location maps; the depth of information about any hotel is miniscule compared to any major hotel brand or Expedia; the real time availability and pricing functionality on TripAdvisor is from the 1990s and consists of an avalanche of pop-up screens that flood your browser.

This is why travel consumers do their hotel location, availability and price research on meta-search sites like Kayak.com, via search engines like Google, Yahoo and Bing, on major hotel brand sites like Marriott or Hilton, and on OTA sites like Expedia. Once they select the hotel at which they would like to stay, become comfortable with the location and price, and check availability, then and only then they go to TripAdvisor to read customer reviews.

In my view, this is the reason why only a few of the visitors to TripAdvisor ever click on the “Show Prices” functionality. Naturally this is proprietary information that is not being disclosed in the public domain, but I believe the “Show Prices” click-through rates (CTR) are far below the similar CTR rates on Expedia, Kayak.com or Marriott.com. In other words, only a small fraction of the total number of visitors click on the “Show Prices” widget, compared to people who click on Expedia.com’s or Marriott.com’s search/availability/price widgets. I do not believe TripAdvisor’s “Show Prices” CTR rate is above 1% of the total number of visitors.

In other words, “Show Prices” serves less than 1% of unique visitors to the site and TripAdvisor is not monetizing the remaining 99%.

In conclusion, I believe Tingo.com is another declaration of TripAdvisor’s misguided and confused anti-industry and pro-OTA business model. By failing to position itself as an industry friend, TripAdvisor is denying itself access to the bulk of advertising dollars in the hospitality industry, controlled at the property level. As for Tingo.com, initiatives like this one further alienate the industry from TripAdvisor and ultimately will weaken further the site’s market position.

Click here to read the entire blog article on HOTELSMag.com, as well as a full selection of Max Starkov’s blog articles on hot industry topics and latest trends in the online channel in hospitality (FREE registration required).

 

About the Author:

Max Starkov is President & CEO of HeBS Digital (Hospitality eBusiness Strategies), the hospitality industry’s leading direct online channel strategy, full-service digital marketing and website design firm (www.HeBSdigital.com)

The OTA Billboard Effect or the Lazy Man’s Approach to Hotel Distribution

Monday, August 1st, 2011

The following article is Max Starkov’s latest contribution to the “Successful eMarketing” blog on HOTELS magazine’s website

The existence of the so-called billboard effect is not a new marketing phenomenon. It has existed long before the online channel became a reality. As confirmed by many studies, any marketing exposure by a hotel produces a billboard effect:  when you launch a banner advertising campaign; when you purchase a full-page ad in the New York Times travel section; when you launch a paid search campaign on Google, etc.

The OTA Billboard Effect

Lately Expedia reps have been aggressively using a new Cornell Hospitality Report, namely “Search, OTAs and Online Booking: An Expanded Analysis of the Billboard Effect” to convince hoteliers that they should use Expedia in order to generate more bookings from the hotel’s own website due to the so-called “Billboard Effect.”

The Cornell Report, based on data from Expedia and InterContinental Hotel Group (IHG) from 2008-2010, is a continuation of a previous report on the subject, heavily supported by Expedia. The report’s analysis determined that when an IHG property was listed on the first results page of Expedia, this created an increase of between 7.5% and 14.1% in bookings for the same property on IHG’s own brand website. In other words, this is a confirmation for Expedia’s billboard effect, which hoteliers should take into consideration when griping against the 25% plus merchant OTA commission. When these “billboard effect bookings” are taken into consideration, Expedia’s commission “would effectively be reduced to single digits,” states the Cornell Report.

Hoteliers, rejoice! We have found the perfect recipe for success: we do nothing as far as marketing the property website is concerned. Instead, we plaster Expedia with our sales promotions and wait for the travel consumers to come to our own website and book.

As discussed, the billboard effect is not strictly an OTA territory. In my view, the Cornell Hospitality Report is a one-sided research project, very proactively supported by Expedia, similar to the first report on the billboard effect published in 2009. Cornell, the finest hospitality institution in the U.S., should know better than to come up with this half-baked “scientific” research, which does not account for the complexities of hotel distribution as well as the “digital information cloud” we all live in and the resulting marketing and distribution channel convergence which directly affects the purchasing habits of today’s hyper-interactive travel consumers.

This report makes conclusions that do not take into account, among many other things, the following:

Complex Travel Planning Patterns in Hospitality

Many surveys show that people are shopping around on a number of hotel and travel websites before narrowing down their search. Typically in hospitality, these sites include a hotel search on a search engine e.g. Google (65% market share), an OTA website, TripAdvisor, the hotel’s own website, etc. Therefore jumping from an OTA website to a hotel branded website and vice versa is at least partially due to particular travel research patterns unique to the users and not due to the so-called billboard effect:

  • Step 1: “I always search on Google first where I identify a property I like”
  • Step 2: “I go to Expedia and see what the rate for this property is”
  • Step 3: “I visit TripAdvisor to read my peer reviews for this hotel”
  • Step 4: “I visit the hotel website and book if I like the location, rate and what I have read and seen about this hotel”

The Rate Parity Effect

Typically, and Internet users already know this well, Expedia places a hotel on the first search results page when it has a particularly good rate for this property e.g. a special rate, a 24-hour or a 72-hour sale. In this day and age of strict rate parity, particularly in the case of branded hotels as in the new Cornell study, the hotel has, due to mandated rate parity, the same special rate or the same 24-hour or 72-hour promotion on its own website. So the fact that there is a natural uptick in bookings on the hotel website during the exact same time the hotel is on Expedia’s first search results page is at least partially due to the rate promotion, and not due to the so-called billboard effect.

Let’s Examine Expedia’s Billboard Effect

So how big is the exposure for an average property on Expedia.com? In June 2011, Expedia.com had 19,066,141 unique visitors (Compete.com). In the same time, Expedia featured 135,000 hotels on its website, i.e. 141 unique visitors per hotel per month. In other words, on average, the customer engagements any hotel can get on Expedia.com is with 141 unique visitors.

Naturally, Expedia.com’s users are not evenly spread among the 135,000 hotels featured on the site. Some hotels get more visits based on property location, brand recognition, rate, or some users visit multiple property listings on the site.  Whatever the case is, even if you believe that your hotel gets double and triple and quadruple attention by Expedia users, this number pales in comparison to the potential customer engagements you could achieve via the direct online channel.

We believe the billboard effect from a property’s exposure on Expedia.com is limited in scope, and has a far smaller effect on the hotel revenues than the property’s paid and SEO initiatives on Google, email marketing, mobile marketing, website optimizations, etc.

Let’s Examine the Billboard Effect from the Direct Online Channel

By utilizing the direct online channel and multi-channel marketing initiatives, any 100- to 150-room independent or branded hotel on average:

  • Should have a minimum of 6,000-10,000 visitors to the hotel website/month
  • Should send out a monthly email marketing piece to the hotel opt-in list of min 5,000-10,000 email recipients
  • Should get an exposure via paid search:
    • min 1,500-2,000 visits from PPC ($1,250-$1,500 monthly budget)
    • over 100,000 -133,000 free impressions (people who have seen the PPC listing) at 1.5% CTR
  • Should get at least 500,000 impressions from its Google Re-Marketing/Re-Targeting campaign
  • Should communicate at least 3-4 times/week with its 1,000-1,500 Twitter followers
  • Should communicate at least 3-4 times a week with its 750-1,250 fans on Facebook
  • Should get at least 1000 mobile visitors and generate a significant amount of reservation calls from its mobile website

In other words, by unleashing a marketing promotional campaign simultaneously across all available marketing channels, thus producing a compounded effect and far greater returns than each individual marketing initiative, the hotel could realize over 650,000 customer engagements/per month. Many of these will be realized repeatedly with potential customers across different marketing channels, which is the best recipe for customer conversion.

Compare this Direct Online Channel billboard effect with the one via Expedia!

Click here to read the entire blog article on HOTELSMag.com, and decide for yourself whether the OTA Billboard effect makes any sense for the hospitality industry.