This is often repeated but I almost never find it to be true in reality. Particularly for non chain hotels, best case scenario is their prices are the same as booking.com but if I go through booking I'll get points and future discounts. This tier is never cheaper booking directly. Chain hotels where I have a non base tier status will sometimes be cheaper but even then usually not.
The chain still makes more money as they can avoid paying the aggregator a commission.
Even if so, the issue I’ve encountered with booking services is a complete lack of options when things go wrong.
I had a situation where the hotel was actively trying to help me, but they had few options because the booking agent (Hotels.com) made it almost impossible to get support. The hotel person patiently stayed on the line with them for almost an hour going through escalation after escalation (I was deeply grateful).
Would have been a 5 minute fix if I’d booked with the hotel, and not every place would be willing to go to these lengths.
I hear you on the points thing. But I’ve started weighing the cost of those points against the likelihood of needing to make changes once I arrive somewhere. If it’s a reputable place that I stay regularly, I’m less worried.
In the case of Hilton it’s 34x per dollar (worth around 20%) and Hyatt 9.5x per dollar also worth around 20% back.
My point is that not every location fits this criteria, and the cost can be very real.
I fully shared your mindset until I had several major issues with smaller places that easily cost more than whatever value the points had.
I’m now more careful about who I use based on where I’m going. There’s still value in the points, no doubt, but risk as well.
Not my experience. In Europe, in low-end hotels / B&B's they will get annoyed.
Wouldn't it be possible to build a decentralized booking.com/expedia alternative based on activity pub?
One thing so, sometimes booking.com is aponsoring fares. Obviously, the hotel cannot match that.
Regarding air travel, the last couple of flights I checked, the was no difference between skyscanner and the airlines directly. With the exception of skyscanner showing you the bare-bone fares where you bring your own seat belt...
I loled but ryanair was considering a "standing only" tier: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/feb/28/ryanair-sta...
Frankly maybe I'd prefer that to cramped seats.
You don't want to take turbulence standing up. The London Underground doesn't take negative g-s, there's no equivalent to brace position should there be an emergency landing, and there are strict certification requirements for how quickly everyone should be able to evacuate.
The same is true about the other stunt fees listed - charge for the toilets and you'll have people peeing in bottles or on the floor.
Moving to one pilot instead of two doesn't yet seem like a cost effective solution as it requires a level of automation that isn't here yet, and definitely not something Ryan can pull off on its own. https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/single-pilot-planes/i...