Maybe it's just me, but the OTA aggregators seem like a relic from a bygone era at this point. Its been at least a decade since I've seen a hotel that didn't have their own online booking system, and using it guarantees you will never have any issues that the hotel themselves can't (or won't) handle. It seems like these companies are existing solely on inertia and marketing at this point; there's not only zero benefit to using them, but they can and do completely screw you over and ruin vacations on a regular basis.
I mostly book through booking or hotels.com and I find that they make it easy to do comparison and discovery, they are often cheaper than the source website, and even large international chains can have booking systems that are cumbersome enough to to drop and return to booking.com and finish it there. I have never been to a hotel that considered a booking.com booking as "less" than one from their own system.
I think they have value as a discovery method and aggregator. If you know the hotel you want, yes you're better off going direct, but if you want to browse its nice to have.
First-party websites to book directly + better aggregators/search like ChatGPT are eroding this value pretty rapidly though. If they leaned into comprehensive trip planning they might have a shot of staying relevant.
>If you know the hotel you want, yes you're better off going direct, but if you want to browse its nice to have.
I see this in a bunch of the responses, that these sites are great for "discovery". I don't have a preference one way or another, but I'm wondering... why not, say, Google Maps? Go to the locale you want, search for hotels, voila. There's your discovery.
Booking is the only site I've ever found that allows you to search by "has bathtub". It's not always correct - they might have some rooms with tubs, but not all - but it's a damned sight better than random chance or visiting every single hotel website.
I honestly just use every tool I can when trip planning: Google, Booking.com, airbnb when applicable, Expedia, Delta trips, even my credit card company has a link.
Similar to the other responder, I think Booking.com had the best dataset for some random features like a hot tub (specifically big hot tub, not bathtub). The problem is that it only searches for hotels with the big hot tub, if you want that actual room you usually need to book direct.
It also yielded some good results for Japanese ryokan (traditional spa hotel), more so than the other search engines. Google is fine as well but tends to lean more towards big hotel chains IME.
Not saying its perfect (nobody does ryokan well at all), and the more familiar I get the more I'll tend to book direct, its just one search tool out of many. If it went away tomorrow I wouldn't miss it terribly.
If something goes wrong with the hotel own booking system, most of the time, the costumer ends up taking the burden for fixing it.
If something goes wrong, and I book through booking.com I'm protected. So, unless I'm getting a big discount to use the hotel's own booking system, exactly why shouldn't I use booking.com?
If you book a hotel directly and something gets screwed up, the hotel is able to change your reservation or refund you directly.
If you book through a third party, the hotel can't help you since they don't have your money, nor can they change the reservation since they didn't make it, the third party did. You have to talk to the third party, and then the third party has to talk to the hotel. It adds additional steps for all interactions.
"If something goes wrong with the hotel own booking system..." - the third party is using an interface into the hotel's own booking system, and that can introduce problems of its own.
Booking sites like expedia and booking.com sell a certain kind of inventory: "bulk" inventory or last-minute unbooked inventory. It's why you don't generally get loyalty points or other benefits when using these sites.
To put it another way: the hotels are the customer, not the guests. Expedia/booking.com are helping the hotels with inventory management. A guest is just the way these sites offset their costs.
> A spokesperson said in early July that they were based on an incorrect interpretation of previous rulings. “It is absolutely nonsense to claim that Booking.com has artificially inflated prices.”
Maybe it's just me, but the OTA aggregators seem like a relic from a bygone era at this point. Its been at least a decade since I've seen a hotel that didn't have their own online booking system, and using it guarantees you will never have any issues that the hotel themselves can't (or won't) handle. It seems like these companies are existing solely on inertia and marketing at this point; there's not only zero benefit to using them, but they can and do completely screw you over and ruin vacations on a regular basis.
I mostly book through booking or hotels.com and I find that they make it easy to do comparison and discovery, they are often cheaper than the source website, and even large international chains can have booking systems that are cumbersome enough to to drop and return to booking.com and finish it there. I have never been to a hotel that considered a booking.com booking as "less" than one from their own system.
Hotel's own website are also often the most expensive options. Which is why consumer goes to other site to sign up.
I think they have value as a discovery method and aggregator. If you know the hotel you want, yes you're better off going direct, but if you want to browse its nice to have.
First-party websites to book directly + better aggregators/search like ChatGPT are eroding this value pretty rapidly though. If they leaned into comprehensive trip planning they might have a shot of staying relevant.
>If you know the hotel you want, yes you're better off going direct, but if you want to browse its nice to have.
I see this in a bunch of the responses, that these sites are great for "discovery". I don't have a preference one way or another, but I'm wondering... why not, say, Google Maps? Go to the locale you want, search for hotels, voila. There's your discovery.
My wife doesn't do showers. She takes baths.
Booking is the only site I've ever found that allows you to search by "has bathtub". It's not always correct - they might have some rooms with tubs, but not all - but it's a damned sight better than random chance or visiting every single hotel website.
I honestly just use every tool I can when trip planning: Google, Booking.com, airbnb when applicable, Expedia, Delta trips, even my credit card company has a link.
Similar to the other responder, I think Booking.com had the best dataset for some random features like a hot tub (specifically big hot tub, not bathtub). The problem is that it only searches for hotels with the big hot tub, if you want that actual room you usually need to book direct.
It also yielded some good results for Japanese ryokan (traditional spa hotel), more so than the other search engines. Google is fine as well but tends to lean more towards big hotel chains IME.
Not saying its perfect (nobody does ryokan well at all), and the more familiar I get the more I'll tend to book direct, its just one search tool out of many. If it went away tomorrow I wouldn't miss it terribly.
Booking.com is great for discovery. They tend to have better prices and better conditions than booking direct.
Also many small guesthouses and hotels do not have online booking, although often they have enquiry forms.
If something goes wrong with the hotel own booking system, most of the time, the costumer ends up taking the burden for fixing it.
If something goes wrong, and I book through booking.com I'm protected. So, unless I'm getting a big discount to use the hotel's own booking system, exactly why shouldn't I use booking.com?
I've generally heard exactly the opposite.
If you book a hotel directly and something gets screwed up, the hotel is able to change your reservation or refund you directly.
If you book through a third party, the hotel can't help you since they don't have your money, nor can they change the reservation since they didn't make it, the third party did. You have to talk to the third party, and then the third party has to talk to the hotel. It adds additional steps for all interactions.
"If something goes wrong with the hotel own booking system..." - the third party is using an interface into the hotel's own booking system, and that can introduce problems of its own.
Booking sites like expedia and booking.com sell a certain kind of inventory: "bulk" inventory or last-minute unbooked inventory. It's why you don't generally get loyalty points or other benefits when using these sites.
To put it another way: the hotels are the customer, not the guests. Expedia/booking.com are helping the hotels with inventory management. A guest is just the way these sites offset their costs.
[dead]
> A spokesperson said in early July that they were based on an incorrect interpretation of previous rulings. “It is absolutely nonsense to claim that Booking.com has artificially inflated prices.”
Interesting angle