The mighty Booking.com has stamped its foot and some partners are worried, but Charlie Osmond says the additional publicity has been good for business

Last week, a letter from Booking.com to hotel partners was leaked to hotel marketing and blog community HotelSpeak. The letter called for them to end their relationship with TripTease, a software-as-as-service startup. Yesterday we analysed what the spat means in a story titled: Why booking.com versus TripTease puts truth and transparency on trial. Today we publish more insights from Charlie Osmond, the start-up’s founder who likes to be known as the ‘chief tease’.

EFT: Some hotels argue that if TripTease’s Price Check widget does not allow hotels to display Booking.com rates then it loses appeal. How do you see the product developing if this ends up being the case?

CO: Interesting! As you know we removed Booking from the widget as a temporary measure last week. This was to hold Booking from their threats of delisting some independent hotels. A lot of hoteliers asked us to return Booking to the widget, but this was mostly because they felt the threats had been in poor taste. As for whether the widget is less powerful, Jacques, one of our data analysts has been tracking the results intently. There is no evidence to suggest anyone has suffered a reduction in conversion rate. Indeed, it appears some hotels may have benefited from Booking’s move. It's amazing just how mighty our little widget is and the months of fine-tuning have really helped us understand what information different guests need at what stage in the booking funnel.

EFT: The last piece of data was that you have 6,000+ hotels using TripTease. What sort of response have you had from hotels to the booking.com letter?

CO: I’m delighted to report that since you read that, we’ve now added a further two thousand properties. Price Check is live on over 8,000 hotel websites and our inbound leads in November (mostly thanks to the additional publicity) were six times higher than October. The response to this hiatus has been delightful. There’s an overwhelming sense of support. ‘I don't want someone else controlling what I show on my website,’ is the feedback we keep hearing via our customer success team.

The response to this hiatus has been delightful

But please don’t get me wrong. I recognise the important role that OTAs can play in the market and the value they can add to the online travel experience. Booking can be a fabulous force for good in the market, but so too can openness and transparency for all. We’re simply in favour of doing the right thing for the consumer.

EFT: What is the rationale for the decision not to let users click out to the OTA site? Could that not be viewed as frustrating for users?

CO: We don’t click out for two important reasons. First – we believe in improving the connections between hotels and guests. That tends to start with direct bookings, so the widget is designed to provide the information people need at the right moment, but not to encourage them to leave the hotel website, else that direct booking may not occur.

We are not an OTA advertising company

Secondly, we are not an OTA advertising company. That is not our purpose. Booking has a huge marketing budget and their adverts are clickable just about everywhere online. They don’t need us to add to that.

EFT: Is the TripTease widget displayed selectively ie: only when the hotel price is lower than the OTAs price?

CO: We display the widget when the hotel is in parity, when the hotel is cheaper and when the hotel is more expensive. Interestingly we have also noticed (across millions of widget displays) that hotels can see an increase in direct bookings even if the OTA is breaking parity and undercutting the direct price. After years of assuming direct is the most expensive channel, I think people just want the peace of mind that the hotel is not out of whack with the market.

EFT: One of the points that booking makes is that the rates aren’t accessed in a way that is approved by them. Is this a fair comment and can you elaborate on how you access your rates?

CO: The precise point I think you’re referring to is: ‘We believe that TripTease is unlawfully accessing Booking.com’s data in order to collate the Booking.com information shown by the widget.' We gather rates using a number of techniques and sources.

We aren't doing anything wrong or illegal

It is important to use a blended methodology to ensure high levels of accuracy (the last thing we’d want to do is misquote the truth). Many of our approaches to rate gathering are the exact same that OTAs themselves use. We’ve taken extensive legal advice. We aren't doing anything wrong or illegal. We have proactively approached Booking.com and asked for a meeting to discuss this matter. It's our intention to find a resolution that's in the best interest of the consumer.