Do we need another Industry Association?

Surely we have enough associations? Do we really need another one? I think the answer is probably no…if those we have provide greater focus on the re-engineering and industry strategies that are developing as I write. But they don’t.

Corporate travel industry evolution is predominately run by it’s suppliers who then create a further strategic reaction across the rest of the supply chain. It has always been so and sadly decisions are made not by the sellers who attend industry conference but executive well removed from them.

In fact I would say the travel supplier strategist liaise as little with their own salesmen as they do with their customers. In addition the airlines have another vehicle (IATA) who are even more removed from the corporate buyer and justify their existence by introducing policy changes that pay for themselves and earn airlines more money. The money comes from tinkering with the rules that were created by airlines for the airlines and are mainly unknown to the other end of the supply chain. Amongst them are things that impact corporates cash flow data fares and rules.

So what is my point? What I am saying is that the whole industry needs to have input and understanding travel evolution and I do not think this is getting any kind of priority by the existing associations. I think there is still too much smoke and mirrors and too little hard information.

Do not get me wrong. GBTA, ACTE et al all provide a useful and valuable service but how deep do they delve into the shadowy world of industry development. I think the trouble is that they have to be all things to all men. If you rely on supplier income from advertising and sponsorship for your very existence can you really afford to challenge your benefactors? Can you really have those suppliers represented at the very core of your own executive grouping? Although I admire these associations greatly for the excellent job they do in their field I do not think the answer lies with them.

So what else is there? I never thought (in my old life) I would say this but the nearest thing we have is Kevin Mitchell’s Business Travel Coalition. For some reason, as a TMC, I found them rather galling but now I have looked closer I realise a developed model could possibly do the job. It represents a key group of large corporations with little or no outside influencers. The problem is that it is not big enough and needs to be more global. It also needs (in my opinion) more subtlety when dealing with international suppliers.

I guess the organisation I am hoping for is a group of key global corporate customers who are strong enough to win serious attention and prepared to invest both brains and power into understanding and contributing to the market they spend so much money in. Could it possibly happen? I hope so. Otherwise we can continue to evolve the way we currently do which is that suppliers such as Lufthansa and American come up with their own strategies and savvy corporations invest in finding an antidote.

You may think I have a point or you might not. May I suggest you take a look at the conference agendas of the major association players and see how little time has been given to the key issues relating to distribution, regulation and other industry developments?

You don’t get ‘owt for nowt’ in travel distribution.

For those that do not speak Yorkshire English that means anything for nothing and never has that been truer than in corporate travel. The only trouble is that this is exactly what many stakeholders are trying to achieve with alarming and inharmonious results.

Now people sometimes call this the pain of change or evolution but I think it is much more basic than that. I believe very little is changing other than people trying to offload cost to others as they rightly (or wrongly) believe that it no longer belongs with them. This has only recently started because now they cannot increase their charges to absorb this expense as the end customer wont stand for it. Lead price now seems to be everything so everything has to be stripped to the bone. This type of commoditisation is fine if you are prepared to do without something but not if you still demand your content, your credit, your data and all.

So everybody tries to find cheaper and more self serving alternatives. Some even see it as an opportunity to make more money by separating out a product and charging more for it than it costs. For example those suppliers who are now charging extra for Global Distribution System (GDS) booking options and credit card usage. Is the price they are currently paying more or less than what they are going to charge the rest of the supply chain who want these services? Just look at Travel Management Companies (TMCs) and you will see how many turned a potentially disastrous commission cut into a more profitable business model.

I think we all have to go back to basics again and ask ourselves what we want and essentially, what we really do not need. Having done this we should look at all these component parts and ascertain who is currently paying for them and whether we could do it cheaper and more efficiently if we took control and accountability ourselves. I definitely think TMCs could play a broader role in managing these costs for corporations than they do at present. They are after all supposed to be an outsourced consultancy arm of their clients.

The travel distribution model is in a mess and stuck in a previous era. Low cost airlines and commoditisation completely shook up the market but the original infrastructure still remains despite attempts to shift it. Airline Cartels like IATA still hold sway and bodies such as ACTE/NBTA/ITM have not really yet driven constructive dialogue to broker a badly needed re-positioning. To my mind these groups need to get together and call a proper summit on these issues which would surely be more constructive than the same old glad handing bi annual conferences.

Everyone is in defence mode. Some people’s idea of defence is by attacking first. Others try the old head in the sand technique favoured by Ostriches. Most have tunnel vision. We need some clear thinking before we all end up as aggressive poor sighted flightless birds!

GDS/Airline issue. Coming to a head?

This whole issue is not only becoming a little tedious but also beginning to build like a volcano about to erupt. We have had quite a few years of the dormant stage but now the tremors are getting longer, bigger and more frequent.

The first sign of life started 5/6 years ago when airlines like British Airways started charging TMCs fees for booking their lower promotional or short haul flights via the GDS. Their logic seemed to be that, as their profit margins were lower then so should their cost of sale. The point having been made most of those airlines then went to their top TMCs and found a way of giving most of the charges back. Meanwhile the GDS also went to the same all important TMCs and compensated them for the cost through their incentive agreements.

Are there GDS/TMC incentive agreements? Yes there are. Or certainly were and I am practically sure this has not changed in the last couple of years. You see, despite what you may read in the AA Distribution Blog the GDS are locked in a battle with not just the airlines but each other as they make sorties into others markets and buy themselves in. Alongside this all GDS want to be sure that they preserve their near monopoly over unbiased content within the business travel sector, and they are prepared to pay to do so.

These GDS incentives must drive the airlines mad. A key reason for taking commissions and some incentives away from TMCs was because those TMCs used the money to pay their own incentives to clients as well as subsidise necessary unprofitable transactions (rail, car etc.) elsewhere. Now they are dealing with the same thing with the GDS to whom they pay a very large fee only to see big chunks of it passed down the supply chain in incentives to win/keep business.

The problem is how they solve the problem. Like commissions and everything else whatever they do is going to have implications down the line. If you take something away from any intermediary the balance will be rectified somewhere else. Rather like pressing a balloon full of water and finding it bulges elsewhere to compensate for the displacement. The only way cost can be truly saved is if what is taken away does not need to be replaced and we are not quite there yet in travel however much the airlines wish it so.

There has been one major tremor which happened shortly before I retired. The not so shy and retiring Lufthansa decided to break the mould but only in their home market where they enjoyed an unusually dominant position. Much to the howls of GDS, TMCs, corporations et al they started making bookings more expensive if they were not transacted direct or through the certain GDS who had reduced their fees. They ‘enjoyed’ mixed fortunes and their success, or otherwise, depends on who you talk to. From what I saw they lost significant business in certain sectors, antagonised people who were once partners and ended up paying much back in different ways. Talk to them and I am sure they will say it was all wonderful!

As soon as I saw that American Airlines had introduced their own distribution blog I knew that something was going to happen. It is certainly a tremor and could possibly become a significant eruption. To do something like they are planning they had to have an outlet to put out their justifications and propaganda. It started relatively brightly but now anybody can see it for what it is.

From my observations the first rumble has come with AA removing the ability for Orbitz to issue their tickets. In a strange way it made me smile. After all it was not that long ago that airlines around the world seemed to see these OTAs as the answer to combat TMCs. They persuaded themselves that it was just what corporations wanted and expected vast volumes of business to transfer over to these new players. It simply did not, and will not happen for all sorts of good reasons. Now, having lovingly introduced and supported these OTAs they are trying to damage them. Rather like a female praying mantis with it’s mate Make love then eat it.

So. Back to our volcano. Is it going to erupt or not? I think it will but not immediately. Something has to happen as these airlines cannot go on paying this level of fees to the GDS indefinitely and there are now growing alternatives, however basic (and costly to others) they may be. Every other part of the supply chain has reinvented themselves so as to respond to enabling technology, new players and changing clients but not (that I can see) the GDS. They have to adjust prices and action new ways of making money just like the TMCs did. Staying as they are is not an option. Meanwhile they should brace themselves for some variations of the Lufthansa model.

To end with my volcano analogy I would say that there will be no big explosion but more a growing flow of lava that will cover and impact the rest of the chain. GDS cost will be taken away, or at least significantly reduced but will pop up again elsewhere until it finally rests with the customer and their employers. They won’t like it and will probably use their power to demand compensation from the ‘offending’ airline. The end result? Rather like the removal of TMC commission the airlines will make a saving in one area only to find a corresponding cost in another. You see what they need to realise is you can only make a lasting saving by improving on the status quo not just changing it.

A Take on AA Distribution Issues

Isn’t the American Airlines distribution blog interesting? No I mean it without the slightest hint of sarcasm. Obviously it is a propoganda vehicle for getting their point across to all sectors of the market but it does make some good and credible (albeit biased) comment on this key issue.

I find the language they use fascinating as it mirrors their strategy at this particular moment in time. For example they are currently referring to TMCs as ‘Travel Agency Partners’ so one can assume that the very zigzag line that represents their TMC love/hate relationship must be on the ascendancy as they focus on those dastardly GDS. No point in having a go at TMCs and GDS at the same time.

The only downer I have on this blog is that it fails to identify or even pay any lip service to the broader issues and seems rather 'me' centric. What their corporate end customer’s true needs, objectives and arguments do not seem to get much coverage. Perhaps if they focussed more on these and put forward some proposed solutions for debate it might help both their cause and the industry they work in. Mind you this might become a double edged sword as their arguments would need to be compelling.They would also need to think outside their own box which they and most major airlines find far too vexing.

Let me try and give you an example. In the last of their blogs I read on ‘The Beat’ they were trying to say that TMCs choice of GDS was predictable and closely linked to their original owning airline. This is a far too simple assumption and somewhat dated. TMCs choose GDSs for much broader reasons than that although, in the past, there is more credibility in that argument. Now it is more a matter finance, other non air products, trained staff availability, support, global reach, and yes, full content and fares. The GDS have exploited their broader strengths in the markets they were dominant in to maintain that position. They provide things like broader choice, comparison and ancillaries that airlines don't.

Corporates demand that their TMC is kitted out with a booking engine that can provide a total regional and global focussed product for all services including that continental train or local hotel. The TMC responds by searching for a system that meets as many of those demands as possible and then bolts on any extras through their own technology. Preferably a one-stop shop covering as many core products as possible. Not just American Airlines bookings. They need to do this cost effectively and as seamlessly as possible.

What the corporate and their TMCs do not want is to find airlines who cherry pick what fares they put on which GDS thus depriving their travellers from the best prices, availability and choice. Any airline who does this is basically saying that they alone will decide which booking system you will use. Even worse some then impose fee penalties on those TMCs and corporates who have the effrontery not to comply.

So the distribution battle is getting hotter. AA in their blog, are now talking about a test of ‘global’ reach with the GDS. It reminds me of a ‘dare’ game I enjoyed with my friends in the playground all those years ago. I cannot see much benefit for the customer while these two forces slug it out and I am not sure either would come out without a very bloody nose.

Meanwhile what is the TMC doing? Are they just sitting their in a ring side seat or in the corner of their favourite with a towel and gum-shield. No, they cannot afford to do either and you will find the bigger ones are already building alternatives. Their issue is that direct links with numerous different suppliers (there are hundreds, perhaps thousands of them) is a poor but increasingly necessary option to the current few well chosen interfaces, but they need to do it.

One very likely scenario for the future will be the further development and release of these mega multi linked TMC platforms. Sounds familiar? Yes, such an entity is currently called a ‘GDS’.What will that do? It will enable TMCs to put (or deny) whatever content they want in front of whoever they want to see it. It will give them power. It will enable them to go to suppliers and negotiate deals and incentives.Deja vu?

So by trying to destroy one type of GDS the airlines will be creating other, possibly stronger ones. The same way they found removing TMC commissions meant they had to charge lower prices. Good luck to them. I suspect they will need it!