Thursday's Travel InsideOut

Orbitz -- she of pressurized travel transactions -- hopped onto the media/advertising bandwagon in a super-charged way with the relaunch of Trip.com. For those of you who remember the ill-fated and nebulous Trip.com brand under former owner Cendant, we can say that at last Trip.com has a raison d’etre.

Dennis Schaal Blog: Mega, Not Meta, Move: Orbitz Enters Search Business: I wrote several weeks ago that Orbitz would attempt to maximize all of those lookers perusing its shop, take its media business a leap forward and get into the search business, possibly through a merger of some sort with Kayak.

Well, Orbitz, has entered the search business on its own, for now, by relaunching Trip.com as a search business. This fairly huge development was brought to my attention by Tom Botts of the Hudson Crossing Travel Industry Insight blog. Read more

-----

There are more warnings that this could be the Winter of our discontent, with airline bankruptcy filings looming.

Wall Street Journal: Loss at AMR Narrows: American Airlines parent AMR Corp. on Wednesday reported a $390 million second-quarter loss as collapsing travel demand continued to erase gains from lower fuel costs.

The results are the latest evidence that the airline industry is flying through one of its toughest summers ever. The other four large U.S. hub-and-spoke carriers -- Delta Air Lines Inc., UAL Corp.'s United Airlines, Continental Airlines Inc. and US Airways Group Inc. -- also are expected to announce second-quarter losses when they report next week. Read more

-----

United is not alone, of course, in feeling the pinch from and lack of control over credit card fees. Even federal agencies haven’t been able to negotiate lower fees from the banking kingmakers of plastic. (Note: the story below inaccurately says that United “last month” began passing along its fees to some travel agencies. Actually, the initiative is slated to begin July 20.)

New York Times: Card Fees Pit Retailers Against Banks: The most profitable item at Patricia Orzano’s 7-Eleven store on Long Island is coffee. Slurpees are a distant second.

But as more customers use plastic to pay for even small purchases like these, she has watched a growing share of her revenue vanish in a stream of credit and debit card fees that retailers say raise the price of goods and sharply lift the cost of doing business. Read more

-----

AirTran claims it’s the first carrier to install Wi-Fi throughout its fleet, and it offers tips about onboard-surfing protocol. I can’t wait until airlines allow passengers to use their cellphones during flights, and I’m looking forward to those yakety-yak-yak do’s and don’ts, too.

Yapta: AirTran the First to Establish "Internetiquette": AirTran Airways announced on Tuesday that it’s the first airline to equip its entire fleet (136 aircraft) with Wi-Fi. The cost for access is $9.95 for flights under three hours, $12.95 for flights longer than that and $7.95 for Blackberry/iPhone access. Read more

-----

Kayak, Airfarewatchdog.com, Hotwire and Yapta good, says Consumer Reports. Expedia and Orbitz price guarantees, not so much.

Consumer Reports: Travel Price Guarantees Come Up Short: Whether it's for a hotel, a cruise, or the fare to get you there, many travel sites offer a "best price guarantee," and will "refund you the difference" to match any lower price you can find. Some sites, such as Delta, will also throw in a travel voucher for up to $100. Read more

-----


Arthur Frommer looks askance at cruising. After all, it’s not “travel,” he sniffs.

TravelMole: Cruising? That's not traveling:
Don’t get him wrong. Arthur Frommer likes cruises but “travel, it’s not.” Read more

-----


Travel InsideOut is a Dennis Schaal Blog daily feature. Get a thorough-going look at the day's travel industry top and tangentially interesting stories. Feel free to comment on them below.

Travel InsideOut is Copyright (c) 2009 by Dennis Schaal. All rights reserved.

Update and Flashback: The Truth About TripAdvisor and Professional Reviews

After writing my previous post about the issue of hotel-review manipulation on TripAdvisor and the merits or demerits of professional reviews, someone at TripAdvisor reminded me of a fascinating Travel Weekly roundtable discussion that focused on some of the same themes.

Check out this exchange between Arnie Weissmann, Travel Weekly's vice president and editor in chief, who moderated the discussion; Tim Zagat, co-founder of Zagat Surveys; and Arthur Frommer, founder of Frommer's Travel Guides:

"Weissmann: If a consumer sent something to the Zagat Survey that struck you as insightful and authoritative, but was the only person to voice that opinion, would you print it?

Zagat: If the opinion says what other people are saying, or more or less says what people are saying, we will print it. And we like to find opinions that are especially well said.

Weissmann: So if somebody had an observation that struck you as insightful, but they were a minority of one ...

Zagat: We would not print them. We never print a minority of one. But you don't find that. What you find is that there are themes. I mean, these reviews practically write themselves.

The average restaurant in New York has got 1,000 comments on the survey, but the first 100 people say it all, and the others say the same things again and again and again. Pick a restaurant. How many ways can you describe it? Or a hotel?

Frommer: Wasn't it Ibsen who said that the majority is always wrong?

Would you not rather rely on the prognostications or the appraisals by Frank Bruni, the ...

Zagat: No.

Frommer: ... restaurant critic ...

Zagat: No.

Frommer: ... of the New York Times ...

Zagat: No.

Frommer: ... than on 100 New Yorkers ...

Zagat: No.

Frommer: ...who have no ...

Zagat: No, no, I would absolutely not, and I will tell you why. First of all, 100 people who filled out our surveys on a specific restaurant will have gone there an average of 11 times each. That means the restaurant has been visited 1,100 times. Frank Bruni has to write another review next week, so he goes once, twice, three times, maybe four.

Frommer: But Frank Bruni has a basis for comparison.

Zagat: What the hell does he have? A Ph.D in taste buds?"

I love that last quote: "What the hell does he have? A Ph.D in taste buds?"

The answer for consumers -- and to travel businesses -- is that you should probably blend restaurant and hotel reviews from the Frank Brunis of this world with hotel reviews written by guests and restaurant patrons, too.

But, as you can see from the above exchange, people like Frommer, who as a guide-book publisher has a vested interest in promoting professional reviews, have a deep distrust for the opinions of average travelers because Joe and Betty Vacation haven't earned their Ph.Ds in room service or hotel-check-out.

Yes, Mr. Frommer, the majority can be wrong, and solitary and minority opinion can inform.

But, in hotel or restaurant reviews, don't dismiss the majority opinion, either.

After all, Joe and Betty Vacation may have an insight that Bruni wouldn't have considered in 5 million years.

@BeatofHawaii kicked off the latest -- what @UpTake characterizes as -- "@TripAdvisor review manipulation kerfuffle," by pointing to TripAdvisor's practice of posting warning notices alongside hotels that allegedly have gamed the hotel-review system.

And BeatofHawaii (Jeff) subsequently clarified his position, tweeting that he values traveler reviews, but "92 fraud badges don't scrape surface of problem. Feels like TripAdvisor wants traffic and reviews at virtually any cost."

We agree that TripAdvisor's reputation and business is at stake when hoteliers muck up the works and encourage fraudulent reviews so I'm sure TripAdvisor will do everything it can to police its hotel reviews.

I like Priceline's approach, which it recently modified.

Priceline stated: "Most hotels now feature a detailed guest scorecard. The scorecard ranks the hotel’s popularity among Priceline hotel guests and shows when a hotel is ranked among the top-rated hotels for a specific city. Also, each hotel receives a guest satisfaction score in 5 different satisfaction categories -- overall quality, cleanliness, staff, location and dining. Unlike other hotel review services that allow anyone to post a review, the priceline.com scorecards are based on surveys that priceline.com hotel guests receive after they’ve completed their stay."

In addition, Priceline took steps to make it easier to enable travelers to search reviews based on their own demographic profile or interest.

Priceline states: "Now, guest hotel reviews can be sorted and grouped according to 7 different traveler types -- solo travelers, groups, seniors, couples, families with teens, families with young children and business travelers. This gives potential hotel guests the ability to search their hotels through the eyes and experiences of like-minded travelers. Priceline.com also offers exclusive hotel and restaurant ratings and reviews from Zagat Survey, LLC."

Any hotel-review system can be manipulated to some extent, and that's especially true, as @RobertKCole pointed out, when it comes to smaller, non-chain properties.

Priceline's policy of limiting hotel reviews to authors who booked their stay on Priceline diminishes the number of potential reviews, but greatly enhances their credibility.

I don't know if TripAdvisor would be able to institute such a policy since it is a research and planning site and doesn't handle bookings.

But, one thing TripAdvisor could and should do immediately is to take the additional step of banning, for a set time frame, the display of hotels that haven't played by the rules and have earned review-manipulation notices.

Then, TripAdvisor, we'd know that you really are serious about the problem.

The Truth About TripAdvisor and Professional Hotel Reviews

The blogosphere is abuzz with "news" that TripAdvisor has conceded that some of its user-generated content is cooked.

Arthur Frommer, a longtime critic of guest-written hotel reviews, is at it again on his blog, blasting the concept of user-generated hotel reviews under the headline, "TripAdvisor is now warning you that numerous hotels are submitting phony recommendations for themselves."

This latest round of TripAdvisor-stomping apparently originated with the Beat of Hawaii blog, which found more than 90 hotels with TripAdvisor review-manipulation warning notices and then trumpeted the news of "TripAdvisor's new stand on fraud."

When TripAdvisor catches a property that allegedly games the system, it prominently displays the following notice: "TripAdvisor has reasonable cause to believe that either this property or individuals associated with the property may have attempted to manipulate our popularity index by interfering with the unbiased nature of our reviews. Please take this into consideration when researching your travel plans."

For example, Hotel Renew in Honolulu, rated #2 out of 102 Honolulu properties on TripAdvisor, earned a notice.

And, while Frommer and the Beat of Hawaii dismiss the worth of guest-written reviews, Chris Elliott takes a more reasoned stance, noting that he reads TripAdvisor reviews on the road, "but I do so with the knowledge that the travel industry is successfully manipulating the site. I ignore the best and worst reviews (those are typically the fake ones) and whenever I read phrases like 'best hotel ever' or 'incomparable service' I roll my eyes and wonder about that fabled algorithm that’s supposed to catch counterfeit reviews."

I would disagree with Elliott on the matter of the travel industry "successfully manipulating the site."

With its more than 23 million hotel reviews, I don't think the crush of bogus reviews rises to the level of hotels "successfully manipulating the site," although certainly some of them would want to.

I find tremendous value in guest-written hotel reviews, but read them skeptically.

It's the same approach I take when I read newspaper websites, book reviews, advertisements and, oh yes, professionally written travel reviews.

There is nothing holy about the professionals. And, there often is wisdom in the masses.

There are great hotel-rating services out there, and you should use them in conjunction with guest-written reviews to get a well-rounded picture.

But, "professionals" have their own prejudices because, after all, they are human.

The dirty little secret about getting advice from a travel agent is that they have business relationships with "preferred" suppliers who compensate them especially well because of all the guests that the agents send to the hotels. So some of these agents might steer their clients to a Marriott property instead of a Starwood hotel because Marriott might give the agent a better deal.

Of course, online-travel sites have preferred relationships, too, and many bias their displays.

And, travel agents, like trade journalists, often get discounted rates or free rooms to entice them to visit and say nice things about particular properties.

This is not to say that the professionals are bought off. Hopefully, the vast majority still have integrity.

But, when scoping out a hotel, use your brain, talk to people, and read both professionally written and guest-written reviews. Don't take any of them in isolation.

One of the shortcomings of the TripAdvisor reviews is that TripAdvisor, unlike some other review sites, demands no proof that the reviewer actually stayed at the property.

That could be a tough requirement for TripAdvisor to impose, even if it wanted to, because TripAdvisor doesn't actually book any travel, but funnels consumers off to advertisers for bookings.

TripAdvisor takes fake reviews seriously because, when you take its business model into account, guest-written hotel reviews are its bread-and-butter.

TripAdvisor's advertising/media revenue is contingent on consumers visiting TripAdvisor over and over, and spending some time there, going through all of that content.

When I'm traveling, I consult TripAdvisor's hotel reviews and find them to be a valuable tool, warts and all.

I think the hidden agenda of some of TripAdvisor's critics, like Frommer, is that they consider the democratic empowerment of the consumer and the Web in general to be one big blemish.