Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > MilesBuzz
Reload this Page >

Google Defends ITA Deal Against Competitor Attacks

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Google Defends ITA Deal Against Competitor Attacks

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 1, 2010 | 12:20 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Programs: AA Plat, UA Silver, DL Silver, Marriott Titanium, etc.
Posts: 4,214
Google Defends ITA Deal Against Competitor Attacks

Very interesting stuff in a blog from Andrew Silverman (10/26/2010) Senior Product Manager at Google and an interesting article in response on a WSJ blog. (I couldn't find this posted anywhere on Flyertalk yet.) Provides some insight into the relationships of the major players in the airfare sales and technology fields.

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/10/...titor-attacks/

It starts off this way:
Google responded to an effort by players in the online travel industry to oppose its acquisition of airfare search provider ITA Software. The Internet giant rejected their arguments that the deal would reduce competition and innovation in the market.
See also:
http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.c...competing.html

An excerpt:
We’ve been encouraged by the travel industry support we’ve seen for this acquisition -- from airlines, online travel agencies, and also ITA’s competitors. Even longtime travel guru Arthur Frommer has weighed in. That said, it’s disappointing that a number of travel companies have today announced their concerns about the deal.

Our reason for making this acquisition is simple: ITA will help us provide better results for our users. When someone searches for “flights from San Francisco to London,” we'd like to provide not just “ten blue links” but exact flight times and prices as well -- just as our competitors do today.
GrizShel is offline  
Old Nov 1, 2010 | 1:51 pm
  #2  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: India
Programs: DL Diamond, Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium, ALL Platinum, IHG Platinum
Posts: 30,705
interesting....
Keyser is offline  
Old Nov 1, 2010 | 1:55 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Programs: MTA NYCTA Super Plutonium Elite
Posts: 107
The mere fact that competitors oppose a deal is very strong evidence that the deal is in fact pro-competitive. If a deal was going to lead to reduced competition, competitors should be jumping for joy over it: they would benefit just as much from reduced competition, at the expense of consumers. If they're against it, it must be because they think that the combined company will in fact be more competitive, forcing them to cut prices or do other pro-consumer things to keep up.

If Toyota was planning to buy Ford, and the rest of the auto industry was talking about what a great thing that was for consumers, that would be something for consumers to worry about.
LH2004 is offline  
Old Nov 1, 2010 | 2:09 pm
  #4  
In memoriam
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,020
Just a tad simplistic.

Consider: competitors might be too dumb to see what is really going on; competitors might not represent interests of consumers (in fact, almost certainly do not); big G might be using this to consolidate monopolistic/oligopolistic power, or maybe something else is going on.

Hypothetically, if Microsoft opposes something does that automatically make it bad? Or, should we actually do some analysis on our own? @:-)
biggestbopper is offline  
Old Nov 1, 2010 | 2:09 pm
  #5  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Programs: AA EXP, UA 1K, F9 Elite, Hyatt Diamond, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Gold
Posts: 1,323
It's pretty much the same as every other single thing in the airline industry:

If airlines oppose it, then it's generally a good thing for pax (example: tarmac rule, DOT compensation increases) ^

If airlines are for something, it generally screws over pax (example: baggage and every other punitive fee)

So, I usually go opposite to every 'want' the airlines have, and in this way I am all for the Google/ITA deal. I know why Google wants ITA and it will be excellent for pax and comparing the competition (basically take Kayak and expand the potential and search power x10).
denCSA is offline  
Old Dec 1, 2010 | 10:17 am
  #6  
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: BZN
Programs: AA:LT Platinum DL:LT Gold UA:1P MAR:LT Titanium
Posts: 8,292
Originally Posted by LH2004
The mere fact that competitors oppose a deal is very strong evidence that the deal is in fact pro-competitive.
Bingo!

Unrelated to that specific issue, has anyone given the ITA mobile apps a try? I don't use an iPhone (is anyone buying them, still?), but I've just tried out the Android version and it *kicks bootay*. On Android, go to Market>Search and look for "onthefly" (without the quotes, and without spaces, to find the proper app). It's free and works flawlessly for me. Impressive UI that is intuitive and allows for a lot of the "matrix" functionality present on the website.
mooper is offline  
Old Dec 1, 2010 | 11:02 am
  #7  
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: ICT
Programs: AA ExP
Posts: 1,860
Originally Posted by LH2004
The mere fact that competitors oppose a deal is very strong evidence that the deal is in fact pro-competitive. If a deal was going to lead to reduced competition, competitors should be jumping for joy over it: they would benefit just as much from reduced competition, at the expense of consumers. If they're against it, it must be because they think that the combined company will in fact be more competitive, forcing them to cut prices or do other pro-consumer things to keep up.
Originally Posted by denCSA
It's pretty much the same as every other single thing in the airline industry:

If airlines oppose it, then it's generally a good thing for pax (example: tarmac rule, DOT compensation increases) ^
While I agree that an ITA acquisition by Google would be good, your simplistic categorization based upon competitor response is not universally true. For instance, I'm a TA in a very specific niche. For a long time, we were the 3rd largest in our niche in the U.S. Then our largest competitor bought out #2. We weren't happy about the purchase because all of a sudden we were 2nd largest, but absolutely dwarfed (as in 10% of the size) by our competitor. But we've found that it's actually been excellent for us as a company. The new behemoth is a lot less nimble and customer-centric because they're so huge and we've acquired a lot of customers from them because their CS quality has gone down and customers have had the ball dropped quite a bit (we've had 20yr customers of theirs tell us they'll never purchase from them again). But it's arguable whether or not their merger was pro-consumer. Obviously it was bad for the clients that were inconvenienced, but now they're working with us and our markups are lower and our customer service is better (24/7 free emergency customer service; they charge for after-hours CS), so if they travel a lot, they're actually better off. Plus, our largest competitor now has more buying power and there's one niche airline contract that we buy through them, so consumers benefit from that too.

Originally Posted by denCSA
If airlines are for something, it generally screws over pax (example: baggage and every other punitive fee)
OT, but I disagree. I like how baggage fees put costs where they actually are and give incentive for responsible behavior. And I say this as someone who would take two 50 lb bags every time if it was free. This allows them to increase cargo profits and lower base ticket prices. It's a competitive, cutthroat market out there, so it's not going to send overall ticket prices up, it just shifts costs to where they actually are and allows them to actually lower the base ticket cost and if people can travel without luggage (or with carry-ons).
HansGolden is offline  
Old Dec 3, 2010 | 8:19 am
  #8  
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Brussels, EU
Posts: 279
Yeah, I love it. Once I find my flight, I generally then hop on the orbitz app to quickly book - easy

Originally Posted by mooper
Bingo!

Unrelated to that specific issue, has anyone given the ITA mobile apps a try? I don't use an iPhone (is anyone buying them, still?), but I've just tried out the Android version and it *kicks bootay*. On Android, go to Market>Search and look for "onthefly" (without the quotes, and without spaces, to find the proper app). It's free and works flawlessly for me. Impressive UI that is intuitive and allows for a lot of the "matrix" functionality present on the website.
Aspirapolvere is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.