Airlines' plan would trample fare competition, critics
say
POSTED: Tuesday, April 30, 2013, 1:15 PM
Jeff
Gelles, Inquirer Business Columnist
One of the promises of "Big
Data" to companies - a deep, empirical understanding of shoppers' buying
habits - has always posed an implicit threat to consumers. If, say, an
airline or hotel chain knows what you've previously been willing to pay, why
should it ever offer you a significantly better deal? More broadly, if it can
predict your relative level of price sensitivity, it has a powerful negotiating
edge.
That's one of the key threats that
critics see in a proposal before the U.S. Department of Transportation from the
International Air Transport Association. Resolution 787, for which the IATA is
seeking approval by June from the DOT, is portrayed by airlines as an important
modernization of data-exchange systems that are crucial to selling tickets and
filling jets in the Internet era.
But that's not all it does,
according to critics such as Kevin Mitchell, chairman of the Wayne-based
Business Travel Coalition, which has collected more than 200 signatories on a
letter asking DOT Secretary Ray LaHood to reject the proposal.
Mitchell says the problem isn't the
new technology, it’s the new business model it would impose on the industry
that would end open price competition and transparency.
While the IATA calls the new model a "win-win" for airlines and travel
agents, because offers can be tailored to
customers, the Business Travel
Coalition's letter identifies a serious drawback
beyond customers' privacy concerns:
Resolution 787 explicitly says that,
before fares are quoted, airlines have the right to demand from consumers
personal information that “includes but is not limited to” the customer’s name,
age, marital status, nationality, contact details, frequent flyer numbers (on
all carriers), prior shopping, purchase and travel history and whether the
purpose of the trip is business or leisure. There can be no legitimate
justification for charging a traveler more or less based on a number of these
items of personal information (such as marital status or nationality), and many
of them by design can be used to pinpoint and extract higher prices from those
travelers who are likely to be less price sensitive, such as business
travelers.
Mitchell, whose group represents
corporate and institutional travel departments, offered his own experience as
an illustration. He recently checked prices for a trip to Phoenix, an itinerary
that from Philadelphia is a hub-to-hub route for US Airways, which is the only
carrier to fly it nonstop. But when he checks prices on a website such as
Orbitz, he sees not only US Airways' $600-plus ticket price, but other
carriers' one-stop offers for about half that fare - a pricing constraint on US
Airways.
Under the new model known as the
"New Distribution Capability," he says, Orbitz won't have the ability
to offer the most-competitive prices from other carriers, because carriers that
adopt the NDC will have to agree to stop publishing their fares, schedules, and
fare rules. Instead, third-party sites will be limited to offering "plain
vanilla" rack-rate prices. Mitchell says that's "the equivalent of a
price on the back of a hotel-room door - a price nobody pays."
Mitchell says the lack of
transparency will shift negotiating power to the carriers, and produce upward
pressure on prices.
"If I go to Orbitz or one of
the other sites today, US Airways doesn't know who I am, and I see those other
prices. Tomorrow, under NDC, I have to provide" access to personal
information that includes his own ticket-purchase patterns. "Now, US
Airways knows it’s Kevin Mitchell going out to Phoenix on business, and they
know I almost always fly nonstop. I’m going to pay more under this new
model."
Are criticisms such as Mitchell's
exaggerated? That's the contention of American Airlines, for one, which urged
LaHood to accept the IATA proposal. In a comment to the department, American -
which is planning to merge with US Airways - said:
In fact, common sense dictates that
NDC will result in better fares and more relevant offers for
consumers simply because it empowers more choices. Some consumers will
certainly choose to remain anonymous in the shopping process, and NDC will do
nothing to deprive them of that option. Because airlines operate with razor
thin margins, and in a highly competitive environment, American has no interest
in disregarding this segment of the market by offering unreasonably high fares
to those who want to remain anonymous. Airlines have a long history of
vigorously competing for every last passenger, since, in our industry, one or
two passengers can determine whether a flight loses or makes money. NDC does
nothing to make the airline industry less competitive or render these consumers
any less important. American will want to serve every last one if them and will
have to compete for the opportunity to do so.
Mitchell and other critics note that
companies are always free to experiment individually with new business models.
Their argument to LaHood is that the IATA's proposal, because it comes from a
group representing the vast majority of airlines, is anti-competitive.
"Any individual firm can try to
price discriminate," he says. "But when 240 competitors agree to a
new business model, that’s a red flag,"
You can find comments on Resolution
787 posted online at Regulations.gov under Docket No. OST-2013-0048. Comments are due by Wednesday - you can click here to submit one.
No comments:
Post a Comment