4 ms·

I just want a good web search for finding and booking flights. Expedia and friends could work on improving their websites instead of complaining.. Just tried

I just want a good web search for finding and booking flights. Expedia and friends could work on improving their websites instead of complaining.. Just tried Expedia now, flying London - Stockholm in December. Next screen I could choose "specific dates" or "flexible". Clicking flexible, page reloaded, saying "This route doesn't support that". So then I clicked "specific dates". This threw me back to the front page, with the flight search form empty. They won't find much sympathy from me..

Retric 16y ago
If Expedia was worth using then people would go back to it vs. praying that Google will come up with something better. I want a travel site that gives Google style search results based on my preferred time of day, start and end locations, and price. If it's 200 dollars cheaper to use a less convenient airport or an evening flight then show it to me but I would rather use the local airport etc. Yet, the only option for most people is to use all these crappy search systems to build such a list by hand. PS: Expedia does not even provide suggestions when someone has a typo EX: 'Washinton DC'. It then asks which one of several local airports to use (you can't pick more than one). No wonder they are afraid of Google.
benologist 16y ago
The article raises a pretty good point regardless of what fixable usability issue some site has: "Companies like Expedia worry that the acquisition could lead Google to present a matrix of actual fares on its search results page, above all of the other sites that sell tickets. At that point, the key question becomes: which sites will Google's results link to, and what (if anything) will be the cost of those links?" This affects more than just entrenched guys, it means newcomers will also have to buy their way to the top as well.
lmkg 16y ago
Not to defend Expedia, but if Google puts their own travel results on the front page, improving Expedia's website wouldn't help them. It could be made of gold-plated strippers, but no one would ever find out because they'd just use Google's flight search, even if Google's flight search sucked. Not that Google would make a crappy flight search (especially with ITA), but the point is that even if other companies did innovate and did make a better flight search that is theoretically better for the consumer, that still wouldn't be able to beat Google putting their own thingy on the front SERP. Don't get me wrong, Google's move is probably better for the consumer and Expedia does suck and deserves to get crushed on its own merit (or lack thereof), but despite that, "just do a better job" is not a viable option, and Expedia's complaints that Google has an anticompetitive advantage are legitimate.
- tesseract 16y ago
  Is ITA the only plausible source of flight data? If not, then what's the big deal? And if so, then it seems like they have a monopoly advantage regardless of whether they are bought by Google or not.
- moultano 16y ago
  Bing is already doing this. If you want to complain, complain about vertical integration in search engines in general not Google trying to keep feature parity with competitors. You can't prevent someone from building a better product just because their product is popular.
  - takadamu 16y ago
    The rules are different when you have the vast majority of traffic. And you can prevent someone from trying to build a better product just because their product is popular - ask Microsoft about its experience with the EU.
    - moultano 16y ago
      Google doesn't "have" the vast majority of traffic. The vast majority of people go there voluntarily when competitors are a click away. There's a big difference. All Google has is their brand and the quality of their product, and how long do you think their brand will last if Microsoft starts offering a better product? What are we going to say to Google if Google is legally prevented from innovating, Bing isn't, and Bing wins?
- apr 16y ago
  I disagree. Expedia has long had an option to innovate and really improve their offering, instead they chose to rest on their laurels and milk the customers. I see it as a good thing that Google moves into the space and will give it some serious shake-up. On the aside I just can't wait till the Ticketmaster's monopoly is disrupted.
- emmett 16y ago
  You mean just like Fandango went out of business when Google started offering movie times? Or how wikipedia died after Knol? Or how there aren't any more weather sites now that Google offers weather?

Retric 16y ago

If Expedia was worth using then people would go back to it vs. praying that Google will come up with something better. I want a travel site that gives Google style search results based on my preferred time of day, start and end locations, and price. If it's 200 dollars cheaper to use a less convenient airport or an evening flight then show it to me but I would rather use the local airport etc. Yet, the only option for most people is to use all these crappy search systems to build such a list by hand. PS: Expedia does not even provide suggestions when someone has a typo EX: 'Washinton DC'. It then asks which one of several local airports to use (you can't pick more than one). No wonder they are afraid of Google.

benologist 16y ago

The article raises a pretty good point regardless of what fixable usability issue some site has: "Companies like Expedia worry that the acquisition could lead Google to present a matrix of actual fares on its search results page, above all of the other sites that sell tickets. At that point, the key question becomes: which sites will Google's results link to, and what (if anything) will be the cost of those links?" This affects more than just entrenched guys, it means newcomers will also have to buy their way to the top as well.

lmkg 16y ago

Not to defend Expedia, but if Google puts their own travel results on the front page, improving Expedia's website wouldn't help them. It could be made of gold-plated strippers, but no one would ever find out because they'd just use Google's flight search, even if Google's flight search sucked. Not that Google would make a crappy flight search (especially with ITA), but the point is that even if other companies did innovate and did make a better flight search that is theoretically better for the consumer, that still wouldn't be able to beat Google putting their own thingy on the front SERP. Don't get me wrong, Google's move is probably better for the consumer and Expedia does suck and deserves to get crushed on its own merit (or lack thereof), but despite that, "just do a better job" is not a viable option, and Expedia's complaints that Google has an anticompetitive advantage are legitimate.

tesseract 16y ago
Is ITA the only plausible source of flight data? If not, then what's the big deal? And if so, then it seems like they have a monopoly advantage regardless of whether they are bought by Google or not.
moultano 16y ago
Bing is already doing this. If you want to complain, complain about vertical integration in search engines in general not Google trying to keep feature parity with competitors. You can't prevent someone from building a better product just because their product is popular.
- takadamu 16y ago
  The rules are different when you have the vast majority of traffic. And you can prevent someone from trying to build a better product just because their product is popular - ask Microsoft about its experience with the EU.
  - moultano 16y ago
    Google doesn't "have" the vast majority of traffic. The vast majority of people go there voluntarily when competitors are a click away. There's a big difference. All Google has is their brand and the quality of their product, and how long do you think their brand will last if Microsoft starts offering a better product? What are we going to say to Google if Google is legally prevented from innovating, Bing isn't, and Bing wins?
apr 16y ago
I disagree. Expedia has long had an option to innovate and really improve their offering, instead they chose to rest on their laurels and milk the customers. I see it as a good thing that Google moves into the space and will give it some serious shake-up. On the aside I just can't wait till the Ticketmaster's monopoly is disrupted.
emmett 16y ago
You mean just like Fandango went out of business when Google started offering movie times? Or how wikipedia died after Knol? Or how there aren't any more weather sites now that Google offers weather?