4 ms·
Modifying a site to be less sensational does not make the makers of the site any less dishonest. Why would I do business with a site that is using sensationalis
by djha-skin 4y ago
Modifying a site to be less sensational does not make the makers of the site any less dishonest. Why would I do business with a site that is using sensationalism to get to my money when I could just do business with one of dozens of other travel websites who treat me better?
It's not like booking.com has a monopoly. Why not so business with a booking company where customer relationship is more of a priority?
- petesergeant 4y ago> Why would I do business with a site that is using sensationalism to get to my money when I could just do business with one of dozens of other travel websites who treat me better? It’s cheap, it’s reliable, and whenever I’ve had any sort of issue then Booking.com have fixed it right away. For all this urgency stuff, I’ve found them absolutely excellent.
- darkstar_16 4y agoI agree. I don't like booking.com's sales tactics but otherwise they're an excellent aggregator. Sort of like Amazon. I don't like that they promote their own branded stuff over competitors but I still use them.
- aflag 4y agoIt's a sad state of things. I've grew unsensitised to that sort of things. Nowadays I usually automatically ignore that and what my brain perceives as ads. They all became background noise to me at this point.
- listenallyall 4y ago> It's not like booking.com has a monopoly You may want to take a closer look at the "dozens of other travel websites." Yes, there are still a few independent ones, but the majority of major sites are all owned by just two companies, Expedia and Booking Holdings (formerly Priceline). It's unfortunate but true.