Against a lot of odds, Travelport retained Flight Centre Limited in Australia. Or at least part of the business. The odds were definitely against Travelport. Amadeus had mounted a very strong campaign as had Sabre. Heavyweights went a courting in Brisbane. In the end, it probably came down to the cost of transition rather than anything else. I suspect that the canny people at FCL knew that there were certain concessions that they wanted from Travelport to stay on Galileo. These would have included:
Full GDS incentive fees for all bookings
Access to low-cost carrier content
Powershopper entries at no charge
Etc etc
So congrats to the Travelport team (yes even Gordon went visiting). The impact of losing FCL in Oz would have been devastating to Travelport so it really was a life and death struggle.
Look for Flight Centre, however, to become more aggressive in its technology process. With the
Datalex debacle now a matter for the courts rather than implementation, they need a new tech base to move forward. Could it be that Travelport agreed to fund some of that?
At the very least it evens the playing field and sends a clear signal to Madrid that Travelport will not be a pushover on any customer.
Interestingly, there is a post on
Gordo's blog:
"There’s no question that the GDSs need to up their game. But there also needs to be a well-thought through “technology framework” for the travel industry if we are to put the customer at the centre of everything we do."
I think what he misses is that the concept that the GDS is no longer at the centre of this triangle. While trying to hold out an olive branch to both sides of the GDS-centric value chain, he misses the point. It is no longer a linear or even triangular world. It is a completely open world. The only time the word Open appears in this blog is when in the context of Open Travel Alliance--something that Travelport has not exactly been actively supportive of in cash and people time. I share his stated view that there is a need for standards. But I do not subscribe to those who are determined to subvert the process to their own ends as others have done before. Travelport has in the past been guilty of this either through neglect or active efforts.
Where I do agree with him is one of his final statements.
"The challenge for the GDS in the new distribution model I’m proposing is that we have to disrupt the status quo."
Let's see if he really does have the moxie to put that into reality. That also includes blowing up the segment fee model.
How will history judge this?
Cheers. Thanks for reading - private comments please to
professorsabena@gmail.com.
Professor Sabena aka Timothy O'Neil-Dunne is managing partner at T2 Impact. This post is syndicated from Professor Sabena's Blog
