FairSearch, fierce opponent of Google’s acquisition of ITA Software, was quick out of the blocks to pour a healthy dose of scepticism over the search giant’s launch of Flight Search.
Within hours of the new service going live, FairSearch (the lobbying group created in October 2010 by Kayak, Microsoft, Sabre, Expedia and others) pondered how honest Google will be when selecting partners, as well as how results for air searches will be positioned.
The launch “raises lots of questions”, FairSearch says.
“Can we expect Google will preference Google Travel over other popular travel search sites?” it asks, while also wondering if paid-for advertising results will be included alongside other data-driven results through ITA’s QPX, but without identifying the difference. But perhaps the most curious question it raises is around the idea of coercion.
Referencing an article on Forbes, FairSearch asks if partners will be forced to working with Google Flight Search or find their natural search traffic is affected.
It’s quite an accusation.
Predictably, FairSearch appears to be unhappy but not surprised that the initial version of Google Flight Search will exclude intermediaries such as OTAs and metasearch engines, the very companies that make up the FairSearch organisation.
This is the only reaction so far from FairSearch, although Kayak’s initial reaction yesterday suggests the group will continue to lobby the US authorities to ensure “Google’s behaviour as it continues to leverage its general search monopoly to enter more and more verticals”.
Bottom line.
Google has a legal fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of its shareholders… A.K.A. maximise profits.
If that means Google skirting the boundaries of the law, anti-trust, DoJ, SEC and all the other regulators around the world, they will do so wholeheartedly. You don’t need to be a cynic (although I am) to recognise that reality.
Google is what is – evil, benevolent or otherwise. They ultimately don’t have a choice but to operate the way they do, it’s baked into the system (US corporate law) that they operate in. Just like FairSearch’s reaction is also predictable, they need to protect the collective value of their shareholders by opposing everything Google’s travel division does.
The real question now becomes, will suppliers (airlines, hotels, etc.) be willing to hand control of their content over to Google in the hopes that they won’t overly leverage their power and “monopoly position in search” as you put it???
Based on my argument above, it’s unlikely they won’t eventually make best use of their market dominance. Like The Scorpion and The Frog fable teaches us, it’s not their fault it’s just their nature!
Time will tell. I’ve got a full supply of popcorn to watch it all play out.
Isn’t this just a question of survival of the fittest? If Kayak, Microsoft, Sabre, Expedia et al actually delivered a product that was what people wanted they’d have nothing to worry about. Google shouldn’t be scolded for building a (arguably) better product. The key principle is to focus on your own business and get that right rather than complain about your competitors