NB: This is a guest article by Jonathan Alford from Seattle-based consulting firm Lenati.
We’ve all seen a little and opined a lot about what Google could do with ITA Software, but could one of the most potentially innovative elements still be flying under the radar?
This is the convergence of mobile, natural language speech, and cloud technology forces that could enable Google-ITA, likely Apple, and maybe Microsoft to really change the travel search and transaction landscape?
I thought I’d take a look after the milestone launch of Siri as part of the release of the iPhone 4S
By now, you might have flirted with Siri, and usage has reportedly been 10x what even Apple anticipated. Android searches were already 25% voice a year ago, but I’m guessing Google isn’t going to let Siri have all the fun.
Along with Microsoft’s voice integration through Windows Phone, Xbox Live, Kinect, and coming Windows 8 platforms, natural language voice engagement is finally going mainstream.
This time last year, voice search was projected to be 15% of all searches by 2015. That may now be an underestimate.
What if you could say:
“Book a flight on Alaska Airlines from Seattle to San Francisco at 3pm on November 14th”
…and then be taken directly to Alaska’s best-matched flight ready to buy with a few more voice commands?
And, then, would a business traveler on the run want to be able to say:
“I need to change my flight to 8pm”
…and then have his ir her itinerary and voice-directed flight change functions load immediately?
Android voice search is already tremendous, but still produces the blue links that seem to take you everywhere but the specific thing you want.
And as we’re seeing from some advertiser pushback to its online flight search tool, Google is facing some tough decisions on whether and how to disrupt its own advertising model.
In the meantime, Siri tells you she doesn’t do flights right now. But imagine when she does.
Siri is different. Its personal assistant model is engineered to deliver the user directly to a desired answer – or transaction point.
But make no mistake, despite Siri’s pleasant personality, the cold business truth is that Apple is mapping it toward high-opportunity transactional industries – like travel.
Could the impact shift the travel search landscape? Could Apple push Google to disintermediate its own travel search advertising model?
We’re currently witnessing the dynamic online information, advertising, and social media ages of travel, but travel is still fundamentally a commerce category. The beauty of Expedia and others is that they gave consumers the ability to cut inefficient offline search and intermediary steps and costs and go directly to the transaction.
Could natural language voice help cut inefficient online search and intermediary steps and costs? Current online booking UI’s and Google’s blue links were great advancements, but still create friction. GDS’s create friction and cost.
Could GDS data structures adapt to receive voice object inputs? Perhaps not, and voice is also a great candidate for direct connect. Can Farelogix integrate with voice object inputs?
Regardless, Google already owns all three platforms necessary to integrate seamless voice-driven search for domestic airfares – Android mobile/tablet, speech, and ITA.
What about flights?
Apple owns two platforms and has clearly targeted travel, but needs the third element – travel platform/supplier partners. With $27 billion in cash/short-term investments and incredible market currency, it could also easily acquire the third platform. Could Farelogix be a flight Direct Connect answer? Could Vayant be a flight search answer?
How about hotels?
Microsoft also owns two of the platforms, and while some might say Bing Travel is underwhelming, keep in mind Microsoft also has plenty of cash/short-term investments, a strong incentive to spend on search, mobile and tablet share, 35 Million Xbox Live members, an install base of perhaps 15 million Kinects after this holiday season, and hundreds of millions of Windows users.
By the way, Amazon just acquired a voice platform for its new Kindle lineup, too.
The technology and cost barriers are high to develop user-acceptable speech technology. Google, Apple and Microsoft will offer robust APIs that OTAs and travel suppliers could integrate.
But the commercial models are not yet formed, and would consumers bypass home screen voice search to download, activate and use more cumbersome mobile applications even if they integrate with speech APIs?
So what’s going to happen? It remains to be seen, but keep listening AND talking.
NB: This is a guest article by Jonathan Alford from Seattle-based consulting firm Lenati.
Related posts:
About Special Nodes
Great commentary! Mind boggling. Cheers.
I don’t know anyone who would book a flight saying “Book a flight on Alaska Airlines from Seattle to San Francisco at 3pm on November 14th” Quite simply this is not how people book whether online or offline. In voice recognition, each variable you add creates an exponential set of possibilities. Siri is a good bit away from something as simple as above; booking air is probably too complex for this technology anytime in the near term.
It amuses me that people think Google can significantly change how people buy air travel. They may have a lot of power and intellect but there are a lot of smart people that have been working on this process for 30 years.
Great article. Enjoy some of the funny responses (lol)
I believe it will be welcome changes….. or a requirement in the future
Cheers
It makes no doubt voice search is going to increase in efficiency and usage over time.
However, I think the Siri lesson takes exactly the opposite direction than Google voice search: voice commands working well in very limited, specific scenarios and not trying to do it all. It might Apple’s ethos here or whatever – the idea that either a function works very well, or it’s not good enough.
If we had intelligent voice search in travel, it would probably be a long suite of questions and back and forths, certainly starting like this:
Q- Book a flight on Alaska Airlines from Seattle to San Francisco at 3pm on November 14th
A- Hey, one way only?
It should go with round trip as a default.
Sadly I think the article misses a critical point. Search itself is moving to the back of the experience rather than the front. Something that must scare the pants of the Googleplex.
Today we are all forced to go through a fixed aperture search process defined and constrained by the way travel (in particular air) has worked since the early days of the web – indeed the way agents have worked too since the dawn of the CRS/GDS. To go faster we are assuming that we need a quicker horse.
For professional mode and consumer mode requirements we are constrained by the structure of the data and our ability to access it. (I am tempted to throw a barb at the gatekeepers but will refrain). The move to voice should not be considered only in the context of putting different lipstick on the pig. We should be pushing the envelope in addressing how we can answer the need to deliver the answer to the requirement rather than focusing on the delivery mechanism(s).
No chaps! now is the time to bring that world – of the old guard concepts of how we must work – to an end. A more natural and human focused way to obtain information must evolve and break free of the 1950s data architecture.
Then Siri can figure out how to differentiate sentiently – the experience could be better as in “Siri – I need to go to a beach” rather than “Siri I need to go and bitch”.
(Apple 4S users know what I mean!)
Cheers
Great reply…
To the Alaska comment a more natural approach would be “Siri I have a business meeting in Alaska at 3pm, work out how I can get there”.
It’s the end result of travel that is the aim, not the detail of the journey.
Thank you for the comments – it’s a fascinating topic that hopefully inspires some debate.
Daniele – I agree, Siri is in ways engineered backward from search as we know it, which I think is touching on one of Timothy’s points as well. What methods end up being most effective remain to be seen.
As Timothy also seems to be reiterating, current archaic data structures could be an obstacle, which is where Google-ITA have likely been able to make progress and why Apple may be better off acquiring a firm bringing new approaches to flight data structuring rather than trying to work with GDSs. Same reason direct connect is a good opportunity.
The competitive implications are quite interesting, and it’s not apparent in everyday consumer experience yet, but no doubt a lot of progress has been made behind the scenes since we originally discussed last year.