Okay, so we now know plenty about Google, ITA Software and that acquisition story. But is it important?

Yes, of course it is. What Google does, matters. However, we seem to be missing the long-term picture. Google is mainly great at keyword based search.

But will keyword based search be the dominant search form in 20 years? Ten years? Five years even? Doubt it.

Mobile search is much more about location. Ecommerce search will be much more about your social connections and their experience with the same product.

If I am still typing in keywords in five years time I consider that as bad as travel agents still typing in cryptic command line messages for flight/hotel bookings. (And, yes, I understand the efficiency argument about an expert using a concise well matured language).

What is the alternative to keyword search? Well one step forward is destination/travel date based search. Not exactly a UI panacea but probably more useful than a keyword based research query in terms of pitching back destination inspiration ideas or available travel product.

Yet, Google is not winning that game. In fact it is not even playing in it. The game has changed and it is Bing with its Farecast acquisition just 16 months ago which is playing the game of converting mainstream searches from keyword based search to destination/date based.

Is that 16 month head start sufficient? Will Bing have built sufficient knowledge to be able to fend off any Google-ITA mainstream solution?

It’s a big question. I don’t have the answer. What I am sure though is that Google have a fight on their hands and they are not first to market. In that situation regulators are bound to give them the green light.

If Google ultimately lose the battle (such as it has with book ecommerce moving to consumers searching on Amazon first) then I believe they will regret the five year period between 2005 and 2010 where it basically squandered a lead.

Can you name a single big innovation in travel search that Google has delivered to market in the last five years? Nope.

Oddly, Expedia is making noises about the Google-ITA Software deal expressing concerns to the US Justice Department.

But Expedia is actually in the same boat as Google. Expedia has also squandered a leading travel search position. Compare for example this 2003 hotel search result to a 2010 version.

2003

2010

Remarkably similar, although the Expedia quality rating has been replaced with a user generated one and wireless has trumped breakfast!

What both Expedia and Google have achieved is the fallacy of the local maximum.

They have both made brilliant efficiencies on their core UI design. Undeniable. However, alternatives now exist that are fundamentally different and none of this will be uncovered by A/B testing that just sandpapers existing approaches.

[NB: Expedia continues to keep the faith, as Dan Lynn, managing director of Expedia Asia-Pacific, told a conference in Sydney this week: "Whenever we A/B test, consumers confirm that the typical layout of OTA is the right one"]

The tortoises are just building up momentum and could overtake the hare.

A Google survey shows that U.S. mobile users opted to use browsers over mobile apps when they book travel.

For example, 52% of business travelers who booked hotels on their mobile devices did so through a browser while 21% booked overnight accommodations through their mobile apps, Google says.

For what Google terms “personal,” or leisure, travelers, 52% of mobile bookers used browsers to book or reserve hotels while only 11% used mobile apps, according the survey.

The browse-over-mobile-apps pattern holds true for all travel categories, according to the survey, although the disparitybetween browser and app use narrows with ooking bvacation activities.

For example, 25% of business travelers who booked vacation activities on their mobile devices did so through a browser while 20% booked vacation activities through their mobile apps.

For personal travelers, 25% who booked vacation activities used browers on their mobile devices while only 10% used mobile apps, according the survey.

Does this mean app developers should packl it in and travel companies should focus exclusively on building better mobile websites?

Not necessarily.

The numbers may be skewed because not all hotels or vacation activity vendors have viable mobile apps, so in some cases opening up a browser may be the only or best option for some travel bookings from mobile devices.

On the other hand, a focus on mobile websites could make the browser option even more attractive.

How that plays out remains to be seen.

Gathering travel research is probably the most frequently used function on mobile devices in the travel planning and booking process, according to the survey.

The survey found, for example, 44% of business travelers and 31% of personal travelers planning cruises used their mobile devices to look for travel information about cruises; 18% of business-traveler and 9% of personal-traveler cruisers used their mobile devices to book or reserve cruises; and 21% of business-traveler and 8% of personal-traveler cruisers used their mobile devices to “check-in” for their cruises using location-based services such as Foursquare or Gowalla.

Another major finding in the Google survey, “The Traveler’s Road to Decision,” is that travelers are increasingly uploading videos of their trips.

In a previous survey, conducted in 2008, “only 4% of travelers reporting uploading a video from their past travels in the previous six months,” Google says.

In the current survey, 9% of personal travelers uploaded travel video in the past 6 months in 2010 and 6% uploaded travel video in 2009.

For business travelers, 23% uploaded travel video in the past six months in 2010 and 16% did so in the prior two months in 2009, the survey found.

“As online video grows in popularity, not only more travelers are viewing them throughout the travel planning process, but they are uploading travel-related content as well,” the survey says.

That means suppliers and intermediaries of all types should allocate some resources to develop or acquire video content.

That’s not an earth-shattering conclusion, but the survey supports it.

To reach its findings about travelers’ online behavior, Google’s survey polled 5,000 U.S. online users who indicated they were business or personal travelers in the second quarter of 2010.

Google could be facing a series of awkward regulatory hurdles in Europe even if its acquisition of ITA Software is approved by US antitrust officials.

Noises emerging this week from Brussels, home to the European Commission, suggest the search giant could be facing scrutiny from members as to whether a beefing up of its position in travel after acquiring ITA Software needs to trigger a shake up of wider regulatory powers.

The problem Google could potentially face is not around the subject of competition, as its acquisition of ITA and the travel tech company’s client base is predominantly a North American issue.

Investigators at the Commission are beginning to be concerned that Google’s dominance of the search market in Europe, coupled with how it decides to use the ITA technology, could seriously impact on consumers and their ability to compare air fares.

There are now increasing calls for the Commission to undertake a study as to whether Google should be seen in the same light as other air data firms, namely the global distribution systems.

A source who wished to remain unnamed but is well-placed in the regulatory world of Brussels, says:

“In a GDS environment, the display neutrality concept enshrined in the GDS Code of Conduct addresses this issue. If Google is going to provide services that are similar to those of GDSs, then probably safeguards similar to those in the GDS Code of Conduct should be imposed on Google.”

Such a move would be a enormous leap for those that administer the GDS Code of Conduct and how regulation of the distribution of airfare data across the continent is handled.

Placing Google alongside the GDSs (as it has done so itself with the travel technology ecosystem chart) within a regulatory framework also has the opportunity to trigger other major permutations.

The push to include Google in such a framework is considered by a number of those close to the situation to be primarily a GDS-led drive.

But Google could argue that if it is subject to such oversight by regulators then other travel search providers (B2C and B2B) should be included – a prospect likely to keep lobbyists in Brussels tied up for years.

For its part, Google remains focused on the competition element of the deal and will not address the Code of Conduct issue, saying:

“The [ITA] transaction is subject to normal pre-merger notification procedures in the United States only. ITA Software’s European revenues aren’t large enough to warrant European regulatory review.

“We think this combination will benefit travelers as well as those seeking their business, but closer scrutiny has been one consequence of our success, and on that basis we wouldn’t be surprised if there were regulatory review before the deal closes.”

An alternative and radical position could be that if commissioners decide Google is not to be included in the regulatory framework then the same powers should be relaxed for the GDSs as well.

A Travelport official says:

“Given that there are so many factors in relation to the potential Google/ITA acquisition that remain to be resolved and/or announced, it would be inappropriate for Travelport to speculate on these specific questions.”

Sabre declined to comment and Amadeus is discussing internally with its legal team how to respond.

On Holiday Group was not expected to be given much time before Google came down hard on the company for brand name infringement over the Google Bypass project.

The initiative is a social media-driven affiliate scheme that allows Facebook and Twitter members to circulate links to travel deals around their networks and, in return, get a commission (£25) if someone books a holiday.

The name of the project, Google Bypass, would probably pass over the heads of consumers as many would either not care or understand the reasoning behind avoiding paying advertising fees for keyword buying.

So the title was clearly aimed at an industry all too aware of how much the search giant makes from travel companies during the purchase cycle of a product.

Co-founder of Travellerspoint, Sam Daams, gave the project less than seven days before Google stepped in.

But why would it?

Well, Google has a dizzying array of guidelines about using or playing with its protected trademark. Such names as Googliscious, Googlyoogly or GaGooglemania are given as example names not allowed.

These examples given nothing away about what might be behind the service, unlike Google Bypass (it’s hardly the name of a road dedicated to the folk at Mountain View), thus the predictions about the longevity of such a flagrant and pointed breach of its trademark.

Google, of course, might just be weighing up its options or simply considers other litigious matters such as its review by the Department of Justice over the ITA Software acquisition in the US rather more important in the grand scheme of things.

Or perhaps Google just hopes it’ll go away.

Nevertheless, Google is aware of the Google Bypass initiative, acknowledging a query late last week with a short but courteous: “No immediate comment from us.”

With many U.S. metasearch and online players mulling their air search options in light of the pending Google acquisition of ITA Software, Amadeus is negotiating with U.S. airlines in a bid to gain customers in North America.

Rudy Daniello, director of product management and distribution for Amadeus globally, says the U.S. is “definitely a target.”

“There is no barrier to Amadeus operating in the North America market,” Daniello says.

Kayak for several years has used ITA Software’s QPX solution in the U.S. and Amadeus Meta Pricer in Europe, and Kayak indicated several weeks ago that it is testing potential new providers following the Google-ITA Software announcement.

Other Meta Pricer clients include Skyscanner, Wego and Fly.com.

Like QPX, Meta Pricer enables airlines and metasearch sites to access airfare pricing and availability.

Daniello says Amadeus has embarked on a push to improve its content in North America and is negotiating with airlines on tighter integration of fares and availability.

“A lot of actors are looking around” for new solutions in the wake of the Google-ITA announcement, Daniello acknowledges.

ITA Software definitely has “the right connections in North America,” Daniello says, while “we [Amadeus] have ours in Europe and Asia.”

ITA Software has a handful of airline customers in Europe and Asia, where Amadeus dominates in air search.

Whether Amadeus can duplicate ITA Software’s access to airline pricing and availability data in short fashion in North America remains to be seen.

Daniello concedes that the push for Madrid-based Amadeus to establish more of a foothold in North America depends on the outcome of airline negotiations rather than any technical obstacles.

Ironically, Amadeus used to own a piece of ITA Software but the two had a falling out and Amadeus shed its stake.

Asked about the emergence of new airfare search players, including Everbread and Vayant, Daniello said new players such as Vayant “don’t play at the same level” as the more mature, ITA Software and Amadeus.

Benoit Janin, Amadeus worldwide vice president of development, pricing and shopping, concurs, adding that it would take a long time for new players to master the user experience and establish links with airlines.

Says Janin: “There’s a lot to be done beyond having a search engine with some fares.”

A Vayant spokesperson says: “We’ve received very positive feedback from airlines and other partners we’ve met with because we add  new layers of functionality and value that others cannot.”

About whether Vayant’s product has the maturity to gain traction, the Vayant spokesperson adds: “Vayant is both visionary and scalable as an industrial strength B2B platform and uniquely allows for personalization, split ticketing and all taxation, ancillary revenue models and so much more than search and pricing.   A GDS could consider Vayant competition or collaborator, and we’ve seen both reactions in the market.”

Amadeus has a competitive advantage in airfare search in Europe and Asia because its Altéa platform is the common IT platform for the Star Alliance. Amadeus therefore hosts the reservations systems for many European and Asian carriers and gets optimum access to fares and availability.

In fact, an Amadeus spokeswoman says: “Over 140 airlines contracted for Altéa Reservation, over 90 airlines are using or about to use Altéa Inventory, and more than 40 airlines are moving to Altéa Departure Control.”

In North America, both Amadeus and ITA Software are still looking for their first reservations system customers.

ITA Software had a reservations system deal with Air Canada and Amadeus landed United Airlines, but both agreements fizzled.

If Amadeus is making a new push for Meta Pricer customers in North America, other players, including Expedia, Travelport, Sabre, Everbread and Vayant may be doing so, as well.

OnHolidayGroup launched Google Bypass this week in a bid to reward Facebook users with money for travel leads, instead of paying advertising fees to Google.

The move is being touted as the first personal affiliate scheme in travel (at least in the UK) and utilises different concepts including social networking, email marketing and good old fashioned travel agent-style commissions.

Run through OHG’s Holiday Nights accommodation-only B2C brand, Google Bypass is handing out £25 to Facebook users if they refer a friend to a product on the system which they eventually buy.

The title of the scheme, Google Bypass, was clearly created for the PR value within the travel and web industries rather than making much sense to consumers – “no comment”, says CEO Steve Endacott, a figure not exactly known for his love of the Big G and the keyword advertising model.

Endacott claims Google takes on average around 75% of an agent’s (off or online) commission through PPC costs, so he would rather give the commission it would ordinarily pay to the search giant to an individual with, presumably, better loyalty and the chance of recommending a product or company again and again.

So how does it work?

• Holiday Nights customers are sent an invitation to participate.
• Each is given access to lists of offers within the system.
• Each offer has a unique identifying URL, matching the user to the product.
• Members of the scheme are then encouraged to send the URL around their various social networks such as Twitter and Facebook.
• When a friend or follower clicks on the link and makes a booking, the originator gets £25 wired immediately via Paypal.

Much of the management of the system is contained within a Facebook application, meaning users can throw offers around their network easily and see how their various campaigns are performing.

Endacott predicts the scheme will be mostly taken on by individuals, rather than offline travel agencies.

Although currently limited to the bed-focused Holiday Nights brand, plans are in place to extend to other areas of the OHG business including its dynamic packaging service.

The idea behind the project (alongside presumably avoiding the Google cash drain) is to turn individuals into powerful advocates for a service or brand, an area once the preserve off the agent but now through networks such as Facebook allowing consumers to wade in.

Early stages of the project are “pretty good”, says Endacott.

Around 4,000 opt-in members of the Holiday Nights database were emailed last week. Approximately 150 registered and the average pass-on was to nine people. The early phase has generated nine bookings, totalling £225 in commission.

The company may licence the Facebook integration and other elements of the technology to third parties, Endacott adds. The project is a collaboration between OHG, RateGain and ClickWithTechnology.

Sometimes I feel like a giant lab rat online – in a maze with a bunch of super beings observing my every move and then controlling what I can and cannot do.

No I am not paranoid –  “They” are really out to get me. As regular readers know – we have a pretty strong focus on the user experience here at Tnooz.

I have personally worked on the user experience since the earliest days of the web and, indeed, before that in things like Videotext (now that really dates me!).

There are way too many things which say “Beta” on them because too often that’s code for:

“We are putting this product out there and we want you to debug it for us because frankly we are pretty lazy and we got tired of doing it ourselves…”

Nevertheless, one of the things that is a little worrying in the UEX department is the way search results come back differently on computers with the same characteristics and even in the same location.

I either put this down to Google tracking my every move or to the fact they were actually looking at the interaction as a specimen where the web is their personal large petri dish.

I think the web is becoming more like the Googlesphere every day. Well, friends, we are NOT ALONE.

We now have proof, confirmed by Google, confirming they are indeed always experimenting with us.

Messrs Brin, Page and Schmidt (sounds like a 1970s folk band) seem to be running a giant experiment.

Indeed the paranoia seems to be well founded. Not only is Google experimenting with the results but they are actually tracking keystroke activity.

My attention was caught by an article on Infoworld and a follow-up on Tnooz, Google results now updating like a travel metasearch site.

SEO expert Rob Ousbey captured video of a Google experiment that displays search results that change as you type – a process which is just a little disturbing.

And if you think this is just a one off – apparently not.

Google itself gave some insight into this on their blog from Friday, announcing the following:

“Today we’ve launched a change to our ranking algorithm that will make it much easier for users to find a large number of results from a single site.

This is enough to drive anyone to becoming a conspiracy theorist. What worries me more than anything else is that now so much power and infrastructure flows through Google that there is almost no possible way that Google cannot do evil. (Yes, a double negative).

I am not doubting their desire to be good and to “do no evil”, but when they can mess with the results as they are doing on both a minor and a macro scale, I know am being abused.

Couple this with the ability to make money and maximize the results to tweak search to suit Google’s commercial ends and we have an end to net neutrality.

But that’s okay because Google has already decided that it is good for us to dispense with that arcane concept.

So next time you feel that “They Are Watching You”, just remember they are and tracking your every keystroke. You have been warned.

At Microsoft they have this great expression that has passed into common language – it’s called “eating your own dog food”.

It implies that you must consume the products that you create. As Microsoft was the epitome of the software world and changed the way people developed code, this made sense.

While the company may look a little dated and as less able to remain relevant than, say, 15 years ago when I was there, it still cuts a swathe in the world. And rightly so.

Microsoft like many companies particularly Google and Yahoo are deeply involved in social media.

In travel, the powerhouse in our little world has to be Expedia and it’s TripAdvisor product.

But it is by no means the only game. Twitter has taken the sector by storm – in my view not always for the better, but that’s another story.

There is another issue – that of the whole concept of social media within companies.

A recent study by Creative Group on where Marketing and Advertising Execs Get Their Social Media Information seems to be the antithesis of the “eating your own dog food” concept.

But what of the other side. Are there any studies that show us how people are consuming social media inside companies, and is it healthy?

Corporations have done plenty to build security into their corporate IT groups – social media seems to want to break down those barriers and, indeed, cause a company a lot of problems.

There is even software from a company called FaceTime whose product Socialite is designed to  “… track users across multiple social media platforms; prevent data from leaving the company, either maliciously or inadvertently…. ”

This is a bigger issue that perhaps people realize. Of course people spilling the beans outside of work with the data stores they carry with them (aka their memories) are hardly controllable by software (or hardware).

But there is an increasing trend towards social media monitoring tools from just about every software vendor worth his salt.

An interesting study was released last week on the subject (referred to here).

On the hiring side, companies are using social media to check out prospective staff (estimates vary from 25% to more than 50% of companies are checking you out on Facebook, Twitter and other social networks).

But it’s interesting to note that now they are starting to monitor and even control use of social media during office time.

Sadly there is still a dearth of talent in the area of social media. If you put “SM specialist” on your resume, you can get hired in a heartbeat.

Or so it would seem judging by some of the talent I have been exposed to lately inside some organizations who should know better.

At least one major hotel player has had to do conventional (aka public relations) spin/damage control after some ill-advise comments posted by an authorized employee.

And what of a company’s internal consumption of social media? Should this be encouraged or curtailed?

Perhaps we should encourage responsible use of social media inside corporations, even amongst ourselves.

Like everything else, moderation should be the order of the day.

My biggest concern is not that bad things will happen. I worry more about the amount of lost productivity.

To support this, UK Jobs website MyJobGroup published a survey earlier this month, asking 1,000 people to determine their use of social media at the office.

Employees spend an hour a day during work time on Facebook, thus accounting for £14 billion pounds of lost work time.

On the plus side – at least they are not round the pub gassing to their mates. But you have been warned…

Almost every enhancement Google makes to its core product is inevitably now seen through the prism of its intentions to move into vertical areas of search, especially travel.

Google’s planned acquisition of airfare data company ITA Software can be blamed for that.

So, assuming for a moment that Google wants to leverage its acquisition for a major consumer-focused play, the data and search technology/expertise obtained through buying ITA is one side of the equation.

But user experience and how such functionality might be used on within search results is something the brainiacs at Google are probably developing themselves.

Live updating of search results (using Ajax or flash) are common on the next generation travel search sites, such as Kayak, Zugu, Momondo, Skyscanner et al.

And it looks like Google has started testing similar web technology…

NB: Could not be replicated in the UK.

NB: Hat-tip Andrew Girdwood of BigMouthmedia.

So what do hotel suppliers, airlines, ancillary service providers and travel distribution players face when they think about China?

I’ll be attending the annual China Travel Distribution Summit in Beijing on September 15-16 – coming at a time when China’s tourism industry has grown 19% in first half of 2010 and is expected to exceed original estimates of $205 billion.

Eva He, editor of TravelDaily.cn and the organizer of China TDS, shared some thoughts in an email interview.

EN: What are some of the important trends featuring in the upcoming Travel Distribution Summit?

EH: One key theme is how China can lead the way in helping the world’s travel industry rebound from the recession.

China’s travel market is still one of growth in all areas.  I’m also very interested in how travel companies should be using the social media tools to engage with Chinese consumers and build brand loyalty.

Many travel industry professionals [in China and internationally] do not realize how important social media is and how to get started.

Trends in the Chinese search engine market is also important. Google’s well-documented troubles in China have presented significant challenges to international travel companies who are relying on SEM tactics to reach Chinese online travelers.

Understanding and projecting the future of search in the country – what players will dominate, how they will do business, and how they will interact with travelers – is a key to navigating this dynamic market.

EN: You mentioned Google’s troubles. And recently Jeff Immelt, CEO of GE, as reported by Financial Times, shared his frustration with China, saying “I am not sure that in the end they want any of us to win, or any of us to be successful.” Why should international travel companies even look at China?  Isn’t it a waste of money and time on an unfair playing field?

EH: While most global industry leaders are charting their courses prudently, some however, are looking at creating exciting new opportunities or new markets in the midst of the entire crisis.

China has remained the hotspot of world’s travel market by achieving 19% growth rate for the first half of 2010, measured by total domestic travel revenue.

China’s domestic air traffic also achieved 17.6% growth on a year-to-year basis. For global companies, China is no long the future. It is the present.

China has become the focus of a world that is looking for a way out of swamp.

The anticipated deregulation of China’s outbound travel and GDS market will present the significant growth opportunities to the world’s travel and tourism industry.

EN: What advice do you have for foreign travel companies who are looking at the Chinese market?

EH: First, building a strong local team should be the No.1 priority. Trust them, empower them and listen to them.  For some reason, this seems to be harder than it sounds.

Second, in the China market you need to learn from making mistakes. It is always hard to make no mistakes while you are entering a new market. Learning from your own mistakes is the best way for future improvement. Be patient to your local team.

Third, you need to focus on the long-term growth rather than on the short-term P&L.

Fourth, you need to invest time in talking to the consumers. Chinese travelers are different. Do not try to duplicate all your winning strategies into your China operation

NB: Discount code for Tnooz readers – 10% discount off of the current rate of RMB 3800 from the event. Use the code “CTS555″ when you register and obtain a $50 off. Register.

NB: Chinese tourists photo credit Jing Daily.