
Hotels blame OTAs.
Commission is the villain. Visibility is the excuse. Distribution is the justification.
But commission isn’t the real threat.
Dependency is.
100 rooms. 70% occupancy. €180 ADR.
≈ €4.6M annual room revenue.
If 60% comes via OTAs:
≈ €2.7M controlled by third parties. ≈ €540,000–€675,000 in commission.
Then:
That hurts.
But it’s not the biggest loss.
The biggest loss is this:
You didn’t build a reusable asset.
Let’s assume just 20% of those OTA guests return next year.
That’s ≈ €540,000 in repeat revenue.
If you owned the relationship. If you controlled communication. If you could segment and time correctly.
But you don’t.
So you reacquire them.
At full acquisition cost.
Again. And again
Every year without owned guest data means:
Full occupancy hides the fragility. Data ownership exposes it.
Distribution-dependent hotels
Relationship-driven hotels
The first compete on visibility.
The second compete on relevance.
One rents growth. The other compounds it.
How many of your guests can you reach tomorrow — without paying anyone?
If the answer is “not enough,” you don’t have a channel issue. You have an ownership issue.
Commission is a cost. Dependency is a strategy failure.
Strategy failures compoundStay Connected
In the next issue:
High Occupancy. Low Profit. What’s Really Going On?
If this shifts your perspective,
We just one message away..