The Innkeeping Blog

Sorry for the long post, but it’s been a while since I updated the innkeeping community on my discussions with TripAdvisor.  For those of you unaware of what PAII has been doing, I have been representing on behalf of innkeepers some requests for change on the TripAdvisor site.   The issues below represent a selection of matters I have been spotlighting for TripAdvisor staff during quarterly meetings at their headquarters outside Boston.

Change and progress are taking time, but I’m glad to report that some thing are changing and will continue to change.  The TripAdvisor staff have been willing to listen and engage in meaningful conversation every step of the way since I became involved. 

The work we are doing keeps the B&B industry visible in their eyes. 

 

Site Features and Property Pages

1. ”Map this Hotel” link.
This link on most B&B pages leads to an Expedia map that doesn’t show the property’s location.  The property only shows on a map, if that property happens to give inventory to Expedia.  Yet on the same property page, a Google Map image already shows.  Using the “Map this Hotel” link can feel like a “bait and switch,” if it leads to a dead end.

Suggestion/Request:  Omit the “Map this Hotel” link for those properties not on Expedia (since you already have a Google map on the property page), or have the link refer to a Google Map like the one already shown on the page.  The “bait and switch” feeling should be removed for those properties not on Expedia.

Dec 08 Update:  TripAdvisor indicated this link might change to “Map This Area” or something a little more accurate and all-encompassing for it’s purpose. 

May 09 Update: The map actually shows the location of all property addresses, so it’s not technically wrong.  The TA staff seemed to agree that it’s not an ideal experience for the traveler, and that we’ll keep this on the list for discussion.  I suggested at least changing it to something like “Map this Address,” to make it more accurate with what shows up.

2. Average Rate
Some properties display an average rate, and others do not.  This seems to have changed since I last visited, when all properties seemed to have an average rate displayed.  I am hoping to learn more about how the average rate is determined and posted, and if innkeepers have the ability to edit the rate if it is wrong.

Suggestion/Request:  Allow innkeepers the ability to post rate ranges that may reflect the seasonal or other pricing changes of that moment

Dec 08 Update:  Still don’t understand how this happens and how innkeepers can control this for the purpose of accuracy and correction.

May 09 Update: Any properties that provide inventory to one of TA’s commerce partners (i.e. Expedia, Hotels.com, etc) are given an average rate based on actual inquiries and real rates offered on these sites.  If an inn is not on a commerce site, TA uses a third-party system to find rates, which has been the problem – many times they are not accurate.  We also learned while on site that an inn that USED to have inventory on a commerce site might have average rates showing from when that inn previously provided inventory – it could have been years ago.  Much of this seemed to puzzle the TA staff, and they were feverishly looking into the issue while I was there.  TA is launching more and more tools for owners to update their own pages and property information.  I advocated for letting owners enter their own rates, and the TA staff seemed to think this was the best way to go…except for inns that have live inventory with commerce partner sites – those inns’ prices will still be determined by live data capture.

3. Hyperlink to B&B’s website
There is no hyperlink to a B&B’s web site on the property’s page on TripAdvisor.  Currently, this can be a dead end for visitors who want to learn more than what the page has to offer (i.e. see the inn’s web site, make a booking, etc).  Due to there being no direct link to a B&B’s web site, innkeepers cannot tell how valuable TripAdvisor is in referring business. Their web traffic analytics cannot currently pick up on direct traffic from TripAdvisor.  If innkeepers could see the actual traffic they are getting, their respect and admiration for TripAdvisor could increase substantially.  Plus, visitors to your web site would appreciate not having to open a new window to search for the property separately.

Suggestion/Request:  Put hyperlinks to the properties’ own web sites on their TripAdvisor pages, like you do with restaurants on TripAdvisor. 

Dec 08 Update: Seems this went from “possible” to “not probable.”  What commerce opportunities are there for TripAdvisor with providing direct links to B&B sites?

May 09 Update: I reiterated the importance of this, but there is nothing to report at this time.

4. Availability search tool – “Plan the perfect trip” Box
When using the availability search fields on the TripAdvisor home page (entering city and check in/out dates), a visitor might encounter another dead-end with regard to B&Bs.  If a property does not provide inventory to Expedia, and a visitor uses the availability search to find properties in a city for specific check-in and check-out dates, the current “No B&Bs/Inns Found” message can be misleading.  There indeed may be B&Bs in that city, which have availability.  TripAdvisor CEO said they would be willing to change the language.

Suggestion/Request:  Adjust the language of the “no availability” message to “No B&Bs/inns are showing availability through this site, although some might have the availability you are looking for.  Click here to show all B&Bs/inns regardless of price availability or online booking option.” Make this appear as one complete phrase.

Dec 08 Update:  No progress.

May 09 Update:  The new “Regardless of Availability vs. Confirmed Availability” approach is better, but B&Bs seem to be even MORE hidden now.  Only hotels show in search.  B&Bs only show if someone scrolls down on the left and opens the “Property Type” menu to choose B&Bs.  Why can’t the system default to all types of lodging?  At least bring back the tabs, or move “Property Type” option to the top.  TA staff said they’ll look into this and seemed to agree that B&Bs were too hidden.

5. Book Now button (new issue)
Some properties of a “Book Now” button on the upper right side of their page.  It seems logical that only those properties with active inventory on commerce partner sites would have that button.  But we found at least one example of an inn that has no active inventory on a commerce partner site, and yet it had the “Book Now” button.  The button led to a dead-end, in which we typed in several options for check-in/check-out, and there was no inventory to be found. 

May 09 Update:  The TA staff said they’d speak to their people who work directly with Hotels.com and Expedia about this problem.
6. Ubiquitous use of word Hotels
I’ve mentioned this since the beginning of our conversation with TripAdvisor.  The word “hotels” is used everywhere throughout the site as the least common denominator term for all kinds of lodging.  B&Bs are not hotels, but we are found only behind the word “hotels.”  I’m suggesting that the word “accommodations” or “lodging” be used when an all-encompassing term is appropriate.

May 09 Update:  Little chance for change with this one.  TA staff tells me that “hotels” is a much more translatable term.  Considering how many international travelers use TripAdvisor, that is possibly understandable.  I still contend that English language versions of the site could use more generic terms in certain places.

7. Changes on “Other Destinations” box on lower right side of destination pages.
Many popular city pages have a box on the lower right side that says “Other Destinations,” which has included direct links to other city pages in the area, i.e. Lancaster, Pennsylvania’s page will have a link to Gettysburg or Philadelphia.  A recent change was made to this box, and now the links go directly to the “hotels” pages for those cities, rather than the destination page.  This seems a bit misleading and cuts out what seems to be what the traveler is after – learning about other relevant destinations.  The links do say “Gettysburg Hotels,” but it’s still misleading.

May 09 Update:  TA staff agreed that it is a strange experience and will investigate why the change was made.

8. Use of property names in advertising (new issue)
While TripAdvisor uses much of a property’s page in the way of advertising, sponsored links, etc., there is one area that seems to cross the line of ethics and/or good taste.  If you look at a B&B’s page, you’ll notice a “Best Deals” box on the right side, i.e. Swiss Woods B&B has “Best Deals: Swiss Woods.”  The problem is that all the “best deals” in the box are simply hyperlinks to nearby hotels completely unrelated to Swiss Woods.

May 09 Update: TA staff will investigate and they seemed to agree with my reasoning that this needs to be changed.  I am encouraged that this will be changed.

9. Old forum threads
Many destinations have forums for visitors and potential visitors to get information on the destination.  Most forums are loaded with local experts (some tapped as official “destination experts” by TA), who answer questions about the area.  It was brought to our attention that threads older than 6 months that have not had any content updates will be “closed.”  This means a lot of valid content might not be accessible.

May 09 Update:  TA staff were not aware of this change and are looking into it.
Reviews and Reviewers

1. The “Did you stay here?” qualifier.
A problem with the current review rules is that someone who didn’t stay at a B&B could leave a review about all aspects of the B&B, including value, check-in, room and cleanliness.  It is reasonable to allow someone to leave a review if he or she didn’t stay at the inn (i.e. if the guest had a negative interaction with an innkeeper during the reservation or cancellation process).  But that reviewer should not be able to comment or review any other aspect of the experience than the booking or cancellation experience. 

Suggestion/Request:  First ask the reviewer, “Did you stay at this property?”  If the answer is no, then the reviewer cannot review any aspects of the inn except something like “reservation process,” and their review should have less of an impact on the property’s “Popularity Index” than a review by someone who had a full stay. 

Dec 08 Update:  Cleanliness, Rooms and Value should not be able to be reviewed if someone didn’t stay at the inn.  A management response indicating they didn’t stay is not enough.

May 09 Update:  It doesn’t seem likely that the TA staff I meet with will advocate for this change.  They did bring up a good point though.  If the question is asked if someone has stayed at the property, it could cause even more people to leave reviews (possibly fraudulent) in cases where the traveler didn’t stay at the property.  And, a point which is reasonable, someone’s negative experience with a cancellation or some other pre-stay interchange is just as valid to that traveler as someone who stayed 4 nights.  If it is any consolation, I was told that the ratings of cleanliness, rooms, etc do not have an impact on the Popularity Index like the overall rating does.  I still think someone who doesn’t stay shouldn’t be able to drill down and rate things like cleanliness or value.

2. Age of new reviews
Although I cannot recall the exact rule, reviewers can review of a stay that might have happened a few years ago.  How far back can you go with a review?  There are two problems with posting a review of an experience that was long ago.  First, it shouldn’t be seen as a “new” review.  Currently, the new review will automatically be listed chronologically by date of stay, NOT date of review, so it could come up first on the list.  A visitor to the site might easily mistake it as a review of a recent stay, if he or she doesn’t pay close attention and find the “date of stay” information.  Also, it was unclear if the review impacts the Popularity Index as a new review, rather than an old review.  I was told that the older a review gets, the less impactful it is on the Popularity Index.  I’m wondering if the age of the review or the age of the date of stay is used for the index.

Suggestion/Request:  When someone leaves a review today of a stay from 8 months ago, the review should automatically be listed in chronological order by date of stay.  If the timing of a review impacts the Popularity Index, be sure the date of stay is taken into consideration, not the date of review.  Limit the time delay between a date of stay and date of review to one year.

May 09 Update: I was told that TA changed the oldest possible review age from five years to three years.  It’s a move in the right direction, but I still believe someone should not be able to leave a review more than 12 months after their actual experience.  I was told that, with regard to the Popularity Index, a recent review of an old stay is considered old…meaning if someone leaves a review today of a stay 3 years ago, it would have minimal or no impact on the index.  I still advocated for reviews to be sorted chronologically by date of stay, so that a new review of a 3 year old stay does not default to the top of the list.

Management Responses and Conflict Resolution

1. Removing censorship of management responses.
In the online review game, innkeepers should be given the ability to fully defend themselves against any negative accusation – especially false ones.  While reviewers are allowed to remain anonymous and virtually safe from any negative comments by the innkeeper, innkeepers and their businesses are at great risk of suffering from negative and false reviews.  We hear from innkeepers all the time that their management responses do not get posted, and it seems TripAdvisor staff is being entirely too restrictive.

Suggestion/Request:  As long as the innkeeper’s response is germane to the respective review, doesn’t reveal the identity of the reviewer or break any important rules about online content, the innkeeper should be able to say just about whatever he wants.  The reviewer is anonymous, so there is no repercussion to an innkeeper’s response.

Dec 08 Update:  TA staff indicated they’ve done a good deal of internal analysis of their management response review process and intend on making some changes. 

May 09 Update:  I hear through the grapevine that this has gotten better.  No innkeepers have come to me lately complaining that their management responses were not posted.

2. Abeyance Period
Currently, a negative review (false or true) can get posted online very quickly.  There can be a tendency for guests to embellish, and there are plenty of stories of false or fraudulent negative reviews that do not get removed.  A negative review on TripAdvisor, and by extension the Popularity Index, can have an immediate and severe impact on an inn’s business.  Yet, there is little recourse against a false or embellished negative review except to leave a management response (a relatively anemic solution).  If a purpose of the site is to “Get the Truth,” an innkeeper should be able to immediately challenge a review based on facts or other criteria that make sense.  During that review period, a review should be removed.  By not removing a harmful and potentially false review, an inn’s business may suffer.  If a false review remains for weeks or months, and is subsequently found to be in fact false or fraudulent by TripAdvisor, the damage to the inn has already been done.  Allowing a negative review under question to remain indicates TripAdvisor may not care about the impact of that review on the inn.

Suggestion/Review:  If an innkeeper wants to challenge the validity of a review, the review should be held “in abeyance,” during which time TripAdvisor staff investigates.  The TripAdvisor team already investigates challenges posed by innkeepers, which seem to take many weeks to get resolved.  If the TripAdvisor team is already investigating challenges, why not remove a potentially harmful review during the investigation?  Reviews should only be held in abeyance if claims are made that the guest never stayed nor interacted with the property, or if there are factual disputes being made by the innkeeper about the review.  If the innkeeper is offended by the opinion of a legitimate guest and simply wants to challenge the opinion, then a review might not need to be held in abeyance.  In addition, there should be a way for the innkeeper to communicate with the anonymous guest through TripAdvisor’s messaging system.  If an innkeeper cannot confront his accuser due to anonymity, at least he should be able to communicate with the person about a review.  The purpose could be positive (i.e. to thank the reviewer) or to address the negative (i.e. to inquire about the harshness or other aspect of a review).  Many times guests will lie, embellish or place false blame, and the truth (remember “Get the Truth, Then Go) might not be seen in the review.  Guests do not likely know that a negative review impacts the Popularity Index, which in turn greatly impacts an inn’s business.  An opportunity for the innkeeper to send a note directly to the anonymous reviewer could diffuse many problems and lighten the burden of your staff.

Dec 08 Update:  It turns out that innkeepers CAN communicate directly with the anonymous travelers.  Innkeepers need to join TripAdvisor as travelers, and then they can use the peer-to-peer messaging service.  As long as the innkeepers identify themselves as such and don’t harass any travelers, this is a decent solution for communicating with guests about their reviews. 

May 09 Update:  I suggested TA provide innkeepers with a guaranteed response time frame for resolution of any conflicts, but that doesn’t seem likely.  I was told that innkeepers should have their issues resolved within 2 weeks…maybe 3.  If the TA staff is overloaded, sometimes they do not communicate back with the property if no changes are to be made with the reviews in question.  I explained that innkeepers need closure on the issues and should be told what the decisions are.  TA staff indicated there may be a new conflict resolution form to fill out, which would allow faster routing of the issue to the right personnel.  I told TA staff that PAII would like to intervene if any issues are still lingering without any word of resolution (either good or bad) for a long period of time.  The abeyance period doesn’t seem likely any time soon, so I will keep pressing for it.  I still believe that an inn’s business can suffer unjustifiably by an embellished or false review and should be taken down during the review process.  But, TA staff feel that taking it down would be depriving the site visitors from possibly valid reviews.

Tags: Online Reviews, TripAdvisor
Posted in Online Review Sites, Online Reviews, TripAdvisor | 14 Comments »