My criticism at the time was this:  I did not particularly like the fact that they required a guest to furnish proof of stay when wanting to post a negative review about a B&B, but didn’t necessarily require it of those wanting to write a positive review.  While I realize this was an “innkeeper friendly” policy, and noted that they aimed to please innkeepers, but felt in the long run it might be a disservice.   My concern was two fold.  First, I felt it in someway violated the “spirit” of Web 2.0.  Why treat one guest differently than another?  Web 2.0 is supposed to be this great “democratization” of web content, right?  But I was also concerned that their site would be filled almost exclusively with positive reviews, because it was more difficult to post a negative review.  Who was going to spend time digging up a receipt or other form of proof of stay?  If guests browsing the site only saw positive reviews everywhere, when they anticipated encountering a spectrum of reviews, they might not consider the review portion of BedandBreakfast.com very legitimate.

After a couple of years of hindsight and speaking or emailing with hundreds of innkeepers on the topic of online reviews, I think requiring proof of stay when wanting to post a negative review is a good policy, simply because the damage that a false negative review can cause is too detrimental.  I think the online review phenomenon is certainly a net-positive for our industry – no question about it.  But when transgressions can be prevented, they should be prevented.  Innkeepers work too hard to fall victim to fraudulent, false reviews.  Maybe I was thinking as much as a consumer as an industry representative…concerned that I wouldn’t see negative reviews that might have made it to the site if it weren’t for a restrictive procedure.

I understand the challenges that TripAdvisor would face if they started requiring proof of stay for any negative reviews, since there are over 50,000 hotels and 19,000 B&Bs on their site.  They would have to add a heck of a lot of staff to verify the negative reviewers; and even then the system would not be foolproof.  A challenge, indeed.

Maybe what the NFL is doing at www.nfl.com is a happy medium.  If the buyer actually bought the product (i.e. a Philadelphia Eagles jersey) from their site, then the site indicates the reviewer is a “Verified Buyer.”  People can still review an NFL product, but if they didn’t buy through NFL, then the “Verified Buyer” badge is omitted.  I like this, because as a consumer I can choose to read only the Verified Buyer reviews…or all of them.  The verification adds legitimacy to those reviews, and that’s a good thing.

In the end, the B&B has everything to lose and the reviewer has nothing to lose.  So, it’s a good thing to offer some protections to those who have everything to lose.

Keep in mind that the issues below represent a portion of the ongoing matters we discuss.  There are some larger issues at play (i.e. not requiring proof of stay from the reviewer when an innkeeper protests a fraudulent review) that we will often discuss, but the list I try to bring to the table involves impactful issues that I think could be changed in the near or foreseeable future, if our case is compelling enough.

Availability Search

Issue:

95% of B&B/Inns don’t offer online inventory to TA’s commerce partners.  It’s likely a lot of people use the availability search tool when doing a generic search.  Travelers will see 0% of B&B/Inns available in nearly 100% of search results – leads them to think no B&B/Inns are really available, since they may not be aware it is both date-sensitive and only shows properties with inventory on sites like Expedia.  People see TripAdvisor as a site for ALL properties, not just those paying to provide online availability.  It’s not intuitive for people to click the “Not confirmed” radio button to see all B&B/Inns regardless of availability.  It appears that all Vacation Rentals appear, even though availability is not confirmed.

Suggestion:

Treat B&B/Inns the same as you do Vacation Rentals. Allow the traveler to “Contact Manager” to inquire about availability.  Or change the “Confirmed v. Not Confirmed” language to something more indicative of the true availability situation.  Or build an API integration with B&B availability systems to capture availability data.

Update:

TA reps acknowledged this is an issue, but they also said that those who show up in the availability search results are paying a premium (through commissions to Expedia, Hotels.com, etc).  On one hand, I get their point.  Those who pay more, get more.  But, when 95% of an industry is left out, there should be a solution.  We discussed the possibility of bridging their availability system with systems that aggregate B&B availability data (i.e. RezStream, Webervations, RezOvation, SuperInn, Reservation Nexus, Availability Online, BookingCenter, Innkeepers Advantage, etc.) and bypass the GDS platform.  It wouldn’t necessarily be a live booking opportunity, but rather a sharing of availability data, so that most B&Bs with available rooms would show up in the results set.  The guest could contact the innkeeper directly to make a booking.  The TA staff is interested in this idea; their CEO said the same at our New England conference last fall.  No promises on this one, but this may be discussed behind closed doors at their HQ in the coming weeks.  There certainly has to be a good business case for it, and I’m quite confident one could be made.

“Map this Hotel” Link

Issue:

This link on most B&B/Inn pages leads to an Expedia map that doesn’t show the B&B/Inn property anywhere on a map. The B&B/Inn only shows if that property happens to give inventory to Expedia.  This might be about 5% of all B&B/Inns. Using the “Map this Hotel” is “bait and switch” for 95% of B&B/Inns.  And, it’s a bad customer experience.  They’re expecting to see a map of that B&B/Inn.  Another strange thing is that some properties have the link at the top, and others don’t.

Suggestion:

Any one of a few options are better for both the property and the visitor.

1. Make it much more obvious on this map where the property in question is actually located.
2. If they’re not on Expedia, show a Google map instead when the link is clicked.
3. Omit the link altogether if the property is not offering inventory on Expedia, and omit the “bait and switch.”
4. Change name of link to something more accurate, such as “Map of Area.”

Update:

While I was at the office, I had their team click on the link to show what I was talking about.  We discovered that there was not even a crosshair symbol to mark where the address in question was, which used to be the case.  So, the Map this Link feature is useless and misleading for B&B/Inns that are not on Expedia.  To their credit, they said they would look into this, because it’s not a good user experience.  But, some form of a map that shows nearby properties on sites like Expedia will likely remain because it’s a revenue source.

Average Price per Night Display

Issue:

Some B&B/Inns display an average rate, and others do not.  Oftentimes the average rate displayed is incorrect by a large margin.  This misinformation could cause some properties to lose business.  There has never been a clear answer on how an innkeeper can get this information corrected, if it’s wrong.  Why does it show on some B&B/Inns, but not others?

Suggestion:

Only display if it’s a real-time feed from live inventory information.  Or, allow innkeepers to edit the price – they’ll always want it to be accurate.  Or display as a price range – many inns have both inexpensive and expensive rooms.

Update:

This is an area that still seems to be a bit cloudy.  If a property is engaging in commerce with an online commerce partner (like Expedia), the system pulls data into TA that reveals an average of prices being offered on those sites – in one fashion or another.  Again, this is still a bit confusing to me.  If you do not provide live data to a commerce partner, then some third-party system is able to find your rates (maybe scanned on your availability calendars?) and averaged for your TA listing.  Then there are some properties that don’t show any average rate.  I’m not sure anything will be changed about this.  If an innkeeper finds the displayed rate is way off, they can contact TA for a fix.

Missing B&B/Inn Reviews

Issue:

On “Tourism Pages” and attraction pages (“Things to Do”), only hotel reviews are displayed on the “Recently Reviewed” box on the left bar.

Suggestion:

Include B&B/Inns wherever there is a collection of reviews of lodging properties.

Update:

I was wrong.  There is a formula used for displaying hotel or B&B/Inn reviews in these boxes.  In cities where B&B/Inns outnumber hotels, you’re more likely going to see B&B/Inn reviews than hotel reviews.  I must have been testing the site in cities where hotels far outnumber B&B/Inns.  So, they’ve taken into account the local ratio of B&Bs-to-hotels for this, which is good.  They do the same for the “Top Rate” hotels and B&Bs on Tourism Pages.  In cities where B&B/Inns outnumber hotels, “Top Rated B&Bs/Inns” show before “Top Rated Hotels.”  This makes for a better user experience, because users are more likely looking for a B&B/Inn in those cities.

Ubiquitous Use of “Hotels”

Issue:

The word “hotels” is used throughout the site as the least common denominator term for all kinds of lodging. B&B/Inns are not hotels, but we are found only behind the word “hotels.”  It puts first in the mind of the traveler to consider or only look for hotels.  An innkeeper summed it up well in an email to me:

A bed and breakfast is not a hotel, and should never be confused as one.  A hotel has an operator and front desk that is open 24/7, a bed and breakfast does not.  A hotel always accepts walk-in customers at any hour of the day or not, a bed and breakfast does not.  A hotel may offer a “breakfast buffet or breakfast bar”, a bed and breakfast offers gourmet meals prepared fresh each morning.  Whenever I get a call late at night and I am feeling generous by offering to get out of bed to accommodate a guest, I am usually rewarded by preparing a breakfast for people who decide they would rather sleep in.  What’s more is that my rates reflect the extra work and amenities I provide.  I constantly get phone calls from guests concerned only with the price.  When I try to explain that a bed and breakfast is, by nature, not a hotel, I am informed that I should not be listed under hotels.  So, long story short, it would be helpful if TripAdvisor did not list my property in a way that misleads the customer.  It is a disservice to me and a disservice to the customer.

Another innkeeper said:

We send a follow-up message to every guest and in it put a request that they place a review on TripAdvisor and/or BedandBreakfast.com.  I can’t tell you the number of people who tell us “I didn’t know you could review B&B’s on Trip Advisor, I thought it was only for Hotels.” The majority of these folks are from the over 50 generation who aren’t as computer literate as the younger folks and won’t go past the first page to find out that B&Bs are listed and reviewable.

Suggestion:

Use Accommodations, Lodging or Hotels/B&B/Inns instead.  Or, add “B&B/Inns” to the top and side bars where “Hotels” and “Vacation Rentals” are shown.

Update:

This might be a losing battle, folks.  The TA staff say that “hotels” is an overall much better term for generic lodging searches.  They say it translates better for the international crowd.  And, TA is heavily into the SEO game and seem to have their site optimized around the term “hotels.”  Maybe rather than asking them to change the ubiquitous term, they should consider getting “B&Bs/Inns” listed beside “Hotels” and “Vacation Rentals” on some of the prime real estate areas of their site.  We’re listed side-by-side once someone hits the “Hotels” link for a particular city, but to get more people thinking about B&B/Inns as a legitimate FIRST option, rather than a SECONDARY option, we should be seen more easily.  More innkeepers would likely patronize TA’s Business Listings program, if we were brought out of the woodwork.

Not All Reviewers are the Same

Issue:

Someone who didn’t stay at a property can review elements such as cleanliness, rooms, sleep quality and value.  Doesn’t seem fair to the property owner, because it likely impacts their rating/scores on TripAdvisor.

Suggestion:

Ask the question “Did you stay here?”  If the answer is no, remove part of the survey that only someone who stayed there would have experienced.

Update:

The TA technical staff that was at our meeting liked my approach to this issue.  He said it made a lot of sense and would talk to his folks more about it.

Dates of Stay and Review Gap

Issue:

TripAdvisor currently allows people to leave reviews up to three years between date of stay and date of review.  There are two problems with posting a review of an experience that was long ago. First, allowing such a gap between stay and review will allow for more inaccurate reviews. When the moniker says, “Reviews you can trust,” how trustworthy can someone’s memory be 36 months later?  Secondly, reviews of old stays shouldn’t be seen as “new” reviews. Currently, the new review will automatically be listed chronologically by date of review, NOT date of stay, 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.   Anyone who takes time to author a review 3 years after they stayed is likely either on a vendetta or is being asked to stack the deck.

Suggestion:

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 – not date of review. Limit the time delay between a date of stay and date of review to one year.

Update:

Their technical folks said they would look into making the date of stay more obvious on the review.  Sounds like they might not be interested in changing this particular policy.  They couldn’t confirm or deny if a recent review of an old stay was treated like a new review or old review when it comes to the algorithm used for the Popularity Index.   They did counter my hypothesis that anyone writing a review today of a stay 2 years ago was on the attack with the possibility that maybe the guest wants to share a story about a fantastic stay.  True.  Nevertheless, even though I don’t think it’s a big issue for B&B/Inns or hotels, I think the gap should be shortened even more.

Business Listings

Issue:

The hyperlink, which costs between $300 and $500 this year with various discounts ($600 – $1,000 next year?) is a “no-follow” link, meaning the innkeeper gets no SEO help from the link.  Some internet marketers in our industry will tell innkeepers that if the link was a “follow” link, the annual price might be worth it, even if no one clicks on it, simply for the “link juice” from such a well-ranked site.  On the same token, the widgets and badges TripAdvisor wants B&B/Inns to use on their web sites have“follow” links back to TripAdvisor, and won’t work if you try making them “no-follow.”  Meaning, TA is getting “link juice” from you by you having the widgets on your site.  Even with this, I still like seeing TA and BedandBreakfast.com widgets on B&B web sites.

Suggestion:

Remove “no follow” from hyperlink code.  Earn some goodwill.  No other paid listing services in our industry have “no-follow” links.

Update:

No changes are likely on this one, at least in the short term.  TA competes with the very properties on their site in the SEO world.  For example, if you search for “Swiss Woods B&B” on Google, of course the Swiss Woods web site is ranked first in the organic listings.  But not far below it is the TA page for Swiss Woods, right there on page 1.  Obviously TA is hoping people will click on their link too, if not instead.   I don’t necessarily hold a grudge against them for this; after all, their business was partly built on successful SEO implementation.  Nevertheless, I wonder how negatively their SEO strategy vis-à-vis small B&B properties would really be impacted by taking the “no follow” code out of these links.  I don’t think there would be any noticeable impact.  As TA continues to press our industry to get on the Business Listings train (which PAII has promoted this year in a 50% deal with TA, and TA continues to advertise the program through our web site and email newsletters), finding more ways to increase the value of the paid listing will be important.  They are adding value to the program in other ways, which is great, so maybe this won’t be much of an issue in the long run.  Nevertheless, I’m not sure the folks at TA saw this one coming.  Despite this issue, I still think the Business Listings program is worth signing up for this year and capturing traffic that might have left your TA listing and not returned.

Star Rating

Issue:

Some B&B/Inns have a star rating next to their name, and some don’t.  There is no explanation as to what this means, except for it saying “Hotel Class” on the property page (but not on the listings page).  Is it quality?  What criteria is used?  This could certainly be misleading, when everything else around them on this page hints to either user ratings or scoring.  Everyone sitting around our table knew that the star rating has to do with the type of property and services offered – not quality.  For example, a 3-star property (which most B&B/Inns are) do not have restaurants, but 4-star properties do.  And since everything around the page has to do with quality or ratings (the reviews, scores, Traveler Rating, Popularity Index, etc.), it is easy to see why someone might think that a particular B&B/Inn is ranked 3 out of 5 stars based on scores and ratings.  It is confusing and possibly misleading.

Suggestion:

Remove it for B&B/Inns (it seems only about 1 in 20 or so have the stars), or have a quick, accessible link to explain what it means.

Update:

The TA staff said they would look into somehow adding an explanation on their site about the “Hotel Class” system.

Do reviews marked as “helpful” get more weight in the Popularity Index?

Issue:

A question was recently brought to me – do negative reviews get marked as “helpful” more often by travelers than positive reviews?  TA allows travelers to rate other reviews as “helpful,” and you can see how often a particular review has been rated as such.  My instinct tells me that negative reviews are more often rated as “helpful,” because these reviews more likely reveal information about an experience that helped other travelers in their research, and maybe ultimately avoid a property.  Positive reviews might provide details that are similarly found in other positive reviews, i.e. the breakfast was great, the beds were comfy, etc.  I suppose for highly-ranked properties on TA, travelers expect to see such comments, thereby rendering those reviews as not as helpful as the occasional negative review.  This in itself is not really much of an issue, except when I place it in the context of the Popularity Index, which has a complicated, secret formula behind it.  I wondered out loud to the TA staff if reviews that are rated as “helpful” by more travelers weigh more in the algorithm of their Popularity Index.

Suggestion:

Because negative reviews might be more often ranked as “helpful”, don’t allow the “helpful” count to impact the Popularity Index.  If it does, then it stands to reason that negative reviews might be more impactful on the Popularity Index than positive reviews.

Update:

This was a new one to the TA staff, so they didn’t have much of a response.  Plus, when it comes to the Popularity Index, they are often tight-lipped.   I asked if they could do a little internal research to find out if in fact within the total count of reviews that were rated as “helpful”, if the negative reviews are more often rated as “helpful” than positive reviews.  I don’t think this is a major issue, but you can possibly see why a helpful, negative review could be quite damaging.  And, since false or embellished negative reviews can still get past their fraud detectors, it’s important to keep tabs on these kinds of things.

Conclusion

Well folks, that’s it for now.  I continue to give the staff at TA a lot of credit for having spent several half-days with me going over our laundry list of issues.  Over time, they have made some changes and always earnestly listen to what we have to say.  In order to stay relevant to both their traveler base and the property owners, they have to be ever-changing, ever-improving.  I like to think of our little visits as helping them in that quest, but at the same time bringing as much parity to B&B/Inns as possible.

They have recently restructured some of their internal teams, so that property owners will get more dedicated staff for their needs and interests, as well (I imagine) to solicit more participation in Business Listings.  This is good; they realize more and more the importance of keeping the property owners happy.  If innkeepers are happy, they are probably more likely to use and promote TA in their marketing strategies.  The more our industry is seen as a both a strong segment of the lodging universe, as well as a revenue source in their business model, the more important our meetings will become.

There is a reason you see TripAdvisor at the Innkeeping conferences and trade shows, advertising their services in our magazine, etc.  They deem B&B/Inns and innkeepers as an important customer base.  Therefore, our dialogue will continue and I’m guessing you’ll see many more changes as the months and years come.

Not a member of PAII?  I encourage you to join and support the association and our efforts.  We’re the only association, as far as I know, as deeply committed to working with entities like TripAdvisor on behalf of the B&B industry.  Your support is vital, and we deliver a fantastic portfolio of benefits and education in return.  Go to www.innkeeping.org to learn more.

TripAdvisor started to hear the complaints right away from innkeepers.  Our Innkeeping Forum was buzzing with discussion, and some innkeepers were encouraging folks to start a campaign to get as many innkeepers as possible to submit grievances.  And this was all happening at the same time TripAdvisor was offering a 50% off deal to innkeepers on their relatively new Business Listings program.  You can read all about that here, but the gist is – pay an annual fee and have your phone, email and web link added to your TripAdvisor property page.  Innkeepers on the fence about Business Listings were scratching their heads – why pay for Business Listings if B&Bs can’t be readily found on the Tourism Pages like they had been for years?

I give credit to TripAdvisor.  They have some senior staff who are involved with PAII.  Brian Payea, their Trade Relations Manager, pops in from time-to-time on our forum to offer innkeepers advice, clear up misunderstandings and to announce things like the changes made earlier this week to the Tourism Pages.  They listen to what innkeepers have to say.  I’ve been meeting with them regularly for nearly two years, and they’ve always been willing to listen – and have made some improvements to their site based on our ongoing dialogue.  So, what changes were made this week?  First of all, “Top-Rated B&Bs” are back on the pages.  Thank you, TripAdvisor!  Furthermore, if you go to a Tourism Page that has more B&Bs than hotels, you’ll notice that “Top-Rated B&B”s are shown above “Top-Rated Hotels.”  This makes good sense for the web site visitor, because if they’re checking out a town with more B&Bs than hotels, they’re probably more interested in B&Bs.  This is TripAdvisor’s way of improving the experience for the web site visitor.  When doing homework on Cape May, New Jersey, it makes good sense to showcase the B&Bs first.

On Tourism Pages where hotels outnumber B&Bs, like Gettysburg, Pennsylvania,“Top-Rated Hotels” are displayed above “Top-Rated B&Bs.”  No problem with that, since the B&Bs are back on the page.

For towns where there are a small handful of total properties (B&Bs and hotels), like Lititz, Pennsylvania, they have co-mingled both types of properties under “Top-Rated Accommodations.”  I think this is a great improvement too, because you’re going to find that B&Bs are generally better rated than hotels, and this allows these properties to shine.  It makes sense too.  If you have a town with one decent hotel, two bad motels and one really good B&B, this allows the right property to be seen as an attractive option stacked against others.

Knowing the 50% off Business Listings promotion that TripAdvisor has been running with PAII comes to an end on May 8, the questions have been coming in at a faster pace – is it worth the money?  I spoke at the Preferred Inns of New Jersey meeting yesterday and the Minnesota B&B Association conference on Monday and Tuesday this week – it was a popular question among attendees.  With only about 3 months of hindsight (Business Listings launched in January), it’s a tough question to answer with absolute authority.  Based on what I’ve heard from innkeepers who are tracking the traffic from their new links and my own opinion – yes, I think it’s worth it.  And I think these changes to the Tourism Pages improve the investment, because B&Bs have a better chance of shining brightly – especially where they likely deserve it.  Plus, the promotional pricing will not last long, so now is the best time to jump in with two feet.

Plus, TripAdvisor may soon be experiencing even more traffic, now that Facebook has integrated their new Open Graph program with TripAdvisor.  Learn more about that here.

If interested in signing up your B&B for Business Listings, go to www.tripadvisor.com/BusinessListings and use the coupon code “TRIPDISC” to get 50% off.

Recently we announced a new partnership with TripAdvisor that allows only innkeepers in the B&B industry to enjoy 50% off rack rate pricing for their Business Listings program.  In addition, those innkeepers who are not members of PAII who sign up during our promotion (ends April 8), will get a free Silver Membership in PAII as an additional incentive.  TripAdvisor’s Business Listings program allows property owners to add their phone number, an email link and a link to their own property’s web site to their TripAdvisor property page.  This may seem like a minor addition to your TripAdvisor page, but it could be very meaningful in capturing bookings you otherwise might have lost.

Since announcing the promotion with TripAdvisor, the PAII office has fielded numerous questions.  I’m using my column this quarter to do a little Q&A about the program and how this does or does not change the nature of our relationship with TripAdvisor.

Is this really worth it?
Especially in 2010, here’s why I think it is in fact worth the investment.  First and foremost, the price will double next year, so now is the time to give it a shot and test the effectiveness of having the added contact information and links on your TripAdvisor page – especially the direct link to your web site.  To that point, you invest a lot of your marketing energy and dollars in your own web site.  You want potential guests getting to your site as quickly as possible, so you have the best chance of keeping their interest high in your property.  And, you know you’re going to receive the highest possible net rate when people book directly with you.  It naturally follows that a visitor to your TripAdvisor page – if she likes what she sees – will have a better chance of making it to your own web site if a link is right there in front of her.  I call this the “stickiness factor,” meaning you want impressed TripAdvisor visitors to stick with you and not move on to check out the competition.  Also, with this new link, you can now start tracking the amount of traffic coming to your web site from your TripAdvisor page.  This doesn’t reveal how many people are viewing your TripAdvisor page, but it does tell you how strong of a referring site TripAdvisor might be.  We are hearing from many innkeepers that their TripAdvisor link is among their top referring links.

How does it feel to now be in bed with TripAdvisor?
This one cracks me up a little, because if you know anything about running an international trade association, you know that we’re really in bed with EVERYONE in our industry!  I know that sounds a little absurd, but running an association is like running the United Nations.  While on one hand you have to be neutral territory for much that happens in our industry, the fact also is that everyone involved in our association is also our customer or member.  At the end of the day, our core constituency is the innkeeper who runs the inn, but we also work hard to nurture a vibrant marketplace where business can be conducted.  In that sense, we try bringing parties together to conduct business, but we also try negotiating advantages for both buyer and seller.  In that sense, we’re in bed with TripAdvisor as much as we’re in bed with other great vendors who have been involved with this industry for decades.  BUT… this partnership does NOT change the nature of PAII’s role as an advocate for innkeepers with regard to the policies and features of TripAdvisor’s web site.  I still have my laundry list of items I think need to change on their site, so that B&Bs receive more appropriate levels of exposure (we’re often too hard to find), so that innkeepers have better help in getting grievances resolved, and that the policies they put forward are fair and not damaging to B&Bs.  You all know I’ve been a tireless advocate for our industry, and the folks at TripAdvisor know that’s not going to change.  And here’s my little secret (shh…), now that the B&B industry is a source of revenue for TripAdvisor, there is more incentive for our friends at TripAdvisor to keep listening to and responding to our needs.  It helps my cause when I travel to Boston to visit with their senior leadership!  I know for a fact (from personal emails I have received) that some innkeepers are vehement objectors to even the existence – let alone policies – of TripAdvisor and other review sites.  They are hoping that PAII will take a flamethrower to TripAdvisor, rather than come up with a promotion like this.  To those folks I say that my modus operandi will likely always be to work with a spirit of diplomacy, candor and forthrightness – with an eye always towards cooperation – with any entity that has a great impact on the business of innkeeping.

Will signing up for this impact my placement on TripAdvisor?
No.  Properties that sign up will not see any change to their Popularity Index ranking or any search results on your respective city pages.  TripAdvisor’s leadership has made it clear that Business Listings is a service enhancement only and does not impact any other aspect of your presence on the site.  Those who don’t sign up won’t be penalized.  Those who do sign up won’t have any advantage other than the benefits that come with having your phone, email and web link under your property’s name and picture – and as explained before, I think there are some distinct advantages.

Does this mean you favor TripAdvisor over the B&B directories in our industry?
We favor working with any directory or other source of business that is going to have an impact on your business.  There is plenty of space on the web for more than one directory of B&B properties and more than one place to leave and read reviews.  If we encountered any entity – including B&B directories – that were having a negative impact on thousands of B&Bs, we would be at their door lobbying for change.  Same goes for B&B directories that are having a positive impact on thousands of inns and innkeepers – we seek and appreciate their involvement in PAII.  With 32 million unique visitors each month reading reviews of properties and clicking through to make bookings, working with TripAdvisor is good business for our industry.

Is there any other way to get people viewing my TripAdvisor page to MY web site, besides participating in Business Listings?
The only thing I can think of would be if you want to invest in sponsored links or display advertising on your own property page or on other areas of TripAdvisor.  Knowing what the average B&B spends on marketing per year, this is probably way out of the question.  I think innkeepers should look at this much in the way you look at investing in some of the productive B&B-specific directories in our industry.  In those cases, you want folks to find you and get to your web site as well (in some cases, you’re happy to have them book directly on those directories and not even get to your site, but that’s a different issue) – and you judge your investment in the annual dues by the level of traffic and bookings you can measure in return.  You should do the same here.  Of course, your TripAdvisor visitors could always just open a new browser and use a search engine to find your site – and we know this happens now when visitors like what they see in your reviews.  But taking that step out of the equation and letting them be one click away from your site is what you want.

It seems that TripAdvisor’s availability search tool and some changes in the site’s layout are obscuring B&Bs.   Why would I pay for this Business Listings if we’re going to continue to be hard to find?
My pursuit to ensure B&Bs are conspicuous lodging options on TripAdvisor remains very important.  I agree it’s not where I would like it, and the folks at TripAdvisor are listening to our comments about the obscurity issue.  There is no question – from an economic standpoint – that if TripAdvisor expects the Business Listings program to be successful in the B&B industry, that it would be counterintuitive to make it harder to find B&Bs.  I would imagine TripAdvisor hopes your Business Listings becomes a top referring link.  To that end, it would be unwise to obscure B&Bs – I know this, and so do they.  I don’t think their site designers are necessarily the same folks I always deal with, who understand the issues the B&B industry has with the site.   There are specific changes I am suggesting to pull B&Bs out of the woodwork – and soon I will visit their offices outside Boston to discuss them in detail.  I will give TripAdvisor credit for being great at listening to my many “suggestions,” and for making changes in the right direction with some of them.   That being said, the Business Listings program is still a business decision innkeepers should consider making, even though the site is not all that you want it to be.  I guess the question you should ask yourself is.. is the site good enough and important enough to warrant spending some money to add the ever-important contact information and link to your web site?

Innkeepers are discussing these and many other TripAdvisor-related issues on the forums at www.innkeeping.org.  We encourage you to join the discussion.

If you’re ready to learn more or sign up for Business Listings at TripAdvisor and take advantage of the PAII-negotiated discount and free membership offer, click here.  You’ll need to use the coupon code “TRIPDISC” to get the Silver Membership and/or the 50% off pricing.

Every property page has a “Best Deals” box on the right side, in which are likely included sponsored links to various properties in your area.  Prior to the change, the title of the box would have said something like “Best Deals: 1889 WhiteGate Inn,” only to find links to competing properties that are completely unrelated to the 1889 WhiteGate Inn.  It was misleading and felt unfair to the people at the inn who worked hard to develop their business and brand.   I understand that business on the web and within TripAdvisor can buy Pay Per Click advertising using terms that might contain competitors’ names.  For example, if you Google “iPhone,” the first ad you’ll see on the right side is for Blackberry (I can’t imagine what they’re paying for that, by the way).  It would be wrong if the Blackberry ad said, “Best Deals for iPhones” and took you over to the Blackberry page.  That’s sort of what this “Best Deals” box felt like.

The small change TripAdvisor made (thanks to the staff I’ve been working directly with and their CEO), is that the box now says, “Best Deals: Asheville,” in the case of the 1889 WhiteGate Inn in Asheville, NC.  It no longer conspicuously uses the name of the B&B to drive traffic to competing properties.  I believe this results in a better experience for the web site visitor and is much more palatable for innkeepers everywhere.  Thank you, TripAdvisor, for listening and acting!

And, while I had seen these changes in the works while I was at the TripAdvisor offices earlier this month, I see today that BedandBreakfast.com members now have a direct link to their listings on that directory within that “Best Deals” box.  These links to the BedandBreakfast.com listings (while they say “Official Website”, which isn’t totally accurate unless your BedandBreakfast.com listing is your inn’s official website) are a good way to maintain the industry’s competitive  approach to hotels.  Before this addition, you’d most likely only find competing hotels in that “Best Deals” box.  Efforts to keep potential “inngoers” looking at potential inns instead of being baited to hotels are good in my book!

BEFORE:

AFTER:

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.