After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and kept growing ad revenue

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by reaperducer on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @11:13AM (#18922054)

And Booking pushing advertisements for the exact same hotel I've just checked on their service. I can't understand how that would seem like a good idea to anyone.

This happened to me just last week. Unfortunately, it's the least of Booking's user-hostile traits.

Like sending me e-mails pestering me to review a hotel I checked into less than an hour before.

Or flashing "Hurry! Only 1 room left!" when I know for a fact that the hotel I'm inquiring about is 90% empty.

Or flashing "23 people booked this hotel in the last 24 hours!" when I know the inn only has 4 rooms and is in probably the lest popular destination in North America.

Unfortunately, there's a particular place I have to travel to which only has one motel within 70 miles, and the only way to book a room in advance is through Booking.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by JAlexoid on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @12:02PM (#18922507)

A hotel can be 90% empty and Booking could have only 1 left in their inventory to sell.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by reaperducer on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @01:36PM (#18923550)

A hotel can be 90% empty and Booking could have only 1 left in their inventory to sell.

There's a difference between "Only one room left!" and "We only have one room left!"

It's called lying.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by r3bl on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @12:52PM (#18923053)

The opposite works as well.

On one occasion, I've tried booking straight from the hotel, it told me no rooms available for the selected dates. I've tried Booking, and sure enough, that same room I had my eyes on was available.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by com2kid on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @01:47PM (#18923679)

Larger hotels have blocks of rooms reserved for the different booking services.

The opposite can also happen, Booking shows no rooms, and calling the hotel results in a room. It just means Booking's block of rooms is all rented out, not that the hotel itself is all rented out.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by distances on Friday January 18, 2019 @04:06AM (#18938018)

These are so obvious that I find them mostly hilarious, even if they are clearly dark patterns. I can see how less experienced hotel bookers can fall to this trap though. I do end up booking with them, as for some reason they usually are cheaper and have more stock listed in Europe than the main competitor Hotels.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by rchaud on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @11:44AM (#18922350)

All those little tricks you described are part of a strategy usually called Conversion Rate Optimization. They do this because it works. What you described was likely A/B tested. Some visitors to the site saw the nagging message, while others didn't.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by ABCLAW on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @12:07PM (#18922559)

Turns out you can grease your numbers by manipulating user sentiment.

Who cares if you need to lie a little bit, right?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by JAlexoid on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @12:01PM (#18922496)

Actually... That one works, if certain conditions are met.

They also don't update that fast.

You looked at a hotel in London and a certain hotel is the best revenue generator in the area - for a little bit you're going to see that ad... or maybe you're going to see that ad for a long time, if there are no better options to advertise.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by pelario on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @10:20AM (#18921530)

I've thought the same (and heard the same booking "blunder"), until I visited a city I had visited before, and went for the exact same hotel...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by dhimes on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @11:02AM (#18921952)

But did you need an ad to get you to do that? Seems like that's the one ad you don't need to see.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by JAlexoid on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @12:06PM (#18922538)

That depends on where you see that ad. If you search for that particular hotel on Google, it's going to have an ad from N online travel agencies(OTA).

If you do a broad search on OTA website, then you're likely to book the same hotel that you stayed last time... Thus pushing it up is a great way of getting you to book... But that depends on how much the hotel is contributing in marketing

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by TuringTest on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @10:45AM (#18921788)

Surely that would make sense the next time you visit the city, not for the same visit.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by bdamm on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @10:57AM (#18921907)

There’s some marketing theory about brand reinforcement near a purchase creating a more likely customer later. I’m not a marketer though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:After GDPR, The New York Times cut off ad exchanges and k... by maxxxxx on Wednesday January 16, 2019 @12:48PM (#18923009)

The easiest way to get "brand reinforcement" is to deliver a good product. I will remember them. Right now it seems they want to get "brand reinforcement" through constant nagging which already causes me to dislike the brand.

[ Parent | on HN ]