IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sef/csefwp/547.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does Direct Connect Benefit Travelers?

Author

Abstract

Direct connect refers to a business practice that has become fashionable again in the travel industry after a period of irrelevance. Airlines provide direct access to their sales systems to travel retailers, who can thus avoid dealing with traditional indirect distribution intermediaries, such as GDS aggregators. Although this practice is often advertised as pro-competitive, we show that it may actually harm consumers, especially in very competitive environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Jorge Padilla & Salvatore Piccolo, 2019. "Does Direct Connect Benefit Travelers?," CSEF Working Papers 547, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    • Handle: RePEc:sef:csefwp:547
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.csef.it/WP/wp547.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rey, Patrick & Tirole, Jean, 2007. "A Primer on Foreclosure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 33, pages 2145-2220, Elsevier.
    2. Oliver Hart & Jean Tirole, 1990. "Vertical Integration and Market Foreclosure," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 21(1990 Micr), pages 205-286.
    3. Rey, Patrick & Vergé, Thibaud, 2016. "Secret contracting in multilateral relations," TSE Working Papers 16-744, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Dec 2020.
    4. Michele Bisceglia & Jorge Padilla & Salvatore Piccolo, 2019. "When Prohibiting Platform Parity Agreements Harms Consumers," CSEF Working Papers 542, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    5. Cazaubiel, Arthur & Cure, Morgane & Johansen, Bjørn Olav & Vergé, Thibaud, 2018. "Substitution Between Online Distribution Channels: Evidence from the Oslo Hotel Market," Working Papers in Economics 8/18, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    6. Germain Gaudin, 2019. "Vertical relations, opportunism, and welfare," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 50(2), pages 342-358, June.
    7. BjØrn Olav Johansen & Thibaud Vergé, 2017. "Platform Price Parity Clauses with Direct Sales," Working Papers 2017-45, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    8. Henrick Horn & Asher Wolinsky, 1988. "Bilateral Monopolies and Incentives for Merger," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(3), pages 408-419, Autumn.
    9. Andre Boik & Kenneth S. Corts, 2016. "The Effects of Platform Most-Favored-Nation Clauses on Competition and Entry," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(1), pages 105-134.
    10. Justin P. Johnson, 2017. "The Agency Model and MFN Clauses," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(3), pages 1151-1185.
    11. Jacques Cremer & Michael H. Riordan, 1987. "On Governing Multilateral Transactions with Bilateral Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(3), pages 436-451, Autumn.
    12. McAfee, R Preston & Schwartz, Marius, 1994. "Opportunism in Multilateral Vertical Contracting: Nondiscrimination, Exclusivity, and Uniformity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(1), pages 210-230, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michele Bisceglia & Jorge Padilla & Salvatore Piccolo, 2019. "When Prohibiting Platform Parity Agreements Harms Consumers," CSEF Working Papers 542, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    2. Bisceglia, Michele & Padilla, Jorge & Piccolo, Salvatore, 2021. "When prohibiting wholesale price-parity agreements may harm consumers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    3. Papadopoulos, Konstantinos G. & Petrakis, Emmanuel & Skartados, Panagiotis, 2021. "The ambiguous competitive effects of passive partial forward integration," UC3M Working papers. Economics 33354, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    4. Konstantinos G. Papadopoulos & Emmanuel Petrakis & Panagiotis Skartados, 2022. "The ambiguous competitive effects of passive partial forward ownership," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 89(2), pages 540-568, October.
    5. Do, Jihwan & Miklós-Thal, Jeanine, 2023. "Partial secrecy in vertical contracting," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    6. Petrakis, Emmanuel & Skartados, Panagiotis, 2022. "Disclosure regime of contract terms and bargaining in vertical markets," UC3M Working papers. Economics 34144, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    7. Patrick Rey & Thibaud Vergé, 2004. "Bilateral Control with Vertical Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(4), pages 728-746, Winter.
    8. Bakaouka, Elpiniki & Milliou, Chrysovalantou, 2018. "Vertical licensing, input pricing, and entry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 66-96.
    9. Rey, Patrick & Vergé, Thibaud, 2016. "Secret contracting in multilateral relations," TSE Working Papers 16-744, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Dec 2020.
    10. Nocke, Volker & Rey, Patrick, 2018. "Exclusive dealing and vertical integration in interlocking relationships," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 183-221.
    11. Bisceglia, Michele & Padilla, Jorge & Piccolo, Salvatore & Shekhar, Shiva, 2022. "Vertical integration, innovation and foreclosure with competing ecosystems," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    12. Emmanuel Petrakis & Panagiotis Skartados, 2022. "Vertical Opportunism, Bargaining, and Share-Based Agreements," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 60(4), pages 549-565, June.
    13. Emanuele Bacchiega & Olivier Bonroy & Emmanuel Petrakis, 2018. "Contract contingency in vertically related markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 772-791, October.
    14. Allain, Marie-Laure & Avignon, Rémi & Chambolle, Claire, 2020. "Purchasing alliances and product variety," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    15. Johannes Münster & Markus Reisinger, 2021. "Sequencing Bilateral Negotiations with Externalities," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 096, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    16. Milliou, Chrysovalantou, 2020. "Vertical integration without intrafirm trade," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    17. Emanuele Bacchiega & Olivier Bonroy, 2021. "Secret contracting and Nash-in-Nash bargaining," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 1(11), pages 1-7, November.
    18. Milliou, Chrysovalantou & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2007. "Upstream horizontal mergers, vertical contracts, and bargaining," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 963-987, October.
    19. Lømo, Teis Lunde, 2015. "Risk sharing mitigates opportunism in vertical contracting," Working Papers in Economics 10/15, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    20. Moellers, Claudia & Normann, Hans-Theo & Snyder, Christopher M., 2017. "Communication in vertical markets: Experimental evidence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 214-258.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agency Model; Direct Connect; Distribution Channels; Travel Industry.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L42 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Vertical Restraints; Resale Price Maintenance; Quantity Discounts
    • L50 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - General
    • L81 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Retail and Wholesale Trade; e-Commerce

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sef:csefwp:547. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dr. Maria Carannante (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cssalit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.