Commission crosshairs target Booking. Online giant to demonstrate compliance with the Digital Markets Act

Brussels – Booking must demonstrate to the European Commission that it complies with the obligations of the Digital Markets Act (DMA), contributing as a “digital giant” to ensuring a fair and open European market. As of today (Nov. 14), the web booking platform is required to demonstrate compliance with European law on online marketplaces as a gatekeeper.

Digital “gatekeepers” have been identified by the Commission (we are talking about platforms like Apple and Meta) for their impact on the European market. They are companies with a turnover of at least €7.5 billion in the EU for the previous three years, a market valuation of more than 75 billion, and a number of end users per month of at least 45 million, combined with 10 thousand corporate users in the EU. Added to this is control of one or more platform services in at least three member states.

Being a gatekeeper involves a specific commitment to avoid unfair competitive practices, the heart of the DMA, so Booking was required to change certain features of its service.

One of these was the possibility for resellers of services using the platform, such as hotels, to offer different (even better) prices and conditions on their own websites or channels. Goodbye to the so-called parity clauses, banned by the DMA, which required commercial users to charge the same prices and terms on all platforms and websites.

It’s a clear ban on Booking finding other gimmicks to enforce parity clauses. It will not be possible for the platform to increase commission rates or de-list business users’ offers with other prices. Such a guarantee promotes fairer competition, encouraging innovation and lower prices.

Another obligation the Commission has imposed on Booking is to guarantee “real-time and continuous” access to customer data, allowing companies to have other commercial profiling information. It also allows transferring data generated on the “parent platform” to other alternatives, giving room for different and more competitive offers.

Booking, in its report on DMA compliance, has outlined its actions to comply with European standards, along with other reports dealing with consumer profiling. What emerges is an extensive discussion with the stakeholders, such as associations representing partners or consumers. The result from the report seems to be good, and there is talk of “positive feedback”. Among the associations consulted is the Association of Hotels, Restaurants and Cafes in Europe (HOTREC), which, apparently, is not convinced by the actions proposed by the digital giant.

“To date, the company has failed to ensure its compliance and has not effectively communicated the necessary changes to business users by yesterday’s deadline,” states Hotrec. The Association continues to believe that the report is inadequate with respect to the DMA and that some of the proposed changes “are cosmetic”.

“European hotels, mostly small and medium-sized businesses, are counting on the DMA to resolve unfair business practices and damages caused by Booking.com,” adds HOTREC’s Director General Marie Audren. From her words comes indeed an appeal to the Commission to start a “non-compliance investigation, given the lack of transparency, for example, on how Booking’s algorithms work.

The report submitted by the digital giant will have to be carefully evaluated, also considering the views of stakeholders. In order to be able to ask for clarifications and give assessments regarding Booking’s proposed solutions, the Commission has organized a workshop on compliance on November 25, in which stakeholders such as HOTREC are involved. At the same time, Booking was asked to keep all documents and information so that progress could be monitored.

The final word, once again, rests with the EU executive. In any case, it is better not to break the law on digital markets, as the risk is sanctions of up to 10 per cent of the previous year’s worldwide turnover, increasing to 20 per cent in case of recidivism.