Consumers will pay the price if search giants are let off the hook

Over the past twenty years, the digital revolution has transformed the way we travel.

It spawned new online travel agencies, comparison sites and other independent businesses that vastly expanded our access to the wonders of the world, opened our eyes to new cultures and experiences, and created memories with family and friends that will last a lifetime.

As part of this revolution, Skyscanner was founded in a bedroom in Edinburgh twenty years ago. Thanks to the Internet, it became one of the first online flight search and comparison companies in the world.

Since then, the company has grown to employ more than 1,400 people across three UK offices and in Tokyo, Miami, Barcelona, ​​Singapore and Shenzhen. We now search 80 billion prices per day, helping millions of travelers discover new places.

But despite this vibrant expansion of consumer choice and opportunity, Britain’s digital market is under threat.

The platforms, like Google, that helped catalyze this growth have slowly but surely turned into gatekeepers who set the rules of the market for their own benefit, putting the entire system at risk.

These gatekeepers prioritize their own services over those of others, regardless of merit or consumer preference. This unfairly limits choice, stifles competition and puts a damper on innovation – the lifeblood of the digital economy.

Google is such a gatekeeper. In the mid-2010s, Google launched its own travel comparison products, Google Flights and Google Hotels, and we welcomed the competition.

In the years that followed, however, Google has used its control over online searches to favor its own products and services ahead of rival companies. It puts Google Flights options ahead of other search results, quietly directing consumers to their own product.

This ‘self-preference’ is difficult to observe, but the impact on our choice and wallet over time is very real.

Imagine if almost every supermarket in a city was owned by one company. When you enter one of these supermarkets, you are greeted in the best places with the company’s own brand products and you have to search the back of the store for the best, most popular or your favorite products.

Over time – something you’ll inevitably be in short supply of – you’ll be less and less likely to go to the back of the store, meaning you’ll unknowingly miss out on a wide range of products you might prefer.

And yet these products can only be made more visible and accessible if the companies that supply them pay a fee to the supermarket company.

But it’s not just about visibility; it is also about fairness and the fundamental principles of competition that drive markets to better serve consumers.

When a single entity has disproportionate power to influence consumer choice, it doesn’t just hurt competitors. It deprives customers of the full range of options that should be offered to them, as well as better prices. And it inhibits innovation.

It’s fair to say that Skyscanner probably wouldn’t exist if we’d launched after 2015, given the way the system works now. And in 2023, it will be even harder for a smart entrepreneur with a bright idea to launch a new online travel business that will benefit consumers.

The Government has rightly recognized that allowing a small number of global technology companies to set the rules for our most innovative British businesses is unsustainable. It has designed a landmark new bill, the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers (DMCC) Bill, which will enable Britain’s globally respected regulator – the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) – to create a level playing field for all British companies. .

But we are concerned about reports that the government is now considering making changes to the bill, including making it easier for gatekeepers to appeal CMA decisions designed to create more competition and choice.

This would be a serious mistake; any change to the appeals process that encourages these companies, with their endless legal resources, to challenge and overturn every CMA decision would be unwise.

When it comes to innovation, speed is crucial. If today’s gatekeepers were allowed to endlessly demand small changes to ranking algorithms or app store terms, it could stifle promising startups within weeks.

For this to be effective, the CMA must be able to make and enforce decisions quickly.

Let’s be clear: it is greater opportunity and competition that drives innovation and investment. We were fortunate that our founders had their idea and the opportunity to put it into practice 20 years ago, before the rise of Google Flights and self-bias.

They knew that with hard work and the right strategy, they had a fair chance at creating and scaling a successful online business.

The government should not allow the gatekeepers to pull up the drawbridge behind them; if they do, British technology and consumers will be worse off.