Hotel social media has found a new favourite villain: OTAs. Every week, I see someone vehemently explaining that “if you depend on Booking, you’re doing things wrong”. And I admit that, for a while, I even nodded along. Until I began to examine the data, commercial tensions, demand elasticities, marginal distribution costs… and realised the conversation was far more complex than the slogan.

I am struck by how those who criticise that dependency most rarely explain how to achieve that longed-for commercial independence. And they do not because the path is not glamorous: it requires discipline, investment, consistency, a multi-year strategy, team culture and acceptance that certain markets or seasons will continue to come through the channels that convert best: OTAs.

In my early years, I thought a hotel could “emancipate itself” overnight. Today, I look back on that naïve enthusiasm with a knowing smile. Operational reality—raw, unvarnished and without Instagram filters—teaches you that a healthy mix is not decreed: it is built. And it takes time.

There is also an uncomfortable truth: sometimes it is not that you depend on Booking; it is that Booking depends on your inability to generate direct demand. And that hurts. But it is liberating once you start correcting it.

I have learned that the conversation is not about OTAs: yes or no. It is about when, how much, for which segments, in which booking windows and under which pricing strategy. Reducing the debate to “Booking is bad” is like saying that a restaurant fails because it buys too much bread: you would be ignoring everything that happens behind the scenes.

At heart, criticising OTAs has become a kind of professional rite of passage. A gesture that positions you, earns likes and creates a sense of moral authority. But real hospitality is not built on slogans. It is built on grown-up decisions.

That is why today I want to share a reflection that is more uncomfortable, more honest and far more useful than any anti-distribution mantra.

Dependence on OTAs is not a problem: it is a symptom

When an OTA dominates a hotel’s customer acquisition, it is not because the OTA is “bad”, but because the hotel:

• Does not have a sufficiently differentiated value proposition
  If your product does not stand out, the OTA decides for you through filters and price.

• Has not built a memorable brand
  The guest remembers Booking.com, not your hotel.

• Has not developed a genuinely effective organic and paid digital strategy
  Poor SEO, poorly targeted campaigns, generic copy, no retargeting.

• Does not accurately measure cost per acquisition (CPA) and compares channels without rigour
  Many hoteliers believe direct bookings are “cheaper” without calculating:
  technology + payments + maintenance + payroll + marketing + customer service.

• Has not worked sufficiently on its online reputation
  On OTAs, reputation is an amplifier; in direct bookings, it is an engine.

But of course, saying this on social media rarely earns applause. Saying that “Booking is the devil” does.

According to a study by Phocuswright, more than 45% of European travellers say they discover new hotels through OTAs before visiting their website. And another relevant figure: the average OTA conversion rate is twice that of most hotel websites. That should humble us just enough to make us want to learn. (Source: Phocuswright, European Consumer Travel Report 2024)

Three truths few people say publicly

• 100% of hotels worldwide need OTAs to some extent
  Even the strongest ones.
• Reducing intermediation requires sustained investment and a medium-term vision
  There are no shortcuts.
• There is no perfect mix; there is an optimal mix for your context
  80/20, 60/40, 90/10… What matters is not the number, but the logic behind it.

So what do we do? A grown-up alternative to empty rhetoric

This is where many “experts” stop the conversation. I prefer to continue it, even if it hurts a little more.

These are the real levers—the ones that genuinely work, not the ones from viral posts—for relying less on OTAs:

• Define your value proposition precisely
  Without real differentiation, no direct booking strategy can sustain itself.

• Build a coherent, recognisable brand
  Guests must be able to remember your hotel without needing an intermediary.

• Optimise your website to convert—not to look pretty
  Booking should be easier for the guest than getting a coffee.

• Invest in marketing consistently, not emotionally
  SEM, funnel management, email marketing and remarketing: the mix must be scientific.

• Manage your online reputation as if your revenue depended on it
  Because it does. Very much so.

• Calculate the true CPA of every channel
  Do not compare perceptions; compare numbers.

• Use OTAs with strategic intelligence, not frustration
  Tactical segments, markets with high acquisition costs, short stays, low loyalty…
  OTAs are your allies when you know what to use them for.

In closing (without demonising anyone)

Whenever I hear someone proclaim that “we depend too much on Booking”, I think the right phrase should be different: “we depend too much on not having done what needed to be done sooner”. And that, however uncomfortable, is an open door. Because what depends on you can be changed.

OTAs are not the enemy. The enemy is complacency. The enemy is a lack of strategy. The enemy is believing that commercial success is a matter of bravado on social media rather than operational discipline. The enemy—I am afraid—is sometimes ourselves.

A hotel’s maturity is not measured by how much intermediation it has, but by how it governs it. And a hotel that governs its channels, understands its demand and makes decisions rigorously is a free hotel. With OTAs or without them.