...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Air Transport World >Bookings Battle
【24h】

Bookings Battle

机译：预订战

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

It has become a ritual: Every few years, usually when global distribution system (GDS) contracts are up for renegotiation, the airlines challenge the distribution status quo and try to loosen the hold that GDS companies have had on airline distribution. The animosity is rooted in the days when GDS companies routinely hiked segment fees by 9% or 10% every year, offering nothing new in exchange. "They were fat, dumb, happy and evil," a distribution veteran who did not wish to be identified said. Along came the Internet, followed in short order by the 9/11 attacks in the US in 2001. The airlines had both the need and the tools to fight back. In 2003, they traded their web-only fares for segment fee discounts, signing the now much-maligned full-content agreements (FCA). In 2006, they threatened GDS companies with alternative distribution systems, the so-called GDS new entrants, or GNEs. Then they dropped the GNEs like hot potatoes when they got better economics from the GDSs.
机译：它已成为一种习惯：每隔几年，通常是在全球分销系统（GDS）合同需要重新谈判时，航空公司会挑战分销现状，并试图放松GDS公司对航空公司分销的控制。这种敌意根源于GDS公司每年例行地将部门费用每年提高9％或10％，却没有提供新的交换条件的根源。一位不愿透露姓名的经销资深人士说：“他们胖，哑，高兴和邪恶。”随之而来的是互联网，紧随其后的是2001年美国发生的9/11攻击。航空公司既有需要也有反击的工具。在2003年，他们将仅使用网络的票价交换了分段费用折扣，从而签署了备受争议的全内容协议（FCA）。 2006年，他们以替代分销系统（所谓的GDS新进入者或GNE）威胁GDS公司。然后，当他们从GDS获得更好的经济效益时，就像热土豆一样抛弃了GNE。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号