Travel Agents Have Six Reasons Not To Believe The Huffington Post

Some people never learn. Same with some media. An article first published by the Huffington Post in 2015—which Travel Market Report debunked—has now been published again. But “6 Google Flight Tricks That Are Better Than Any Travel Agents” is wrong six ways to Sunday, say travel agents who reviewed the article’s pseudo-journalism.

“The headline is stupid,” said Stacy Small, founder of Elite Travel International. One of the six tips is to use a feature called “I Feel Lucky” in Google Flights, where you can tap into the search engine’s knowledge of what you might like, in order to figure out the best place to go and the best routing to get there. Small said it gave her Paris on a 15-hour connection on Delta Air Lines, instead of a much more convenient nonstop flight.  In terms of the destination it chose for her, Small noted, “I like Paris, but I was just there recently.”

“It’s the same stuff, they just recycle,” she told TMR. “My clients are way too busy. They don’t have the time to spend searching for flights. The reason people use a human agent is we do all this for them. Google is not checking to make sure their kids are sitting next to them, requesting special meals, or entering their TSA data.”

Other parts of the article were just plain misleading, said Michael Holtz, CEO of SmartFlyer. He said good agents have access to unpublished fares, so where “Google might show $7,000 for business class from New York to London, we will have that same airline for $5,000.”

Holtz said that trusting Google to find the best prices can cost consumers lots of money. As an example, he cited a family of four going to Cancun. Searching Google Flights will give you the lowest fare at which four seats are available. However, a smart travel agent might find two seats at a lower fare, saving significant money.

He also noted that in some cases discounted business-class fares can be lower than coach, something that online searches won’t pick up if the consumer specified lowest economy class fare.

Both our travel experts also pooh-poohed the article’s contention that Google Flights tells consumers if better fares become available—noting, “That’s what we do.”

The article misses the forest for the trees, Small said. While it may offer pricing insights, many clients care about other things as well, such as having Wi-Fi or power sources to charge their various devices. “I know the difference between a new Airbus A380 and an old 747. I know which planes on which airlines have Internet. I know which seats on which airlines on which planes have power ports.”

Holtz noted that even comparing business class fares is only a starting point. “Some airlines have sloping seats, others have flat beds, and it depends on the aircraft. We know these things. Sure, Google will find you the lowest business class fare to Paris. But you will end up sitting in a 1990s wedge seat.”

He snickered at the tip about using the map-based fare search to help decide where to go based on price. “If you don’t know where to go, pick up a quality magazine like AFAR, which has great ideas on experiences, or Travel + Leisure. Get some ideas, and then talk to a good travel agent. Going on vacation someplace because it’s $50 cheaper is silly.”

Among the other issues missed by the writer was that Google can’t help if consumers want to use miles for upgrades. “Google won’t tell you what fare classes you can use to upgrade with your miles, and Google won’t tell you which partner airlines you can use your miles on,” Small said. “So you might think you can use your miles, and then you find out the fare you bought can’t be upgraded.”

She also scoffed at the assertion that Google Flights is better than an agent at finding the best connecting options, noting that all hubs are not created equal. “There are some airports that are easy to connect in, and others to avoid at all costs,” she said. “The novice isn’t going to know that.”