Behind Google’s Headlines: What the DMA Really Means for Hotels

By now, it’s hardly a secret that Google isn’t thrilled about the Digital Markets Act (DMA). Ever since the EU’s landmark law began reining in self-preferencing in online search, Google has made a habit of warning that its compliance is somehow bad news for everyone else, especially for hotels, airlines, and restaurants.

Its favorite talking point? That by “forcing search engines to remove direct links to hotels, flights, and restaurants, the DMA now favors a handful of large intermediary websites.”

It’s a dramatic line, one Google has been repeating for months, and again just recently, after unveiling its latest compliance proposal for travel search. But as with many good stories, the facts don’t quite match the plot.

From 0.8% to 30% or how to put a bit of drama in your PR headline

Google’s central claim rests on the idea that “European businesses like hotels, travel services, and restaurants have lost up to 30% of online traffic since the DMA obligations became applicable.” The source? A company called Mirai, which describes itself as “a hotelier’s partner in the common objective of maximizing the potential of direct sales, commercial independence, and access without intermediaries.”

The bias is clear – a firm engaged in helping hotels avoid intermediaries and benefiting financially from the click revenue from hotels associated with this service, has found that Google’s compliance supposedly benefits intermediaries.

Leaving aside the bias issue, there are also other issues with this statement, including the relevance of discussing such impact considering the European Commission has serious concerns the solution implemented is non-compliant (investigation pending), questionable representativeness of the underlying data and the fact that it focuses on a narrow set of traffic (from ads) which may have indeed shifted, but not necessarily to the disadvantage of hotels.

Still, let’s humor the argument. Say hotel traffic really did fall by 30%. That would sound catastrophic; until you read Mirai’s own follow-up analysis. In a later update, the company clarified that the overall impact of Google’s DMA adjustments amounted to a mere -0.8% in direct bookings across Europe. Keep in mind this isn’t a 0.8% drop in total bookings, just those being done through hotel websites. We do not know how much of this drop was compensated by an increase in indirect bookings, which could indeed lead to a higher overall reservation figure. As Mirai notes itself: “It does not seem like a huge impact, especially in a record year for many hotels in Europe”.

When The Gatekeeper Pretends to Protect Competition

The real story here isn’t about hotels or booking links, it’s about Google diverting attention from its failed compliance and seeking to sow division between its business users.

The DMA doesn’t ban direct links or force Google to promote intermediaries. It simply tells gatekeepers not to give themselves preferential treatment compared to their competitors, a rule Google has famously struggled with for over a decade across many sectors in online search. Google therefore has to stop giving its own travel intermediary and comparison services favored visibility on the search results page. Google Hotel Ads or proposed “Book Direct” modules are exactly that: a sophisticated intermediary embedded in search results. It is a question of leveling the playing field between Google and other intermediary services, ensuring competitors to Google get a fair chance to compete with Google.

Self-preferencing is a core aspect for Google’s strategy: it keeps users engaged longer and longer in its own ecosystem and ultimately leads to users seeing more ads, and thus more money in Google’s coffer. Because when a hotel receives a click from Google’s Ads, they are paying for this traffic. The clicks are not truly direct bookings, but sourced traffic, for which the hotel incurs a cost to Google. Google’s gloomy warnings about “harm to small businesses” are thus less about defending hotels and more about defending its own privileged position. Because if fair competition feels like punishment, maybe the playing field was never level to begin with.

In a debate with such high stakes, it is worth looking past the flashy headlines and dramatic stats. Google has spun a seemingly compelling story, but one that shifts attention away from the homework it still hasn’t done under the DMA.

This Op-Ed has been authored by:

Emmanuel Mounier, Secretary General of  eu travel tech