Home Upload Photo Upload Videos Write a Blog Analytics Messaging Streaming Create Adverts Creators Program
Bebuzee Afghanistan Bebuzee Albania Bebuzee Algeria Bebuzee Andorra Bebuzee Angola Bebuzee Antigua and Barbuda Bebuzee Argentina Bebuzee Armenia Bebuzee Australia Bebuzee Austria Bebuzee Azerbaijan Bebuzee Bahamas Bebuzee Bahrain Bebuzee Bangladesh Bebuzee Barbados Bebuzee Belarus Bebuzee Belgium Bebuzee Belize Bebuzee Benin Bebuzee Bhutan Bebuzee Bolivia Bebuzee Bosnia and Herzegovina Bebuzee Botswana Bebuzee Brazil Bebuzee Brunei Bebuzee Bulgaria Bebuzee Burkina Faso Bebuzee Burundi Bebuzee Cabo Verde Bebuzee Cambodia Bebuzee Cameroon Bebuzee Canada Bebuzee Central African Republic Bebuzee Chad Bebuzee Chile Bebuzee China Bebuzee Colombia Bebuzee Comoros Bebuzee Costa Rica Bebuzee Côte d'Ivoire Bebuzee Croatia Bebuzee Cuba Bebuzee Cyprus Bebuzee Czech Republic Bebuzee Democratic Republic of the Congo Bebuzee Denmark Bebuzee Djibouti Bebuzee Dominica Bebuzee Dominican Republic Bebuzee Ecuador Bebuzee Egypt Bebuzee El Salvador Bebuzee Equatorial Guinea Bebuzee Eritrea Bebuzee Estonia Bebuzee Eswatini Bebuzee Ethiopia Bebuzee Fiji Bebuzee Finland Bebuzee France Bebuzee Gabon Bebuzee Gambia Bebuzee Georgia Bebuzee Germany Bebuzee Ghana Bebuzee Greece Bebuzee Grenada Bebuzee Guatemala Bebuzee Guinea Bebuzee Guinea-Bissau Bebuzee Guyana Bebuzee Haiti Bebuzee Honduras Bebuzee Hong Kong Bebuzee Hungary Bebuzee Iceland Bebuzee India Bebuzee Indonesia Bebuzee Iran Bebuzee Iraq Bebuzee Ireland Bebuzee Israel Bebuzee Italy Bebuzee Jamaica Bebuzee Japan Bebuzee Jordan Bebuzee Kazakhstan Bebuzee Kenya Bebuzee Kiribati Bebuzee Kuwait Bebuzee Kyrgyzstan Bebuzee Laos Bebuzee Latvia Bebuzee Lebanon Bebuzee Lesotho Bebuzee Liberia Bebuzee Libya Bebuzee Liechtenstein Bebuzee Lithuania Bebuzee Luxembourg Bebuzee Madagascar Bebuzee Malawi Bebuzee Malaysia Bebuzee Maldives Bebuzee Mali Bebuzee Malta Bebuzee Marshall Islands Bebuzee Mauritania Bebuzee Mauritius Bebuzee Mexico Bebuzee Micronesia Bebuzee Moldova Bebuzee Monaco Bebuzee Mongolia Bebuzee Montenegro Bebuzee Morocco Bebuzee Mozambique Bebuzee Myanmar Bebuzee Namibia Bebuzee Nauru Bebuzee Nepal Bebuzee Netherlands Bebuzee New Zealand Bebuzee Nicaragua Bebuzee Niger Bebuzee Nigeria Bebuzee North Korea Bebuzee North Macedonia Bebuzee Norway Bebuzee Oman Bebuzee Pakistan Bebuzee Palau Bebuzee Panama Bebuzee Papua New Guinea Bebuzee Paraguay Bebuzee Peru Bebuzee Philippines Bebuzee Poland Bebuzee Portugal Bebuzee Qatar Bebuzee Republic of the Congo Bebuzee Romania Bebuzee Russia Bebuzee Rwanda Bebuzee Saint Kitts and Nevis Bebuzee Saint Lucia Bebuzee Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Bebuzee Samoa Bebuzee San Marino Bebuzee São Tomé and Príncipe Bebuzee Saudi Arabia Bebuzee Senegal Bebuzee Serbia Bebuzee Seychelles Bebuzee Sierra Leone Bebuzee Singapore Bebuzee Slovakia Bebuzee Slovenia Bebuzee Solomon Islands Bebuzee Somalia Bebuzee South Africa Bebuzee South Korea Bebuzee South Sudan Bebuzee Spain Bebuzee Sri Lanka Bebuzee Sudan Bebuzee Suriname Bebuzee Sweden Bebuzee Switzerland Bebuzee Syria Bebuzee Taiwan Bebuzee Tajikistan Bebuzee Tanzania Bebuzee Thailand Bebuzee Timor-Leste Bebuzee Togo Bebuzee Tonga Bebuzee Trinidad and Tobago Bebuzee Tunisia Bebuzee Turkey Bebuzee Turkmenistan Bebuzee Tuvalu Bebuzee Uganda Bebuzee Ukraine Bebuzee United Arab Emirates Bebuzee United Kingdom Bebuzee Uruguay Bebuzee Uzbekistan Bebuzee Vanuatu Bebuzee Venezuela Bebuzee Vietnam Bebuzee World Wide Bebuzee Yemen Bebuzee Zambia Bebuzee Zimbabwe
Blog Image

Trivago fined $45 million for misleading customers on hotel pricing claims

Global hotel booking giant Trivago has been fined nearly $45 million for misleading customers with advertising that claimed it made it easy to find "the best price" for rooms.

Two years ago, the Federal Court found the company had breached Australian Consumer Law over a "lengthy period of time", and today it ordered the company to pay $44.7 million in penalties for its breaches.

Trivago was also ordered to pay the legal costs of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), which brought the case against it.

In his orders on penalties, Justice Mark Moshinsky noted that there was a "considerable gulf between the parties' positions", with the ACCC arguing for at least $90 million in fines and Trivago saying up to $15 million would be appropriate.

In coming to a figure between the two, Justice Moshinsky noted Trivago's breaches of the law were "extremely serious".

"The television advertising conducted by Trivago during the early part of the relevant period was highly misleading," he concluded.

"The advertising conveyed that the Trivago website would quickly and easily identify the cheapest rates available for a hotel room responding to a consumer's search, but in fact the website did not do this.

"Higher [priced] offers were selected as the top position offer over alternative lower priced offers in 66.8 per cent of listings."

How Trivago misled consumers

When Justice Moshinsky decided that Trivago had breached consumer laws, in his previous judgement of 2020, he said: "The fact that Trivago was being paid by the online booking sites was not made clear."

Most of the time, the hotels listed at the top of the search results were not the best or cheapest deal. Trivago promoted hotels that paid it the biggest fees.


Consumers were also misled by "strike-through" price comparisons.

For example, it might list the hotel room's full price as $420 — with a "strike through" to show the price has been slashed — and the final price is listed as $299.

"Trivago misled consumers by using strike-through prices which gave them the false impression that Trivago's rates represented a saving, when in fact they often compared a standard room with a luxury room at the same hotel," ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said.

"Trivago's conduct took advantage of consumers' desire to find the best deal, and the court's decision to order such a significant penalty reflects the seriousness of Trivago's conduct.

"This penalty sends a strong message not just to Trivago, but to other comparison websites, that they must not mislead consumers when making recommendations."

Consumers lose $30m from 'highly misleading' conduct

Justice Moshinsky added that much of the offending conduct continued for nearly three years, meaning a large number of consumers were affected, with nearly 93 per cent of clicks going to the "top position" offer.

"There were approximately 57 million click-outs on a top position offer for an identified hotel where the top position offer was not the cheapest offer for that hotel," he observed. Read More...

Previous Post

Linde to invest US$15 million to expand production capacity.

Next Post

Portuguese GDP growth cut to 4%

Comments