By Emmanuel Mounier, Secretary General, Global Travel Tech.
This week, Ryanair was fined by Italy’s competition authority for blocking online travel agencies (OTAs) from selling its tickets. The decision centred on technical and commercial obstacles that steered travellers back to Ryanair’s own booking channels. The case is specific, but the question behind it is not: should airlines be able to limit how people compare and combine travel options?
Ryanair says direct booking protects customers from inflated prices and misleading intermediaries. However, the ruling highlights a broader issue. If a dominant airline controls distribution, it can also control what options and comparisons are visible to customers, which can ultimately control what customers choose, significantly limiting choice and competition.
Why price comparison matters in travel
Travel is rarely a quick and easy purchase. People compare flights against other flights, different OTAs, different airlines, and modes of transport, but also against layovers, baggage rules, and departure times to find the options that suit their itinerary best. Independent platforms exist to provide choice and flexibility for customers. Instead of having to research every airline one by one, travellers can run this through an OTA and save significant time and effort. They provide choice and flexibility for customers while also helping maintain a fair playing field and promote competition. When airlines pull away from those platforms, comparison doesn’t disappear; it just becomes harder. Travellers often end up piecing trips together across multiple sites, frequently without a clear understanding of the total cost or the best alternatives.
When direct booking becomes the only realistic option
Direct booking isn’t the problem. Many travellers prefer it, and airlines are right to invest in their own digital channels. The issue arises when direct booking becomes the only workable option, not because it’s better, but because the alternatives have been shut out. That kind of reduced visibility weakens competition quietly. If fewer options can be compared side by side, there’s less pressure on pricing, less incentive to improve service, and fewer ways for consumers to mix and match tickets and services in the way that suits them.
OTAs provide consumers with choice and transparency
OTAs play a central role in making travel markets more transparent and competitive. By aggregating options across airlines and services, they provide consumers a clearer view of prices, routes, and trade-offs that would otherwise be difficult to compare. That function has been key to widening access to travel and keeping pressure on pricing. In doing so, OTAs help reduce information asymmetries that would otherwise disadvantage consumers.
What this means for competition and consumers
The decision by the Italian Competition Authority fits into a broader regulatory shift focused on how digital travel markets work in practice, and how to protect consumers while ensuring fair competition. Across Europe and across the globe, regulators are paying closer attention to how control over distribution affects competition in travel markets. Control over distribution can be a huge advantage in the travel sector, and if massive players keep their flights off OTAs, this can lead to a very skewed market where big airlines can reach near-monopoly-level status in certain segments, such as specific destinations or budget travel.
If airlines truly offer the best value, open comparison should benefit them. Competition should be won on price, service, and experience, not by narrowing where tickets appear or how journeys can be combined. In a sector built on choice, blocking comparison isn’t fair play, and consumers are the ones who end up paying the price.