[imdsm]

Just to add to the dynamic for those too busy to read:

> When Mann booked the accommodations, Formula One organizers hadn't locked in the exact race dates. So she covered her bases — reserving the same four-bedroom unit for two possible weekends in May 2026, both with free cancellation.

> Once the official dates were announced, she cancelled the extra booking, in line with Booking.com rules.

I wonder if this changes our perception of things. If you book two dates and then cancel, are you not also part of the problem?

Perhaps if you didn't go for the free cancellation, then it should be a fair two way lock in, if you commit, we'll commit etc. Still not as bad as when Jason Manford finished a show, turned up at the Village Hotel in Bournemouth, and because he checked in late, they'd given his room to someone else.

[stavros]

> I wonder if this changes our perception of things. If you book two dates and then cancel, are you not also part of the problem?

If the website said "you can cancel for free", why would I consider myself part of the problem?

If the website said "you can book, but we could cancel your booking for any reason, including because we can rent it to someone else for more money", I wouldn't consider the website as part of the problem either.

As it stands, only one of those two things was prominently mentioned on the website.

[xethos]

That's definitely part of the problem. You're following the letter of the rule, because yes, it says Free Cancellations, and you cancelled for free.

It doesn't follow the spirit of the rules though; it's something I've always viewed as the business saying "Listen, we get it, life happens. If you can't make it, don't panic, we've got your back". To book both weekends with the intent of cancelling carries a strong odour of bad faith, and IMO makes you part of the problem.

Notably, the free cancellation policy only really works in a high-trust society, which at least one prominent nation seems to be backsliding on - meaning policies like this may be on their way out.

[overfeed]

> If the website said "you can cancel for free", why would I consider myself part of the problem?

Equally, if the fine print the guest agrees to says the platform/hotel can cancel unilaterally, why should it be considered a problem?

> As it stands, only one of those two things was prominently mentioned on the website

Why does prominence matter?

[floatrock]

It's standard practice now to charge higher prices for cancellable reservations.

Given all the asymmetric squeezing being done by corporate algorithms everywhere in the ruthless march towards economic efficiency, it's hard to feel bad for the algos when a human finds a pricing arbitrage that the hotel conglomerates failed to notice.

In other words, the hotel conglomerates are the ones who started the algorithmic event pricing and "cancellable reservations carry a price premium" games. It's on them if they mispriced their own dynamic-event cancellation premium.

[j45]

Absolutely agreed. Data is a two way street.

[guipsp]

The hotel can just not offer free cancelation

[j45]

The irony, hotel industry is among the cheapest.

[b3lvedere]

"I wonder if this changes our perception of things. If you book two dates and then cancel, are you not also part of the problem?"

Gee, the system tries to game you, so you may not try to game the system? Fact is this is about earning as much money as possible and nothing else.

I'm 100% for gaming the system, but i can't blame the system from trying to protect itself from it as well. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.

[j45]

Seriously. Maybe it’s an attempt at being devils advocate. Or they work in the industry?

[Cerium]

Not only can the hotel select their own policies, but the cancellation is 6 months early. Surely the room will not go empty in that time.

[the__alchemist]

I had the same thought when reading that line. I think we can treat it independently from the article's main point.

This is a common consumer tactic for reservations of all sorts. (It is a thorn in the side of restaurants, and why you get emails asking you to Confirm them and other appointments)

2 bookings isn't heinous; some people do things like book at multiple restaurants, then cancel all but one right before. (e.g. when their friend group comes to a consensus) It's fine in this case IMO.

It is a point of consternation for consumers more generally, when you can't get a booking because many of the ones are ghosts.

[HPsquared]

Sounds a lot like the shenanigans in the job market. The number of job ads and applications far outstrips the actual number of places and applicants. It's mostly froth. Come to think of it, huge tracts of our economy are like this.

[jerlam]

In high demand restaurants, I've seen them require a fee to make a reservation that is credited to your bill when you come in. This would dissuade the casual multiple bookings, but not that common. I would actually prefer it to be more common.

[globular-toast]

A deal is a deal. If the hotel doesn't like it then don't offer that deal to the next customers.

[SilverElfin]

Airlines are similar. Consumers view it as a deal is a deal. But they can cancel your seat at the last minute due to overbooking or really any reason.

[cowpig]

No matter what shady thing a company does you can rest assured there will be a bit of "well, let's think about it from another angle" at the top of the comments section.

The company offers cancellable reservations for a fee. She paid the fee. What are you talking about

[dghlsakjg]

This my exact same reaction.

Every time I have ever seen a cancellable reservation at booking.com I have also noticed that it costs more than the same reservation without cancellation priveleges.

She almost certainly paid for the flexibility.

[vb-8448]

+1

booking & hotel are just abusing their power ... there is no another perspective here

[j45]

Doesn’t seem realistic.

It shouldn’t be a problem ever.

It’s a mutual agreement.

The free cancellation is provided to one side in exchange for booking. If the booking wasn’t cancelled it would be charged.

The booking agency could limit it to one booking per person but it could miss out in group bookings.

If there was a way to lock in the rates that might be an option.

This is possibly an overly simplistic ai optimization agent gone wild.

Detailed pricing models for airfare and hotels around events have existed for a very long time.

[blitzar]

> I wonder if this changes our perception of things.

It does not.

[spider-mario]

> If you book two dates and then cancel, are you not also part of the problem?

How so, exactly? Maybe if you cancel at the last minute, but if she cancels when the race dates are announced, presumably, that’s enough in advance for someone else to book the cancelled room in her place?

[csomar]

No it doesn’t change our perspective. You offered free cancellation. If the hotel doesn’t think it’s fair then it should not have offered it.

[bartread]

> Still not as bad as when Jason Manford finished a show, turned up at the Village Hotel in Bournemouth, and because he checked in late, they'd given his room to someone else.

This isn't quite what happened.

He turned up before the show to check in, and found that the hotel had been overbooked and that his room had been sold to someone else as a result, so he was forced to share a room with members of his team.

Source: https://news.bournemouthone.com/81555/

(Now that's not to say that this isn't a shitty practice and that it shouldn't happen: the hotel were absolutely in the wrong, it's just that they were wrong in a different way to what you suggested - but your bigger point is well made.)