Buyers Air Views On IATA ID Issue At ACTE Forum
<B>Buyers Air Views On IATA ID Issue At ACTE Forum</B>
By David Jonas
<I>New York - </I>Travel managers and travel agents told the International Air Transport Association that the main sticking points regarding its proposed corporate client ticket coding system involve personal traveler security, data confidentiality and suspicions regarding the plan's voluntary nature.
Mike Müller, assistant director of passenger services in IATA's industry distribution and financial services division, was surprised at the level of concern expressed at an Association of Corporate Travel Executives forum held here earlier this month.
IATA's Corporate Client Identification Service remains in limbo as the U.S. Department of Transportation continues its review (BTN, July 10, 2000). IATA claimed that every other government in the world already has approved the proposal.
While all parties agreed that more sophisticated tracking would improve buyer-supplier relationships, big questions remain as to who should furnish such systems, and how.
"We've been hearing from corporates about inconsistent data flows into different tracking systems at various carriers," Müller said. "But it now is clear that we need to clarify the intent and the mechanisms." For example, he said data will not be added into MIDT and airlines must sign an agreement binding them to certain provisions.
Nevertheless, Earl Foster, speaking from the perspective of Vivendi Universal's corporate travel manager and not as ACTE's chairman, said, "I am literally terrified. It is my data and my responsibility to collect and use it. CCIS violates all confidentiality agreements." Though IATA said it would unsubscribe any carrier found violating confidentiality rules, Foster asked, "What would that do for me if the damage already is done?"
CCIS is positioned as a voluntary program for corporations, but many buyers suspect carriers will request participation as a prerequisite for any deal. Müller said it is up to the airlines to address that concern, not IATA, since it is a commercial issue. Frans Allaert, KLM manager of IATA and industry affairs and chair of the CCIS users group, said, "Each carrier individually must decide whether or not to impose CCIS as a pre-condition for an agreement, but it is doubtful that corporate code usage would break any deal."
Even so, one travel manager surveyed by ACTE ahead of the forum said, "I will not allow the airlines to force the use of these codes. If a carrier pushes, we will use those that do not." Another buyer said airlines should sign an agreement explicitly stating they won't insist on the corporate coding system.
Another concern raised was that an airline will have access to a corporation's data if just one traveler from that corporation books a flight with that carrier, even in the absence of a corporate contract. In response, one buyer favoring CCIS said, "Aren't we all talking about working together to get to a better place? After all, you choose to have a relationship with airline X as soon as you buy just one ticket from them."
Müller said it could be possible to tweak the system so a corporation can indicate which carriers can access their data, rather than providing blanket access to all subscribing airlines.
Buyers also were skeptical of the $5,500 annual subscription cost for carriers. Though that price tag is a drop in the bucket for most large carriers, Foster asked, "Who do you think will wind up paying that? Won't that enter my pricing scheme?"
Representing the travel agency community, Jeff Austin, president of Austin Travel, said, "The tremendous fear is that this system would make it much easier for a subscribing airline to go to a customer, show how much they know about that customer and explain why they don't need the agency involved."
Müller said all such concerns are legitimate but already exist without CCIS. "Could they be exacerbated by CCIS?" he asked. "Maybe, and we'll have to take a look at that."
Most domestic and foreign airlines contacted by BTN remained on the fence. Those in favor include American Airlines, British Airways, KLM and Lufthansa. United Airlines is a notable opponent.
Barbara Cusumano, manager of sales process and training in the U.S. for Lufthansa German Airlines, said the carrier's important corporate clients have been asking for global deals that would require global tracking. "Because of the differences in BSPs and ticketing environments around the world, in-house tracking of global business has been challenging, occasionally requiring manual work that delays payments to the customer," she said. "CCIS, or a similar solution, would enable faster and more accurate tracking of revenues eligible for compensation, especially in an alliance environment."
Meanwhile, Allaert said such a unique global system for identifying global accounts could have other benefits, such as recognizing valued customers at checkin and offering certain services that could be negotiated into a corporate deal. "But if you choose not to use it, you must come up with another way to track flown revenue for auditing and tracking purposes," he said. "CCIS is a global solution."
In fact, other ways are being developed, notably Corporate Insight, a product developed for Continental Airlines by the Prism Group.
DOT has not indicated when it would make a decision determining the fate of CCIS.