Notes by Rajeev Goswami

Insights on AI, Business Travel & Leadership

Chart comparing TMC vs OTA commission economics

It’s not AI. It’s commission.

Long Lake Management’s $6.3 billion take-private of American Express Global Business Travel closed the loop on a deal most coverage still frames as an AI story. It isn’t. There’s a detail buried in the SEC filings that nobody in the trade press has connected:

Expedia — an OTA — is one of four shareholders who voted to approve the sale, together holding 69% of shares. Expedia’s stake goes back to 2021, when it sold Egencia to Amex GBT for equity plus a 10-year hotel-supply deal that survives this ownership change untouched.

That single, unexamined fact points to something every corporate travel manager should understand about their own TMC’s (Travel Management Companies) economics — and it has nothing to do with artificial intelligence.

What the Deal Is Actually Proposing

Long Lake’s public pitch is that its “Nexus” AI platform will modernize Amex GBT’s servicing workflows — rebooking, disruption management, ticket exchanges. Fine. But for a travel manager, the detail that actually touches your program isn’t what Expedia gained financially from this deal — it’s what Expedia keeps operationally.

Its 2021 stake came with a 10-year hotel-supply agreement, and Expedia’s voting agreement waives any change-of-control termination right on it. That means the pipe carrying Expedia’s hotel inventory into your TMC’s booking tool survives this sale untouched, no matter what Long Lake does with the rest of the company.

Why Travel Managers Need to Ask a Sharper Question

The obvious question is whether PE ownership will cut service quality. The sharper one is: why does a TMC want OTA content in the first place?

The answer lies in how TMCs actually get paid. Here’s the mechanism: US airline commissions have been effectively zero since the early 2000s — carriers pay TMCs transaction fees, not a cut of the fare. Hotel commissions still exist, but negotiated corporate rates are typically “net rates” — industry terminology for a rate structure that, by definition, excludes any commission for the intermediary selling it.

Meanwhile, 71% of corporate buyers now pay transaction fees directly, and TMCs still lean on supplier commissions, volume overrides, and GDS incentive payments. Put plainly: the rate a TMC is contracted to protect for its client is the rate that pays the TMC the least.

Where the Real Incentive Lives

That’s the structural reason OTA content integration has become standard practice across the TMC industry, not just at Amex GBT — Expedia and Booking.com content now sits inside most major booking tools, commissionable and publish-rate-style, with more room for a TMC to earn than from a client’s own commission-free negotiated rate.

Amex GBT is one of several TMCs marketing this integration as a leakage fix, and the mechanism is plausible — a competing platform, Spotnana, builds its whole pitch around the same logic. But no independently verified number, from any TMC, shows it’s worked at scale.

Research GBTA co-published with Spotnana in 2025 shows why that matters: 67% of travel managers say air leakage grew or held flat year-over-year; 81% say the same for hotels. Whatever’s been tried industry-wide hasn’t bent the leakage curve.

The Trend Accelerating This

What has changed, with real data behind it, is how corporate rates themselves are being renegotiated. The most recent GBTA/Radisson research, published in 2026, found 49% of hotel programs increased their use of dynamic discounts in the past year, while only 17% expanded fixed rates — a real shift, even though fixed rates still anchor most programs.

That matters more than any Nexus press release: a negotiated hotel rate is no longer a number you set once a year and defend — it’s a live position, continuously benchmarked against market pricing, the same logic OTAs have used from the start. AI accelerates this by making continuous rate-benchmarking cheap enough to run in real time, instead of once a year. The static corporate rate isn’t being replaced by OTAs directly — it’s being restructured to behave like one.

My Take

Here’s where I’ll go further than anyone covering this deal has: TMCs across the industry cede booking control to OTAs not because it’s generous, but because it’s one of the only ways to grow revenue once corporate rates stop paying commission and shrink as a share of bookings. Hotels pay Expedia and Booking.com commissions of 15-30% on every booking — a well-documented figure. What any individual TMC earns reselling that content isn’t disclosed, but a negotiated corporate rate pays nothing at all. Once one channel pays something and the other pays nothing, the incentive exists industry-wide, whatever the exact split turns out to be.

This is the same misalignment Business Travel News has documented for years in GDS and airline volume deals, just relocated to OTA content. Once that gap exists, the effect is the same regardless of how it’s labeled. A booking made through OTA content and a booking made outside the managed program are the same booking behavior — one just happens to occur inside the TMC’s tool. Duty-of-care and reporting remain the TMC’s unique value; everything else in the transaction economics now favors OTA content over negotiated rates, industry-wide.

If AI accelerates the decline of the static negotiated rate, expect this to intensify across every TMC, regardless of ownership. Long Lake’s deal isn’t unique — it’s just the moment this industry-wide problem became visible in one company’s cap table.

Rajeev Goswami is CEO of WWStay and a member of the GBTA Technology Committee.


References


Enjoyed this post?
Subscribe on Substack to receive my latest writing directly in your inbox.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Notes by Rajeev Goswami

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading