Op-Ed: Booking.com's Guest Masking Means Hotels Pay Commission on Regulars They Cannot Recognize

Independent hotels may be paying Booking.com commission on guests who are already their regulars and not knowing it. That is the argument in an opinion piece by Markus Busch, editor and publisher of hospitality.today, published on Hospitality Net on November 2. The piece appeared with sponsorship from reconline AG, a GDS company, which is worth keeping in mind when weighing its case.

Busch's starting point is Booking.com's Genius loyalty programme. He says travelers in the top two Genius levels make up just over 30% of Booking.com's active customers and a high-50% share of its room nights, and that both figures rose over the past year, based on the company's first and second quarter 2026 earnings calls and its 2026 proxy statement. Reaching level 2 takes five stays in two years. CEO Glenn Fogel has said these members book more often, cancel less, return more consistently and book directly more often.

Genius is free for travelers and funded by hotels. Properties give members at least 10% off, and can offer up to 15% at level 2 or 20% at level 3, with extras such as breakfast or upgrades. Commission is charged on the discounted price. Booking.com says the programme brings incremental bookings, and that Genius guests write more reviews and fill more off-season rooms. Busch notes that is the company's own reading of its data. More than 850,000 properties had joined by the end of September 2025.

The recognition problem comes from guest masking. Booking.com gives every reservation a unique @guest.booking.com email alias, and since September 28 reservations also arrive without a phone number. The company cites privacy and fraud prevention. The result, Busch says, is that a returning guest often looks brand new in a hotel's system.

He cites Bookboost data covering 2.2 million guests at European hotel groups from 2024 to 2026. Guests whose first stay was direct came back 5.1% of the time, against 1.3% for guests who first booked through an OTA. OTAs accounted for 65% of first stays but only 32% of repeat stays. Busch points out that Bookboost does not explain how it matches guests, and if it relied on email, the OTA return rate could be understated.

His suggested fixes are practical. Pull the last 12 months of repeat guest reports and match on name and check-in details rather than email alone. Total the commission paid on repeat Booking.com guests. Ask guests for a real email address at the desk and add it by hand. Have front desk staff check every Booking.com arrival against past guests by name, so regulars get recognized and offered direct deals.

The numbers are one vendor's data and one author's reading, but the audit he describes is cheap to run and will show any hotel what its own repeat rate looks like.