I've had a particular way of booking hotels over the past few years which has served me well and saved quite a bit of money … or so I thought. Recently, I've been seeing people going crazy over getting 12% cashback deals and so forth on sites such as Expedia. But I thought what I was doing was a better deal, so would love to have feedback!
Firstly, I search booking.com for a hotel I'm interested in based on price, quality, location etc. I then try and find that same hotel on hotels.com (which I believe is basically a reseller of expedia stock and therefore has the same listings). The reason I choose hotels.com is because of the free night after 10 nights stay loyalty program which is in effect a 10% discount. When you add your cashback to that, you currently get 14% off the listed price and at times it's been 20% (when quidco had some amazing cashback offers).
Of course, hotels.com prices are sometimes higher, but I also sometimes find that hotels.com has free cancellation when booking.com doesn't. So that small price increase that sometimes happens to me on hotels.com is easily offset by the loyalty program and ability for free cancellation that I seem to get more often there.
One negative from hotels.com that I find vs booking.com is that they have far fewer hotels listed. So I sometimes can't find the hotel I want on hotels.com and have to book through booking.com anyway.
So I guess the question is, why would you use expedia or booking.com unless you got a 14% cashback or some sort of equivalent price difference? Or am I just completely getting the maths of this wrong?
Cheaptickets is an Expedia company and I normally use them to get an instant 16% discount using their never ending discount coupons. My view is why bother staying 10 nights before I can get a 10% discount when I can get a larger discount instantly.
I only use booking.com (or their alternate brand Agoda) if they have a hotel I really want to stay at which is not listed with the Expedia group.