Why has the OTA share of bookings increased?
You already know OTAs are expensive.
You've done the math.
You've sat in that budget meeting.
You've watched the commission line increase.
Now, ownership wants to know what marketing and revenue management is doing about it.
Knowing what it costs, why does the number keep climbing?
The OTA share of independent hotel bookings just hit 64.3% in North America, up 3.3 points from last year (Cloudbeds State of Independent Hotel 2026 report).
With this data and question on my mind, I went and asked hoteliers.
I posted a poll on LinkedIn.
The results, so far, tell the real story.
35% said it's easy. It's our go-to.
Another 35% said there's no bandwidth to change it.
20% said marketing feels risky and unclear.
Only 10% said OTAs simply do a better job.
Read that together, and the picture gets clear.
Most hotels aren't leaning on OTAs because they've looked at other options and made the OTA choice.
It's because OTAs are familiar, and everything else feels harder.
That pattern shows up everywhere: Uber Eats for restaurants, OTAs for hotels.
A third party makes the short term easier and the long term more expensive.
And here's the revelation of why the middleman's profit is increasing.
OTA - known outcome.
Direct channels - unknown outcome.
That's the real reason the OTA commission check keeps getting written.
Perception is reality.
If it feels true for Hoteliers, it drives the decision - even when the numbers tell a different story.
Here is what those numbers actually say.
A hotel generating $6.4M a year with a 54% OTA share pays roughly $701K in commissions or more each year.
A focused, well-planned marketing investment for the same property is about $170K. This isn't a typo: these are real numbers.
Hoteliers are choosing the costlier option over the cheaper one because the less expensive route feels like a bigger risk.
And the industry report tells us this is increasing.
There's pressure to get rooms booked.
There's pressure to reduce costs.
Marketing doesn't solve either problem overnight.
In a business measured day to day, today matters.
The OTA wins.
Inventory goes in, bookings come out, and costs are visible.
Under pressure, the belief that OTAs have predictable outcomes feels like control.
It's the most expensive belief in the building.
This isn't a choice between OTAs or direct channels.
The hotels navigating this well aren't replacing OTAs overnight.
They are using a phased plan. They are steadily building direct demand while OTAs remain part of the mix.
That changes the risk calculation entirely.
Right now, marketing may feel like a risky investment for you, and the OTA feels like the safe one.
But look at what each actually delivers.
The OTA is a guaranteed cost with no upside.
Every booking starts at a deficit and ends at checkout.
A direct channel investment has a cost, too.
But it builds something.
Owned data, repeat guests, a relationship that doesn't cost you every time it converts.
One is an expense that repeats.
The other is an investment that compounds.
When I look across the industry, I see three groups.
1. Hotels that tried marketing for a short season and returned to the OTA default.
2. Hotels that never tried and only sell on the OTAs.
3. The smaller group saw the status quo as a bigger risk. They created something that was accountable, measurable, and easy to defend for ownership.
That third group started with a plan, not an overhaul.
They shifted their belief and their budget and started building something they could actually own.
If you're reading this and thinking, "I want to act on this, but I don't know where to start,"-that's the most common thing I hear.
I am happy to talk about it -> Book a call with me.
