Sim, é muito mais complexo do que o "paradigma" (parte II)

Parte I.
.
Em linha com o que andamos a escrever aqui no blogue, há quase dez anos, sobre o sector hoteleiro, este texto para reflexão "Reactive pricing strategies don’t work in hospitality, new Cornell study finds". Infelizmente, duvido que esta informação chegue a quem tem poder para mudar as coisas:

"A ten-year study of pricing and revenues in over 4,000 European hotels revealed that regardless of the economic situation of the time period, hotels that positioned with ADRs above those of their direct competitors benefited from higher relative RevPAR even though they experienced lower comparative occupancies.
.
The study, published by the Center for Hospitality Research (CHR), found that hotels that maintained average daily room rates (ADR) somewhat higher than the hotels in their competitive set recorded consistently higher revenue per available room (RevPAR), again compared with their competitor hotels.
...
maintaining a consistent relative price over time (as compared to having a fluctuating price) did not significantly affect revenue performance for these European hotels, controlling for hotel type and location.
...
"Hotels that offered prices lower than their competitive set did see stronger relative occupancy, as one might expect. However, higher occupancy percentages did not make up for the relatively lower ADR. That is the reason that hotels with relatively lower pricing also saw RevPAR lower than their competitors."" [Moi ici: Em sintonia com o Evangelho do Valor e os gráficos de Robert Dolan e Hermann Simon]

Dá que pensar nas promoções mixirucas de hotéis de 5 estrelas que pagam portagens, ou de "descontos humilhantes".
.
Claro que a tentação de pedir protecção ao governo e de criar barreiras à entrada de novos players está presente, como se pode perceber em "Vão abrir 47 hotéis, mas metade da oferta está por ocupar"