CoStar, hotels slam consumers' ‘fanciful’ room pricing lawsuit
By Mike Scarcella
May 20 (Reuters) -Commercial real estate information giant CoStar CSGP.O and a group of high-end hotels have asked a U.S. judge to dismiss claims that they improperly shared data to keep room prices artificially high, calling the case "fanciful."
CoStar and six hotel operators including Hilton HLT.N, Hyatt H.N and Marriott MAR.O said in their Seattle federal court filing on Friday that there was no evidence that they conspired to fix prices.
The defendants called the lawsuit, filed in February, “implausible and legally deficient.” The consumer plaintiffs want to mimic a wave of antitrust lawsuits targeting "algorithmic pricing" as a newfangled form of price-fixing, but the CoStar data at the heart of the case involves "neither algorithms nor pricing recommendations," they said.
The lawsuit focused on CoStar’s Smith Travel Research (STR) reports, which advertise “performance benchmarking and comparative analytics” for the hotel industry. CoStar and the hotels defended the reports, which they said feature historical data on room availability and revenue.
CoStar, Hilton, Hyatt and Marriott either had no immediate comment or did not immediately respond to requests for comment, and neither did an attorney for the consumer plaintiffs.
The defendant hotels shared prices, supply and future plans, allowing participating companies to use rivals’ strategic information to inflate prices in Washington, D.C., San Francisco, New York, Nashville, Chicago, Boston, Austin and other cities, according to the lawsuit.
The complaint said the data reports "act as the essential 'fuel' propelling pricing algorithms towards the ultimate goal of charging higher prices."
The plaintiffs are seekingclass-action status for potentially hundreds of thousands of people.
CoStar and the hotels argued that a ruling allowing the lawsuit to move ahead “would set new precedent that could upend numerous industries where benchmarking is a common and important market-intelligence tool.”
A U.S. judge in Las Vegas on May 8 dismissed a consumer lawsuit accusing some major hotels there of sharing information with a revenue management platform to unlawfully coordinate on room prices.
The judge there said the plaintiffs had not shown that the hotels had made any agreement with each other to fix prices.
The case is Jeanette Portillo et al v. CoStar Group et al, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, No. 2:24-cv-00229.
Read more:
Las Vegas hotels defeat price-fixing class action over room rates
CoStar, luxury hotels hit with US consumer price-fixing lawsuit
RealPage must face renters' price-fixing lawsuit over multifamily housing
Reporting by Mike Scarcella
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
