2026.10.05 | TB | Software | Amadeus Expert: Airline Revenue Management

Client-led • 20 Mar 2026

Companies: SABR US, AMS ES

Expert Former Senior Executive, Airlines at Amadeus IT Group SA

Agenda

• Over 15 years' experience leading geographic operations and airline software strategies at Amadeus, with deep expertise in regional market dynamics
• Well-placed to discuss competitive positioning across Amadeus, Sabre, Pros, Wiremind, Flyr, Fetcherr and Accelya
• Knowledgeable on core KPCs (key purchasing criteria) and dynamic pricing shifts, including real-time algorithmic forecasting and vendor selection drivers
• Comprehensive knowledge of airline IT ecosystems, with deep insights into PSS (proprietary sales system), RMS (revenue management system), GDS (global distribution system), Network Planning integrations and O&D (origin and destination) vs leg architectures and real-time revenue technology
• Disclaimer: This transcript has been translated from the language in which the interview was conducted. The translation process included the use of artificial intelligence. This translation may contain errors or omissions and may alter the nuance, emphasis, or meaning of the original statements. Third Bridge does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the translation. Only the translated version is published; the original-language transcript is not made available.

Questions

00:02:00] We’re currently researching the entire ecosystem of revenue management systems and passenger service systems. We want to gain an understanding of the competitive landscape, as well as the market positioning of Amadeus and its primary competitors. Specifically, we’re looking into new, innovative solutions entering the market to better grasp these dynamics.

Client [00:04:41]: Is your current focus still in aviation, or perhaps on a bus or train?

Expert [00:04:49]: These days, our clients aren’t just airlines. For example, we have clients such as what are known as Destination Management Organisations, like Visite France – organisations that promote cities and countries.

00:05:35] Are you familiar with a company called Wiremind?

Expert [00:06:06]: Yes. Not in great detail, but they are indeed active in that sector, however, I can’t comment on their features because I don’t have a detailed understanding of the product, but I am aware of them in the broader context.

00:06:21] I’m trying to get a better grasp of this ecosystem. On one hand, there’s the RMS [revenue management system], which covers rate optimisation, demand forecasting and pricing. On the other, everything to do with inventory management and the PSS [proprietary sales system]. How do these two broad categories differ – perhaps with the help of a comprehensive use case for each solution – as well as how they interact. The aim is to determine whether players such as Amadeus and Travelport are more akin to RMSs or PSSs, or whether it is in fact irrelevant to distinguish between them, in order to better understand the value chain between these two broad product categories.

Expert [00:07:28]: PSS vs RMS, is that right?

Client [00:07:31]: Yes, exactly.

Expert [00:07:32]: This provides a good starting point for understanding strategic, competitive and differentiation issues. The PSS essentially does three things. Firstly, it distributes the airline’s products to its distributors, which are typically either other airlines or travel agencies. Generally speaking, it also powers the airline’s website, facilitating the booking process. That is the first element, booking. The second element of the PSS is inventory and this is where it links very closely with the RMS, as inventory is, broadly speaking, the management of seat stock, bearing in mind that there is a particular feature in the aviation industry, once the plane takes off, the seat stock no longer exists, regardless of whether the plane was full or empty. The aim is to maximise load factor. Inventory is also, generally speaking, where the RMS comes into play, at least historically because there is a trend today for the RMS to be more closely linked to booking and we’ll come back to that later in the discussion. The third function performed by the PSS and this has little to do with an RMS, is check-in and aircraft departure. This is an important activity for airlines, but one that has become completely separate from the RMS, as there is generally no longer any commercial aspect at this stage.

00:09:13] You first mentioned bookings, then the distribution of the airline’s services to other airlines or travel agencies. What do you mean by other airlines in the context of distribution? Are you referring to airlines such as Air France or Ryanair, which have their own fleets of aircraft?

Expert [00:09:47]: It’s a practice that’s quite common, at least among full-service carriers, though much less so for low-cost airlines, but it’s known as codeshare or interline. This means, for example, that you book a Bordeaux – Paris flight and a Paris – New York flight and the Bordeaux-Paris leg is operated by Transavia or another airline. It’s about facilitating this kind of collaboration. It is mainly in this context that joint distribution takes place. I have outlined the PSS in very broad terms. As for the RMS, its objective is to maximise the airline’s revenue, that is, its turnover. If you break this down into finer detail, it comes down to the revenue per seat, since ultimately, that is what revenue mainly consists of. Historically, revenue per seat was simply the ticket price. Today, there is an additional dimension, which is all the ancillary services, because the flight itself is one aspect, but now people are buying seats, luggage, drink. It has become a bit more complex in that respect,

Client [00:11:23]: We all see it in the summer when we go on holiday.

Expert [00:11:26]: Yes, absolutely. As a consumer, one cannot help but notice it. Historically, the revenue management system was really about predicting tomorrow’s demand, assessing my load factor and based on these two factors, determining the prices at which to price flights today for the various service classes. That’s the somewhat traditional approach. This traditional approach is now being challenged by a number of factors. One of these factors is that today, revenue is not just derived from the price of a seat, but from other sources as well. This is what we’ve just been discussing and what I pointed out to you earlier. This has introduced an additional layer of complexity to manage. Then there is another important factor, which is that basing future prices on historical data has become less reliable, particularly, let’s say, since Covid, because travel demand has become more erratic. Historical data is not necessarily a good reflection of what tomorrow will bring.

Client [00:11:34]: If we look at the situation in the Middle East, isn’t that a prime example? We can no longer make forecasts because it’s becoming increasingly unpredictable?

Expert [00:12:57]: Yes, these are the sort of events that are becoming more common. They have quite a significant impact on the aviation industry very quickly. Incidentally, it’s interesting, it’s been reported in the press, but a number of European airlines are currently increasing their capacity to Asia, because as those who used to travel to Asia via Dubai or Abu Dhabi can no longer do so, this creates new markets for the airlines, at least in the short term. The (inaudible) is quite obvious. In principle, these decisions are taken by the airline’s revenue management team. Here, it’s a combination of revenue management, because there’s a second dimension within airlines known as network planning. These are the people who decide whether to open or close routes. Normally, revenue management operates on existing routes, it doesn’t create new ones. I think that in somewhat extreme scenarios like this one, there is collaboration between revenue management and network planning.

00:14:12] Network planning is a third major category of products to consider. Alongside PSS and RMS there is network planning for route management, correct?

Expert [00:14:29]: Yes. RMS generally covers the next six months or so, whereas network planning, with the exceptions we’ve just mentioned, typically has a time horizon of between one and five years. The dynamics aren’t quite the same, but both serve much the same purpose, to maximise revenue.

00:14:58] In practical terms, the RMS and PSS interact mainly around seat inventory, but apart from that, the RMS is a standalone mathematical model. It uses statistics to optimise prices based on historical demand and observed price sensitivity. Is that right?

Expert [00:15:43]: It’s mainly algorithms, actually, and the system’s value was largely marketed on the basis of the so-called superiority of these algorithms. The algorithms calculate price optimisation and then they publish the prices historically associated with classes, labelled ABCD. There are a maximum of 26 classes. The advantage of doing this is that it allowed classes to be opened or closed. Because they set a price for a class and then the dynamic aspect is opening or closing classes depending on how full the plane is, the fuller the aircraft, the more the lower-priced classes close and the higher-priced classes open. The expensive classes are always open, but we’ll gradually close the cheaper classes as they fill up, and that’s what will cause the price to rise dynamically for the user. The advantage of this system is that it means we don’t have to publish real-time information everywhere, except for the opening and closing of classes. The downside, precisely, is that it isn’t very dynamic in terms of adjusting prices. Today, the major trends in RMS are, firstly, an AI dimension, but we’ll come back to that and secondly, a shift to real-time pricing instead of a class-based system. Real-time pricing has an advantage for airlines, it really allows prices to be optimised to the situation at a given moment, in a truly instantaneous way.

00:17:32] Wiremind's website mentions causal forecasting, which it presents as its unique selling point. What sets it apart from others is that it no longer relies on historical data, but instead isolates the effect of price – essentially, what happens if I reduce the price by 10%? In short, it determines the price elasticity at a given point in time, without relying on historical data. I get the impression that this ties in with the trend you’re talking about, but I wanted to make sure that’s exactly what you mean by "in real time". Given that Wiremind is something of a rising star in the fields of algorithms and statistics, is it in high demand amongst airlines and exactly how significant it is? Is it appropriate to make this connection and is this indeed what you mean by real-time optimisation?

Expert [00:18:43]: What I mean by real-time optimisation is being able to take into account influencing factors in real time, amongst other things. One important element is the ingestion of competitors’ prices. I suppose that in causal analysis, if they’re looking at price elasticity, they must be incorporating what a competitor is offering somewhere, because that’s a major factor affecting elasticity, after all.

00:19:09] Wiremind has a product called Cayzn and it has a product called Cayzn Tracking, which is essentially a competitive intelligence tool. These products have a 97% extraction rate from website scraping and the two work together.

Expert [00:19:36]: That has become virtually essential data, at least for those who have a somewhat sophisticated revenue management system these days. They all treat other airlines’ prices as fundamental data. So, this aspect isn’t necessarily all that unique, though. That said, I don’t know what Wiredmind does. They might be doing something unique, but when it comes to pricing that takes real-time data into account—and, among other things, the most important factor being what prices my competitors are offering on the same routes on that date, pretty much all systems, or at least the more sophisticated ones, do that these days.

00:20:20] If we take Amadeus and Pros in terms of revenue, is it the case that Amadeus is 2-5% and Sabre is 3-6%? Is that how you measure it? What order of magnitude are we talking about? I’m curious to know what metric you use to measure the quality of these algorithms, these RMS.

Expert [00:21:08]: The key business metric is that if you use my solution, you’ll generate x% more revenue than with your existing solution. Generally speaking, the increase we’re talking about is between 1% and 5%, it’s rarely 20%, because that would be massive. A 20% increase might be possible if you were switching from manual processes to using a system, but nowadays, hardly anyone operates these things manually anymore. It all depends a bit on the algorithm we apply. When you look at an airline, generally speaking, the average EBITDA or EBIT for an airline is in the region of 1-2%, so if you generate a 1% increase in top-line revenue, the impact is massive.

00:22:02] You mentioned 1-5% compared to another solution and you said the impact could be 20% if we switch from a manual system to a digital solution, but what you’re saying is that the market is almost entirely digitised, so these are situations we hardly ever see anymore?

Expert [00:22:23]: Yes, that's right. All salespeople highlight figures like that, actually finding them is a bit trickier, though. Because the real complexity would lie in running the same airline using both systems. In theory, we run one system in 'dry run' mode and the other in live mode. However, the dry run isn't operating in the real world, so we can never be certain that it would have produced the same results under actual conditions. That’s where it gets a bit technical.

00:23:07] If we look at the KPCs [key purchasing criterias] that an airline takes into account when comparing Amadeus, Pros and Wiremind, this is the primary factor, and then, I suppose, it would be the price of the solution. Are there any other KPCs? What is the order of priority during the selection phase? I understand that this percentage – between 1% and 5% – is roughly what everyone takes into account. How significant is it in relation to the other decision-making criteria and what are those other criteria?

Expert [00:24:00]: The intrinsic benefits of the solution – and the number one benefit, is whether it will generate more revenue for me. That’s an important factor, but it’s not the only one, as you say, especially since it’s not always easy to prove. Of course, price does have an impact to some extent, but I don’t think it’s the number one criterion. Then there’s a question of faith, to some extent, do I believe in the benefits in terms of revenue, or how much I believe in them or not. That ties in with that point. Then there are aspects of integration with what I already have, and in particular, integration with my PSS. Will it work well together? In theory, the answer is always yes, but in practice, it’s sometimes a bit more complex. Where it gets particularly complex is with all the systems that take charge of that aspect and have a direct influence on pricing. Some PSSs can’t handle that. The major providers such as Amadeus can handle this, but the smaller ones sometimes struggle with it. I’ll come back to that point later. There’s the issue of integration into my existing environment and there’s the difficulty of implementing changes for both the team and the technology infrastructure. Those are the main factors. Then, sometimes, an airline has different ways of managing its network. Typically, there are two main approaches. One is selling point-to-point and pricing point-to-point. The other is selling origin and destination. For example, Bordeaux-Paris-New York instead of Bordeaux-New York.

00:26:02] Are there two approaches that can influence the way software is built?

Expert [00:26:11]: The way the airline operates. These are two software systems that are quite slightly different. Some RMS providers offer only one or the other, whilst others offer both. When an airline switches from one model to another, it can also be a good time to ask yourself whether you want to change systems at the same time.

00:26:38] Does the majority operate on a source-to-destination basis or rather on a point-to-point basis?

Expert [00:26:59]: Origin and destination – low-cost carriers don’t do that. In any case, they don’t want to take that approach, it involves complexities they’re not interested in. Then, as for full-service carriers, all the major ones with an intercontinental network generally operate on an O&D basis these days, whilst the others do so much less – very few of them. Because the real value of O&D lies mainly – and simplifying this to the extreme – in the fact that, taking the same Bordeaux-Paris-New York example, the Bordeaux-Paris leg is almost full, so in theory, I sell the Bordeaux-Paris leg, which would be expensive, but at the same time, this allows me to sell a Paris-New York leg that is almost empty and which I want to fill. I’ll lower the price of my Bordeaux-Paris flight. That’s the logic of O&D simplified to the extreme and so it benefits airlines that have this type of network.

00:28:10] We’ve discussed revenue uplift, implementation cost, integration, change management for the team and alignment with the company's operating model — such as O&D [origin and destination] vs segment-based approaches. Could you rank these five factors in order of importance or impact on the final decision?

Expert [00:28:39]: Yes, certainly. The revenue uplift is probably 40%. I’d probably give it a 30% for that aspect, but if I were to add another factor, it would be how well the system fits in with the airline’s way of working. Beyond O&D and point-by-point, that’s one factor, but I think there are others – the right functionality, so to speak.

Client [00:29:38]: Does that also take into account what we discussed regarding integration with existing solutions?

Expert [00:29:50]: It’s different for me, because integration with existing solutions is more of a technical issue at this stage, in my view. That leaves 10, 10, 10 for the other three. That reduces the price a bit, so I’d still tend to give the price 20. As I’ve given you two functional aspects, we could reduce the revenue aspect — which I’ve given 40-30%. Because I think the functional aspect is still quite important. We have 60%, then we have the price and then we have two implementation constraints and change management, which each have 10%. I think that’s a fairly reasonable weighting. What’s interesting is that, as these are high-value-added solutions, the value of the solution still stands at 60%, before the integration and price factors.

Client [00:30:49]: Is there anything in particular you’d like to go back over?

Expert [00:30:58]: Yes, this aspect of revenue management is having an increasingly direct impact on pricing – that is, on the fares offered to travellers. This has several implications. Historically, pricing was handled within the PSS, today, it is gradually shifting towards the RMS. In any case, that is the general trend. On the one hand, this means being able to distribute pricing. Currently, systems for distribution to agencies such as Amadeus, Sabre and Travelport were not historically designed to process prices in real time. They were designed for the old model where there were fare classes.

Client [00:31:49]: That’s what travel agencies are, isn’t it?

Expert [00:31:56]: Travel agencies for booking flights – not the agencies themselves, but the systems they use, namely Amadeus, Sabre and Travelport, which are known as GDSs, bearing in mind that Amadeus and Sabre also provide PSS, though these are two slightly different businesses. One is the distribution of airlines to agencies and the other is the airline’s own system, the PSS. Historically, the distribution side was not designed to handle real-time pricing. All of this is shifting towards real-time pricing, but it presents some technical complexities at this stage. I think it’s being resolved bit by bit. The most important and interesting strategic factor is that the fact that RMS is starting to take control of pricing isn’t going down too well, particularly at Amadeus, but I don’t think Sabre likes it either, because they’re starting to say, "This element is quite strategic at the heart of my solution. If someone else takes control of it, what value does my PSS solution retain"? It’s not quite that black and white. There’s a strategic debate, where what you see is that the PSSs and Amadeus in particular, are trying to defend that aspect of their position. Typically, if Pros — the biggest competitor — wants to implement dynamic pricing for an Amadeus client, Amadeus will charge for the integration at roughly the same price as if they were providing the solution themselves. It’s a way of making access difficult.

00:33:51] Wiremind is primarily an RMS because it specialises in pricing optimisation and has algorithms. If tomorrow, Wiremind tries to compete with Amadeus for EasyJet and EasyJet decides to implement it because the revenue is higher, it will have to connect to Amadeus’s PSS, but given that the focus is shifting towards the PSS, this risks slowly undermining the RMS solution and Amadeus’s importance within EasyJet’s technological landscape. Is that what we’re saying?

Expert [00:34:52]: Yes, in any case, that’s how Amadeus views the risk, and as a result, it charges just as much for integrating Wiremind, for example, as it would if the customer were buying the Amadeus solution. It’s a bit prohibitive. It creates a commercial barrier to the integration of their competitors. Of course, there are limits to this game. It’s always a rather tense debate with clients and airlines. When you have a scenario where a company wants to implement Pros or Wiremind—their dynamic pricing systems—it’s always a bit tense, because Amadeus isn’t necessarily going to be very cooperative. Eventually, they’re forced to play along, but they might overcharge for it, make things a bit more difficult and so on.

00:35:43] I'm very keen to go into a bit more detail about the names we’ve mentioned to understand the value chain. You mentioned GDS [global distribution system]. We’ve talked about PSS, RMS and Network Planning – the three main categories of solutions. Could you please tell me where GDS fits in with the others?

Expert [00:36:26]: Firstly, the GDS operates in a different sphere, even though it involves the same companies, it’s a different sphere because RMS, Network Planning and PSS are solutions that airlines use to manage their business. The GDS is really an intermediary platform between airlines and travel agencies. Typically, one of the main features a travel agency offers is comparing prices between different airlines. It takes more than that, but the basic element starts there. To be able to do that, they need to have a centralised view of the airlines’ offerings. That is what the GDS does. It is not in competition with the other systems at all, it interacts technically with the other systems, that is all, there is no commercial dynamic.

Client [00:37:29]: Would it be possible to include Amadeus in the solutions we’ve come up with?

Expert [00:37:50]: Amadeus appears in all four software boards.

00:37:54] What are Amadeus's strengths compared to solutions it should have developed as standard, but which are not necessarily its strong points?

Expert [00:38:24]: Historically, they started out as a GDS, then moved into PSS and in the PSS sector, they have become the undisputed leaders. That’s a major strength. They also dominate the GDS market. They subsequently developed a revenue management solution that has gained credibility, though I believe they still lag behind Pros, the market leader. Their network planning solution is relatively new and has a small market share, but its credibility suggests it will grow.

00:39:09] Does Pros offer all four solutions or is it really just an RMS specialist?

Expert [00:39:22]: Pure RMS. That’s why this debate on pricing is so interesting. As RMS has gradually become part of the pricing process, they’ve really thrown themselves into it. Then there’s another factor that might be important, today, within the airline technology stack — mainly the PSS — there’s a whole debate about what’s known as Offer and Order. I don’t know if you’ve come across this, but it involves moving PSS systems towards something a bit more generic. Because today in the airline industry we talk about PNR, for example, for a purchase. That’s the passenger name record. There used to be tickets—and there still are tickets in the airline industry, though not for low-cost carriers — but all that sort of thing doesn’t necessarily exist in modern traditional retail. The idea behind Offer and Order is to move towards more modern retail models, with the main benefit being to simplify how processes work, and perhaps also to open the door to the PSS market for new entrants such as SAP, Oracle, IBM, etc. Because it’s a relatively oligopolistic market, which is a bit of a headache for the airlines. To be honest, will it really open the door? That’s a matter of debate. For now, those who have tried, such as SAP, haven’t succeeded because, even if we want to simplify things, airlines actually have their own rather unique way of operating. You have to understand that to succeed.

That aside, it does raise a few questions, it ties in somewhat with this whole instant pricing thing, incorporating ancillary services such as seat selection, baggage, drinks into the pricing. In the concept of an offer, there’s a notion of retail and a more dynamic sales approach. Which means it supports the idea that if you’re already setting prices, you’re at the heart of what’s on offer and you can become the owner of that offering. Hence, once again, Amadeus isn’t happy about it, or rather, Amadeus thinks, "That’s my territory. You’re not going to start coming in through there to take my place". Pros, on the other hand, have acquired various companies — one that built websites and another that handled pricing and web distribution for airlines, I mean—which means they’re expanding their portfolio to truly become an offer management system. This puts them in more direct competition with Amadeus, going beyond a pure revenue management system and it blurs the lines a bit between PSS and RMS, where the PSS really becomes nothing more than an operational tool, broadly speaking, for check-in. That’s not necessarily how Amadeus sees the world.

Client [00:42:42]: Pros is the leader in pricing and it does offer some PSS capabilities, but if we had to position it, would it be the leader in RMS and pricing?

Expert [00:43:10]: Absolutely. That’s for sure. Pros were recently acquired by a British PE firm. You may have heard about it.

00:43:23] One specific point that interests me is the issue of dynamic pricing – real-time pricing. Is Pros ahead of the game in this regard or is it lagging behind? Is everyone expecting it to be the ones to solve this problem or is it a bit behind the curve on this?

Expert [00:43:53]: Running late? No, I don’t think so. Ahead of schedule. If you ask Pros, yes, if you ask Amadeus, no. It’s not entirely clear. I think they’re doing well in that respect, but do they have a massive lead? Not sure.

00:44:14] Could we talk about Sabre?

Expert [00:44:32]: Yes, of course. I don’t think I’m wrong in saying that they sold Network Planning, because they sold a range of solutions to raise cash and I believe Network Planning was part of that. I don’t think they have Network Planning anymore. That needs checking.

Client [00:45:23]: I think PE Sponsor will know how to put the money where it’s needed. Sabre is like Amadeus, but not as good and in a bit of a pickle?

Expert [00:45:36]: In decline, let’s say, because if you look back 15 years, they were in just as strong a position as Amadeus, if not stronger. Amadeus came along later, even though their PSS solution was more modern, they arrived at just the right time because the airlines were in the process of outsourcing this sort of solution, so Amadeus snapped up a large share of the market at Sabre’s expense. There’s perhaps one important point I haven’t mentioned. When I said Amadeus had snapped up a large share of the market, I was thinking of PSS. A PSS’s revenue is, roughly speaking, USD 1 per airline passenger.

00:47:07] For Sabre or Amadeus, in terms of their PSS contracts with Air France alone, will that be a USD 100m contract?

Expert [00:47:23]: Yes, whereas for an RMS-only contract, it’s more like USD 15m.

Client [00:47:29]: Is it USD 0.15 per passenger?

Expert [00:47:34]: This is particularly important in the context I was referring to, where I said that for Amadeus, beyond defending their RMS positions – which is what matters most to them – the key priority is not to lose their grip on their very strong position within the PSS, because that is where they really make their money.

00:47:51] If I may venture a guess, perhaps this difference between USD 1 and USD 0.15 tends to reflect the shift in value from the PSS to the RMS?

Expert [00:48:16]: Yes and no. It depends. The transfer of functionality is to the offer management system. What exactly is the offer management system? Are they existing RMS systems that have been expanded, or are they PSS systems that have been updated? I think that’s more or less how it went.

Client [00:48:37]: I hadn't realised those contracts were so important.

Expert [00:48:49]: Air France is a big airline. If you’re talking about an airline with 10m passengers, perhaps you shouldn’t divide that figure by 10 exactly, but by eight.

00:48:57] How do you position Accelya?

Expert [00:49:08]: Accelya, starting from a different angle, is now trying to do much the same as Pros. They have an RMS, they bought a company within the RMS sector – I can’t remember its name – a few years ago. Historically, they’ve been doing something different. They do what’s known as revenue accounting. It’s a form of accounting used by airlines, particularly for revenue and ticket accounting, to reconcile all that. That’s where they come from. Historically, they provided a few other services for airlines, but they decided to expand their portfolio, starting with, amongst other things, acquiring a revenue management solution, and then, a few years ago, they acquired a company called Farelogix. If you ask Farelogix, I’d say it’s an offer management system. I think there are a few pieces missing for it to be complete, but it’s a precursor to offer management systems. Clearly, Accelya is also trying to carve out a place for itself in this new environment and become one of the providers of offer management systems.

Client [00:50:13]: When you mentioned earlier that it had acquired an RMS, were you referring to Farelogix, or is it something different from Farelogix?

Expert [00:50:19]: No. I can't quite remember the name.

00:50:35] Flyr and Fetcherr are two other names I wanted to mention. I’d really like us to talk about Flyr so we can understand its positioning as well.

Expert [00:50:55]: Of course. Flyr is a newcomer, as is Fetcherr, for that matter. They’re both newcomers, having been around for just a few years. Flyr entered the market on the premise of AI transforming revenue management, so they’ve built a purely AI-driven revenue management system. They’ve sold their story well because they’ve raised nearly USD 300m, I believe. However, I think they’ve encountered a few commercial barriers, the main one being, on the one hand, the conservatism of airlines, which aren’t keen on taking risks. Flyr introduced a system claiming to improve revenue through AI, but without the airline understanding the underlying logic — the black-box effect. Carriers were naturally wary of entrusting their revenue to a process they couldn't comprehend. While the idea was interesting, it proved problematic in practice. Faced with this, they expanded their offering to become almost a PSS today, or an order management system. That’s how they present themselves. They’ve expanded their portfolio. There’s a real question mark over the survival of this company today. It was all the rage two years ago, but today, people are wondering where it’s all heading. That’s pretty much the situation with Flyr.

Fetcherr are a bit more low-key, they’re much more cautious. I think they’ve raised some money too. It’s an Israeli company, I believe. I think they have a more sensible approach, Flyr too. Flyr’s CEO is highly confident and an effective salesman, which is both a strength and a weakness. In contrast, Fetcherr adopts a more incremental approach, focusing on solving specific problems within the RMS landscape bit by bit. We’re proposing an innovative approach. That’s the positioning. I get the impression — without having done a detailed analysis, this is just what’s coming across — that it’s a bit similar to Wiremind’s positioning, actually, of differentiating themselves through innovation, "Perhaps we don’t have to do everything for you, but we can solve problems here and there within the full scope of your RMS. Exactly, rather than replacing your solution. If you like, we can also replace your solution”.

Client [00:54:08]: Those two mainly came in via their RMS, it’s just Flyr that’s expanded a bit into the PSS, isn’t it?

Expert [00:54:15]: Yes.

00:54:19] To what extent do providers use multiple sources when it comes to RMS and PSS. Do providers actually develop their own solutions in-house? I understand that this isn’t really the case.

Expert [00:54:45]: Yes, it does exist. Air France, for example, is more the exception to the rule, but it does exist. Air France, in fact and others.

00:56:02] Emirates bought an RMS solution that it manages in-house, is that right?

Expert [00:56:12]: I think so, yes, and the same goes for PSS actually, they have an older solution that they maintain in-house themselves for PSS. They have the volume to justify that sort of approach.

00:56:30] You can have a PSS and an RMS from different vendors. However, within the PSS and RMS, does it make sense to have multiple solutions?

Expert [00:56:58]: Within PSS, no, not at all. Within RMS, in principle, no. What I’m not sure about is whether smaller players like Wiremind or Fetcherr might sometimes propose to complement the existing RMS rather than replace it. That could be an interesting proposition, especially for entering the market gradually rather than through the front door – entering through the back door, so to speak. Then again, to what extent is it a success? It depends on the little bits they offer. If they’ve identified a genuine, poorly resolved issue and manage to solve it better and get that message across, it’s this sort of back door that can be interesting, but they’re not easy to find.

Client [00:57:54]: The last name I had in mind was Travelport, to get back to the competition topic.

Expert [00:58:09]: I really do think they’re more or less on the sidelines, they’re primarily a GDS, so they act as an intermediary between airlines and travel agencies. They don’t really develop technology for airlines. In the RMS debate, we can largely ignore them.