Expedia CEO says AI not changing bookings yet

Expedia CEO Ariane Gorin said the company has not yet seen AI agents changing how customers book travel, though the early signs show potential for an industry shift, CNBC reported.

“It’s a great way for people to do inspiration, to do trip planning,” Gorin said in an interview with CNBC. “We haven’t seen it change the way they’re actually doing booking.”

The comments come as personal AI agents like Meta’s Muse and OpenAI’s Dots enter the mainstream, promising to handle scheduling, shopping and travel for consumers. Expedia’s stock fell about 12% on Thursday after the company delivered weaker-than-expected guidance for the fourth quarter.

The AI threat

Gorin said Expedia is “working with all of the agents” to make sure it surfaces in AI results, to understand how the agents get information and to ensure the company has the necessary integrations. She acknowledged that AI agents could develop their own travel programs and claim market share, but she said the complexities of the travel industry make full replacement difficult.

“People were already shopping across a number of places, so the agent can do that in a much easier way,” Gorin said. “But when it comes to actually booking, being confident that the content that you’re getting is right, the amenities are right, the price is right, if something goes wrong, someone’s going to actually either solve it for you, answer the phone, be there for you, I don’t think those agents are going to do it for you, and that’s why people trust Expedia and come to us.”

The argument is that travel booking is not just a transaction. It involves verification of content, price matching, and customer service when things go wrong. An AI agent can search and compare, but it cannot call a hotel to resolve a booking error or negotiate a refund for a canceled flight. Expedia’s value proposition is the human infrastructure behind the booking, not the booking itself.

The Q4 guidance

Expedia forecast fourth-quarter revenue of between $3.69 billion and $3.75 billion, with the midpoint below analyst estimates of $3.74 billion, according to FactSet. Gorin attributed the moderation to “geopolitical events in the Middle East and Europe,” the midterm elections and the company moving its fall sale from the fourth quarter to the third quarter.

The third quarter was strong. Total gross bookings rose 11% and revenue climbed 12%. The Q4 guidance shortfall is not a demand collapse, but it is enough to make investors nervous, especially with the AI agent question hanging over the online travel industry. The contrast between the Q3 strength and the Q4 caution is what spooked the market.

The stock decline reflects two concerns. The first is the near-term guidance, which suggests a cooling travel market. The second is the long-term AI threat, which could compress Expedia’s take rate if agents route bookings through lower-cost channels or bypass online travel agencies entirely. Gorin’s comments addressed the second concern, but the market was not entirely reassured.

The 12% stock drop is disproportionate to the guidance miss. The midpoint of Expedia’s Q4 range is $3.72 billion, which is $20 million below the consensus estimate of $3.74 billion. For a company that generated $3.7 billion in a single quarter, a $20 million miss is a rounding error, not a demand signal. The selloff is about the AI narrative, not the numbers.

What I think

Gorin is right about the complexity of travel booking, but she is wrong about how long that complexity will protect Expedia. The customer service problem is real, but it is also solvable. AI agents are already handling customer service for banks and retailers, and the technology is improving fast. The moat that Expedia relies on, human customer service agents who can solve problems, is the same moat that every intermediary has relied on, and it is narrowing as AI gets better at handling exceptions.

The more durable advantage is inventory. Expedia has relationships with hotels, airlines and car rental companies that give it access to rooms and seats that AI agents cannot find on the open web. If Expedia can be the inventory layer that agents query, it stays in the value chain even if the booking interface changes. Gorin’s comment about “working with all of the agents” suggests the company understands this, but the execution will determine whether Expedia is a partner to AI agents or a competitor.

The Q4 guidance is the less interesting part of the story. Geopolitical events and midterm elections are temporary headwinds, and moving the fall sale to Q3 is a timing choice, not a demand signal. The 11% gross bookings growth in Q3 shows the underlying business is healthy. The stock selloff is an overreaction to a guidance midpoint that missed by a few million dollars, compounded by the AI anxiety that every intermediary is facing.

The travel industry is in the same position as every other intermediary business: the value is shifting from the booking interface to the inventory and service layer. Expedia has both, but the market is questioning whether the AI agents will let it keep them. The tech industry has been disrupting intermediaries for two decades, and travel is the next target. Expedia’s defense is that travel is harder than retail, and that is true today. The question is whether it is true in three years, and Gorin’s “yet” is the word that matters most in her answer.