The "CRS/GDS Centric" travel distribution model is actually the easiest to visualize coming about. This is due to how close the CRS/GDS are now. However, the current Vendors utilizing the CRS/GDS have already begun to complain about the costs of CRS/GDS participation. Given that the DOT has labeled the CRS/GDSs as an "Oligopoly" with all its attendant monopolistic practices, it is unlikely that the Vendors want to encourage greater utilization of the CRS/GDS. In addition, the economics of the Vendor/CRS relationship severely limit the CRS/GDSs from lowering their charges to the Vendors to attract the remaining "off-line" Vendors. Given the costs of the CRS/GDS infrastructure (the networks, the mainframes, and the small army of TPF developers), it is unlikely that any CRS/GDS can substantially lower their costs. If a CRS/GDS can not lower its costs, dramatically lowering its charges (to attract the "rest" of the Vendors) is highly unlikely! (Note: I believe that most of the largest Vendors utilizing the CRS/GDS have "best price" clauses in their CRS/GDS contracts. This means that any price reduction for "new, small" Vendors would automatically have a LARGE negative impact on the CRS/GDS revenues!)