When the FTO joined forces with Abta, it was rumoured the association had to take on more than £750,000 in costs. It must now balance the books and, while a move out of its Newman Street headquarters will save some money, it’s unlikely to be enough.

Agents who are now being hit with fairly hefty hikes in their subscriptions are under-standably making a link with the FTO merger. Abta says there is no connection.

It is believed big operators were promised subscription fees to both Abta and the FTO would be reduced by a third for the single body. That could apparently amount to £250,000 for some! So, while big operators are seeing their overheads come down, agent are paying more.

Abta argues that it hasn’t raised subscriptions for six years and that its services represent good value for money. It is also urging members to see the bigger picture. It’s no secret that some of the larger operators questioned the value of being in both Abta and the FTO last year, with Tui apparently the closest to walking away.

Without the major players, Abta’s role and clout as the UK’s “travel association”, would surely have been in question.

It might be a bitter pill to swallow if you are an agent member, but the alternative could have been no Abta at all.

Are agents courting disaster either way?

Agency groups which publicly pledged not to work with non-principal accommodation suppliers two years ago are now being forced to revise their stance.

Indemnity cover is suddenly in vogue, with Advantage, among others, now having to investigate whether it offers the same or, as some in the sector believe, better protection than principal status.

The key question is: when there is a multimillion-pound claim, who will pay?

With the consumer highly likely to pursue their travel agent, will the middleman truly step in and take the hit. And more importantly, will
he be able to afford to do so?