# Rate parity records: a system map | SourceX

Canonical: https://refer.sourcex.si/guides/rate-parity-exception-review-records-across-systems
Last updated: 2026-10-19

The rate plan code is the spine of every price-gap case. Every other record joins to it: the snapshot through the channel's room or rate name and the stay date, the channel mapping through the channel product ID, the rate plan definition through its effective dates, the direct price through the stay date, the distribution terms through channel, market and effective dates, and the correction record through a case ID. With those keys a flagged gap can be rebuilt end to end; without mapping history and rate plan versions it cannot.

This map is part of the [rate parity exception review guide](/guides/workflow-rate-parity-exception-review), which covers the inventory before a channel contract renewal. Its job is narrower: which system holds each record and which code gets you to the next one.

## Six records, five systems

| Record | System | What it holds | Who usually owns it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rate snapshot | Rate shopping tool | Channel, stay date, shop time, displayed price, room and rate name | Revenue manager |
| Channel mapping | Channel manager | Channel product ID mapped to internal room type and rate plan | Distribution manager |
| Rate plan definition | Property system or booking engine | What the price buys, cancellation rule, restrictions, effective dates | Distribution manager |
| Direct price | Booking engine | Price and conditions shown on the brand site for a stay date | Ecommerce lead |
| Distribution terms | Contract repository | Rate conditions, if any, per channel and market, by version | Commercial director |
| Correction record | Spreadsheet, ticket or change log | Decision, fix, owner, date | Revenue operations head |

Groups that advertise on Google add a seventh source: the Hotel Center price accuracy report gives a reason for each mismatch, and each line joins to the same rate plans by property and stay date.

## The joining keys, one hop at a time

| From | To | Joining key | Typical gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Snapshot | Mapping | Property, channel, channel room or rate name | Old shop results expire after a set period |
| Mapping | Rate plan | Rate plan code | Mapping history overwritten; only today's mapping visible |
| Rate plan | Its version on the stay date | Rate plan code plus effective dates | Plan contents edited in place, not versioned |
| Rate plan | Direct price | Rate plan code plus stay date | No stored copy of the direct price at shop time |
| Snapshot | Terms | Channel, market, effective dates | Contracts filed apart from revenue records |
| Snapshot | Correction | Case or snapshot ID | Fixed in the extranet with no note |

The date hops matter as much as the code hops. Because Booking.com removed parity requirements from its terms for properties in the EEA in July 2024, according to the European Commission, one gap on one plan can be judged under two regimes depending on the shop date. Effective dates on the terms are therefore a join key, not paperwork.

## One fully joined case (Illustrative)

A fictional 760-person lodging group; every code, price and date is invented. This is a different flag from the breakfast case in the worked example: a genuine price gap caused by a remapping error.

- **Snapshot** S-1187: an agency shows a Saturday stay at $184.00 against $209.00 on the brand site, shopped Monday 06:00.
- **Mapping history:** two weeks earlier, during a room-type cleanup, the agency product AG-61044 was pointed away from the free-cancellation plan KG-FC to the non-refundable plan KG-NR.
- **Rate plan versions:** KG-NR is $184.00, prepaid, no cancellation; KG-FC is $209.00, free cancellation until 48 hours before arrival. Both versions are effective for that Saturday.
- **Direct price:** the brand site sells KG-FC at $209.00 and does not offer KG-NR for that date.
- **Terms:** the agency agreement for this market has no rate condition, but the group's own distribution policy says non-refundable rates stay off that channel.
- **Correction:** case PX-102 records "mapping error, policy breach, no contract breach"; the distribution manager restores AG-61044 to KG-FC and the change ticket references the snapshot.
- **Check:** Tuesday's snapshot S-1193 shows the agency at $209.00, matching the brand site.

Without mapping history, this case would look identical to a channel deliberately pricing below the brand site. With it, every line joins to the next through a code or a date. The [worked exception example](/guides/rate-parity-exception-review-exception-examples) follows a flag that turned out to compare two different products; read together, the pair shows why plan versions and mapping history are both needed.

## Where the map usually breaks

- **Expiring shop results.** Some comparison tools purge results after a set period, so older flags lose their evidence.
- **Overwritten mapping.** When a channel product is pointed at a new plan, the old link disappears unless the channel manager keeps history.
- **Unversioned rate plans.** If plan contents were edited in place, nobody can later prove what an old price bought.
- **Terms outside revenue.** Contracts sit with the commercial or legal team, often without effective dates in a searchable form. The [contract review workflows page](/data-types/contract-review-workflows) covers how agreement records are usually kept.
- **Fixes with no note.** A correction made directly in an agency extranet leaves a changed price and no reason.
- **Display checks left in the account.** Google's price accuracy policy asks for the booking-page total to equal the advertised total, yet report views are seldom saved elsewhere, so old mismatch reasons may live only in the account.

## Questions for the revenue operations head

Ask the company's administrator what the channel manager, booking engine and shopping tool actually export, and for how far back. Write "unknown" until someone confirms.

| Question | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| How far back can past comparison results be pulled, with channel and rate names? | Sets the oldest case that can be rebuilt |
| Does the channel manager keep mapping history by date? | Without it, old results cannot reach a rate plan |
| Were rate plan changes versioned? | Without it, what a past price bought is unknown |
| Are agreements filed with effective dates and markets? | Without it, no case can be judged by its own rules |
| Where is each closing reason written? | The reason is the most explanatory field |

Getting data out of a vendor at renewal depends on the contract; [SaaS data export rights](/guides/saas-data-export-rights-contract) covers what to look for. Freight audit firms face a similar map across carriers and invoices, described on the [freight audit and payment company page](/industries/freight-audit-and-payment-company).

The revenue operations head knows the joins; the CEO decides whether to discuss licensing, with the CFO or a commercial director preparing the case and counsel on distribution terms. The introduced company needs 50+ full-time employees at peak (contractors excluded), a documented operating history, rights to license and an authorized contact. Companies in the U.S., Canada and the EU qualify, as do companies in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, India, Singapore, South Africa, Latin America, the UAE and Saudi Arabia when at least 90% of the data is in English. Buyer interest, the rights review result and any offer stay unknown until SourceX's review. Partners sign the Channel Partner Agreement before submitting; the first valid introduction within the 90-day window is credited when the company submits a verified application. Related lodging workflows are on the [hospitality page](/industries/hospitality).

## Next step

> **Refer a company. Earn up to $100,000.** Default reward: 25% of Actual Supplier Payout, capped at $100,000 cumulatively per referred company. Eligibility and payment conditions apply, and a signed Schedule A or addendum can differ. A lead, meeting or signature alone does not trigger payment.

If the group can join comparison results to rate plans and dated terms for several years, [register as a partner](/register), check the company on [who qualifies](/who-qualifies) and read the [program terms](/terms), then write the handoff with the [referral brief template](/resources/rate-parity-exception-review-referral-brief-template).

## Sources

- https://support.google.com/hotelprices/answer/6318506?hl=en
- https://support.google.com/hotelprices/answer/6064419?hl=en
- https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/factsheet-how-dma-ensures-businesses-using-bookingcom-are-free-set-their-prices-and-bookingcom-2026-09-28_en
- https://refer.sourcex.si/terms