The situation
Zuri Sands is a well-regarded 84-key resort with a genuinely strong physical product and a review profile to match. Its commercial problem was arithmetic rather than reputational. The resort earned the overwhelming majority of its annual revenue in roughly 120 nights, and for the remaining 245 nights it either sold at heavily discounted rates through Agoda and MakeMyTrip or did not sell at all. Annual occupancy of 45% concealed a distribution in which peak season ran above 90% and the monsoon months ran below 20%. Because fixed costs — staffing, maintenance, grounds, utilities — do not seasonalise, the trough months were consuming the margin the peak months generated.
The complication
The resort had responded to the trough in the way most seasonal properties do: by discounting harder and by opening more OTA inventory. This produced two compounding effects. Rate integrity eroded, because guests who had seen a ₹3,200 monsoon rate would not accept ₹9,000 in December, and the OTAs — which held 80% of room nights — began to treat the property as a discount inventory source, surfacing it in price-sorted results and suppressing it elsewhere. Meanwhile a flat rate structure meant that during the peak weeks, when the resort was genuinely capacity-constrained, it sold Friday and Saturday inventory at the same rate as Tuesday. The resort was discounting when it should have been holding and holding when it should have been yielding.
“
Struggling with extreme seasonal occupancy drop-offs during monsoon periods, heavy OTA commission leakages (80% OTA share) via Agoda, and static flat rates leading to weekend pricing dilution.
Engagement scoping note
Partner commentary
Occupancy carried this engagement and rate followed modestly, which is the correct sequence for a property whose core problem was 245 unsold nights rather than underpriced ones. The monsoon repositioning contributed 14.2 points of the 23-point occupancy gain; peak-weekend yielding and villa re-pricing contributed the majority of the ADR movement. Had the 80% OTA share persisted at the new revenue level, commission would have reached ₹2.40 Cr against the ₹1.35 Cr actually paid.