It was March 2025.

I had just lost a $40,000 safari proposal.

The client booked the same destination through an OTA. Budget lodge. $12,000.

I had spent three hours researching my proposal.

Carbon-neutral accommodations.
Community partnerships.
Solar-powered camps.
Sustainability certifications.

The client loved the presentation. Said it aligned with their values.

Then they booked based on price.

I sat there staring at my screen, thinking, "What did I do wrong?”

Here's what I figured out: nothing.

And everything.

I didn't fail at selling sustainability.

I succeeded at revealing who was never my client in the first place.

The industry had sold me a game I couldn't win.

And I'd been playing it for years.

When a client says "sustainability matters" and then books on price, most of us think we failed at communicating value.

We didn't explain the certifications well enough.
We didn't justify the premium clearly enough.
We need better sustainability credentials to compete.

That's what I thought for a long time.

But here's what was actually happening: the client was telling me exactly who they were, and I wasn't listening.

They weren't luxury transformation clients shopping for expertise. They were price-comparison clients using sustainability as a socially acceptable reason to shop around.

"We care about the environment" sounds better than "we're price shopping," so that's the language they used.

And I spent three hours building a proposal for someone who was always going to book on Expedia.

The industry “told me” to compete on sustainability. Carbon offsets. Eco-certifications. Green credentials.

What they didn't tell me: I was competing on a playing field designed for me to lose.

Because the client asking for sustainable options wasn't asking for expertise. They were asking for comparable features they could price-shop.

Just like hotel star ratings. Just like TripAdvisor reviews.

And to make this worse: while I was losing deals on sustainability claims, I was actually doing real work.

The trips I designed, the ones I was proud of, had:

This created lower environmental impact. Real social benefit. Genuine economic circulation.

I just didn't think of it as "sustainability." I thought of it as intelligent luxury design.

The difference?

I wasn't marketing it with carbon calculations and certification badges. I was demonstrating it through itinerary architecture and guide expertise.

The clients who valued that work weren't shopping on sustainability claims. They were evaluating whether I understood their destination better than they could understand it themselves.

Those deals closed. Not because of my eco-credentials. Because of my expertise.

But the industry kept telling me: market the sustainability. Get the certifications. Compete on green claims.

So I did. And I lost deals to OTAs who could match the certification theater at lower prices.

I was doing real work while playing a fake game.

Last week, industry reports showed sustainable aviation fuel production stalling. Costs rising. Net-zero targets slipping.

The sustainability framework the industry sold, carbon offsets, eco-certifications, net-zero promises, is breaking on its own terms.

Most advisors I talk to see this as bad news. Another thing working against them. Another marketing advantage disappearing.

I see it differently now.

The game is ending. And the advisors who were never really playing it are positioned perfectly.

Here's what "real" sustainability actually looks like: the version developed by researchers and economists, not the version marketed by the travel industry:

All three together over time.

The trips I was already designing? They delivered all three.

Fewer movements, lower impact. Local guides employed and trained. Money circulating in local economies.

I just wasn't calling it "sustainable travel with carbon offsets."

I was calling it intelligent design.

And intelligent design survives when the marketing theater collapses.

The clients who genuinely care about responsible travel aren't looking for carbon math. They're looking for someone who understands complexity.

So I stopped doing this:

And started doing this:

When a client mentions sustainability, I say this:

Then I show them the itinerary.

I'm not selling carbon neutrality. I'm demonstrating systems thinking.

The client isn't evaluating my sustainability credentials. They're evaluating whether I see patterns they can't see from their position.

That's a completely different sale.

The advisors I know who are thriving right now aren't talking about sustainability at all.

They're talking about itinerary intelligence. Guide quality. Destination timing. Access depth.

When sustainability comes up, they don't pivot to certifications. They explain design choices.

"We're spending eight days here instead of bouncing between three countries because that's how you actually understand a place. You work with the same guide. You build relationship with the community. You see patterns instead of highlights. That's what luxury transformation actually is."

The carbon footprint is lower.
The community benefit is real.
The economic impact is genuine.

But that's not the headline. Intelligence is the headline.

And the clients who value intelligence don't price-shop it.

Because they can't find it online.

The sustainability marketing the industry sold is breaking. SAF won't scale. Offsets are theater. Net-zero claims are slipping into the future.

Many advisors will keep playing the game for a while.

Researching certifications.
Promoting carbon claims.
Competing on green credentials.

They'll do this until clients stop believing any of it, or until the next marketing trend replaces sustainability.

Some of us will see this moment differently.

We were already doing the real work: designing intelligent travel that creates genuine environmental, social, and economic benefit.

We just got tricked into marketing it as carbon offsets and eco-certifications.

Now that marketing theater is collapsing, and we're exactly where we should be.

Not selling sustainability. Demonstrating intelligence.

The clients who care about responsible travel still work with us.

But they're working with us because we understand complexity, not because we're repeating comfortable myths.

That client who booked the OTA safari at $12,000? They were never my client. The sustainability conversation just revealed that faster than anything else could have.

The clients who close at $40,000 aren't shopping on sustainability claims. They're buying expertise they can't find anywhere else.

I've been doing that work all along, and now, I just stopped letting the industry tell me how to talk about it.

—Alex

📩 Share this email with your colleagues and invite them to join our expanding community of luxury travel professionals.

📫 If you received The Expert’s Guild Weekly from a friend and would like to subscribe, please do so here: