travel intentions Archives - Réseau de veille en tourisme

The cultural travel market

American cultural travellers represent an especially lucrative market: nearly one-third spend over US$1,000 when they travel. By way of comparison, only 11% of all U.S. travellers spend this much. This news comes from Renee Mitchell, Research Director, Smithsonian Magazine, speaking at the most recent TIA Marketing Outlook Forum. Her presentation discussed the demand for cultural travel.

Characteristics of cultural travellers

Over 44 million American cultural tourists stay in commercial lodgings when they travel and generate an estimated US$29 billion per year in travel spending. Around 76% of them are leisure travellers, while 24% are business travellers. Some specific traits of cultural travellers are listed below:

Average age is 46 years old
Average household income is US$75,800
62% are married
87% have a college diploma or higher
31% have children living at home
37% travel during the summer

Interest in culture = interest in travel

According to Mitchell, Americans interested in history and culture, like the readers of Smithsonian Magazine, are especially interested in travel with an historic/cultural emphasis. A survey of the magazine’s readers showed:

93% visit historic sites
84% learn all they can about a destination before going there
76% consider culture and heritage when selecting a destination
71% explore towns off the beaten path

According to a TIA/Smithsonian survey, American cultural travellers can be characterized by the four « L’s »:

Learning – 82 million say, « Trips where I learn something new are more memorable. »
Leisure Activities – 67 million say, « My hobbies and interests influence my destination selection. »
Locals – 63 million say, « While on vacation, I like to find places that are popular with locals. »
Love it! – 34 million say, « Vacation/leisure trips including cultural activities are more important to me. »

Not the same as other travellers

Comparing cultural travellers with other travellers reveals some interesting differences. For example, cultural travellers spend a lot more than other travellers and tend to stay at destinations for much longer (see table). In addition, they are very active tourists: nearly half of those who stay in hotels participate in at least four activities. They are fond of shopping, nightlife and urban sightseeing.

Table 1: Comparison of American travel behaviours

All travellers Hotel travellers Cultural hotel travellers

Spent US$1,000+ on trip 11% 20% 30%
Primary travel by air 19% 30% 32%
Trip = 3+ nights 41% 52% 66%
Trip = 7+ nights 13% 23%
3+ people in party 19% 26%
2+ activities on trip 38% 45% 88%
4+ activities on trip 7% 45%
Shopping 29% 29% 47%
Nightlife/dancing 7% 10% 16%
City/urban sightseeing 10% 15% 30%

Source: Roper Reports 2004

Promising outlook for 2005

In 2005, the demand for historic/cultural travel products will be high. According to a Roper survey, among Americans planning to travel in 2005:

24% will visit an historical site
17% will take a fishing trip
16% will visit a casino
16% will go hiking or camping
10% will purchase a package tour
9% will visit a health spa

Renee Mitchell emphasized that the travel behaviour of cultural hotel travellers makes them very profitable targets. She also stressed that hotels are ideal cultural partners for promoting special products, packages, events, etc.

However, one must remain realistic with regard to the overall tourism potential of US travellers. It is increasingly difficult to get them to cross any borders. For Americans, the most important factor in selecting a destination is safety (75%), which has now surpassed affordability (62%). Obviously, statistics such as these tend to favour domestic travel. Nonetheless, Canada does offer proximity and a reputation for safety, which certainly gives it an edge over other destinations.

Source:
– The Roper Center – TIA and Smithsonian Magazine. « The Historic/Cultural Traveler » [www.tia.org], 2003.

Travel intentions vs. actual travel

The increased number of polls used to determine travel intentions has contributed to the tools used by industry decision-makers. Unfortunately, the existence of more surveys has not necessarily translated into a more accurate portrait of the future. In fact, a look back uncovers major discrepancies between Canadian travel intentions and actual travel.

It is common practice for tourism stakeholders to consult tourism forecasts when developing business strategies. People are periodically surveyed on their travel intentions so pollsters can anticipate the short-term tourism demand. We are accustomed to looking forward, but what about taking a look back? The industry has rarely taken the opportunity to compare stated travel intentions with the actual number of trips taken.

To conduct this study, we reviewed Canadian travel intentions over the past five years. To ensure reliable, homogeneous results, we looked at the findings of a poll published twice a year by the Conference Board of Canada; conducted at the same time each year, these surveys follow the same methodology and may be readily compared.

For the purpose of our analysis, we thought it best to compare the growth rate of planned vacations with the growth rate of reported trips (that is, actual trips taken). Absolute numbers are difficult to reconcile because, while vacations usually refer to stays of three days or more, Statistics Canada survey data on declared travel includes any overnight leisure trip.

Survey reliability: myth or reality?

Should the reliability of forecasts be called into question? An analysis shows that projections have proven to be very different from actual outcomes when it comes to the number of trips taken by Canadians. During the five years studied, the annual growth rates of planned trips and actual trips diverged by 17% on average, a significant gap. Furthermore, the difference between forecast and reality was never less than 10%. Obviously, many factors, including unforeseeable events, have a strong influence on the performance of a given tourism season. For example, the SARS crisis dealt a severe blow to Canadian tourism in 2003. A closer look at each year helps elucidate the reasons behind the discrepancies:

In 1999, the economy was in full swing and the stock market was reaching new highs. Actual travel surpassed expectations by 10%.
In 2000, the high-tech stock market bubble burst and the economy began to show signs of flagging. Actual travel was 14% lower than planned travel, indicating more Canadians decided to stay home that year.
In 2001, the travel industry was rocked by the catastrophic events of September 11. However, since most vacations had already been taken before the day of the attacks, actual travel was nonetheless 14% higher than expected. Forecasts had underestimated the strong economic showing of the first three quarters of 2001.
In 2002, the «post-September 11» effect had a major impact on travel intentions, which dipped to an unprecedented low. In actual fact, however, Canadians resumed travelling faster than anticipated and actual travel surpassed forecasts by 15%.
In 2003, against the backdrop of the war in Iraq, the SARS crisis was a decisive factor in the travel decisions of many Canadians. Surveys were unable to foresee the extent of the crisis and, as a result, actual travel trailed planned travel by 21%.
The forecasts for 2004 once again indicate negative growth and the industry remains concerned about year-end results.

Intent is not action

Unforeseeable factors aside, there is a significant difference between the absolute number of trips taken and the number of trips planned. Generally speaking, approximately 60% of Canadians actually follow through on vacation plans made six months earlier.

According to the Conference Board, some 20 million Canadians expressed interest in travelling during 2004. This represented an 8% drop compared to 2003 travel intentions. Although one can predict the direction of the economy with some success, other factors like weather conditions, exchange rates and disruptive events are difficult to anticipate and have a major impact on consumer travel decisions.

For decision-makers, tourism forecasts make up just one variable in a complex equation involving completely unpredictable elements. Travel intention surveys may herald an annual trend, but they are no substitute for managerial instincts and should not form the basis of the decision-making process.