Battlefield: Hotels go on the all-inclusive offensive

There we were thinking that some new model of all-inclusive might be on the horizon, one that embraces bars and restaurants into the system. We might have been thinking this; the tour operators might have been suggesting it. The hotels don't seem in any mood to go along with it. This is the impression formed by statements from heads of hotel associations in Menorca and Ibiza; there has not been a similar statement from Mallorca, only ones that are more veiled in their sympathy with views in other Balearic islands.

The other impression is that the hotels are going on the offensive in defending the all-inclusive offer. Or perhaps this does all tie in with the tour operators' mixed-offer all-inclusive (discussed on 12 March) in that positions are being adopted, with the hotels taking an assertive high ground from which they might be seen as the good guys in admitting outside bars and restaurants into their all-inclusive "club". The tour operators are demanding an increase in all-inclusive while at the same time wanting the so-called "complementary offer" to be a part of it. The hotels, seen as the villain in the all-inclusive piece, seem to want to play hardball.

The picture of bars and restaurants being painted by the hotels is one of complaining and of a failure to do anything to attract tourists. It is the hotels, so the argument goes, that assume all the risk and that make the effort; the complementary offer is being challenged to step up to the plate in attracting tourists. Moreover, the hotels' line is that they have every right to challenge incentives such as happy hours and "menus" (presumably they mean menus del día) offered by bars and restaurants. This challenge comes and has come in the form of all-inclusive.

We seem to be heading to a state of all-out war between the hotels and the complementary sector. The hotels, in addition to all-inclusive, have been moving ever more into the territory once secured by the outside businesses - more entertainment, TV (Sky and football), even Sunday roasts. Entertainment may actually be cut back this summer as a way of reducing costs, but in mostly all other ways the hotels are attacking the complementary offer. This war could be a precursor to some truce or negotiated settlement, e.g. the mixed-offer all-inclusive, but what the hotels are angling at is that it should not be they alone who assume the costs and risks of marketing to get tourists to come in the first place.

The hotels are overstating the case; they are but one aspect of promotion. Nevertheless, they have a point when accusing bars and restaurants of only complaining and apparent inaction. And ever more, the complementary sector is seen as leeching off of the efforts made by the hotels. But this growing antagonism can also be seen as the result of shifting circumstances: economic conditions, stronger competition from other destinations and so on. For years, there was a symbiotic relationship between the two. This has gone or is going. It might only return if the tour operators are genuine in wishing to establish the mixed-offer.

One could accuse the hotels of being disingenuous. They are, together with government, town halls and tour operators, the frontline assault forces in tourism promotion. Clearly they are, and they know it, hence the possible disingenuousness. They are also, generally speaking, far better resourced than businesses in the complementary sector. (It might also be noted that some hotel groups run their own outside restaurants.) Their self-interests are served by co-operation, such as in being parts of local hotel associations which conduct their own marketing, but at least they do engage in co-operation. Does the complementary sector act in a similar way? Self-interest is even more extreme here. Do bars and restaurants band together to push a resort? Well, do they? I'm unaware of this happening. Where co-operation does exist, it tends to be as a means to kick against something - all-inclusives, the latest regulation. Negative rather than positive. And when something comes along which might require some co-operation, such as with the estación náutica concept in Alcúdia, self-interest comes to the fore; what has ever happened to this idea?

The hotels have thrown down the gauntlet. To quote, in translation, from yesterday's "Diario", the president of the Menorcan hoteliers says: "we do not see any effort at any time by the restaurant sector to bring tourists to the Balearics." There is, in all of this, a horrible sense of bitching and bickering as the great edifice of tourism threatens to collapse around the hotels and as all the supply that has risen around them also tumbles and falls. Yet for the hotels to attack the complementary sector is - though they wouldn't admit this - the consequence of their being beholden to the muscle of the tour operators; the reverse of the situation that once used to exist, a situation that used to allow for mutually beneficial co-existence with the complementary sector. The hotels are, therefore, going on a bullying offensive while simultaneously they are being rendered less potent by the masters of the industry - the tour operators. They are hitting out at the weakest link in the whole tourism supply chain, because it suits them to be able to try and cling to a power that is diminishing in a market that has changed fundamentally; they are less the victims of the all-inclusive war initiated by the tour operators than the complementary sector, but they are victims nonetheless, clutching at the spoils of war and abandoning their one-time compatriots in the bars and restaurants. Lines drawn for the battlefield.


QUIZ:
Battlefield. Love is a ... . Great, great song from the 80s. Video that goes from the naff ("you leave this house now...") to the also great.

Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.