Guilt By Too Many Associations

It was one of those news stories which comes along with depressing frequency. Whenever the official sales periods are about to start, have come to an end or are even weeks past, up pop retailers' associations to complain about the market liberalisation which has allowed sales and promotions at times other than during the official sales periods. (There are two such periods: in winter and in summer.)

We therefore had not one, not two but three associations (or federations or whatever) saying roughly the same thing prior to the current sales campaign. The only novelty was that one of the associations suggested that other associations - those for larger retailers - are beginning to think like they do; they being representatives of smaller retailers.

And which were these smaller-representing associations? They were Afedeco, Pimeco and the Balearic trade (retail) confederation. Their presidents were quoted in agreeing with each other, some statistics were dragged out (based on one of the association's "barometers" of sales activity), the Rajoy government was berated, and it was said - once more - that consumers are confused by the fact that there can be sales at times other than the official sales periods. Are consumers confused? I suppose one has to take the associations' words for it, given that the words are similar.

Reading this story, I asked myself why there are these different associations. In this instance, as has been the case in the past, a normal curiosity and willingness to research what and who they represent was set aside. When it comes to retailers' associations, I've lost the will to live, and if I have, then I suspect others reading the same story will be of like mind. There is an abundance of associations making the same points. It smacks of overkill. Why don't they just form one association and have done with it?

Which isn't to deny the rightful place that associations have, whether in business or for other purposes. No, associations are absolutely crucial in defending and promoting the interests of those they represent. The fact of associationism isn't at issue; its extent is what is.

Allied to this is the repetitious nature of the message. Of course, if it is made often enough, it may have an impact in influencing public or political attitudes and so bringing about desired change. Associations are, in many cases, lobby groups. Their announcements in the media are intended only so much for the public's consumption. There are politicians being targeted as well. But the repetitiousness can also have an adverse effect. Say things so often and the intended audience is turned off. It ceases to listen because it's been heard so many times.

In the specific case of retailing, it's not as though I don't have sympathy with the smaller retailers. Moreover, the current regional government is sympathetic to them, placing much store (sic) on "local" business, namely the smaller retailer as opposed to the larger ones and multiple chains. A left-wing regime in the Balearics is thus, once more, butting heads with a right-wing national administration, whose business allies are the grander retailers.

The cause is therefore not wrong, the campaigning is therefore not unjustified, although it doesn't follow that holding sales outside the official periods is solely the preserve of the larger retailers; this is manifestly not the case. The bottom line with the argument in favour of a reversal of market liberalisation and the re-establishment of official sales periods alone is that everyone is a winner - all retailers and all consumers. Discuss.

But when they talk of consumers - be they consumers of news or of goods and services - being confused by the liberalisation, are they not guilty of creating confusion by their very associational proliferation? Why are there all these associations, and does anyone care?

Toni Abrines, president of the Aviba travel agencies' association, has spoken about why people should care. He makes the case for the absolute need for associations. He notes, though, that an association doesn't always do things for the best in terms of the interests it is supposed to be defending or of wider society/economy. There is also the issue of all pulling in the same direction, which can be difficult enough within one association, but when there are several with different messages, then which one will be listened to? Any?

At least the associations for the retailers generally seem to have similar messages, but these do differ when one includes the associations for the larger retailers. Hence, there are conflicting views, and it becomes a case of who shouts loudest and most often. Residents' associations in Palma are another example. They seem to be in competition to see who can get the town hall to listen. In the end, because of the number, the rival messages and a fair degree of pomposity, there's the danger that no one is listened to.

The Sharing Lobby

The regulation or non-regulation of holiday lets has reached the highest levels of Spanish governmental administration. The national competition commission is addressing the issue, taking account of the explosion of the P2P phenomenon, i.e. web portals which place consumers in direct contact with providers, be they apartments for rent or other types of service. As the issue climbs towards the top of the regulatory heap, companies engaged in P2P in Spain have formed an association to lobby government. It includes the most celebrated of the P2P websites, Airbnb, plus other accommodation websites and, for example, car sharing sites. It does not include Uber, however. This taxi and transport network has been condemned in Spain for providing unfair competition. A judge has ordered Uber to cease all activities in Spain. The French are to ban Uber from the start of next year.

But if Uber is a sort of black sheep of the P2P community, other web operators are craving legitimacy and have so formed their association - "Sharing España". Much of this sharing, holiday accommodation and so on, is considered by opponents to represent an underground economy, which this week was said to equate to 22% of the Spanish tourism sector. How such a figure is arrived at is unclear, but the secretary-general of the Spanish Confederation of Hotels and Tourist Accommodation, Ramón Estalella, asserted that 22% it was. The hoteliers want tough action on any form of what they see as unfair or illegal competition, but arriving at regulations is far from straightforward. As the director-general for tourism in the region of La Rioja has quite rightly noted, attaining uniform regulation in all regions of Spain would be "unworkable". She has thus reinforced the fact that the devolution of responsibilities for holiday let regulation to the regions by national government is itself all but unworkable; the consequence of this is that there are seventeen separate regulatory frameworks.

The holiday lets sector is now trying to fight back against the hoteliers and their claims. The association for apartments for tourist use (APTUR) in the Balearics has argued that holiday lets generate more employment than the hoteliers do, both directly, e.g. through cleaning services, and indirectly - car hire, restaurants, shops, etc. This lobby in the Balearics has, until recently, been fairly quiet, unlike in the Canaries, and the association for holiday rentals there held its first forum on Monday at which a video was unveiled. It is called "Holiday rental: the tourist decides" and features personal accounts by tourists as to why they opt for non-hotel accommodation. In addition, Homeaway, an online holiday rental marketplace similar to Airbnb, has teamed up with the university in Salamanca to create the first "barometer" of holiday lets activity in Spain and specifically in the Canaries, where the economic impact of the sector is said to have been worth 817 million euros over the past three years. The Canaries are, unlike the Balearics, edging towards a permissive form of regulation akin perhaps to that of Catalonia. And that region, the only part of Spain which has a tourist tax, anticipates generating 10% of revenue from the tax in 2015 from accommodation which has been regularised and which may legitimately form part of P2P sites' offers. Catalonia is looking forward to raising 44 million euros from tax next year, meaning that holiday lets will account for approximately four million. This is revenue which is used for tourism promotion purposes.

The Moving Target: All-inclusives

Sometimes you can't tell the difference between tourists and local business types. An elderly chap wandered into Cheers on Tuesday lunchtime, scanning earnestly the business types, and pulled up a chair at the next table. Wasn't he going to join us? I realised that he wouldn't be when he ordered steak and chips in a broad Brummy accent. Having positioned himself next to the long table of business types, I trust he was well informed as to the latest thinking about all-inclusives. Cheers is a big place. It was not exactly packed on Tuesday lunchtime, but the tourist still chose the next table. I guess had he looked around at the empty tables, he would have got the drift as to what the discussion was about.

There again, Alcúdia's main tourist centre gets fairly quiet in October. You wouldn't expect packed restaurants at lunchtimes. More important, though, is whether you can expect packed lunchtime terraces and dining areas at any time of the season, except in the restaurants of all-inclusive hotels.

The tourist centre, a couple of kilometres away from Alcúdia's port, goes under various names. One of them is "around Bellevue". This massive complex has lent its name to the area because of its imposing importance. Five thousand or so guests when it's full, it now has five thousand or so guests who are all-inclusive, assuming that the figure given by one of the bar owners is accurate. 99%, he said. Which I suppose means 100%. You can never be 100% sure, as Bellevue has long been a breeding ground for rumours, urban myths and outright untruths.

This is hardcore all-inclusive land insofar as there are hotels which are known to be predominantly or exclusively all-inclusive. The all-inclusive tentacles, however, spread out from around Bellevue. They are wrapped around Magic and have crept into the port. In the opposite direction, they have grown into triffids, consumed much of Playa de Muro and swallowed almost whole Can Picafort. 

The resorts of the bay of Alcúdia form a conurbation in which there are similar concerns, the greatest being all-inclusive. I don't know that I had anticipated there being many people at the meeting but I began to appreciate why there weren't very many. From this conurbation (populated with roughly 150 hotels), you might have thought that Cheers would be thronged, but it wasn't, and the reasons why speak volumes as to why opposition to all-inclusives from the complementary sector is so weak.

The principal reason is fragmentation. Even within Alcúdia there is fragmentation. Bars and restaurants represented at Acotur's gathering to discuss all-inclusives were predominantly from around Bellevue. There was only one representative from the port. There were no great delegations from Muro or Can Picafort. One only has to consider how the local hotels are organised to realise just how shambolic the organisation of opposition is; Alcúdia and Can Picafort hoteliers federations joined forces some three years ago, and it is one of the loudest of the island's hotel groupings.

There was discussion about the need for far greater unity and for the creation of a genuine lobbying mechanism to match the all-powerful one of the hotels. It makes eminent sense for there to be one loud voice rather than the many quiet ones that proliferate in Mallorca's business world. Opposition to all-inclusives and indeed other aspects of tourism from within the complementary sector is dogged by fragmentation in terms of different associations, so the sector needs a proper structure before it embarks on a strategy; without a unified lobbying organisation, the detail of opposition is pretty useless.

But if the structure were right, would the strategy be right? One problem is that there is disagreement as to how current moves by the regional government should be responded to. Is the insistence on greater hotel and all-inclusive quality beneficial to the complementary sector? Some say it is, as this will result in a tourist base with greater spending power which doesn't confine itself to the hotel. Others disagree. Raise the quality that much and no one would ever leave a hotel.

If the bars and restaurants are unsure what their position is on facets of tourism policy, it will be difficult to create a coherent strategy of opposition, whatever this might be. And one fears that even with a unified body, nothing would change. There was much talk of the government giving the hotels carte blanche and of the hotels having the government in their pocket, but ultimately does this not miss the point that the real target for opposition is neither the hotels nor the government? It is the tour operators.


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.