In the summer of 2012, the Partido Popular government passed the second general tourism law for the Balearics. The PP had been responsible for the passage of the first law in 1999, and the two bills bore some similarity in terms of general aims and objectives. Among these were provisions for modernisation of resorts and of hotel accommodation described variously as mature, obsolete or outmoded.
In the preamble to the 2012 law, there is an explanation as to the lack of regulation that characterised the building of tourist establishments from the 1960s. It says that there was "some kind of urban planning" in the 1980s, followed by a "proliferation of regulations" in the 1990s. The 1999 act sought to try and draw all these together, recognising that hotel modernisation during the '90s was anything but consistent. By 1999, therefore, there was a percentage of Balearic hotel stock not conforming to regulations as they had become. It was obsolete and given that much of this stock dated from the '60s and '70s, when there was precious little regulation, it could have been argued that this stock had in-built obsolescence right from the very outset.
By 2012, the stock was still very much in existence. The intentions of the 1999 law had not been followed through, so Carlos Delgado, who was the tourism minister who introduced the 2012 law, took aim at low-grade accommodation. Of nine key points contained in that law, there was one directed specifically at the modernisation of one and two-star establishments. These were to be given a maximum period of four years to upgrade. If they didn't, they would be closed, if only temporarily.
The thrust of this had been to eliminate anything under three stars, and yet, almost exactly four years after the law was approved, the tourist tax was introduced, and it contained rates for one and two-star establishments. In theory, there should no longer be any. Revealingly enough, the one and two-star hotels are lumped in with three stars for the purpose of the tax - each of them carrying a day rate of one euro. This is revealing in the context of what the now tourism minister, Biel Barceló, as well as some hoteliers are saying or at least implying: any hotel with a classification below three-star superior (which attracts a 1.50 rate of tax) is obsolete and exists only to attract an inferior type of tourist.
There is no doubting the fact that a great deal of the current three-star stock (which is vastly greater than one or two-stars) dates to the days when there was little regulation. Likewise, much of it has not been modernised. Consequently, one gets the conclusions of Barceló and Magalluf and Playa de Palma hoteliers: these are rough hotels, more often than not all-inclusive, bringing in a rough tourist with no money. Therefore, these hotels must be "eradicated" together with their clientele.
As ever, we are fed a view biased towards the resorts of twin obsession. Nowhere else in Mallorca or indeed the Balearics appears to matter. Moreover, we are given an impression that all tourists opting for a hotel with a lower-star rating are, by definition, low quality. This is a disgraceful generalisation, one with strong echoes of the start of the century when Maria Munar and Celesti Alomar (the tourism minister who oversaw the introduction of the old eco-tax) were seeking a similar eradication of low-quality tourists. So outraged were the Germans by an impression conveyed that a whole class of tourists was being made to feel unwelcome, that they temporarily boycotted Mallorca. The falsehoods reported with hindsight about the old eco-tax always neglect this fact when claiming that the tax was a disaster.
One can defend the tourist who chooses a lower-star hotel on the grounds that he or she prefers that type of accommodation and that the lower cost of the actual holiday in fact permits greater spending. Nevertheless, we can't kid ourselves that there isn't the rough element which contributes little or nothing and parades itself in unseemly fashion.
But there is nothing new about this. What should have been taken as landmark research by the university at the start of the 1990s into the percentage of tourism which was actually a net loss maker for Mallorca was totally ignored. This research predated all-inclusives. They, with the exception of the one Club Med hotel that used to be in Mallorca, were a phenomenon born out of early '90s recession.
This "rough" element has always been there, and attempts to legislate against it through insistence on standards of accommodation have existed for nigh on twenty years. Will the new "eradication" be any different? If there is a failure, as has been the case until now, to rigorously apply provisions under law, then one might conclude that it won't be.
Showing posts with label Quality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Quality. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 02, 2016
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
The Trouble With Markets
The market is an important part of the town or village's economic and social life. It can occur once a week or more than once a week. It is also, in summer, a feature of the local tourism economy. Its role is, therefore, varied, and the importance attached to it is such that a town hall councillor will typically be assigned specific responsibility for it - the promotion and the approving of pitches.
Not all is well, however, in the world of the Mallorcan market. While many are flourishing, this activity reveals a preponderance of certain types of product. The market's variety and diversity has been lost under the weight of clothes, footwear and the nicky-nacky of northern Africa. Three markets in particular have been identified as culprits in this regard, those of Inca, Santa Maria del Cami and Sineu. They aren't alone though.
Issues to do with quality at Inca's market were evident over four years ago. In May 2011 I wrote about the fact that tour operators, who traditionally place the Thursday market on their excursions' itineraries, were threatening to stop taking their customers. The market, it was said, had lost much of its attraction. There was too much of it, and too much that wasn't much good.
The town hall, concerned by this loss of tourist influx, set about changing things. There was to be more local craft and also to be traditional dance to captivate the visitors. Almost 50 stallholders were to be told to sling their hook. Despite this, not much, if anything, has changed. Of the some 250 pitches, approximately two-thirds are devoted to precisely what they were over four years ago: way too much clothing and the rag-tag of jewellery of the imitation and low-grade type and of the nicky-nacky. Pointedly, it is said that 73 of the pitches are of a Moroccan character. Only one stall is given over to pottery. So much for the local craft therefore.
Inca, as is also the case in Santa Maria, has now introduced a system whereby it gives weight to what are called "innovative producers" and to the artisan. Ten points go to the former and five to the latter, meaning, in theory, that they will gain priority and so shift the general offer of the market and make it more diverse and more interesting, while also promoting local trades. But will this make any difference? The town hall's last "initiative" - over four years ago - hardly had the desired effect.
Oddly, and despite all the emphasis placed on the revival of the artisan craft heritage, it is felt necessary to positively discriminate in favour of craft traders or to establish special market events for them. This was the case recently in Palma, where there was a week of such promotion at four or five markets in the city. But by seeking to place the emphasis on such traders, might there be a risk that the market mix goes too far in this direction and creates a similarity of offer, albeit a different one? And what precisely is meant by artisan craft in any event?
Part of the problem with it is that it can be expensive. A sole producer/trader can hardly churn out masses of stuff, and what he or she does produce is inevitably going to attract a premium. It has to in order to cover all sorts of cost, not least the rent and tax for a market stall. Tourists, by and large, don't go to markets expecting to hand over great wads of cash. They go in the anticipation of finding bargains or of engaging in haggling.
And tourists go to markets in summer which are - and it is of course mandatory to describe markets in this way - "bustling". The ambience of a market is supposed to be like this, but this in itself creates a problem. Crammed into narrow streets or in market squares with wave upon wave of sweating summer humanity, tourists can appear to be moved en masse in the way that a football crowd is, never daring to stop in case they get crushed.
Is it the case, therefore, that town halls, which do of course make a very nice earner from markets, have created rods for their own backs by allowing there to be too many stalls? In a way, they are caught between two stools. They want there to be a lot of traders in order to achieve this "bustling" character, but this can - and is clearly the case with some markets - result in too much of the same. And how pleasant, in truth, is it for visitors who are corralled into areas made too packed as a result of the sheer number of stalls?
Perhaps less is or should be more. Markets can be too big for their own good.
Not all is well, however, in the world of the Mallorcan market. While many are flourishing, this activity reveals a preponderance of certain types of product. The market's variety and diversity has been lost under the weight of clothes, footwear and the nicky-nacky of northern Africa. Three markets in particular have been identified as culprits in this regard, those of Inca, Santa Maria del Cami and Sineu. They aren't alone though.
Issues to do with quality at Inca's market were evident over four years ago. In May 2011 I wrote about the fact that tour operators, who traditionally place the Thursday market on their excursions' itineraries, were threatening to stop taking their customers. The market, it was said, had lost much of its attraction. There was too much of it, and too much that wasn't much good.
The town hall, concerned by this loss of tourist influx, set about changing things. There was to be more local craft and also to be traditional dance to captivate the visitors. Almost 50 stallholders were to be told to sling their hook. Despite this, not much, if anything, has changed. Of the some 250 pitches, approximately two-thirds are devoted to precisely what they were over four years ago: way too much clothing and the rag-tag of jewellery of the imitation and low-grade type and of the nicky-nacky. Pointedly, it is said that 73 of the pitches are of a Moroccan character. Only one stall is given over to pottery. So much for the local craft therefore.
Inca, as is also the case in Santa Maria, has now introduced a system whereby it gives weight to what are called "innovative producers" and to the artisan. Ten points go to the former and five to the latter, meaning, in theory, that they will gain priority and so shift the general offer of the market and make it more diverse and more interesting, while also promoting local trades. But will this make any difference? The town hall's last "initiative" - over four years ago - hardly had the desired effect.
Oddly, and despite all the emphasis placed on the revival of the artisan craft heritage, it is felt necessary to positively discriminate in favour of craft traders or to establish special market events for them. This was the case recently in Palma, where there was a week of such promotion at four or five markets in the city. But by seeking to place the emphasis on such traders, might there be a risk that the market mix goes too far in this direction and creates a similarity of offer, albeit a different one? And what precisely is meant by artisan craft in any event?
Part of the problem with it is that it can be expensive. A sole producer/trader can hardly churn out masses of stuff, and what he or she does produce is inevitably going to attract a premium. It has to in order to cover all sorts of cost, not least the rent and tax for a market stall. Tourists, by and large, don't go to markets expecting to hand over great wads of cash. They go in the anticipation of finding bargains or of engaging in haggling.
And tourists go to markets in summer which are - and it is of course mandatory to describe markets in this way - "bustling". The ambience of a market is supposed to be like this, but this in itself creates a problem. Crammed into narrow streets or in market squares with wave upon wave of sweating summer humanity, tourists can appear to be moved en masse in the way that a football crowd is, never daring to stop in case they get crushed.
Is it the case, therefore, that town halls, which do of course make a very nice earner from markets, have created rods for their own backs by allowing there to be too many stalls? In a way, they are caught between two stools. They want there to be a lot of traders in order to achieve this "bustling" character, but this can - and is clearly the case with some markets - result in too much of the same. And how pleasant, in truth, is it for visitors who are corralled into areas made too packed as a result of the sheer number of stalls?
Perhaps less is or should be more. Markets can be too big for their own good.
Tuesday, August 25, 2015
Tourist Satisfaction Not Guaranteed
We are told, repeatedly, that things have never been better for peak-summer tourism. In they come, the holidaymakers, great droves of them, boosting occupancy levels in some resorts to 100% (a figure which may be given but which is only truly attained in specific instances and never resort-wide). More passengers than ever before have passed through Son Sant Joan. The "irregular" offer of holiday accommodation is booming in much the same way as the legitimate offer is. But this joyous news is, as always, tempered by realities created by all-inclusives and of genuine spend. It may well be up, but the spread is not uniform.
It is also tempered by concerns that there are simply too many people. The strains on services, on infrastructure, on the environment are such that the regional government appears willing to consider what has not previously been unthinkable but which has not been acted upon or at least seen through: a deliberate and concerted strategy aimed at reduction, offset, the government would hope, by a smoothing of tourist numbers to create a longer season.
While the politicians agonise over this human and environmental pressure, dabble with financial engineering (tourist tax, off-season social security discounts) and constantly utter the mantra of a tourist base of greater quality, the hoteliers have been hard at it, raising their game along with their star classifications and so prices. Profit is up, turnover is up. Tour operators are gladdened by the upward trend in the quality of hotel stock. Mallorca may be more expensive - hotel-wise - than most of the Mediterranean, but to the advantages of reliability, safety and durability can be added this recent qualitative leap.
But if this is all the case, why are the people who really matter - the holidaymakers - not more satisfied? Are the strains causing them to be less satisfied? Are they more discerning, more demanding than ever before? Is dissatisfaction simply the result of their not having been asked before?
Gadeso, the Mallorcan research organisation, does ask tourists. It has been asking for a few years now. It isn't alone. Cala Millor is an example of a resort having finally cottoned on to the need to conduct surveys with the objective - it might be hoped - of the opinion-asking being more than just PR. But the surveying is limited; Gadeso's sample base is small - only 400 interviews.
Given the size of the sample, should the latest tourist satisfaction survey be considered credible? Can it ever be truly representative of what is, after all, a highly diverse market? Tourists form anything but a homogeneous market. It is one that differs in every way imaginable: demographics, attitudes, country of origin, expectations, to cite just a few.
The findings, therefore, come with this caveat. Nevertheless, there are worrying trends. Take the upping of the quality ante and of prices. The price-quality ratio for accommodation is deemed "adequate" (six out of ten), but it is slipping by a point year upon year. It's impossible to know if this is as a consequence of higher prices or of, for example, a more demanding attitude, one that may be influenced by experiences in other destinations. Whatever the cause, despite the efforts to raise quality, the satisfaction level stubbornly continues to drop.
It is when one leaves the hotel, however, that things go decidedly pear-shaped. The price-quality ratio satisfaction for the "specialised" offer - restaurants, beach services, shops, sports facilities, leisure activities - has gone from "deficient" to "very deficient" (2.9 out of ten). Gadeso supports this finding by referring to excessively high prices for food and shopping that are "repetitive and outmoded". It is an embarrassing finding, given that gastronomy is supposedly one of the great saviours of Mallorca's tourism.
Then there is what may be evidence of those strains of human pressure. Down have gone assessments for water quality (the sea's), for air pollution, for the general environment. Down also are opinions on what previous surveys had already identified as the two most deficient factors - cleanliness and noise (acoustic contamination).
Palma's new mayor, José Hila, has identified filth as a major problem for the city, and his administration is making efforts in rectifying this. But is Palma unique? Cast an eye around and observe, for example, plastics recycling containers that are overflowing and so not emptied often enough. Has it not occurred to anyone that there is high plastics waste on account of all those bottles of water and drinks being purchased? This is only one example, and standards of waste collection will doubtless vary from resort to resort, as will complaints about noise.
Gadeso cannot be taken as being definitive, but it is an indication. As such, therefore, it should serve not as the definitive word but as the starting-point. There should be far greater systematic surveying of visitors: resort by resort.
It is also tempered by concerns that there are simply too many people. The strains on services, on infrastructure, on the environment are such that the regional government appears willing to consider what has not previously been unthinkable but which has not been acted upon or at least seen through: a deliberate and concerted strategy aimed at reduction, offset, the government would hope, by a smoothing of tourist numbers to create a longer season.
While the politicians agonise over this human and environmental pressure, dabble with financial engineering (tourist tax, off-season social security discounts) and constantly utter the mantra of a tourist base of greater quality, the hoteliers have been hard at it, raising their game along with their star classifications and so prices. Profit is up, turnover is up. Tour operators are gladdened by the upward trend in the quality of hotel stock. Mallorca may be more expensive - hotel-wise - than most of the Mediterranean, but to the advantages of reliability, safety and durability can be added this recent qualitative leap.
But if this is all the case, why are the people who really matter - the holidaymakers - not more satisfied? Are the strains causing them to be less satisfied? Are they more discerning, more demanding than ever before? Is dissatisfaction simply the result of their not having been asked before?
Gadeso, the Mallorcan research organisation, does ask tourists. It has been asking for a few years now. It isn't alone. Cala Millor is an example of a resort having finally cottoned on to the need to conduct surveys with the objective - it might be hoped - of the opinion-asking being more than just PR. But the surveying is limited; Gadeso's sample base is small - only 400 interviews.
Given the size of the sample, should the latest tourist satisfaction survey be considered credible? Can it ever be truly representative of what is, after all, a highly diverse market? Tourists form anything but a homogeneous market. It is one that differs in every way imaginable: demographics, attitudes, country of origin, expectations, to cite just a few.
The findings, therefore, come with this caveat. Nevertheless, there are worrying trends. Take the upping of the quality ante and of prices. The price-quality ratio for accommodation is deemed "adequate" (six out of ten), but it is slipping by a point year upon year. It's impossible to know if this is as a consequence of higher prices or of, for example, a more demanding attitude, one that may be influenced by experiences in other destinations. Whatever the cause, despite the efforts to raise quality, the satisfaction level stubbornly continues to drop.
It is when one leaves the hotel, however, that things go decidedly pear-shaped. The price-quality ratio satisfaction for the "specialised" offer - restaurants, beach services, shops, sports facilities, leisure activities - has gone from "deficient" to "very deficient" (2.9 out of ten). Gadeso supports this finding by referring to excessively high prices for food and shopping that are "repetitive and outmoded". It is an embarrassing finding, given that gastronomy is supposedly one of the great saviours of Mallorca's tourism.
Then there is what may be evidence of those strains of human pressure. Down have gone assessments for water quality (the sea's), for air pollution, for the general environment. Down also are opinions on what previous surveys had already identified as the two most deficient factors - cleanliness and noise (acoustic contamination).
Palma's new mayor, José Hila, has identified filth as a major problem for the city, and his administration is making efforts in rectifying this. But is Palma unique? Cast an eye around and observe, for example, plastics recycling containers that are overflowing and so not emptied often enough. Has it not occurred to anyone that there is high plastics waste on account of all those bottles of water and drinks being purchased? This is only one example, and standards of waste collection will doubtless vary from resort to resort, as will complaints about noise.
Gadeso cannot be taken as being definitive, but it is an indication. As such, therefore, it should serve not as the definitive word but as the starting-point. There should be far greater systematic surveying of visitors: resort by resort.
Thursday, April 23, 2015
The Worst Hotels In Mallorca
Trip Advisor, bless it, offers a useful means of filling newspaper columns. Short of some copy? Why not use some Trip Advisor Travellers' Choice best-of info? The local media loves this stuff, even if the result of the choice is relatively unremarkable, such as being ranked seventh. I mean, why would you bother mentioning being seventh? Little is the kudos to he had, even if Mallorca can revel in the glory of being the seventh top island in Europe (Santorini is number one).
While Trip Advisor floods media inboxes and news feeds with its top-of-whatever lists, it doesn't make a habit of considering the other side of the travelling choice coin: the lowest of. Such rankings might, I would suggest, be of rather greater interest than the top ones. Rather than the best, which are the worst?
Ever one to undertake a more arduous task than merely regurgitating something from a press release, I have given Trip Advisor a bit of a hand. Want to know the worst hotels in Mallorca? Well, they're coming up right here. Sort of.
I was inspired to delve into the depths of Trip Advisor rankings by a correspondent who informed me that a particular hotel was a "health hazard", where "staff physically and verbally abuse tourists", where robberies are "commonplace" and where the unofficial all-inclusive offer allows guests to drink as much local vodka as they like at a rate of six euros an hour. Pretty good, eh?
With the proviso that, in order to get a good sample, a hotel had to have more than 100 reviews, I set to work. In fact, it wasn't that arduous. There may be over 1,000 Mallorcan hotels reviewed on Trip Advisor but its rankings system very conveniently puts those with no or few reviews at the end together with the lousy hotels. Click on the places with over a century of reviews, home in on the number of terribles, calculate the percentage and, bingo, you've got the worst. It took far less time than I had imagined.
There is, therefore, a worst top five. My apologies for any hotels that I may have overlooked, but fifth worst is ... . Er, should I actually name and shame? Should diplomacy get the better of me? Perhaps it should. So, being circumspect, I can reveal that the fifth worst is in S'Illot with a 26% terrible rating. "Avoid at all costs," remarked a reviewer. Fourth worst, well, this one's in Alcúdia: 26.2% terrible with "arrogant, ignorant and rude staff". In at number three, we're back in S'Illot, 33% terrible: "we left after two days and paid to fly home". In the runners-up slot, it's Cala Ratjada. 33.8% terrible, and proving that the Germans can be as critical as the Brits, "einfach widerlich" (simply disgusting). And at number one? Yes, it's my correspondent's hotel. Congratulations go to Santa Ponsa. 35% terrible: "if I could, I wouldn't even give this place a one star".
None of this is of course scientific, and one man's hellhole can just as easily be another's little piece of heaven (even our winner manages a 10.3% excellent rating). Moreover, there will be some reviewers who are trying it on: it's the Trip Advisor blackmail game. But when there is a critical mass of rubbish reviews, these have to amount to some proof of poor quality and standards. and it is this - quality - which is a key theme for the island's tourism industry. It needs to be upped. Urgently. And the regional government is demanding that it is.
Overall, the impression from Trip Advisor is that low standards of quality are confined to relatively few hotels, but the few can drag down the reputation of the many. So, what, if anything, can be done?
Certain hotel chains - Meliá is an example - now use reviews as a basis for senior management performance pay. But Meliá is the exception and not the rule. If hotels
won't themselves take action, what about the government? The tourism ministry should be monitoring reviews' sites. It should take note of the poor hotels. It should send in inspectors. It should have powers to apply sanctions, the ultimate one being closure.
Would the government do this? It's doubtful. There aren't enough inspectors, while these are hotels and not easier targets for inspectors, such as bars. As I have previously noted, it is inspection which is likely to be a reason why the new tourism law will not live up to its content. Take the unofficial all-inclusive offers as an example. Will they be registered, as hotels are now required to register any all-inclusive element? And if they're not, who is going to check?
Opinions on reviews' sites cannot be taken as being definitive, but when the level of poor reviews and ratings is as it is with some hotels, they should prompt action. Does Mallorca want quality or not?
While Trip Advisor floods media inboxes and news feeds with its top-of-whatever lists, it doesn't make a habit of considering the other side of the travelling choice coin: the lowest of. Such rankings might, I would suggest, be of rather greater interest than the top ones. Rather than the best, which are the worst?
Ever one to undertake a more arduous task than merely regurgitating something from a press release, I have given Trip Advisor a bit of a hand. Want to know the worst hotels in Mallorca? Well, they're coming up right here. Sort of.
I was inspired to delve into the depths of Trip Advisor rankings by a correspondent who informed me that a particular hotel was a "health hazard", where "staff physically and verbally abuse tourists", where robberies are "commonplace" and where the unofficial all-inclusive offer allows guests to drink as much local vodka as they like at a rate of six euros an hour. Pretty good, eh?
With the proviso that, in order to get a good sample, a hotel had to have more than 100 reviews, I set to work. In fact, it wasn't that arduous. There may be over 1,000 Mallorcan hotels reviewed on Trip Advisor but its rankings system very conveniently puts those with no or few reviews at the end together with the lousy hotels. Click on the places with over a century of reviews, home in on the number of terribles, calculate the percentage and, bingo, you've got the worst. It took far less time than I had imagined.
There is, therefore, a worst top five. My apologies for any hotels that I may have overlooked, but fifth worst is ... . Er, should I actually name and shame? Should diplomacy get the better of me? Perhaps it should. So, being circumspect, I can reveal that the fifth worst is in S'Illot with a 26% terrible rating. "Avoid at all costs," remarked a reviewer. Fourth worst, well, this one's in Alcúdia: 26.2% terrible with "arrogant, ignorant and rude staff". In at number three, we're back in S'Illot, 33% terrible: "we left after two days and paid to fly home". In the runners-up slot, it's Cala Ratjada. 33.8% terrible, and proving that the Germans can be as critical as the Brits, "einfach widerlich" (simply disgusting). And at number one? Yes, it's my correspondent's hotel. Congratulations go to Santa Ponsa. 35% terrible: "if I could, I wouldn't even give this place a one star".
None of this is of course scientific, and one man's hellhole can just as easily be another's little piece of heaven (even our winner manages a 10.3% excellent rating). Moreover, there will be some reviewers who are trying it on: it's the Trip Advisor blackmail game. But when there is a critical mass of rubbish reviews, these have to amount to some proof of poor quality and standards. and it is this - quality - which is a key theme for the island's tourism industry. It needs to be upped. Urgently. And the regional government is demanding that it is.
Overall, the impression from Trip Advisor is that low standards of quality are confined to relatively few hotels, but the few can drag down the reputation of the many. So, what, if anything, can be done?
Certain hotel chains - Meliá is an example - now use reviews as a basis for senior management performance pay. But Meliá is the exception and not the rule. If hotels
won't themselves take action, what about the government? The tourism ministry should be monitoring reviews' sites. It should take note of the poor hotels. It should send in inspectors. It should have powers to apply sanctions, the ultimate one being closure.
Would the government do this? It's doubtful. There aren't enough inspectors, while these are hotels and not easier targets for inspectors, such as bars. As I have previously noted, it is inspection which is likely to be a reason why the new tourism law will not live up to its content. Take the unofficial all-inclusive offers as an example. Will they be registered, as hotels are now required to register any all-inclusive element? And if they're not, who is going to check?
Opinions on reviews' sites cannot be taken as being definitive, but when the level of poor reviews and ratings is as it is with some hotels, they should prompt action. Does Mallorca want quality or not?
Friday, March 21, 2014
Sick Smiley: Quality
SICK TED. Ok, I've done it before, but here goes again. Is this pervy Edward or infirm Eddie? Because urban vernacular now decrees that sick means something completely different to what it ought to mean, as in good or (to use an out-of-date urbanism) wicked, is SICK TED also good Ted? And the answer is ... yes. SICTED. The Sistema Integral de Calidad Turística en Destinos. Get a SICTED and you too can boast your touristic quality in destination. Sick. Wicked. Good.
They've been SICTED-ing in Alcúdia and Pollensa. They don't SICTED everywhere. I'm not sure why not. Only Palma and Artà also SICTED in Mallorca. Is there no touristic quality in other destinations? No, but it would seem that other destinations have not been in touch with Turespaña (area of quality and technological development) or something called FEMP (the Federación Española de Municipios y Provincias) in order to obtain this mark of quality. Alcúdia and Pollensa have been pioneering destinations, therefore, and the latest businesses in the two towns to have been inducted into the SICTED hall of fame have recently been announced.
Both town halls posted photos of the happy winners onto their websites or Facebook pages. Spot the restaurant owner (and various others) time. I got four in Alcúdia - Bodega d'es Port, Café Illa, Diana Apartments and Magdalena, boss of the tourist offices - and a measly one in Pollensa (Posada d'Ariant), but there were more to choose from in Alcúdia, as they included businesses renewing their SICTEDs as well. I should have done better.
I was thinking I might list all the SICTED diploma holders. A cheap and easy way to fill some space, but I have standards; I'm applying for my own SICTED. So, if you want to know which businesses have this quality accreditation, you will need to look out for the logo. You can't miss it because it looks like TUI's, in that there's some of that smiley thing going on as there is in TUI's logo, assuming it is a smiley thing, which it might not be when you're in for fifty million euros to the Balearics tax office.
Good, sick, though this all is for the Alcúdia and Pollensa businesses, they will be horrified to learn that having had to go through the rigmarole to get their certificates and plaques, the regional government has come up with yet another quality wheeze. Under this one, there would be a special category for bars and restaurants with superior quality. It would also have a rather easier name. Or one that doesn't lend itself to having the rise taken out of it. GOLD is the probable title. I can already hear Spandau Ballet blaring out of the speakers at the inaugural ceremony. (Perhaps they could get Tony Hadley, as he's a regular in Pollensa and, let's face it, isn't doing much these days.) This GOLD award would be handed out by the tourism ministry and winners determined by a technical committee from the Chamber of Commerce and restaurant associations, and winners will also apparently be entitled to some tax benefits (unspecified), which sounds like a real incentive. More than a smiley logo. Sick.
They've been SICTED-ing in Alcúdia and Pollensa. They don't SICTED everywhere. I'm not sure why not. Only Palma and Artà also SICTED in Mallorca. Is there no touristic quality in other destinations? No, but it would seem that other destinations have not been in touch with Turespaña (area of quality and technological development) or something called FEMP (the Federación Española de Municipios y Provincias) in order to obtain this mark of quality. Alcúdia and Pollensa have been pioneering destinations, therefore, and the latest businesses in the two towns to have been inducted into the SICTED hall of fame have recently been announced.
Both town halls posted photos of the happy winners onto their websites or Facebook pages. Spot the restaurant owner (and various others) time. I got four in Alcúdia - Bodega d'es Port, Café Illa, Diana Apartments and Magdalena, boss of the tourist offices - and a measly one in Pollensa (Posada d'Ariant), but there were more to choose from in Alcúdia, as they included businesses renewing their SICTEDs as well. I should have done better.
I was thinking I might list all the SICTED diploma holders. A cheap and easy way to fill some space, but I have standards; I'm applying for my own SICTED. So, if you want to know which businesses have this quality accreditation, you will need to look out for the logo. You can't miss it because it looks like TUI's, in that there's some of that smiley thing going on as there is in TUI's logo, assuming it is a smiley thing, which it might not be when you're in for fifty million euros to the Balearics tax office.
Good, sick, though this all is for the Alcúdia and Pollensa businesses, they will be horrified to learn that having had to go through the rigmarole to get their certificates and plaques, the regional government has come up with yet another quality wheeze. Under this one, there would be a special category for bars and restaurants with superior quality. It would also have a rather easier name. Or one that doesn't lend itself to having the rise taken out of it. GOLD is the probable title. I can already hear Spandau Ballet blaring out of the speakers at the inaugural ceremony. (Perhaps they could get Tony Hadley, as he's a regular in Pollensa and, let's face it, isn't doing much these days.) This GOLD award would be handed out by the tourism ministry and winners determined by a technical committee from the Chamber of Commerce and restaurant associations, and winners will also apparently be entitled to some tax benefits (unspecified), which sounds like a real incentive. More than a smiley logo. Sick.
Sunday, November 24, 2013
Do Not Refill: Olive oil goes political
There is now a further challenge to this character looming into view. It is not of the same magnitude as the smoking ban, it is not a change that has been paid a great deal of attention, but it is one which, nevertheless, has bar and restaurant owners complaining once more. From the start of 2014, the way in which olive oil is dispensed is to alter.
It is common to find, even in the humblest of bars, an oil and vinegar set. The culinary tradition is to pour the oil and vinegar simultaneously onto a salad or pour only the oil onto whatever might take one's fancy. Oil will still be available, but not in the dispensers which are currently used. As of January, olive oil will only be served in capsules or in small, non-refillable bottles from between 250 and 750 millilitres. What this will mean in practice is that the current table-top dispenser, which is refilled, will disappear along with other more exotic oil dispensers, such as those which have spices in tall, thin-tipped bottles.
Restaurant and bar owners fear that this change, and it is one enshrined in national government law, will increase their costs, and there is a fear also therefore that the cost will be passed onto the customer. Indeed, it is hard to see how it won't be. The chances are that there will be a small addition to the bill, one to cover the cost of olive oil which, if it is there at present, is hidden.
Why is the government introducing this law? It all comes down to quality and to preserving the good name of Spanish olive oil. It might not be well appreciated just how easily olive oil can go off; unlike wine, which is meant to improve with age, the opposite applies to olive oil, as it will become rancid. Expose it to light (and dispensers are usually clear glass), to the air and to high temperatures, and it will deteriorate. In fact, olive oil deteriorates almost from the time it is pressed. It is similar in some respects to fruit juice. It is best used immediately, but it does of course undergo any number of processes, not least storage and transport. By the time it actually gets to a shop or a bar, it has already lost some of its quality. But further loss can be prevented by adopting measures which don't bring it into contact with environmental factors; hence, the government's law.
There is, though, a knock-on environmental issue associated with this change. What is going to happen with all the containers with half-used oil? Is there not actually going to be a great deal of wasted oil? Possibly, though the point is being made that a container does not have to be used for only one customer; it could, depending on volume, serve several. This, though, is likely to represent one of the biggest cultural shifts in how oil is consumed in restaurants at present. Customers aren't used to being offered another customer's leftovers.
But where customers might not have been that alert to the idea that the oil they were consuming was undergoing a process of deterioration, they will be more aware now, even if one non-refillable container is used. This is because the government will be telling them that it is deteriorating. Labels are apparently due to state that there is a "loss of integrity after a single use", which may be all very well in terms of consumer information but doesn't sound like a completely ringing endorsement of the very change it is effecting.
There again, most Spanish customers will be aware that oil deteriorates. They do, after all, buy huge amounts of oil for domestic consumption. Regardless of how many times the oil bottle might be opened and the oil therefore exposed to the air, the oil doesn't typically go rancid; it gets used up pretty quickly because it is so much of a staple of the Spanish diet, both the "suave" version and the higher-grade, more flavoursome, more health-giving extra virgin oil.
The government believes that this law will be helpful for exports - and Spain is the world's leader in olive-oil export - as tourists will be assured that what they are consuming in restaurants is of the very finest quality and be so impressed that exports will increase. Perhaps the government is right to believe this, but its argument sounds pretty weak.
Whatever the arguments for and against, by the end of February at the latest, all establishments will be expected to have used up any existing stock, and so will not able to use it after then. Two months before this, on 1 January, the new law will come in, and the nature of the serving of olive oil in bars and restaurants will change forever.
Photo from http://www.photoblog.host-spain.com
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Is The Customer Satisfied?
The Balearics received 11% more international visitors in the first seven months of this year than last. Let joy be unconfined. Put out the bunting.
5.75 million people up to the end of July, but have they been happy? Loads of people doesn't automatically mean loads of satisfied people or indeed loadsamoney. At the same time as the statistics of joy are being sung about arrivals into the airports and ports, the latest tourism satisfaction survey compiled by the research organisation Gadeso offers a less upbeat tempo.
The overall index of satisfaction where Mallorca is concerned is down. Only fractionally, but down nevertheless. Of the four key measures of satisfaction, only the quality of the environment shows a slight upward trend. Satisfaction with public services is unchanged from 2010, while satisfaction with both accommodation and the so-called complementary offer (bars, restaurants etc.) is down.
A caveat in all this is that the results are based on a mere 400 interviews, and these 400 have been conducted across the Balearics. There have been more in Mallorca than anywhere else, but the number still isn't great, and there is no indication as to the backgrounds of those interviewed. So, is the survey of any use?
Its value does rather depend upon whether you believe that results from a limited survey can be extrapolated into painting an accurate picture of attitudes more generally. Tourists are a highly diverse bunch with a highly diverse set of expectations, and when a survey asks for making a ranking between one and ten, the decision of the person being surveyed can be fairly arbitrary.
What you get, at best, is an indication. No more. You can choose to use the results as evidence or not. If, however, you are inclined to take them as evidence, then certain findings do rather jump out at you. One in particular. That of the satisfaction with the price-quality ratio of the bars and restaurants. It has the lowest rating of any factor in the survey - 3.4 - which is the same as last year and down from 4.0 since 2009. It is the one factor that Gadeso describes as "deficient".
If one interprets this as meaning that prices are too high and quality is too low, then the bars and restaurants of Mallorca are not performing well. One suspects the ratio is, in the minds of those surveyed, skewed more by price than it is by quality; that the assessment is an assessment of price as opposed to what actually appears on a plate. Why might one suspect this? Because prices are known. Quality is intangible. Providing a ratio between the known and the unknown will place a greater emphasis on what is known. Simple.
Consequently, can we assume that prices are too high? Anecdotally they are said to be. But what are the benchmarks? One also suspects that a benchmark is an historical recollection of what things cost in the good old days or is a completely unrealistic expectation that because Mallorca is "foreign" it should automatically be cheap. Prices vary so markedly that is almost impossible to come to a conclusion. How, for instance, does one reconcile the fact that in Puerto Pollensa you can pay three euros for a coffee and a bacon sandwich in one establishment, then go to another and pay 4.50 for the coffee alone? Yes, the quality element kicks in, but if you go solely on price then a reconciliation cannot be made, other than the fact that one place is cheap and the other isn't.
The singling out of price, be it by anecdote or by survey result, is a headline maker because price is arguably the most important issue to the tourist. Indeed the Gadeso survey reinforces this, but in doing so it raises an apparent contradiction. Since 2009 price as a motivation for tourists choosing Mallorca has shot up by over 12 percentage points. 61.8% of those surveyed said it was the main motivation. So, how does this square with the finding regarding the price-quality ratio?
Perhaps it is a reflection of what tourists expect of Mallorca and is also a reflection, as noted by the survey, of low-cost travel. It may also represent expectations of first-time visitors, those who opted for Mallorca this year because of problems elsewhere in the Mediterranean region. The percentage of those who had previously been to Mallorca is down quite significantly, while the percentage of those saying they would return is also down.
Surveys are notorious for enabling whatever interpretation you want to put on them, but the message from this one is that price is the overriding factor in coming to Mallorca in the first place, and that price, once on the island, is not quite as was expected.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
5.75 million people up to the end of July, but have they been happy? Loads of people doesn't automatically mean loads of satisfied people or indeed loadsamoney. At the same time as the statistics of joy are being sung about arrivals into the airports and ports, the latest tourism satisfaction survey compiled by the research organisation Gadeso offers a less upbeat tempo.
The overall index of satisfaction where Mallorca is concerned is down. Only fractionally, but down nevertheless. Of the four key measures of satisfaction, only the quality of the environment shows a slight upward trend. Satisfaction with public services is unchanged from 2010, while satisfaction with both accommodation and the so-called complementary offer (bars, restaurants etc.) is down.
A caveat in all this is that the results are based on a mere 400 interviews, and these 400 have been conducted across the Balearics. There have been more in Mallorca than anywhere else, but the number still isn't great, and there is no indication as to the backgrounds of those interviewed. So, is the survey of any use?
Its value does rather depend upon whether you believe that results from a limited survey can be extrapolated into painting an accurate picture of attitudes more generally. Tourists are a highly diverse bunch with a highly diverse set of expectations, and when a survey asks for making a ranking between one and ten, the decision of the person being surveyed can be fairly arbitrary.
What you get, at best, is an indication. No more. You can choose to use the results as evidence or not. If, however, you are inclined to take them as evidence, then certain findings do rather jump out at you. One in particular. That of the satisfaction with the price-quality ratio of the bars and restaurants. It has the lowest rating of any factor in the survey - 3.4 - which is the same as last year and down from 4.0 since 2009. It is the one factor that Gadeso describes as "deficient".
If one interprets this as meaning that prices are too high and quality is too low, then the bars and restaurants of Mallorca are not performing well. One suspects the ratio is, in the minds of those surveyed, skewed more by price than it is by quality; that the assessment is an assessment of price as opposed to what actually appears on a plate. Why might one suspect this? Because prices are known. Quality is intangible. Providing a ratio between the known and the unknown will place a greater emphasis on what is known. Simple.
Consequently, can we assume that prices are too high? Anecdotally they are said to be. But what are the benchmarks? One also suspects that a benchmark is an historical recollection of what things cost in the good old days or is a completely unrealistic expectation that because Mallorca is "foreign" it should automatically be cheap. Prices vary so markedly that is almost impossible to come to a conclusion. How, for instance, does one reconcile the fact that in Puerto Pollensa you can pay three euros for a coffee and a bacon sandwich in one establishment, then go to another and pay 4.50 for the coffee alone? Yes, the quality element kicks in, but if you go solely on price then a reconciliation cannot be made, other than the fact that one place is cheap and the other isn't.
The singling out of price, be it by anecdote or by survey result, is a headline maker because price is arguably the most important issue to the tourist. Indeed the Gadeso survey reinforces this, but in doing so it raises an apparent contradiction. Since 2009 price as a motivation for tourists choosing Mallorca has shot up by over 12 percentage points. 61.8% of those surveyed said it was the main motivation. So, how does this square with the finding regarding the price-quality ratio?
Perhaps it is a reflection of what tourists expect of Mallorca and is also a reflection, as noted by the survey, of low-cost travel. It may also represent expectations of first-time visitors, those who opted for Mallorca this year because of problems elsewhere in the Mediterranean region. The percentage of those who had previously been to Mallorca is down quite significantly, while the percentage of those saying they would return is also down.
Surveys are notorious for enabling whatever interpretation you want to put on them, but the message from this one is that price is the overriding factor in coming to Mallorca in the first place, and that price, once on the island, is not quite as was expected.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Never Mind The Quality: Meaningless systems for tourism
There are certain words which, because of their widespread and widely unthinking usage, have lost any sense of meaning. Quality is one of them. Everyone does quality. "Our meat/fish/desserts/full Englishes/beers (use as applicable) are of the highest quality." Oh, for the bar or restaurant which advertises its quality as being rubbish. Or the resort which promotes itself as being the worst or most maligned: "Everyone hates us, but we don't care."
None of this applies to Alcúdia, Pollensa or, mystifyingly, Artà. Quality abounds in all three, unlike, at present, anywhere else in Mallorca, other than Palma. Each can boast of quality. The whole of Menorca can also do some boasting, as can Formentera and Ibiza. Soon, you would imagine, everywhere in Mallorca will be proclaiming quality, and so the meaning will go out the window, if there was any to begin with.
I am not making this qualitative assessment of the three towns/resorts. It is being done by something called SICTED, the Sistema Integral de Calidad Turística en Destinos. It's an unfortunate acronym. Is sick Ted pervy Edward or infirm Eddie? Sick Ted, Father Ted: "Would you have a look at this quality here, Ted." "Not while I'm vomiting, Dougal."
SICTED is, so says its website, "a project for improving the quality of tourist destinations that is promoted by the Spanish tourism institute (Turespaña) and the Spanish federation of municipalities and provinces". I'm sure you feel better for knowing this, as you will feel better - less sick - for knowing that the sick note from SICTED is a sign of a destination's "commitment to tourist quality". And signs you can get, it would appear. One with a T with a gap and a sort of Smiley curve that brings to mind the TUI logo.
They should mind the gap. If it's quality they're after, then they should learn to cross their Ts properly. But a broken T is, I suppose, all the more aesthetically and graphically-designed pleasing, and it would seem that it will be making itself known outside "distinguished establishments" in the SICTED towns: the odd restaurant or hotel and, in the case of Alcúdia, its police station.
I confess to being utterly confused. Not so long ago, there was all this stuff about the Q quality mark, something also to do with Turespaña. Now there's this one. Destinations and businesses can apply to be assessed for receiving their sick note and subject themselves to surveys of customer satisfaction. So convoluted does SICTED appear, the FAQs (frequently asked questions) on the website run to 102 in total. If you can wade through this lot, then you probably deserve to get what you're meant to - your commitment to tourist quality and your broken T.
But as the mere word quality loses its meaning, so do exercises in granting quality. How many more of them are there? And what on earth do they mean? And for whom?
Alcúdia's SICTED, so says the citation on the website, is on account of, among other things, "beautiful beaches with fine sand", "hidden coves", and "very diverse peoples who form a tranquil environment". These will presumably be the same diverse peoples whooping it up in the bars and entertainment centres of The Mile of an evening, scratch-card touts, and lookies selling dodgy DVDs and/or crack on the streets.
Pollensa "combines sea, countryside and mountains". It has "solitary coves" as opposed to hidden ones; someone's been at the thesaurus. No mention of dog mess on the streets, not getting the management of the beaches sorted out on time for the start of season or protesting business owners marching through Puerto Pollensa.
Then there is Artà. Its inclusion is a bit mystifying, as it's not exactly a place with a lot of tourism. It's off-the-beaten-track coastal Mallorca, but it does, like Alcúdia, so goes the SICTED blurb, have beaches with "fine sand". There is, possibly though, more of a reason for Artà having its SICTED than Alcúdia and Pollensa, and this is because it isn't particularly known for its tourism. Otherwise, what really is the point of all this?
The answer, one guesses and obviously so, is a desire for a general lifting of quality, a response to the threats posed by perceptions of greater quality in rival destinations. Fair enough, but does this require the rigmarole that SICTED and the Q mark demand? It should be obvious where quality failings may exist, and failings there are, even in Alcúdia and Pollensa, despite their having passed the sick test.
Who takes any notice? Tourists? It's very doubtful. And were all other towns/resorts in Mallorca to apply for and be awarded the same status as Alcúdia, Pollensa and Artà, then even less notice would be taken. It is quality becoming meaningless because everywhere has it, or so it is claimed.
Never mind the quality, because no one's paying any attention.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
None of this applies to Alcúdia, Pollensa or, mystifyingly, Artà. Quality abounds in all three, unlike, at present, anywhere else in Mallorca, other than Palma. Each can boast of quality. The whole of Menorca can also do some boasting, as can Formentera and Ibiza. Soon, you would imagine, everywhere in Mallorca will be proclaiming quality, and so the meaning will go out the window, if there was any to begin with.
I am not making this qualitative assessment of the three towns/resorts. It is being done by something called SICTED, the Sistema Integral de Calidad Turística en Destinos. It's an unfortunate acronym. Is sick Ted pervy Edward or infirm Eddie? Sick Ted, Father Ted: "Would you have a look at this quality here, Ted." "Not while I'm vomiting, Dougal."
SICTED is, so says its website, "a project for improving the quality of tourist destinations that is promoted by the Spanish tourism institute (Turespaña) and the Spanish federation of municipalities and provinces". I'm sure you feel better for knowing this, as you will feel better - less sick - for knowing that the sick note from SICTED is a sign of a destination's "commitment to tourist quality". And signs you can get, it would appear. One with a T with a gap and a sort of Smiley curve that brings to mind the TUI logo.
They should mind the gap. If it's quality they're after, then they should learn to cross their Ts properly. But a broken T is, I suppose, all the more aesthetically and graphically-designed pleasing, and it would seem that it will be making itself known outside "distinguished establishments" in the SICTED towns: the odd restaurant or hotel and, in the case of Alcúdia, its police station.
I confess to being utterly confused. Not so long ago, there was all this stuff about the Q quality mark, something also to do with Turespaña. Now there's this one. Destinations and businesses can apply to be assessed for receiving their sick note and subject themselves to surveys of customer satisfaction. So convoluted does SICTED appear, the FAQs (frequently asked questions) on the website run to 102 in total. If you can wade through this lot, then you probably deserve to get what you're meant to - your commitment to tourist quality and your broken T.
But as the mere word quality loses its meaning, so do exercises in granting quality. How many more of them are there? And what on earth do they mean? And for whom?
Alcúdia's SICTED, so says the citation on the website, is on account of, among other things, "beautiful beaches with fine sand", "hidden coves", and "very diverse peoples who form a tranquil environment". These will presumably be the same diverse peoples whooping it up in the bars and entertainment centres of The Mile of an evening, scratch-card touts, and lookies selling dodgy DVDs and/or crack on the streets.
Pollensa "combines sea, countryside and mountains". It has "solitary coves" as opposed to hidden ones; someone's been at the thesaurus. No mention of dog mess on the streets, not getting the management of the beaches sorted out on time for the start of season or protesting business owners marching through Puerto Pollensa.
Then there is Artà. Its inclusion is a bit mystifying, as it's not exactly a place with a lot of tourism. It's off-the-beaten-track coastal Mallorca, but it does, like Alcúdia, so goes the SICTED blurb, have beaches with "fine sand". There is, possibly though, more of a reason for Artà having its SICTED than Alcúdia and Pollensa, and this is because it isn't particularly known for its tourism. Otherwise, what really is the point of all this?
The answer, one guesses and obviously so, is a desire for a general lifting of quality, a response to the threats posed by perceptions of greater quality in rival destinations. Fair enough, but does this require the rigmarole that SICTED and the Q mark demand? It should be obvious where quality failings may exist, and failings there are, even in Alcúdia and Pollensa, despite their having passed the sick test.
Who takes any notice? Tourists? It's very doubtful. And were all other towns/resorts in Mallorca to apply for and be awarded the same status as Alcúdia, Pollensa and Artà, then even less notice would be taken. It is quality becoming meaningless because everywhere has it, or so it is claimed.
Never mind the quality, because no one's paying any attention.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Friday, December 14, 2007
Blame It On (The B.G.)
“Jack Frost nipping at your toes.” Ah yes, the cosy chill of Christmas that calls from every mall and supermarket. But not only from the shops. There was a frost this morning. Strange thing you might think for Mallorca at sea level, but you’d be wrong. Beautiful clear skies at this time of the year mean really cold nights and mornings. The sun doesn’t get to work until about ten; it’s bitter until it does.
Here we go again. “Euro Weekly” cites an unattributed source (as always in Magaluf) as believing that the good news figures for 2007’s tourism and those projected for 2008 mask the (Balearic) Government’s own shortcomings. As always, the causes of bars’ summer problems are all here – lower spend, too many all-inclusives, too little quality, in addition to those government shortcomings – as are the causes of the winter malaise, or rather cause, as that seems firmly to be one of the Government’s making.
The Government takes the rap. Always someone or something to blame, and who better than the Government. This is not to say that the Government and the tourism authorities could not do better or could not do things differently, but it is a convenience of untruth to heap the blame onto the Government.
Theoretically, the Government could stop all-inclusives. Hotels’ activities are licensed, so it is within the Government’s gift, via its agencies and the local authorities, to determine those activities. But this is anti-market. Any limitation might also be deemed a restraint of trade under European law. Any attempt at enforcement by governments nationally or in the autonomous regions, i.e. Madrid or Palma in Mallorca’s case, could create conflict with the town halls. Besides, the legality of the all-inclusive offer has been accepted by the Government, and the national ombudsman has decreed that there are no grounds for any action against all-inclusives. It – the banning or whatever of all-inclusives – will not happen, so forget it. Stop blaming the Government; it is the wrong target. It is the tour operator, some hotels and the tourist him or herself who are to blame for all-inclusives, if one is to play the blame game at all. The Government is most unlikely to antagonise the source of so much economic wealth (the tour operators) by telling them what sort of offer they can or cannot make. Equally, the Government is most unlikely to tell hotel owners to quit offering all-inclusive packages. Let it not be forgotten that the boss of Iberostar was glad-handing with Government ministers at the recent World Travel Market. Were the ministers telling Miquel Flaxa to stop all-inclusive holidays? I don’t think so somehow. Let it also not be forgotten that Iberostar brings in the sort of “quality” the “fuming bar boss” of this week’s Euro Weekly longs for, albeit that some of that “quality” is going all-inclusive.
But, you know, there is something the Government can do, and something the Government plans to do, so we are led to believe. That is to impose quality standards on hotels. Now this would most certainly affect some all-inclusives quite significantly. One of the reasons for the success of some of the big all-inclusives is because they are relatively cheap, and they are relatively cheap because the standards are not always high. Cost of quality compliance will alter the business model of some hotels. This may not put a stop to some all-inclusives but it for sure will change their markets and may well make them think about the mix of board that they can offer. And this is not a Government involvement that does necessarily conflict with the tour operators. TUI wants 4-star, TUI wants eco-friendly establishments, whatever they are. What TUI wants, TUI often gets. And it comes at a price.
QUIZ
Yesterday – Duran Duran. Today’s title – well the B.G. (for Balearic Government) is a sort of play on words or initials if you prefer. Who?
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
Here we go again. “Euro Weekly” cites an unattributed source (as always in Magaluf) as believing that the good news figures for 2007’s tourism and those projected for 2008 mask the (Balearic) Government’s own shortcomings. As always, the causes of bars’ summer problems are all here – lower spend, too many all-inclusives, too little quality, in addition to those government shortcomings – as are the causes of the winter malaise, or rather cause, as that seems firmly to be one of the Government’s making.
The Government takes the rap. Always someone or something to blame, and who better than the Government. This is not to say that the Government and the tourism authorities could not do better or could not do things differently, but it is a convenience of untruth to heap the blame onto the Government.
Theoretically, the Government could stop all-inclusives. Hotels’ activities are licensed, so it is within the Government’s gift, via its agencies and the local authorities, to determine those activities. But this is anti-market. Any limitation might also be deemed a restraint of trade under European law. Any attempt at enforcement by governments nationally or in the autonomous regions, i.e. Madrid or Palma in Mallorca’s case, could create conflict with the town halls. Besides, the legality of the all-inclusive offer has been accepted by the Government, and the national ombudsman has decreed that there are no grounds for any action against all-inclusives. It – the banning or whatever of all-inclusives – will not happen, so forget it. Stop blaming the Government; it is the wrong target. It is the tour operator, some hotels and the tourist him or herself who are to blame for all-inclusives, if one is to play the blame game at all. The Government is most unlikely to antagonise the source of so much economic wealth (the tour operators) by telling them what sort of offer they can or cannot make. Equally, the Government is most unlikely to tell hotel owners to quit offering all-inclusive packages. Let it not be forgotten that the boss of Iberostar was glad-handing with Government ministers at the recent World Travel Market. Were the ministers telling Miquel Flaxa to stop all-inclusive holidays? I don’t think so somehow. Let it also not be forgotten that Iberostar brings in the sort of “quality” the “fuming bar boss” of this week’s Euro Weekly longs for, albeit that some of that “quality” is going all-inclusive.
But, you know, there is something the Government can do, and something the Government plans to do, so we are led to believe. That is to impose quality standards on hotels. Now this would most certainly affect some all-inclusives quite significantly. One of the reasons for the success of some of the big all-inclusives is because they are relatively cheap, and they are relatively cheap because the standards are not always high. Cost of quality compliance will alter the business model of some hotels. This may not put a stop to some all-inclusives but it for sure will change their markets and may well make them think about the mix of board that they can offer. And this is not a Government involvement that does necessarily conflict with the tour operators. TUI wants 4-star, TUI wants eco-friendly establishments, whatever they are. What TUI wants, TUI often gets. And it comes at a price.
QUIZ
Yesterday – Duran Duran. Today’s title – well the B.G. (for Balearic Government) is a sort of play on words or initials if you prefer. Who?
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
Monday, October 29, 2007
Every Brother Is A Star, Every Sister Is A Star
From Sa Pobla, Lluc, Soller, Petra, Vilafranca de Bonany and Mancor de la Vall - “Els màrtirs del Coll”. Male and female - Brothers and Sisters. They were among those beatified yesterday. They were shot in the Coll district of Barcelona. There were Mallorcan flags in St. Peter’s Square, and Mallorcan relatives.
Today is another day to be celebrated. This is not a religious day, but a political one. 29 October 2007 marks 30 years since a vast demonstration that called for a statute of autonomy for Mallorca (and the Balearics) in the immediate post-Franco era. That statute was granted in 1983.
So much for that Civil War and Franco-period amnesia.
To other matters ... Here’s a surprise. The “Diario” is quoting industry representatives who reckon that the bar/café/restaurant market is reaching saturation point. Well, who would have thought it!? There is a belief that this saturation is being brought about partly by those who open up for the tourist season with the sole intention of making a fast buck, who offer low quality and high prices in pursuit of that goal, and then look to sell on the traspaso having achieved it. Depending on how the figures are arrived at, there has been - at most - an average increase of 7% in the total number of various types of establishment.
There is turnover of bars and restaurants. This is undoubtedly the case, but I am not aware of hordes of fly-by-nights acting in the way suggested, which isn’t to say it doesn’t happen. The fact is though that it takes a hefty financial commitment to stump up for a traspaso in the first place. A resultant swift sale is usually more because the place has flopped rather than because a fast buck has been attained. I could give you plenty of examples of this.
Saturation is an issue. I have referred to it several times before. The growth of the all-inclusive (AI) only compounds the problem of saturation - too many places chasing too little demand. The flops are largely the result of the double-whammy of too much competition and too much AI offer. Rather than cynically chasing wads of cash, perhaps it is more a case that people take on establishments without full appreciation of the market and then have to adjust quality (down) and prices (up) because it is the only way to survive until they can sell on the traspaso - and that is becoming quite a big if.
On the Balearic property scene, it is being widely reported that, while the prices of new properties have risen (by around 4%), prices for other properties are down by as much as 10% - and this only over the past few months. There is an adjustment occurring in the market, and mortgage lenders are becoming a lot tighter. Though this may put a block on overall growth, the adjustment is overdue.
And weather ... no, yesterday was a blip. Rain again.
QUIZ
Yesterday - Jethro Tull. Today’s title - who? (I’m not making a statement; like many of the titles, it just came to me.)
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
Today is another day to be celebrated. This is not a religious day, but a political one. 29 October 2007 marks 30 years since a vast demonstration that called for a statute of autonomy for Mallorca (and the Balearics) in the immediate post-Franco era. That statute was granted in 1983.
So much for that Civil War and Franco-period amnesia.
To other matters ... Here’s a surprise. The “Diario” is quoting industry representatives who reckon that the bar/café/restaurant market is reaching saturation point. Well, who would have thought it!? There is a belief that this saturation is being brought about partly by those who open up for the tourist season with the sole intention of making a fast buck, who offer low quality and high prices in pursuit of that goal, and then look to sell on the traspaso having achieved it. Depending on how the figures are arrived at, there has been - at most - an average increase of 7% in the total number of various types of establishment.
There is turnover of bars and restaurants. This is undoubtedly the case, but I am not aware of hordes of fly-by-nights acting in the way suggested, which isn’t to say it doesn’t happen. The fact is though that it takes a hefty financial commitment to stump up for a traspaso in the first place. A resultant swift sale is usually more because the place has flopped rather than because a fast buck has been attained. I could give you plenty of examples of this.
Saturation is an issue. I have referred to it several times before. The growth of the all-inclusive (AI) only compounds the problem of saturation - too many places chasing too little demand. The flops are largely the result of the double-whammy of too much competition and too much AI offer. Rather than cynically chasing wads of cash, perhaps it is more a case that people take on establishments without full appreciation of the market and then have to adjust quality (down) and prices (up) because it is the only way to survive until they can sell on the traspaso - and that is becoming quite a big if.
On the Balearic property scene, it is being widely reported that, while the prices of new properties have risen (by around 4%), prices for other properties are down by as much as 10% - and this only over the past few months. There is an adjustment occurring in the market, and mortgage lenders are becoming a lot tighter. Though this may put a block on overall growth, the adjustment is overdue.
And weather ... no, yesterday was a blip. Rain again.
QUIZ
Yesterday - Jethro Tull. Today’s title - who? (I’m not making a statement; like many of the titles, it just came to me.)
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
