Bill Geist's Zeitgeist

When it's Not About the Next Election

I love Chicago. Maybe it's because I grew up in its shadow and I feel "at home" there...but, it's just such a perfect destination for the arts, culture, entertainment, sports and culinary. 

Except when you live in pockets of the city that have been ignored for decades; where crime and decay rule. That's the part of any city that breaks our heart.

Chicago has a new Mayor. And, she has a mountain to climb to fix what's wrong with her city while supporting all that is right.

A recent critique in Patch laid bare the challenges ahead. But, it also included a quote from Mayor Lori Lightfoot regarding the path forward that was as refreshing as an autumn morning: 

"And if it means that I sacrifice myself politically, so be it in pursuit of the right thing."

I so want to believe.

Unintended Consequences

I remember debating a community development consultant on the Sharing Economy about five years ago. I argued for the need for regulation to level the playing field; that people who played by the rules (taxi drivers) faced losing their jobs (or worse) in the face of a free-for-all of "cabbies" that simply had to sign up on an online platform to compete. She chided me for being "old-school" and not realizing where the economy was headed.

That's the point. I did.

Fast forward to the present and home-sharing plays like Airbnb. Today, it's not so much that we can all be innkeepers without health inspections and, in some cases, not paying the appropriate taxes. The lodging community seems to have absorbed most of the hit in most communities. But, the unintended consequence is far more insidious.

Here in Madison, there was an initial move to limit the number of Airbnbs in a block as on-street parking downtown is already notoriously difficult for residents. Multiply three couples (with three cars) renting a house on a game-day weekend by 5 houses on a block and you've got a problem. Once again, those who play by the rules (hotels) must provide parking. Those who don't, don't. Of course, the State of Wisconsin swooped in and made that conscious consideration mute with a "hey, whatever" law that would supersede ours.

Which is kinda what has happened in Arizona, where a State law now prevents communities from effectively regulating home-sharing. And, particularly hard hit has been Sedona, as 20% of the housing stock there has been taken over by short-term rentals. That means residential housing is becoming scarce...and scarcity drives price.

Many people who work in the area can no longer afford to live in the area.

Sold to the public as a way for homeowners to make extra money, one legislator now says "We never anticipated that somebody would go into a neighborhood, purchase a home and turn it into a mini-hotel." And, that's because no one ever anticipates unintended consequences...until it's too late.

Which is why (as much as it is a creative buzz kill) we should all seriously consider the "what could go wrong" factor for every new initiative that sounds so right.

The New Nomad

We all have our own "Modus Operandi" when we travel. A select few of us abide by Air Laws and are far from the maddening crowd of self-absorbed assholes that make travel almost unbearable. Some of us travel for business. Others for leisure. Some for self-aggrandizing selfies. We all do our thing.

But, an interesting study by BVA BDRC has identified a new cohort in the travel space that they call "The New Nomad." The research shows that 18% of us (virtually 1 in 5) take more than twice the trips as does the average traveler. Conde Nast has indicated that this is one of their new target markets...because this group spends 80% more, on average, than the traditional traveling public.

For those of us that have been in the Destination Marketing world for a while, we instinctively know "when" the travel consumer is in the "consideration" mode. Think again...

The New Nomads are "always on" in their search for travel experiences. 74% say they book spontaneously.

For today's DMO...how will you address the "always on" consumer, 81% who say they are always in the market for an experience?

The Right Thing vs. Resident Taxes

In what was probably my favorite class in my quest for my MBA, our professor would pit members of his class against each other in search of the truth amidst an ethical dilemma. The results were often fascinating, opening our eyes to concepts and realities we had never considered. 

An interesting conundrum is facing my city of Madison. The genesis of a project in our downtown core that was initially designed to provide a second HQ hotel for our convention center has de-evolved into a hodge-podge of special interests that includes office space, retail and residential (and, not surprisingly, not nearly the required rooms needed for the Center). And, it's the residential component that is now gumming up the works.

To make the project financially feasible, a developer has proposed a number of residential units with spectacular views of the lakes and the Capitol, from which the resulting revenue will make the financial package work. The City has requested the developer make a number of the units "affordable." The developer agreed...and set aside some of the lower floors for these units, floors from which they couldn't command top dollar for the somewhat diminished view.

Ahhh, but not so fast. That's not fair, according to the City...which is pushing for "affordable" units throughout the structure so that disparate socio-economic citizens can co-mingle as equals. Noble, to be sure. But, according to the developer, the numbers don't work.

So...here's the dilemma. Should City taxpayers be on the hook to subsidize these units to make the developer whole in the name of social equality?

Thoughts?

Image: Gebhart Development

There Was a Plan B, After All

A few weeks ago, the City of Solvang abruptly severed its contract with its Destination Marketing Organization without an apparent Plan B. Realizing its error (shutting down its Visitor Center and festival and event support in the middle of high season), the City then hurriedly extended enough funding for a skeleton crew for the next couple months.

Then, this past Monday, the Council reversed itself completely, restored the contract and pledged to continue discussions and negotiations with the Chamber and its DMO. The City is still not happy with the situation and, at least from afar, it appears that the influence that Chamber membership has on its DMO's marketing is at least partially to blame.

It's why so many DMOs have ditched the "membership model" that restricts visibility to only those businesses that pay a fee. As Chambers have fewer available revenue streams, it's harder for them to operate inclusively. Thus, they are often criticized for favoring only members if the DMO resides within the Chamber.  

Clearly, members of the business community had a lot to do with opening the Council's eyes to their mistake. As one Lyft driver said, “Please, let’s be adults about this. Let’s not get personal. Without marketing we will be Ghost Town USA. We will not be Tourist Central."

True 'dat. Here's hoping cooler heads prevail in the weeks ahead.

What DMOs Do

Those of us in Destination Marketing often chuckle with each other that our families simply have no idea of what we do. Destinations International's Jack Johnson is on a mission to ensure that what we do is a shared community value (see yesterday's Z-News).

In the meantime, we refer anyone that doesn't understand what DMOs do to a recent article in the Grand Rapids Business Journal where the writer really went deep. And, let's be clear...that's a rarity these days.

For those of us in the Destination Marketing world, it's nothing we don't understand. For my friends from the outside, this article is a pretty sensational view of the work that DMOs do on your behalf. 

Can We Just Say It?

A recent article in Travel Weekly cites tourism providers and experts claiming that Mexico's current Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Year is because of an over-supply of hotel rooms and Sargassum. And, while these two forces are never good, they could be mitigated by a well-financed and strategic marketing effort from the country's Tourism Board.

Which, of course, no longer really exists...as its previous $300 million budget has been reassigned to develop rail service on the Yucatan Penninsula. Tourism promotion is now, apparently, being handled by Mexico's Embassies around the world (can you say incoherent?).

And, now most (not all) of the country is seeing significant declines in occupancy and revenues. I get that Sargassum sucks. But, I gotta call it like I see it. Without a strong invitation to visit, Mexico will continue to suffer.

Sadly.

 

Where We Spend

According to new data from Skift, we eat when we travel.

That is, of course, not a surprise...but just how much we spend on culinary experiences may be.

If one takes transportation to and from a destination out of the equation (43% of total consumer travel spend and, at least in my mind, an unavoidably sunk cost), we spend just under 40% of our remaining travel budget on food.

Isn't it time we begin to have a serious conversation about the restaurant industry stepping up to have a more meaningful role in the marketing of our communities? Hotels have borne the burden alone far too long.

Just sayin...

Scratching my Head 'til it Bleeds

As the legislative machinations continue in the drive to federally reauthorize Brand USA (this country's Destination Marketing Organization) a travel industry association is lobbying to effectively kill the bill.

It's no surprise that Congress is thinking nothing of increasing the inbound fee layered onto international arrivals. It's easier than the mental exercise required to do the math that international visitor spending is one of this country's greatest exports. But, we're talking $7 here.

And, that is apparently enough to cause the Airlines For America (A4A), an industry trade group whose members includes American Airlines, United, Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines to oppose the reauthorization of Brand USA. Their CEO actually said, that "air travelers are already overtaxed, and we oppose taxing them for anything other than services provided by the government.”

Ummm...isn't inspiring people to fly here an important service of the government? And, hasn't Brand USA facilitated $5.2 billion in revenue for American airlines since 2013?

I'm sorry. I simply don't understand the logic here.

Do you?

The Unintended Consequence

We've really gotten to a point in our society that we elect people that clearly don't understand how all this works. 

Take Solvang CA. Some City Council members there decided that they should put the contract for Destination Marketing up to bid (is there a city council chat room where this idiocy is getting lift...cause it's happening across the county with increasing frequency).

Ultimately, the Council in Solvang severed the contract with its CVB and its CEO, Digital Media Director and Accountant were let go last week. Then, the City clearly realized its folly and extended limited funding through this month.

When asked WTF, the Mayor said, "August is a busy month for tourism in Solvang, and keeping the Visitors Center open during that time was a priority for us all."

Ya think?

“This is also a crucial planning time for fall events,” he said. “By extending funding, we are able to support the Visitor Center ambassadors as well as two full-time staff dedicated to event planning, social media (and) website maintenance including an events calendar, film and sales.”

Yeah...ooops?

The Mayor went on to say, “Tourism is very important to the City Council. It is essential to provide helpful information to tourists and give them a reason to return to Solvang with its cherished annual events.”

As that takes funding a talented staff of Destination Marketing professionals, apparently not.

Sigh.