Comments on: Tourism in Pierce County http://5views.com/2008/02/29/tourism-in-pierce-county/ Right-Blogging Tacoma/Pierce/Puget Sound/Washington Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:42:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: Erik Hanberg http://5views.com/2008/02/29/tourism-in-pierce-county/#comment-173 Erik Hanberg Fri, 29 Feb 2008 23:16:52 +0000 http://5views.com/2008/02/29/tourism-in-pierce-county/#comment-173 Your question about paying $84 million for the convention center is right on. I'd refer you to some of Peter Callaghan's writing during the building of the convention center, who questioned the wisdom of building it when there were 11 others being expanded or built in Washington at the same time. I don't question the wisdom of building it, I question the wisdom of having the City run it. The Bellevue Convention Center is probably a better model, or even Seattle, where the CVB handles the bookings. The measurement for the success of the convention center is not in the number of events booked. The measurement you want is how many room nights each event books. Anyone who you can convince to stay in a hotel overnight will drop hundreds of dollars a day between their room, their food, entertainment and alcohol, transportation, etc. And they are frequently more willing to do it as the money is frequently covered by their business. In many ways the day-tripper tourism that we think of when we think of tourism pales in comparison to the bonanza of 100 visiting business people in town for 3 days. I would even go so far as to argue that selling Tacoma as a tourist destination is really a game of trying to convince an organization's meeting planners rather than families. Since the original question you asked was "what kind of return are we getting for money spent on tourism marketing and sales" we need to figure out how much we spend on it. The number is tricky. Some things like the convention center were created largely with bonded funds. A lot of ours was funded by bonding 20 or 30 years of hotel-motel tax revenue in Tacoma and other local cities (one of the reasons it's called the "Greater" Tacoma CTC). The hotel-motel tax can really only be used for generating tourism (by law, I believe) although you can shove a bunch of stuff under that banner. In some cities, a board of concerned citizens actually designate or recommend to their councils where that tax money is spent (ie, $25,000 promote tourism, $75,000 to the CVB, $25,000 to the Sports Commission, etc etc.) Then you have to add the cost of running the CVB, the Sports Commission, etc. I would guess that in terms of an annual expenditure that tourism promotion is no more than a few million (the CVB's contract with the City of Tacoma when I was there in 2002/3 was around $600,000). As a final aside, the Convention Center pulling events from the Tacoma Dome does have at least one advantage: events like this weekend's state high school basketball tournament can be more easily booked if more local events are held elsewhere. And sports events like this even put the business travelers to shame. Picture the teams, their families, their friends and fans who book blocks of rooms. The numbers that get spent in Tacoma from events like this from out-of-towners (a word I figure you'll like better here than tourist) is astronomical. Your question about paying $84 million for the convention center is right on. I’d refer you to some of Peter Callaghan’s writing during the building of the convention center, who questioned the wisdom of building it when there were 11 others being expanded or built in Washington at the same time. I don’t question the wisdom of building it, I question the wisdom of having the City run it. The Bellevue Convention Center is probably a better model, or even Seattle, where the CVB handles the bookings.

The measurement for the success of the convention center is not in the number of events booked. The measurement you want is how many room nights each event books. Anyone who you can convince to stay in a hotel overnight will drop hundreds of dollars a day between their room, their food, entertainment and alcohol, transportation, etc. And they are frequently more willing to do it as the money is frequently covered by their business.

In many ways the day-tripper tourism that we think of when we think of tourism pales in comparison to the bonanza of 100 visiting business people in town for 3 days. I would even go so far as to argue that selling Tacoma as a tourist destination is really a game of trying to convince an organization’s meeting planners rather than families.

Since the original question you asked was “what kind of return are we getting for money spent on tourism marketing and sales” we need to figure out how much we spend on it. The number is tricky. Some things like the convention center were created largely with bonded funds. A lot of ours was funded by bonding 20 or 30 years of hotel-motel tax revenue in Tacoma and other local cities (one of the reasons it’s called the “Greater” Tacoma CTC). The hotel-motel tax can really only be used for generating tourism (by law, I believe) although you can shove a bunch of stuff under that banner.

In some cities, a board of concerned citizens actually designate or recommend to their councils where that tax money is spent (ie, $25,000 promote tourism, $75,000 to the CVB, $25,000 to the Sports Commission, etc etc.)

Then you have to add the cost of running the CVB, the Sports Commission, etc. I would guess that in terms of an annual expenditure that tourism promotion is no more than a few million (the CVB’s contract with the City of Tacoma when I was there in 2002/3 was around $600,000).

As a final aside, the Convention Center pulling events from the Tacoma Dome does have at least one advantage: events like this weekend’s state high school basketball tournament can be more easily booked if more local events are held elsewhere. And sports events like this even put the business travelers to shame. Picture the teams, their families, their friends and fans who book blocks of rooms. The numbers that get spent in Tacoma from events like this from out-of-towners (a word I figure you’ll like better here than tourist) is astronomical.

]]>