United States considering $10 “tourist fee” to pay for promoting tourism

by Scott Carmichael on

A proposal currently under consideration in the U.S. Congress may soon charge visitors to the United States a $10 entry fee.

The fee will go into a fund used to pay for promoting tourism. By now, I can imagine you are laughing about this (unless you don’t live in the U.S.). The concept of having tourists pay for the PR activities of a country they are already visiting is completely insane.

The idea behind the bill is that promoting tourism should not cost the U.S. taxpayer, something I completely disagree with.

The European Union is obviously against the concept, and given the hassles tourists already encounter when they come to the country, I have to agree with them.

The $10 tourism sponsorship fee would be linked to the ESTA pre-registration system currently required for all visitors from visa waiver countries. When ESTA was introduced, foreigners were told that it would always be free, and by hiding the new fee as a “tourism sponsorship fee”, the government obviously thinks they are keeping their word. The site currently says that there may be a fee in the future.

A family of five will have to pay $50, just for the right to travel to the States, in addition to any new luggage fees imposed by the airlines. This means a trip to the United States could start costing about $400 more than it used to – a price many people may simply refuse to pay, making them head elsewhere instead.

As always in the tit-for-tat world of immigration, if the U.S. pushes ahead with this, expect other nations to do the same to Americans heading abroad.

The end result could easily be a really well filled tourism promotion fund, but another slump in tourism and American tourists having to pay a reciprocal fee whenever they visit Europe.

One other thing to keep in mind, is that this fee (if implemented through ESTA) will most likely require a debit or credit card, something not everyone abroad possesses. ESTA itself is a horrible system, because it requires a computer to access, locking out anyone without Internet access. Now the penalty could be double – you’ll need Internet access and a credit card if you want to visit the US of A.

The bill in question, and all details about the proposal can be found here: Travel promotion act of 2009. The bill calls for a non-profit company to manage the money, and proposes to fund it with $100,000,000 in its first year.

Americans prefer independence (when traveling)

by Tom Johansmeyer on

The United States is the largest leisure travel market in the world – by far. The closest point of reference is the entire European Union. We’re three times larger than our closest competitor, the United Kingdom. Yet, despite our size, we just don’t spend as much money on packaged travel. In fact, the folks in the UK spend 50 percent more on it than we do.

Over here, the travel business accounts for $271 billion a year, according to travel industry research firm PhoCusWright, and only 7 percent of that ($18 billion) is spent on travel packages. Meanwhile, the UK has an $84 billion-a-year travel industry – not even a third of ours – and they spend $30 billion a year on packages (35 percent of the local market).

What’s the deal?

There are plenty of reasons bandied about. Europeans tend to take longer vacations, with 10 to 14 days not unusual (especially for the residents of northern European countries), and they tend to take more time off than the workaholics in the United States. They go more and longer, which translates to increased spending.

But, this doesn’t explain the affinity for packages. What makes Americans different?

Well, independence is a major factor. Americans usually prefer to set their own agendas, deciding what they want to see and do, taking on the task of research (and coming to places like Gadling – thanks, by the way, we all appreciate it) and putting together the pieces on their own.

Maybe we’re getting lazier or trying to seem like sophisticated Europeans, but the packaged travel market is growing on this side of the Atlantic, even rapidly. Of course, you need to compare it to starting point to understand how this can happen. In 1999, the packaged travel market was effectively nonexistent. Some large, enterprising online travel agencies, however, created a market from nothing, and turned it into an $8 billion space by the end of last year. This “new” offer has grown at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 50 percent during this time, while tour operators have seen aggregate revenues decline at a compound annual rate of 5 percent.

So, we’re still not heavy package buyers in the United States, but taking the easy way out is becoming more and more attractive.

European Union proposes global airline black list after Yemen crash

by Scott Carmichael on

For several years, the European Union has been maintaining an airline black list. The list contains the bottom of the barrel in the aviation world. On it, you won’t find any of the big global carriers, but it is very well represented by countries like Kazakhstan, Angola and the Democratic republic of Congo.

As it turns out, the airline involved in the most recent crash had once been on the black list for incomplete reporting on its fleet inspections.

That crash has now prompted the E.U. transport commissioner, Antonio Tajani to propose turning the the European black list in to a global black list.

As much as I like the idea of sharing this kind of information and turning it into a global list, I’m not sure it will actually make any difference – for a global black list to work, every country in the world will have to participate. Thing is, the kind of country that does not take aviation safety that seriously, is not going to be the kind of country that signs up for the black list, only to ground its own national carrier(s).

A global black list of carriers won’t do anything to prevent any of the recent air disasters we’ve seen – Air France would certainly not deserve a spot on the list, nor would Continental/Air Colgan (involved in the Buffalo crash back in February).

Many of these rickety airlines fly within their own country, or to neighboring countries with similar lax oversight. For a global aviation black list to work, countries should help each other, not simply tell them that they are not welcome to land at their airports. I’m pretty sure that “Sky Gate International” from the Kyrgyz Republic won’t give a damn if the USA tells them to stay away from any of their airports.

The only other option is to increase passenger awareness and get the list promoted, to help people make an informed decision about whether or not to travel with an unsafe carrier. But if that airline is their only option, I’m guessing they’ll take the risk.
The top countries by number of their airlines included in the list:

  1. Democratic Republic of Congo (57 airlines!)
  2. Republic of Indonesia (51 airlines)
  3. Republic of Angola (18 airlines)
  4. Kyrgyz Republic (17 airlines)
  5. Equatorial Guinea (9 airlines)
  6. Sierra Leone (8 airlines)
  7. Republic of Benin (8 airlines)
  8. Swaziland (7 airlines)
  9. Republic of Gabon (7 airlines)
  10. Republic of Kazakhstan (7 airlines)

Some noteworthy airlines (mainly because of their silly sounding names):

  1. Helimalongo – Republic of Angola
  2. Alafia Jet – Republic of Benin
  3. Golden Rules Airlines – Kyrgyz Republic
  4. Motor Sikh – Ukraine
  5. Dames – Kyrgyz Republic

%Gallery-66473%

%Gallery-51812%

Russians predict demise of United States

by Grant Martin on

You had no idea, but the United States is on the verge of civil war. At least that’s what Igor Panarin, a Russian professor and “expert” on American relations is saying. He’s been saying it for years, actually, but just in these past weeks Russian media (and the Kremlin) has picked up his story and is running wild with it.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Panarin’s theory is that “mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar. Around the end of June 2010, or early July, he says, the U.S. will break into six pieces — with Alaska reverting to Russian control.”

Glad you’ve got that schedule down to weeks.

In the end, you skinny-leg jean people out on the east coast will end up joining the European Union, everyone in the south goes to Texas (?!), the west goes to CHINA and everyone in the North? Oh they just fade into Canada.

It’s sad to me that Panarin can not only get away with publishing this theory in Russia but that the state, knowing full well what complete rubbish it is, will let it propigate. But we’re also talking about the country where Dimitry Medvedev is the “President,” people have “rights” and the government isn’t a tyrannical oligarchy, right?

Which European Country Works the Hardest?

by Josh Lew on

I have always been under the impression that Europeans worked fewer hours than Americans. However, a new survey shows that more than one country’s population averages over 40 hours per week on the job.

Romania and Bulgaria are home to the hardest workers on the continent. According to research conducted by The European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound), the citizens of these new EU members average 41.7 hours per week at the office. The UK ranks next, at 41.4 hours.

Overall, the 12 newest EU states worked more than the original members (40.6 hours compared to 39.5). At the other end of the spectrum sit the French. They work a leisurely 37.7 hours each week. That might sound like a healthy workload, but France’s Minister of Finance recently criticized her country-people for not working hard enough. Italians also boast an under 40 hour work week (38.4 hours). Eurofound put the mean number of days off per year at 25. In the US, the average number of paid vacation days is 14.

Source