Positioning and potentials of Greenland, the Faroe Islands and Iceland on the German holiday travel market

Transcription

1 Positioning and potentials of Greenland, the Faroe Islands and Iceland on the German holiday travel market Full report June 2016 Ulf Sonntag, NIT Philipp Wagner, NIT Institut für Tourismus- und Bäderforschung Fleethörn 23 Tel.: (+49) NIT in Nordeuropa Kiel, June 2016 GmbH (NIT) D Kiel Fax: (+49) ww.nit-kiel.de 1

2 Introduction and background of this study CONTENT 1. Interest/experience in Germany to travel to Nordic destinations 2. Profiles of potential German travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland 3. Product preferences of potential German travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland 4. Segmentation of potential German travellers to Nordic destinations 5. Reasons against travelling to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland 6. Development of interest/experience to travel to Nordic destinations 2012 to Relevant trends of German holiday demand until 2025 NIT Kiel, June ANNEX: Example how to work with this report

3 Introduction and background of this study» The North Atlantic Tourism Association (NATA) has commissioned the Institute for Tourism Research in Northern Europe (NIT) to conduct a market research study on the Positioning and Potential of Greenland, Iceland and Faroe Islands on the German Holiday Market 2016.» The central aim is to get a thorough and complete picture on the volume, the structure, the attitudes and developments of the market potential in Germany, in order to provide a sound basis for the future strategic planning of the three destinations concerning their marketing efforts, product development and communication on this market.» The study builds on the knowledge of the NATA 2012 Reiseanalyse study and track developments since 2012 in volumes and structure. At the same time it goes beyond the rather general results of 2012 and focusses more on the individual character of each destination. It applies the tourists segmentation that is already used by Greenland and the Faroe Islands.» Basis for most of the analyses in this report is an online survey with 4,000 interviews, representative for the German-speaking population in Germany aged years. The interviews were conducted by our partner IPSOS in the second half of January 2016, based on their online access panel.» Source for the general trends in tourism demand in Germany is the Reiseanalyse trend study "German Holiday Travel 2025". Based on data spanning more than 40 years of holiday travel surveys we are able to show long-term trends in German tourist demand, relevant for the three NATA destinations. NIT Kiel, June

4 1. Interest/experience in Germany to travel to Nordic destinations NIT Kiel, June

5 Experience with destinations in the North 35% of the German population have been at least to one of these ten Nordic destinations at least once in their life Sweden Norway Ireland/Scotland/Wales Canada Finland Iceland Faroe Islands Svalbard Islands 1% 1% 3% 6% 8% 11% 13% 16%» 35% of the German population have been to at least one of these ten Nordic destinations at least once in their life.» Sweden is by far the most popular destination (16% have been there), followed by Norway (13%).» Ireland/Scotland/Wales, Canada and Finland follow» 3% have ever been to Iceland, 1% to the Faroe Islands and 1% to Greenland. Greenland 1% Alaska 1% Q2b: Which of these destinations have you already visited for a holiday in the past? Basis: All respondents (n=4,000) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

6 Travellers to Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands in the past Travellers to Iceland/Greenland/Faroe Islands Source: Reiseanalyse 2016; set of 59 destinations worldwide All-time visitors to Greenland/Iceland/Faroe Islands Source: NATA online survey 2016; set of 10 Nordic destinations All-time visitors for each destination Population 2.4 million 0.4 million» According to Reiseanalyse 2016, 0.4 million persons (or 0.5% of the German population 14+ years) have visited Iceland/Greenland/ Faroe Islands as a holiday destination in the last 3 years.» 2.4 million persons (or 4.2% of the German population years) have been to Greenland, Iceland or the Faroe Islands at least once in their life:» 1.6 million (2.8%) report to have been to Iceland.» 0.7 million (1.2%) report to have been to the Faroe Islands.» 0.5 million (0.9%) report to have been to Greenland. Source: NATA online survey 2016; set of 10 Nordic destinations 1.6 million 0.7 million 0.5 million Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years resp years0 NIT Kiel, June

7 Interest to travel to destinations in the North in the next 5 years Ireland/Scotland/Wales Norway Sweden Canada Iceland Finland Alaska Greenland Svalbard Islands Faroe Islands 9% 8% 8% 11% 78% of the German population would like to go to at least one of these ten Nordic destinations in the next 5 years 20% 28% 35% 39% 38% 41%» 78% of the German population would like to go to at least one of these ten Nordic destinations in the next 5 years.» Ireland/Scotland/Wales is the most popular destination (41% would like to go there).» Norway, Sweden and Canada follow, all on a similar level of 35% to 39%.» Iceland (28%) is more popular than Finland or Alaska.» 9% would like to go to Greenland, 8% to Faroe Islands.» The contrast in ranking of the actual and the potential guests is quite striking. Q2a: Which of these destinations would you like to visit within the next 5 years? Basis: All respondents (n=4,000) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

8 Interest for Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands as holiday destinations in the future Potential travellers Iceland/Greenland/Faroe Islands almost definitely or generally considering Source: Reiseanalyse 2016; set of 59 destinations worldwide Potential travellers Greenland/Iceland/Faroe Islands would like to go within the next 5 years Source: NATA online survey 2016; set of 10 Nordic destinations Potential visitors for each destination would like to go within the next 5 years Source: NATA online survey 2016; set of 10 Nordic destinations 15.7 million Population 4.3 million 18.2 million 5.1 million 4.5 million» According to Reiseanalyse 2016, 4.3 million persons (or 6.2% of the German population 14+ years) are almost definitely planning or generally considering Iceland/Greenland/Faroe Islands as a holiday destination in the next 3 years.» 18.2 million persons (or 32% of the German population years) would like to go to Greenland, Iceland or the Faroe Islands within the next 5 years:» 15.7 million (28%) would like to go to Iceland.» 5.1 million (9%) would like to go to Greenland.» 4.5 million (8%) would like to go to the Faroe Islands.» The differing volume figures of the potentials in the two surveys are intentional and due to different questions and competitive sets. Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years resp years NIT Kiel, June

9 Interest for Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands as travel destinations in the next 5 years: Overlapping and ratios Potential travellers to the North-Atlantic Islands 18.2 Mio. g b c a e f d Basis: 18.2 million potential travellers to the North-Atlantic Islands % million a 11% 2.0 b 10% 1.8 c 6% 1.1 d 1% 0.1 e 6% 1.1 f 7% 1.2 g 59% 10.8» Most of the persons (59%) interested to travel to the North-Atlantic Islands are interested in Iceland only (g).» 10-11% of the potential travellers to the North-Atlantic Islands are interested in all three destinations (a) or in Iceland and Greenland (b)» 6-7% are interested in Iceland and Faroe Islands (c), Greenland only (e), and Faroe Islands only (f).» 1% is interested in Greenland and Faroe Islands (d).» Overall you can see heavy overlapping of potential travellers of the three destinations and a certain domination by Iceland: 86% of all potential travellers are interested in Iceland! Q2a: Which of these destinations would you like to visit within the next 5 years? Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland (n=1,283) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

10 Competition: Where in the North do potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland also want to go? German population Iceland 28% 76% 70% 100% Norway 39% Ireland/Scotland/ Wales 41% Sweden 38% Canada 35% Finland 20% Alaska 11% Svalbard Islands 8% 46% 63% 57% 52% Faroe Islands 8% 43% 100% Greenland 9% 100% 71% 67% 65% 43% 56% 50% 48% 71% 68% 68% 63% 40% 60% 66% 57% 55% 25% 19% 20% 24%» Potential travellers to Greenland are interested to travel to 5.4 other Nordic destinations within the next 5 years, most often to Iceland, Norway or Ireland/ Scotland/Wales.» Potential travellers to the Faroe Islands are interested to travel to 5.4 other Nordic destinations within the next 5 years, most often to Norway, Iceland or Ireland/Scotland/ Wales.» Potential travellers to Iceland are interested to travel to 3.7 other Nordic destinations within the next 5 years, most often to Ireland/Scotland/Wales or Norway. Ø number of alternative destinations Q2a: Which of these destinations would you like to visit within the next 5 years? Basis: All respondents (n=4,000), potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=318), or Iceland (n=1,108) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

11 Interest to travel in the next 5 years to Competition: In the German mind Ireland/Scotland/Wales is the least, Greenland the most exchangable destination. Ireland/Scottland/Wales Canada Sweden Norway Iceland Finland Alaska Svalbard Islands Faroe Islands Greenland 2,9 3,1 3,2 3,2 3,7 4,3 4,8 5,4 5,4 5,4 Exchangeability = Number of alternative Nordic destinations [Basis: Interest for the 10 shown destinations] among persons interested those 10 destinations» The Germans are increasingly interested in various destinations and holiday types. They are multioptional and thus open to different possibilities for realising their holiday needs.» As a result, destinations and holiday types are becoming increasingly exchangeable, even if they differ from each other from an objective point of view.» The more alternative destinations potential customers for a certain destination have in mind, the more exchangeable the destination is.» It can be seen that Ireland/ Scotland/Wales, with 2.9 alternatives, is the least exchangeable destination. Greenland, in comparison, is the easiest to exchange. Q2a: Which of these destinations would you like to visit within the next 5 years? Basis: Potential travellers to each of the 10 Nordic destinations Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

12 To Learn 1: Interest/experience in Germany to travel to Nordic destinations» 35% of Germans have been to at least one of the 10 Nordic destinations in our questionnaire, at least once in their life.» Sweden is the most popular destination followed by Norway and Ireland/Scotland/Wales» Iceland follows on rank 6 after Canada and Finland, Faroe Islands on rank 7 and Greenland on rank 9.» In total, we find 2.4 million who have been to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland at least once in their lives. Of course most of them have been to Iceland.» 78% of Germans would like to travel to at least one of the 10 Nordic destinations in our questionnaire within the next 5 years.» They are most interested in Ireland/Scotland/Wales, Norway and Sweden.» Iceland follows on rank 5 after Canada and in front of Finland and Alaska, Greenland is on rank 8, followed by Svalbard Islands and Faroe Islands on rank 10.» In total, we find more than 18 million persons who would like to travel to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland in the next 5 years, 15.7 million would like to go to Iceland, 5.1 million to Greenland and 4.7 million to Faroe Islands.» Obviously there is some overlapping between the potential travellers to the three destinations, meaning there is competition among the three destination about the same potential guests.» Of course the three destinations are not only in competition about these guests with each other but also with other competitors in the North and all over the world.» The competition is more fierce the more exotic a destination is. In our case this means that potential travellers to Greenland or Faroe Islands are interested in more destinations in total than potential travellers to Iceland.» Compared with the actual demand, there is a huge interest in the three NATA destinations. This is the room for destination marketing. The following part of the report should help with strategic marketing decisions.» Within the three destinations a certain domination by Iceland is immanent.» All three destinations are in fierce competition with each other, with other Nordic destinations and destinations around the globe.» Chapter 6 of this report shows the recent developments from 2012 to 2016 of interest and experience with the three NATA destinations and their competitors. NIT Kiel, June

13 2. Profiles of potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland NIT Kiel, June

14 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Gender & Age Gender German population Age Male 50% 50% Female 50% 50% German population years 6% years 17% years 17% years 21% years 21% years 8% 10% 10% 23% 19% 17% 20% 52% 48% 20% 11% 21% 23% 18% 49% 51% Ø (years) % 7% 19% 17% 12% 23% 23%» The potential travellers to the 3 North Atlantic destinations are quite evenly distributed on both sexes.» The age structure of potential travellers to the three destinations is very similar to that of the German population» The majority of potential travellers to the 3 destinations is years old:» Greenland (60%)» Faroe Islands (64%)» Iceland (64%)» For all three destinations, the age group is clearly overrepresented, the age group is somewhat overrepresented. Basis: All respondents (n=4,000), potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=318), or Iceland (n=1,108) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

15 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Education and marital status Education German population low 6% middle 47% high without university 28% 5% university 20% 24% 35% 35% 5% 29% 27% 40% 4% 36% 33% 27%» Regarding their formal education, we find that potential travellers to the three destinations have a higher education than the average German.» Concerning their marital status, we find a higher share of singles within the potential travellers to the three destinations than in the population. Marital status German population married / with partner 61% 54% 56% 58% single 28% 38% 34% 34% previously married, no partner in household 11% 8% 10% 8% Basis: All respondents (n=4,000), potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=318), or Iceland (n=1,108) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

16 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Size of household and children under 18y in household Size of household German population 1 person 20% 2 persons 36% 3 persons 21% 21% 21% 33% 4 persons or more 24% 26% Children 18y. German population Yes 29% 31% No 71% 69% 21% 30% 22% 28% 36% 64% 20% 34% 20% 26% 31% 69%» Also in terms of household size and children in household, the potential travellers to the three destinations do not differ much from the German population.» Around half live in households of one or two persons, and half in households with three and more persons.» The two person households are a bit underrepresented, the 4+ person households a bit overrepresented.» There are slightly more households with children within the potential guests (Faroe Islands: A lot more) than in the population. Basis: All respondents (n=4,000), potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=318), or Iceland (n=1,108) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

17 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Monthly household net income German population Up to 1,000 9% 12% 1,001-2,000 27% 24% 2,001-3,000 30% 30% 3,001-4,000 19% 17% 4,001-5,000 9% 10% 5,000+ 6% 7% 12% 24% 29% 16% 10% 9% 9% 25% 30% 19% 10% 8%» The income structure of potential travellers to the three destinations is very similar to that of the German population.» The majority of potential travellers to the 3 destinations have a monthly household net income between 1,000 and 4,000 :» Greenland (71%)» Faroe Islands (69%)» Iceland (74%)» For all three destinations the income group of EUR is slightly overrepresented. Basis: Respondents with income response (n=3,362), potential travellers to Greenland (n=311), Faroe Islands (n=282), or Iceland (n=950) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

18 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Working status German population Employee 58% Self-employed 6% Not working 5% Housewife/-man 6% Retired 14% Pupil/student In education 6% 6% 3% 9% 11% 21% 56% 6% 7% 3% 12% 14% 58% 6% 4% 4% 10% 16% 60%» Concerning their working status, the biggest group of potential travellers to all three destinations is made up of employees (56%-60%), compared to 58% in the population.» The next biggest groups are pupils/students, retirees and self-employed, the pupils/students being overrepresented (especially with the potential guests to Greenland). Basis: All respondents (n=4,000), potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=318), or Iceland (n=1,108) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

19 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Nielsen regions German population I 16% II 22% IIIa 14% 14% 25% 11% 17% 24% 13% 16% 21% 14%» The regional structure of potential travellers to the three destinations is quite similar to that of the German population.» Most of the travellers live in Nielsen II, IV and I.» There are slight differences in the regional structures of potential guests between the three destinations. IIIb 13% 14% 12% 14% IV 16% 18% 16% 16% V 4% 5% 5% 6% VI 8% 9% 8% 8% VII 8% 6% 5% 7% Basis: Respondents with income response (n=3,362), potential travellers to Greenland (n=311), Faroe Islands (n=282), or Iceland (n=950) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

20 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Place of residence by federal state Schleswig-H. 3% Hamburg 2% Niedersachsen 10% Bremen 1% NRW 22% Hessen 8% Rheinland-P. 5% Baden-W. 13% Bayern 16% Saarland 1% Berlin 4% Brandenburg 3% Mecklenburg-V. 2% Sachsen 5% Sachsen-A. 3% German population 3% 2% 0% 4% 0% 5% 2% 3% 4% 3% Thüringen 3% 2% 8% 7% 14% 18% 25% 4% 3% 10% 0% 24% 8% 5% 12% 16% 0% 5% 3% 4% 3% 2% 1% 4% 3% 9% 1% 21% 7% 6% 14% 16% 1% 6% 3% 3% 4% 2% 3%» Most potential travellers to all three destinations live in the four most populated federal states [NRW, Bayern, Baden- W., Niedersachsen]:» 64% Greenland» 63% Faroe Islands» 59% Iceland» For Greenland, NRW, Bayern and Mecklenburg-V. are overrepresented. Niedersachsen, Brandenburg, Sachsen and Hessen, are underrepresented.» For the Faroe Islands, NRW, Bayern and Hessen are overrepresented, Baden-W. is underrepresented.» For Iceland, Baden-W., Berlin, and Rheinland-P. are overrepresented. NRW, Niedersachsen and Sachsen are underrepresented. Basis: All respondents (n=4,000), potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=318), or Iceland (n=1,108) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

21 To Learn 2: Profiles of potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland» Gender: The potential travellers to the 3 North Atlantic destinations are quite evenly distributed on both sexes.» Age: The majority of potential travellers is years old. Generally, their age structure is very similar to that of the German population» Education: Regarding their formal education, we find that potential travellers have a higher education than the average German.» Marital status: Concerning their marital status, we find a higher share of singles within the potential travellers than in the population. Nevertheless, the majority of potential travellers is living together with a partner.» Household size/children: Around half of the potential travellers live in households of one or two persons, and half in households with three and more persons. There are slightly more households with children (Faroe Islands: A lot more) than in the population.» Monthly household net income: The majority of potential travellers to the 3 destinations have a monthly household net income between 1,000 and 4,000. The income structure is similar to the German population.» Working status: The biggest group of potential travellers to all three destinations is made up of employees (56%- 60%), compared to 58% in the population.» Regional structure: Most potential travellers to all three destinations live in the four most populated federal states [NRW, Bayern, Baden-W., Niedersachsen]. The regional structure is similar to the German population.» In most regards, the demographic profiles of potential travellers to the three NATA destinations do not differ much from each other or the German population. This means you do not have to take peculiarities into account when addressing them.» On the other hand, the small but noticeable differences may show opportunities for specific targeting (e.g. high education level, lots of singles, families for the Faroe Islands)» Chapter 6 of this report shows the recent developments from 2012 to 2016 of the demographic profiles of potential travellers to the three NATA destinations. NIT Kiel, June

22 3. Product preferences of potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland NIT Kiel, June

23 Product expectations of potential travellers to Greenland/ Faroe Islands/Iceland» The next chapter focusses on the product expectations of the potential travellers to Greenland, Faroe Islands, Iceland.» In this chapter we wanted to have this information separately regarding each of the three destinations.» Within the project budget, however, it was necessary that each respondent answered the following questions only concerning one destination.» This made it necessary to filter these questions according to specific rules, if a respondent was interested to travel to more than one of the three destinations. Based on the experiences with the 2012 NATA study on the German market, we defined the following segments: Potential travellers to Greenland Faroe Islands Iceland Other Any other Nordic destination Definition All persons interested in travelling to Greenland All persons interested in travelling to the Faroe Islands but not interested to travel to Greenland All persons interested in travelling to Iceland but not interested to travel to the Faroe Islands or to Greenland All persons interested in travelling to any other destination(s) in the North but not interested to travel to Iceland, to the Faroe Islands or to Greenland Interviews n=357 n=165 n=760 n=1,840 Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

24 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Preferred experiences Other Nordic destinations Stunning scenery (e.g. mountains, fjords, cliffs) Natural phenomena (e.g. Northern Lights, Midnight Sun) Glaciers/icebergs 70% 37% 54% 30% Wildlife (e.g. whales, birds, polar bears) Volcanoes/hot springs/geysers Traditional villages 50% 54% 39% 35% New and unexpected experiences Historic sights/events 35% 38% 37% 44% Contemporary culture/lifestyle 81% 79% 70% 29% 44% 59% 70% 70% 50% 47% 40% 25% 82% 76% 81% 34% 26% 54% Capitals/cities 27% 29% 39% 49% 74% 61% 48% 38% 29% 24%» The ranking of what potential travellers would like to see/experience in the three destinations is somewhat similar, nevertheless with a characteristic touch for each destination.» For all three destinations the stunning scenery and the natural phaenomena (e.g. northern lights, midnight sun) are very important.» The biggest chances to differentiate are for Greenland its glaciers, wildlife and unexpectedness, for the Faroe Islands its traditional villages and for Iceland its volcanoes and Reykjavik as a modern capital city. Q4: When thinking about travelling to... what would you like to see/experience? Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=165), or Iceland (n=760), other Nordic destinations (n=1,840); definitions: see page 11) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

25 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Preferred activities I Wildlife watching (e.g. whales, birds) Photography 67% 57% 57% 48% Guided nature excursions Hiking 58% 48% 55% 44% Eating/drinking local specialities Experience quietness 56% 53% 61% 57% Dog-sledding 48% 34% 29% 25% Meeting and mingling with locals Glacier hiking 41% 23% 26% 13% Learning about local handicraft 68% 61% 57% 43% 39% 48% 54% 40% 42% 59% 39% 38% 55% 65% 55% Other Nordic destinations Guided cultural tours 37% 31% 33% 28% 47% 49% 56% 36% 31%» There are similar activities that potential guests would like to do in the three destinations, but yet the ranking is somewhat different and shows further possibilities for differentiation.» For Greenland most important are wildlife watching and photography, both with a significantly higher interest than in Faroe Islands and Iceland.» Other activities that are standing out for Greenland are dogsledding and glacier hiking.» For the Faroe Islands most important are local specialities together with photography. Slightly outstanding is the learning about local handicraft.» Most important for Iceland are guided nature tours and its quietness, both somewhat outstanding. Q5: Which of the following activities would you like to do when travelling to...? Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=165), or Iceland (n=760), other Nordic destinations (n=1,840); definitions: see page 11) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

26 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Preferred activities II Swimming/wellness (e.g. in thermal baths) 30% 38% 41% Other Nordic destinations Shopping for souvenirs 30% 32% 30% 30% Kayaking 23% 19% 14% 11% Cycling 18% 18% 15% 19% Horseback riding 14% 10% 15% 7% Fishing 13% 7% 6% 8% Skiing 10% 6% 4% 7% Cold-water diving 9% 10% 6% 8% Trophy hunting 2% 2% 1% 1% Other 4% 3% 3% 3% 33%» As we wanted to know about the preferred activities in the three destinations in great detail we asked a list of 20 different activities.» On this slide you can see the second half of the list (based on a Greenland based ranking), which are mostly secondary or niche activities.» Here Iceland is outstanding for swimming/wellness and horseback riding.» The Faroe Islands are somewhat outstanding for cold-water diving and souvenir shopping.» Greenland is somewhat outstanding for kayaking, fishing and skiing. Q5: Which of the following activities would you like to do when travelling to...? Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=165), or Iceland (n=760), other Nordic destinations (n=1,840); definitions: see page 11) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

27 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Getting there and around Getting there Plane: direct flight 62% 53% 81% 52% Plane: round trip, multiple countries Plane: Stopover on transatlantic flight Cruise: start/end in Continental Europe Cruise: start/end in the NATA region 24% 10% 24% 13% 12% 10% Cruise: transatlantic 8% 7% 2% 3% Car/ferry 16% 22% 11% 33% At the destination 9% 9% 25% 3% 3% 14% Other Nordic destinations Stay at one location 23% 20% 22% 25% Stay at multiple locations Excursions to one of the other countries 17% 61% 20% 64% 15% 65% 14% 4% 20% 3% Other Nordic destinations 58% 15%» Even though most potential travellers prefer direct flights into the region, the wishes how to travel to the three North Atlantic destinations differ characteristically.» For Greenland also a big share of the potential guest wants to include it in a multi country air trip or as a cruise destination. The quite high share of car/ferry enthusiasts shows that apparently not everybody has a clear picture of the destination.» For the Faroe Islands, the cruise segment is also quite important.» For Iceland, the direct air travel is really dominant, but keep in mind that even if lower in % the volume of the other segments is bigger than in Greenland or Faroe Islands. Q6: How would you like to travel to?; Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=165), or Iceland (n=760), other Nordic destinations (n=1,840); definitions: see page 11); Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

28 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Preferred sources for inspiration & information Other Nordic destinations Internet search engine 69% 61% 68% 64% Guide book 54% 50% 56% 42% Travel magazine 42% 36% 39% 34% Books/literature 41% 29% 31% 21% Travel agent 37% 36% 40% 37% Destination websites (e.g. greenland.com) Personal releations (friend, family, co-worker) Holiday review sites (e.g. TripAdvisor) Online booking agent (e.g. Expedia, Booking.com) Social media (e.g. Facebook, Instagram, Twitter) 35% 30% 27% 22% 15% 33% 27% 25% 26% 20% 34% 34% 25% 21% 10% Newspaper 12% 6% 8% 8% 23% 36% 21% 20% 8%» The first three preferred information sources are the same in the three destinations: Internet search in front of guide books and travel magazines.» For Greenland books/literature are somewhat outstanding, for Faroe Islands online booking agents and social media, for Iceland travel agencies and VFR.» Destination websites are ranked 5 in Faroe Islands and Iceland and 6 in Greenland, all with around 1/3 of the respective potential guests naming it as a preferred information source. Previous experience 10% 7% 7% 12% Q7: When thinking about travelling to... how would you like to look for inspiration/information for this trip?; Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=165), or Iceland (n=760), other Nordic destinations (n=1,840); definitions: see page 11); Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

29 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Preferred kind of online content Other Nordic destinations Pictures of the destination, its natural/cultural attractions Pictures of accommodations/ activities/tours Texts on how to get there/get around, where to stay, to eat & go shopping Videos of nature/landscapes incl. natural phenomena Texts from other travellers with recommendations what do there Videos about local cultural traditions/lifestyle/art Texts with stories by locals about their daily life/culture Contact options, where to find specific information/travel offers 72% 54% 54% 51% 41% 35% 33% 31% 65% 51% 46% 43% 41% 32% 31% 34% 74% 23% 59% 51% 38% 37% 29% 28% Destination companies' newsletters 19% 18% 16% 14% 67% 53% 45% 34% 28% 21% 19% 24%» When asked for their preferred kind of online content, most potential guests of all three destinations favour destination images in front of product images and factual texts on the travel product.» These seem to be basic prerequisites that every travel website should offer.» A higher share in Greenland than in the other destinations then fancies videos of the destination.» Then come texts and videos by other travellers and locals.» Only a minority is interested in destination newsletters or social media posts. Social media posts/stories 10% 13% 7% 7% Q8: Which kind of content do you like to find when looking for online information about...?; Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=165), or Iceland (n=760), other Nordic destinations (n=1,840); definitions: see page 11); Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

30 To Learn 3: Product preferences of potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland» Experiences: The ranking of what potential travellers would like to see/experience in the three destinations is somewhat similar, nevertheless with a characteristic touch for each destination:» For all three destinations the stunning scenery and the natural phaenomena (e.g. northern lights, midnight sun) are very important.» The biggest chances to differentiate are for Greenland its glaciers, wildlife and unexpectedness, for the Faroe Islands its traditional villages and for Iceland its volcanoes and Reykjavik as a modern capital city.» Activities: There are similar activities that potential guests would like to do in the three destinations, but yet the ranking is somewhat different and shows further possibilities for differentiation:» Greenland: most important are wildlife watching and photography, both with a significantly higher interest than in Faroe Islands and Iceland. Other outstanding activities are dog-sledding and glacier hiking.» For the Faroe Islands most important are local specialities together with photography. Slightly outstanding is the learning about local handicraft.» Most important for Iceland are guided nature tours and its quietness, both somewhat outstanding.» Getting there/around: Most potential travellers prefer direct flights into the region, followed by the cruise segment. Details vary between the three destinations» Information sources: The first three preferred information sources are the same in the three destinations: Internet search in front of guide books and travel magazines.» Online content: When asked for their preferred kind of online content, most potential guests of all three destinations favour destination images in front of product images and factual texts on the travel product.» This chapter is basically the CORE of the study and was the focus of the questionnaire.» The results help to understand in detail, how the potential travellers would like to spend their holidays in each of the three NATA destinations (and in comparison with the Nordic competitors).» This knowledge should give you substantial help with regard to product development, marketing strategy and communication.» The following segmentation of tourists can help you to draw more specific conclusions for effective targeting approaches. NIT Kiel, June

31 4. Segmentation of potential travellers to Nordic destinations NIT Kiel, June

32 Interest focus & engagement level: Basis for the Visit Greenland (VG) segmentation approach Interest focus Predominantly culture Predominantly nature Culture and nature Special interest* Other** 3% 7% 14% 25% *like photography, river fishing, trophy hunting, heli-skiing, etc. ** e.g. sun&beach, relaxation, familiy, fun&party etc. without cultural or natural motivation Engagement level Total immersion into local nature/culture Get to know and experience local nature/culture Observe and look at local nature/culture 8% 32% 51% 60%» These two questions on the interest focus regarding nature and culture and the preferred engagement level are the basis for the following segmentation approach by Visit Greenland.» For more information on the Visit Greenland segmentation approach have a look at: /en/tools/segmentation-andmapping/» The results of the two questions show: Concerning the interest focus, the mix of culture and nature is dominating, as is the experience dimension in terms of engagement level. Q1a: When you travel in general, is it the destination s nature or culture that you want to experience? Or is it something else that motivates you to travel? Q1b: When you travel in general, how close do you want to engage with the destination s nature or culture? Do you stand back and observe? Do you totally immerse yourself by, for example, living in the home of a local? Or are you somewhat in between? Basis: All respondents in Germany (n=4,000); Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

33 Observation ENGAGEMENT LEVEL Interaction Immersion VG Segmentation: Germany (all respondents) INTEREST FOCUS Culture Culture&Nature Nature Personal Challenge 4% Ethnophile 3% Destination Freak 3% Wilderness Seeker 3% Special Interest 4% Culture Lover 33% Globetrotter 13% Nature Lover 2% Culture Appreciator 15% Sightseer 10% Nature Appreciator 14% no segment* * Respondents answering Other regarding their interest focus Q1a: When you travel in general, is it the destination s nature or culture that you want to experience? Or is it something else that motivates you to travel? Q1b: When you travel in general, how close do you want to engage with the destination s nature or culture? Do you stand back and observe? Do you totally immerse yourself by, for example, living in the home of a local? Or are you somewhat in between? Basis: All respondents in Germany (n=4,000); Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

34 Interest focus & engagement level: Basis for the VG segmentation approach Interest focus Predominantly culture Predominantly nature Culture and nature Special interest* Other** 7% 5% 5% 25% 58% 5% 4% 4% 29% 59% *like photography, river fishing, trophy hunting, heli-skiing, etc. ** e.g. sun&beach, relaxation, familiy, fun&party etc. without cultural or natural motivation Engagement level Total immersion into local nature/culture Get to know and experience local nature/culture Observe and look at local nature/culture 17% 20% 63% 13% 23% 64% 7% 24% 60% 3% 6% 9% 65% 26%» In all three destinations, the mix of culture and nature is dominating, as is the experience dimension in terms of engagement.» Concerning the interest focus, the differences between the destinations are marginal.» Concerning the engagement level, the level for total immersion is highest with the potential travellers to Greenland (17%), followed by those to Faroe Islands (13%) and Iceland.» The figures for interaction/ experience are on the same level in the three destinations.» The figures for observation are highest in Iceland (26%) and lowest in Greenland (20%). Q1a: When you travel in general, is it the destination s nature or culture that you want to experience? Or is it something else that motivates you to travel? Q1b: When you travel in general, how close do you want to engage with the destination s nature or culture? Do you stand back and observe? Do you totally immerse yourself by, for example, living in the home of a local? Or are you somewhat in between? Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=318), or Iceland (n=1,108); Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

35 Observation ENGAGEMENT LEVEL Interaction Immersion VG Segmentation: Potential Greenland travellers INTEREST FOCUS Culture Culture&Nature Nature Personal Challenge 10% Ethnophile 7% Destination Freak 4% Wilderness Seeker 5% Special Interest 2% Culture Lover 41% Globetrotter 14% Nature Lover 2% Culture Appreciator 10% Sightseer 7% Nature Appreciator 5% no segment* * Respondents answering Other regarding their interest focus Q1a: When you travel in general, is it the destination s nature or culture that you want to experience? Or is it something else that motivates you to travel? Q1b: When you travel in general, how close do you want to engage with the destination s nature or culture? Do you stand back and observe? Do you totally immerse yourself by, for example, living in the home of a local? Or are you somewhat in between? Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland from Germany (n=357), Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

36 Observation ENGAGEMENT LEVEL Interaction Immersion VG Segmentation: Potential Faroe Islands travellers INTEREST FOCUS Culture Culture&Nature Nature Personal Challenge 7% Ethnophile 5% Destination Freak 4% Wilderness Seeker 4% Special Interest 3% Culture Lover 41% Globetrotter 15% Nature Lover 0% Culture Appreciator 12% Sightseer 9% Nature Appreciator 4% no segment* * Respondents answering Other regarding their interest focus Q1a: When you travel in general, is it the destination s nature or culture that you want to experience? Or is it something else that motivates you to travel? Q1b: When you travel in general, how close do you want to engage with the destination s nature or culture? Do you stand back and observe? Do you totally immerse yourself by, for example, living in the home of a local? Or are you somewhat in between? Basis: Potential travellers to Faroe Islands from Germany (n=318), Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

37 Observation ENGAGEMENT LEVEL Interaction Immersion VG Segmentation: Potential Iceland travellers INTEREST FOCUS Culture Culture&Nature Nature Personal Challenge 6% Ethnophile 5% Destination Freak 2% Wilderness Seeker 3% Special Interest 4% Culture Lover 42% Globetrotter 14% Nature Lover 1% Culture Appreciator 14% Sightseer 9% Nature Appreciator 5% no segment* * Respondents answering Other regarding their interest focus Q1a: When you travel in general, is it the destination s nature or culture that you want to experience? Or is it something else that motivates you to travel? Q1b: When you travel in general, how close do you want to engage with the destination s nature or culture? Do you stand back and observe? Do you totally immerse yourself by, for example, living in the home of a local? Or are you somewhat in between? Basis: Potential travellers to Iceland from Germany (n=1,108), Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

38 VG Segmentation: Potential travellers Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland German population Ethnophile 4% Culture Lover 4% Culture Appreciator 2% Globetrotter 33% Sightseer 15% Wilderness Seeker 3% 10% 2% 2% 10% 5% 41% 8% 3% 0% 12% 4% 41% 6% 4% 1% 14% 2% 42%» In all three destinations, the Globetrotters are by far the dominating segment, with a share of 41%-42% compared to 33% in the population.» The next important segments in all destinations are the Nature Lovers (14%-15%), the Sightseers (10%-14%) and the Ethnophiles (6%-10%).» Even though the main findings of the segmentation are similar in the three destinations, there are some differences: Nature Lover 13% Nature Appreciator 10% Special Interest 3% 14% 7% 5% 15% 9% 4% 14% 9% 3%» Greenland has the highest share of Ethnophiles, Special Interest and Wilderness Seekers.» Iceland has the highest share of Sightseers, Nature Appreciators and Culture Lovers. Q1a: When you travel in general, is it the destination s nature or culture that you want to experience? Or is it something else that motivates you to travel? Q1b: When you travel in general, how close do you want to engage with the destination s nature or culture? Do you stand back and observe? Do you totally immerse yourself by, for example, living in the home of a local? Or are you somewhat in between? Basis: All respondents (n=4,000), potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=318), or Iceland (n=1,108) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

39 Observation ENGAGEMENT LEVEL Interaction Immersion VG Segmentation: Germany (interested in any of the Nordic destinations) INTEREST FOCUS Culture Culture&Nature Nature Personal Challenge n=140 Ethnophile n=99 Destination Freak n=98 Wilderness Seeker n=107 Special Interest n=124 Culture Lover n=1,154 Globetrotter n=427 Nature Lover n=55 Culture Appreciator n=479 Sightseer n=306 Nature Appreciator n=233 no segment* * Respondents answering Other regarding their interest focus Q1a: When you travel in general, is it the destination s nature or culture that you want to experience? Or is it something else that motivates you to travel? Q1b: When you travel in general, how close do you want to engage with the destination s nature or culture? Do you stand back and observe? Do you totally immerse yourself by, for example, living in the home of a local? Or are you somewhat in between? Basis: All respondents in Germany interested to travel to any of the 10 Nordic destinations (n=3,123); Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

40 VG-Segments: Preferred experiences in Nordic destinations Ethnophile Culture Culture&Nature Nature Culture Lover Culture Appreciator Globetrotter Sightseer Wilderness Seeker Nature Lover Nature Appreciator Special Interest Stunning scenery (e.g. mountains, fjords, cliffs) Natural phenomena (e.g. Northern Lights, Midnight Sun) Wildlife (e.g. whales, birds, polar bears) Volcanoes/hot springs/geysers Capitals/cities Historic sights/events Glaciers/icebergs Traditional villages New and unexpected experiences Contemporary culture/lifestyle Q4: When thinking about travelling to Nordic destination, what would you like to see/experience? Basis: All respondents in Germany interested to travel to any of the 10 Nordic destinations (n=3,123) in the segments; definitions: see page 39) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

41 VG-Segments: Preferred activities in Nordic destinations Ethnophile Culture Culture&Nature Nature Special Interest Culture Lover Culture Appreciator Globetrotter Sightseer Wilderness Seeker NIT Kiel, June Nature Lover Nature Appreciator experience quietness eat/drink local specialities guided nature excursions photography wildlife watching hiking meeting with the locals swimming/wellness learning about local handicraft guided cultural tours shopping for souvenirs dog-sledding glacier hiking cycling kayaking horseback riding fishing cold-water diving skiing trophy hunting Q5: Which of the following activities would you like to do when travelling to Nordic destinations? Basis: All respondents in Germany interested to travel to any of the 10 Nordic destinations (n=3,123) in the segments; definitions: see page 39) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos

42 VG-Segments: Preferred ways to travel to Nordic destinations Ethnophile Culture Culture&Nature Nature Culture Lover Culture Appreciator Globetrotter Sightseer Wilderness Seeker Nature Lover Nature Appreciator Special Interest Plane: direct flight Plane: round trip, multiple countries Plane: Stopover on transatlantic flight Cruise: start/end in Continental Europe Cruise: start/end in the NATA region Cruise: transatlantic Car/ferry At the destination: Stay at one location At the destination: Stay at multiple locations excursions to one of the other countries Q6: How would you like to travel to Nordic destinations? Basis: All respondents in Germany interested to travel to any of the 10 Nordic destinations (n=3,123) in the segments; definitions: see page 39) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

43 VG-Segments: Preferred sources of inspiration and information when travelling to Nordic destinations Ethnophile Culture Culture&Nature Nature Culture Lover Culture Appreciator Globetrotter Sightseer Wilderness Seeker Nature Lover Nature Appreciator Special Interest internet search engine guide book travel agent travel magazine Personal relations (friend, family, co-worker) destination websites (e.g. greenland.com) books/literature holiday review websites (e.g. TripAdvisor) online booking agent (e.g. Expedia, Booking.com) social media previous personal knowledge newspaper Q7: When thinking about travelling to Nordic destinations, how would you like to look for inspiration/information for this trip? Basis: All respondents in Germany interested to travel to any of the 10 Nordic destinations (n=3,123) in the segments; definitions: see page 39) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

44 VG-Segments: Preferred online content when looking for information about Nordic travel destinations Pictures of the destination, its natural/cultural attractions Pictures of accommodations/ activities/tours Texts on how to get there/get around, where to stay, to eat & go shopping Videos of nature/landscapes incl. natural phenomena Texts from other travellers with recommendations what do there Contact options, where to find specific information/travel offers Texts with stories by locals about their daily life/culture Videos about local cultural traditions/lifestyle/art Destination companies' newsletters Ethnophile Culture Culture&Nature Nature Culture Lover Culture Appreciator Globetrotter Sightseer Wilderness Seeker Nature Lover Nature Appreciator Special Interest Social media posts/stories Q8: Which kind of content do you like to find when looking for online information about Nordic destinations? Basis: All respondents in Germany interested to travel to any of the 10 Nordic destinations (n=3,123) in the segments; definitions: see page 39) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

45 VG-Segments: Age/Gender Ethnophile Culture Culture&Nature Nature Culture Lover Culture Appreciator Globetrotter Sightseer Wilderness Seeker Nature Lover Nature Appreciator Special Interest years years years years years years Average (years) 37,1 37,8 39,6 43,0 47,4 39,3 42,4 44,4 39,5 Male Female Basis: All respondents in Germany interested to travel to any of the 10 Nordic destinations (n=3,123) in the segments; definitions: see page 39) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

46 VG-Segments: Education/Marital status Ethnophile Culture Culture&Nature Nature Culture Lover Culture Appreciator Globetrotter Sightseer Wilderness Seeker Nature Lover Nature Appreciator Special Interest Education: low Education: middle Education: high without university Education: university married / with partner single previously married, no partner in household Basis: All respondents in Germany interested to travel to any of the 10 Nordic destinations (n=3,123) in the segments; definitions: see page 39) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

47 VG-Segments: Monthly household net income Ethnophile Culture Culture&Nature Nature Culture Lover Culture Appreciator Globetrotter Sightseer Wilderness Seeker Nature Lover Nature Appreciator Special Interest up to 1,000 Euro ,001-2,000 Euro ,001-3,000 Euro ,001-4,000 Euro ,001-5,000 Euro ,001 Euro or more Basis: All respondents in Germany interested to travel to any of the 10 Nordic destinations with response regarding their income (n=2,661) in the segments; definitions: see page 39); Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

48 VG-Segments: Nielsen regions Ethnophile Culture Culture&Nature Nature Culture Lover Culture Appreciator Globetrotter Sightseer Wilderness Seeker Nature Lover Nature Appreciator Special Interest I II IIIa IIIb IV V VI VII Basis: All respondents in Germany interested to travel to any of the 10 Nordic destinations (n=3,123) in the segments; definitions: see page 39) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

49 To Learn 4: Segmentation of potential travellers to Nordic destinations» Segmentation approach: The Visit Greenland segmentation approach is based on the two dimensions interest focus regarding nature and culture when travelling and the preferred engagement level. This enables you to identify 9 different segments of tourists ( The results of the two segmentation questions show: Concerning the interest focus, the mix of culture and nature is dominating in the German population, as is the experience in terms of engagement level.» Segments: In all three destinations, the Globetrotters are by far the dominating segment, with a share of 41%-42% compared to 33% in the population. The next important segments in all destinations are the Nature Lovers (14%- 15%), the Sightseers (10%-14%) and the Ethnophiles (6%-10%).» Even though the main findings of the segmentation are similar in the three destinations, there are some differences:» Greenland has the highest share of Ethnophiles, Special Interest and Wilderness Seekers.» Iceland has the highest share of Sightseers, Nature Appreciators and Culture Lovers.» Product preferences and profiles of segments: To be able to target the different segments specifically, it is important to know the product preferences and demographic profiles of each segment:» In this study we look at the 9 segments within all Germans interested to travel to at least one of the Nordic destinations.» The results give important clues for a prioritisation of the segments and a segment specific marketing.» The Visit Greenland segmentation approach is on the one hand very helpful to further understand the potential travellers to the three NATA destinations, on the other hand it enables us to target the different segments according to their size and needs.» The segmentation approach helps to learn about what the three destinations have in common and which segments are most suited for a differentiation.» As the product preferences and demographic profiles differ significantly between the segments, it is possible to address the different segments according to their different needs and characteristics. NIT Kiel, June

50 5. Reasons against travelling to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland NIT Kiel, June

51 Reasons against travelling to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland Too expensive Cold climate I have not yet thought of going there Bad weather Poor accessibility Other destinations are more interesting Whale hunting I would not know what to do there Doubts about adequate accommodation Low quality of tourism services There are no reasons against going there 5% 4% 7% 14% 14% 12% 21% 20% 21% 30% 38%» The last question in the survey is dealing with possible reasons against travelling to Greenland, Faroe Islands and/or Iceland.» The good news first: 21% of the Germans have no general objections to travel to Greenland/Faroe Islands/ Iceland.» On average, however, they find 1.6 reasons against travelling there.» Most important reason against travelling to the three destinations are the expected high costs, followed by the cold and bad weather.» There are also important factors in play that are not directly linked to the tourism offer in the three destinations (marked grey). Q9: What are in your opinion reasons against travelling to Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands? Basis: All respondents (n=4,000) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

52 VG-Segments: Reasons against travelling to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland Ethnophile Culture Culture&Nature Nature Culture Lover Culture Appreciator Globetrotter Sightseer Wilderness Seeker Nature Lover Nature Appreciator Special Interest too expensive cold climate bad weather poor accessibility (air, sea connections) whale hunting doubts about adequate accommodation for me low quality of tourism services other destinations are more interesting I would not know what to do there I have not yet thought of going there there are no reasons against going there Q9: What are in your opinion reasons against travelling to Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands? Basis: All respondents in Germany interested to travel to any of the 10 Nordic destinations (n=3,123) in the segments; definitions: see page 39) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

53 Potential travellers: Reasons against travelling to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland German population too expensive 38% cold climate 30% whale hunting 12% poor accessibility (air, sea connections) 14% bad weather 20% doubts about adequate accommodation for me low quality of tourism services other destinations are more interesting I would not know what to do there there are no reasons against going there 5% 4% 14% 7% 21% 20% 20% 20% 14% 9% 7% 6% 2% 25% 50% 22% 20% 22% 19% 9% 6% 5% 3% 22% 49% 46% 24% 17% 16% 19% 6% 4% 8% 2% 27%» Looking at the potential travellers to the three destinations, we can see interesting differences compared to the population.» Again, the good news first: The share of persons without obstacles is higher with potential guests than in the population (22%-27%)» Cold climate and bad weather are less important obstacles with the potential guests as are other destinations and doubts what to do there.» Other product related obstacles (expensive, accessibility, tourism product) and whale hunting are more relevant with the potential guests! Q9: What are in your opinion reasons against travelling to Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands? Basis: All respondents (n=4,000), potential travellers to Greenland (n=357), Faroe Islands (n=318), or Iceland (n=1,108) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos NIT Kiel, June

54 Potential travellers: Objections against travelling to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland in different age groups No Objections (in %) y y y y y y Objections (in %) y y y y y y Q9: What are in your opinion reasons against travelling to Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands? Basis: All potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland (n=1,283) in the respective age groups Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos 0 NIT Kiel, June

55 To Learn 5: Reasons against travelling to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland» Population: The good news first: 21% of the Germans have no general objections to travel to Greenland/Faroe Islands/ Iceland. Most important reasons against travelling to the three destinations are the expected high costs, followed by the cold and bad weather. There are also important factors in play that are not directly linked to the tourism offer in the three destinations.» Segments: The share of persons without obstacles is between 14% (Wilderness Seeker) and 25% (Globetrotter). In detail, the differences between the segments are quite interesting, e.g. the share of persons fearing cold climate and bad weather are highest with the Culture Lovers and Culture Appreciators.» Potential guests: The share of persons without obstacles is higher with potential travellers to the three destinations than in the population (22%-27%). Product related obstacles (expensive, accessibility, tourism product) and whale hunting are more relevant with the potential guests! Cold climate, bad weather, the attractiveness of other destinations and doubts what to do in the NATA region are less important obstacles with the potential guests.» Age groups: Demographically you find the most striking differences regarding reasons against travelling to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland in the different age groups. The younger age groups (16-39) have more obstacles, the older age groups (50-70) less.» The results of Chapter 1 show that the three NATA destinations are in fierce competition with other destinations in the North and around the world.» To transform potential guests into actual ones, it is not only important to know who they are (Chapter 2) and what they want (Chapter 3) but also the possible reasons against travelling to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland.» The results of this Chapter give hints what to address in your communication and product (price, climate, access) etc.» The results also show the differences, e.g. in the segments and the age groups, which might help you for a more precise targeting. NIT Kiel, June

56 6. Development of interest/experience to travel to Nordic destinations 2012 to 2016 NIT Kiel, June

57 Long-term development of interest and experience with Iceland/Greenland/Faroe Islands in % interest next 3 years experience last 3 years 2,4 2,5 0,1 Interest = almost definitely planning or generally considering 2,2 3,6 3,3 0,3 0,2 0,3 0,2 4,3 3,9 5,5 6,2 0,4 0,3 0,4 0, Source: Reiseanalyse 2016 Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years» According to Reiseanalyse 2016, 6.2% of the German population 14+ years are almost definitely planning or generally considering Iceland/Greenland/Faeroe Islands as a holiday destination » This figure increased from 2.4% in 2000 with some setbacks in the years and » The development of the actual travellers to Iceland/Greenland pretty much follows the same dynamics, yet the figures are too small to serve as a basis for reliable analyses.» The 6.2% potential guests to Iceland/Greenland are divided in 0.5% hard potential ( almost definitely planning ) and 5.7% soft potential ( generally considering ). NIT Kiel, June

58 Experience with destinations in the North: 2012 and 2016 Sweden Norway Ireland/Scotland/Wales* Canada Finland Iceland Faroe Islands Svalbard Islands Greenland Alaska 0,8% 0,1% 1,4% 1,2% 1,0% 0,9% 0,7% 2,8% 5,9% 5,3% 6,1% 7,6% 9,8% 10,8% 13,1% 12,7% 12,6% 16,4% » The comparison of 2012 and 2016 shows a general upward trend in the actual experience for all Nordic destinations that were covered in both questionnaires in the same way.» The highest absolute increase by 3.3 percentage points can be accounted for Sweden.» The highest relative increase with doubling the persons with experience can be accounted for Iceland.» Even though the increase of Greenland looks even bigger, I would advise to be careful with the interpretation of this development due to the low number of underlying interviews. * In 2012, Ireland, Scotland, Wales were asked separately and not as one destination. Hence, you have be careful when comparing the figures of 2012 and Q2b: Which of these destinations have you already visited for a holiday in the past? Basis: All respondents (2016: n=4,000; 2012: n=2,500) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos; RA online 5/2012 NIT Kiel, June

59 Interest to travel to destinations in the North in the next 5 years: 2012 and 2016 Ireland/Scotland/Wales* Norway Sweden Canada Iceland Finland Alaska Greenland Svalbard Islands Faroe Islands 6% 6% 9% 8% 8% 11% 15% 17% 20% 29% 29% 28% 35% 35% 41% 39% 38% 45% » The comparison of 2012 and 2016 shows a general upward trend in the interest to travel there for all Nordic destinations that were covered in both questionnaires in the same way. The only exception is Canada which has remained on the same level.» The highest absolute increase by 11 percentage points can be accounted for Iceland.» Iceland is also scoring the highest relative increase (+65%).» Greenland (+50%) and Faroe Islands (+33%) are also performing very well. * In 2012, Ireland, Scotland, Wales were asked separately and not as one destination. Hence, you have be careful when comparing the figures of 2012 and Q2a: Which of these destinations would you like to visit within the next 5 years? Basis: All respondents (2016: n=4,000; 2012: n=2,500) Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos; RA online 5/2012 NIT Kiel, June

60 Interest for Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands as holiday destinations in the future 2012 and 2016 Potential travellers guests Iceland/Greenland/Faroe Islands almost next definitely 3 years or generally almost definitely considering or generally considering Source: RA face-to-face 2012; Source: set of 59 Reiseanalyse destinations 2012/2016; worldwide set of 59 destinations worldwide 4.3 million Potential travellers Greenland/Iceland/Faroe Islands would like to go within the next 5 years Source: NATA online survey 2016; RA online 5/2012; set of 10 Nordic destinations million 2.7 million 12.6 million Potential visitors for each destination would like to go within the next 5 years Source: NATA online survey 2016; RA online 5/2012; set of 10 Nordic destinations 15.7 million 5.1 million 4.5 million 10.0 million 3.8 million 3.4 million Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years resp years NIT Kiel, June

61 Interest to travel to Greenland, Faroe Islands, Iceland: Overlapping and ratios 2012 and 2016 Basis: potential travellers to the North-Atlantic Islands 2012: 12.6 million total 2016: 18.2 million total % million % million g b c a e f d a 10% % 2.0 b 11% % 1.8 c 5% 0.7 6% 1.1 d 1% 0.1 1% 0.1 e 8% 1.1 6% 1.1 f 11% 1.3 7% 1.2 g 54% % 10.8 Q2a: Which of these destinations would you like to visit within the next 5 years? Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos; RA online 5/2012 NIT Kiel, June

62 Travellers to Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands in the past 2012 and 2016 Travellers to Iceland/Greenland/Faroe Islands last 3 years Source: Reiseanalyse 2012/2016; set of 59 destinations worldwide All-time visitors to Greenland/Iceland/Faroe Islands Source: NATA online survey 2016; set of 10 Nordic destinations 2.4 million 0.4 million 1.3 million 0.3 million All-time visitors for each destination Source: NATA online survey 2016; set of 10 Nordic destinations 1.6 million 0.7 million 0.5 million 0.9 million 0.5 million <0.1 million Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years resp years NIT Kiel, June

63 Competition 2012 and 2016: Where do potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland also want to go? 76% 70% Iceland 100% Norway Ireland/Scotland/Wales* Sweden Canada Finland 43% Faroe Islands 100% 36% 65% 60% 57% 58% 69% 71% 67% 65% 63% 69% 84% 57% 49% 63% 65% 58% 56% 71% 68% 68% 63% 81% 60% 53% 57% 50% 66% 20% 19% 77% 36% 53% 40% 55%» With the potential travellers to Greenland the competition of Greenland with most other Nordic countries increased compared to With Finland it remained stable, with Canada it decreased.» With the potential travellers to the Faroe Islands the competition of Faroe Islands with all other Nordic countries increased compared to 2012.» With the potential travellers to Iceland the competition of Faroe Islands with most other Nordic countries increased slightly compared to Greenland 100% 48% 41% 24% 26% * In 2012, Ireland, Scotland, Wales were asked separately and not as one destination. Hence, you have be careful when comparing the figures of 2012 and Q2a: Which of these destinations would you like to visit within the next 5 years? Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos; RA online 5/2012 NIT Kiel, June

64 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Gender & Age 2012 and 2016 Gender Age Male 50% 51% 50% Female 49% years years years years years years 52% 49% 48% 48% 49% 51% 52% 51% 10% 7% 7% 5% 4% 9% 23% 20% 23% 27% 22% 21% 19% 21% 19% 18% 19% 17% 17% 23% 23% 24% 20% 23% 20% 18% 17% 15% 17% 18% 10% 11% 12% 11% 18% 13% Ø (years) 40.5 (39.8) 39.4 (42.6) 40.5 (40.5)» The comparison of 2012 and 2016 shows a stable ratio of males/females within the potential travellers to the three destinations.» Regarding the age structure there have been some developments from 2012 to 2016 with the potential travellers:» Greenland: On average a bit older; share of 16-19, increased; 20-29, decreased» Faroe Islands: On average younger; share of 16-19, increased; 20-29, decreased» Iceland: Stable average age; share of slightly increased; 16-19, slightly decreased Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos; RA online 5/2012 NIT Kiel, June

65 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Education and marital status 2012 and 2016 Education low middle high without university 5% 30% 35% 35% 35% 16% university 20% Marital status married / with partner single previously married, no 8% partner in household 9% 24% 54% 56% 38% 35% 5% 33% 40% 30% 29% 18% 27% 20% 56% 56% 34% 32% 10% 12% 4% 32% 36% 31% 33% 14% 27% 23% 58% 52% 34% 36% 8% 12%» The comparison of 2012 and 2016 shows quite astonishing developments regarding the level of education: We can observe a sharp drop of the low income level and a steep increase of all other levels; the highest increases can be found in the high without university segment.» The comparison of 2012 and 2016 shows quite stable ratios of marital status segments of the potential travellers to the three destinations.» In Greenland and Faroe Islands, the share of singles increased a bit.» In Iceland the share of couples slightly increased. Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos; RA online 5/2012 NIT Kiel, June

66 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Working status 2012 and 2016 Employee Self-employed Not working Retired Pupil/student 6% 13% 9% 12% 9% 10% 21% 15% 56% 50% 6% 14% 10% 16% 12% 9% 14% 11% 58% 50% 6% 6% 8% 12% 10% 11% 16% 18% 60% 53%» The comparison of 2012 and 2016 concerning working status shows that the biggest group of potential travellers to all three destinations is made up of employees, even with growing importance since 2012» For Greenland, also the share of pupils/students increased, all other segments slightly decreased.» For Faroe Islands, also the share of pupils/students and retired persons increased, all other segments slightly decreased.» For Iceland all other segments (besides employees) slightly decreased. Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos; RA online 5/2012 NIT Kiel, June

67 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Monthly household net income 2012 and 2016 Up to 1,000 12% 12% 9%» The comparison of 2012 and 14% 12% 15% 2016 shows a quite stable income structure of the 1,001-2,000 24% 23% 24% 27% 25% 25% potential travellers to the three destinations. 2,001-3,000 3,001-4,000 4,001-5,000 5, % 29% 30%» The income structure of the 31% 37% 34% potential travellers to Greenland remains basically Faroe Islands, we observe 10% 10% 10% growth in the segments 3, % 7% 8% and declines in the segments 17% 7% 16% 10% 19% 8% unchanged. 1,001-3, % 6% 11% 6% 15% 5%» With the potential travellers to» With the potential travellers to Iceland, we observe growth in the segments 3,001+ and declines in the segments 2,001-3,000 and up to 1,000. Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland with answers regarding their income Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos; RA online 5/2012 NIT Kiel, June

68 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Size of household 2012 and person 2 persons 3 persons 21% 18% 21% 16% 33% 26% 4 persons or more 26% 41% 21% 13% 23% 30% 22% 36% 28% 28% 20% 21% 20% 19% 25% 34% 36% 26%» The comparison of 2012 and 2016 shows a quite stable household structure of the potential travellers to the three destinations.» The most stable household structure can be found in Iceland with practically no changes between 2012 and 2016.» Regarding the household structure of the potential guests to Greenland and Faroe Islands, the share of 1 and 4+ person households has remained quite stable whereas the share of 3 person households grew remarkably on cost of the 2 person households. Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos; RA online 5/2012 NIT Kiel, June

69 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Nielsen regions 2012 and 2016 I II IIIa IIIb IV V 14% 18% 25% 15% 11% 12% 14% 15% 18% 19% 5% 7% 17% 20% 24% 20% 13% 13% 12% 14% 16% 16% 5% 4% 16% 16% 21% 18% 14% 16% 14% 16% 16% 12% 6% 5%» The comparison of 2012 and 2016 shows a quite stable regional structure of the potential travellers to the three destinations.» Remarkable is the increase of significance of NRW (Nielsen II) for all three destinations and the increase of the significance of Bavaria for Iceland.» Basically these developments mean that now the regional structure of the potential guests for each of the three destinations is pretty similar to the structure of the population in VI 9% 9% 8% 8% 8% 10% VII 6% 5% 5% 5% 7% 7% Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos; RA online 5/2012 NIT Kiel, June

70 Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland: Place of residence by federal state 2012 and 2016 Schleswig-H. Hamburg Niedersachsen Bremen NRW Hessen Rheinland-P. Baden-W. Bayern Saarland Berlin Brandenburg Mecklenburg-V. Sachsen Sachsen-A. Thüringen 1% 3% 5% 2% 2% 8% 11% 0% 0% 25% 15% 7% 6% 4% 6% 14% 15% 18% 19% 0% 0% 5% 7% 2% 5% 3% 2% 4% 4% 3% 2% 2% Basis: Potential travellers to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland Source: NATA online survey 2016 by NIT/Ipsos; RA online 5/2012 4% 3% 3% 4% 10% 13% 0% 0% 24% 20% 8% 6% 5% 6% 12% 14% 16% 16% 0% 1% 5% 4% 3% 3% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 4% 5% 3% 2% 9% 9% 1% 1% 21% 18% 7% 8% 6% 7% 14% 16% 16% 12% 1% 1% 6% 5% 3% 5% 3% 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 3% 3% NIT Kiel, June

71 To Learn 6: Developments of interest/experience to travel to Nordic destinations 2012 to 2016 VOLUME:» The comparison of 2012 and 2016 shows a general upward trend in the interest to travel there for all Nordic destinations that were covered in both questionnaires in the same way. The only exception is Canada which has remained on the same level.» The highest absolute increase by 11 percentage points can be accounted for Iceland. Iceland is also scoring the highest relative increase (+65%).» Greenland (+50%) and Faroe Islands (+33%) are also performing very well.» The total of potential travellers to three NATA destinations is now 18.2 million, up from 12.6 million in 2012.» 15.7 million (2012: 10.0 million) would like travel to Iceland» 5.1 million (2012: 3.8 million) would like travel to Greenland» 4.5 million (2012: 3.4 million) would like travel to the Faroe Islands. STUCTURE:» Regarding their structure and the dynamics since 2012, there are no revolutions to report.» The structure of the potential guests to the three NATA destinations is very similar to the German population.» Their formal education is strikingly higher than in 2012.» Regarding their age, potential travellers to Greenland are now a little older and to the Faroe Islands somewhat younger than in 2012.» The results of this Chapter show very positive prospects for the three NATA destinations on the German market.» They can profit from a positive trend for almost all Nordic destinations and are even leading in terms of absolute and relative growth of interest.» Despite this dramatically positive development in the volume of potential guests, their structure remains pretty stable. This means that generally no adjustments in the general targeting of potential guests is necessary.» Of course not all of the potential guests will eventually travel to the NATA region. But the results of this study can help you with a successful marketing to address them. NIT Kiel, June

72 7. General Trends of German holiday demand until 2025 and their relevance for Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland as travel destinations NIT Kiel, June

73 Holiday trips and short breaks 2015 of German travellers: Demand figures overview Holiday trips (5 days and more) Year Travellers Holiday trips per person Holiday trips Expenditure p. p. and trip Turnover million million billion Short breaks (2-4 days) Year Short break travellers Short breaks per person Short break trips Expenditure p. p. and trip Turnover million million billion Basis: Holiday trips (5+ days): German-speaking population 14+ years, January to December; Source: RA 2016 face-to-face; Basis: Short holiday trips (2-4 days): German-speaking population years, November to October; Source: RA online 11/2015 NIT Kiel, June

74 Trend 2025: Volume key figures; Stability; Certain growth potential for short breaks Holiday trips 2025: -1 million* Stable/ slightly declining No growth of holiday travel propensity Holiday travel frequency declining Short breaks 2025: +5 million* Certain potential for growth More trips per traveller More trips of 70+ year old travellers * Basis: Compared to number of trips 2013 of the German-speaking population 14+ years Source: Martin Lohmann, Dirk Schmücker, Ulf Sonntag: German Holiday Travel 2025: Development of holiday travel demand in the German source market. (German Holiday Travel 2025). NIT Kiel, June

75 Trend 2025: Age structure of travellers; Significantly more older travellers in the future Volume of holiday trips years +2,2 million trips years +4,1 million trips years -7,4 million trips The market share of trips by 60+ year olds increases from 30% in 2014 to almost 40% in 2025 Source: Martin Lohmann, Dirk Schmücker, Ulf Sonntag: German Holiday Travel 2025: Development of holiday travel demand in the German source market. (German Holiday Travel 2025). NIT Kiel, June

76 Trends 2025 regarding volume of holiday travel and age structure of holiday travellers» We are currently measuring a holiday travel intensity of more than 77% among the German-speaking population aged 14 years and older. This equals a volume of more than 53 million holiday travellers. We anticipate that the relative and absolute figures will remain stable through With the demographic change, however, there will be a drastic modification of the structure, a shift from the younger and middle towards the older age groups.» As for holiday travel frequency i.e. the answer to the question of how many holiday trips a holiday traveller will take per year we expect 1.25 holiday trips per traveller for the year 2025, which is somewhat less than for This development is a result of a continued slight decline in travel frequency among the age groups 14 to 59 years, but it will be attenuated by the stability or even slight growth of the figures among the 60- to 69-year-olds and the above 70-year-olds.» Based on these predictions, we expect a total volume of nearly 70 million holiday trips for the year This figure has a fluctuation range that makes both a decline (to 67 million) and an increase (to 72 million) appear possible.» As for the short holiday trips, there is a more positive outlook for a certain growth in the years But the range of uncertainty is considerably greater in this estimate than it is for the holiday trips.» Expenditures per person and holiday trip will probably remain about the same in 2015 prices for the period until At least, the trends among travel destinations and travel behaviour do not suggest any substantial increases or declines. There might be some nominal increases due to inflation.» For Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland this means that they cannot profit from a growing German market.» On the other hand the NATA destinations can rely on the overall stability of the German holiday travel demand.» A certain opportunity can be seen in the good prospects for short breaks. But one has to bear in mind that the vast majority of short trips stay within Germany and a good proportion of the international short breaks are leading into the European metropolises.» Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland have to keep an eye on the modification of the age structure of the German market. NIT Kiel, June

77 Trend 2025: Share of domestic/ outgoing holiday trips - Slightly negative trend for destinations abroad 85 Abroad 2025: % market share 46.6 million trips (-2.6 million vs. 2013) Domestic 2025: 33% market share 23.0 million trips (+1.5 million vs. 2013) in % Basis: Holiday trips (5+ days) of German/German-speaking population 14+ years; Source: Martin Lohmann, Dirk Schmücker, Ulf Sonntag: German Holiday Travel 2025: Development of holiday travel demand in the German source market. (German Holiday Travel 2025). NIT Kiel, June

78 Holiday destinations (regions) : Stability for most regions 29% 8% % 7% Long-haul destinations North-western Europe Germany 8% 7% Eastern Europe % The Alps* 10% European Mediterranean Non-European Mediterranean * Alps = Alpine regions in Austria, France, Germany, Italy and Switzerland Basis: Holiday trips (5+ days) of German-speaking population 14+ years; 1995, 2005 only Germans. Source: RA 1996, RA 2006, RA 2015 face-to-face NIT Kiel, June

79 Holiday destinations TOP 10 in detail Spain 13,1% Italy Turkey 7,3% 8,2% Austria 5,3% Croatia Greece France Poland Netherlands USA 3,2% 3,0% 2,9% 2,5% 2,1% 1,9% Basis: Holiday trips (5+ days) of German-speaking population 14+ years Source: RA 2016 face-to-face NIT Kiel, June

80 Experience with and interest in travel destinations ,5 Average number of holiday destinations in the last/next 3 years 5,8 6,0 5,8 6,4 6,2 6,0 6,5 6,8 2,3 2,4 2,3 2,2 2,3 2,4 2,4 2,3 2,4 2,4 Number of travel destinations with interest in the next 3 years Number of travel destinations in the last 3 years On average, Germans list almost seven different travel destinations they would like to visit on holiday in the near future. This degree of flexibility on the customers part ensures that crises in the various holiday countries do not result in a decline in overall tourism demand: if a crisis occurs, people simply go elsewhere. The reverse also applies: when a destination is no longer making negative headlines, demand is relatively quickly back at its regular level. This happened, e.g., with Greece, which has been able to increase both its market share again in 2013 and the number of responses expressing an interest in going there. Multi-optionality in terms of overall interest in different travel destinations has increased considerably since 2005 at the time, interest was expressed in 5.5 different travel destinations on average, and in 2014 the figure was 6.8 (see on the chart). The figures for actual demand are considerably smaller at a constant level: on their holiday trips and short holiday trips in the three years prior to 2005 and 2014, Germans visited 2.4 different travel destinations respectively. Number of travel destinations indicated (from a list of 59 travel destinations). German resident population aged 14 years and older in Germany (without foreigners), RA face-to-face. NIT Kiel, June

81 Trends 2025 regarding holiday destinations» For decades, foreign destination areas were able to gain market shares at the expense of domestic holiday trips. Since the mid-1990s, the ratio between all domestic and foreign holiday trips was relatively stable at 30:70. Currently there are strong indications that Germany is becoming a more sought-after travel destination within the next few years. A market share growth by approx. 10% remain stable as a significant destination, and it also looks as if the relationship between European and non- European regions were stabilizing. Eastern Europe and the Alps have to battle a slightly negative trend. As a general rule, however, the differences in dynamics between individual countries and regions within the greater regions can often be drastic. during the period until 2025 seems realistic. With the» Looking at the international destinations on the country number of holiday trips declining by a total of 1.1 million, level, the big ones abroad will stay big, too: Spain is going this translates into growth for Germany of 1.5 million to remain the uncontested top dog with similar market holiday trips and a simultaneous decline by 2.6 million shares as today, and Italy and Turkey will compete for the holiday trips for foreign countries compared to runner-up position, with Turkey currently having a slight» If we look at travel destinations in terms of major regions, not only Germany, but also the distant destinations have fairly good chances for growth, as do travel destinations in North-western Europe albeit at a considerably lower rate than Germany. The Mediterranean as a whole tends to lead. Austria is in fourth place. Its current figures show that it has increased its market shares during previous years, and so it is probably going to be able to secure its position in the future, too. Next, Croatia and Greece are competing against France about fifth to seventh place.» For Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland this means that competition on the German market will remain high.» Even though the general outlook for the volume of international holiday trips is slightly negative, the prospects for North- Western Europe (UK, Ireland, Benelux, Scandinavia and NATA region) are rather positive.» Nevertheless, it will stay a hard job to convince Germans coming for their holiday trips and short breaks to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland rather than going someplace else. NIT Kiel, June

82 Development of the landscape preferences RA 1987 RA 2008 RA Question: Please tell me for each of these areas/landscapes (disregarding countries) whether you like them as holiday destinations very much, pretty much... or not at all ; like very much in %. German resident population aged years, RA 2008 face-to-face, RA online 11/2015 NIT Kiel, June

83 Holiday motivations in January 2016 Get away from daily routine 64% Relaxation 62% Recuperate 60% Rest, do nothing, be lazy 49% Freedom, free time 48% Relax, recuperate, be free Enjoy nature 53% Healthy climate 42% Do something for my health 29% Gentle sports and fitness 27% Escape from pollution 16% Nature and health New experiences 38% Travel around, be on the move 37% Get completely new impressions 37% Get to know other countries 32% Do something cultural 25% New experiences Sun, warmth 65% Fun, amusement, enjoy myself 57% Spoil myself 50% Share experiences 36% Do something for my appearance 30% Meet new people 29% Be entertained 25% Flirt/Erotic 11% Sun, fun, people Spend time with friends/family 52% Play with the children 19% Partner, family Revisit an area 32% Meet the locals 28% Interaction discovery, risk 11% Active sports 8% Risk, action Holiday motivations particularly important German-speaking population aged 14 or over, RA 2016 face-to-face NIT Kiel, June

84 Holiday motivations of the Germans, Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan TOP 5: The most important motives are... Mentioned most frequently Unwinding, relaxing* (64%) Get away from daily routine (62%) Unwinding, relaxing* (65%) Get away from daily routine (58%) Unwinding, relaxing* (71%) Get away from daily routine (66%) Relaxation*, etc. (65%) Get away from daily routine (59%) Sun, warm weather,... (68%) Get away from daily routine (68%) Finding new strength (54%) Finding new strength (47%) Experiencing nature (52%) Being free, having time (58%) Relaxation*, etc. (68%) Being with nice people (53%) Resting, not doing anything (43%) Recuperate (52%) Recuperate (57%) Recuperate (62%) Being outdoors (50%) Experiencing nature (38%) Totally new impressions (51%) Time for one another (49%) Having fun (61%) Mentioned least frequently Discovering things (17%) Improving my education (16%) Actively engaging in sports (15%) Refreshing memories (12%) Discovery tour (10%) Hobbies, etc. (7%) Particularly important only for few people: Discovery, risk, etc. (16%) Doing s.th. for my beauty (12%) Actively engaging in sports (12%) Light sports activities, etc. (9%) Discovery, risk, etc. (7%) Actively engaging in sports (7%) * careful adaptation of wording over the years, e.g. unwinding, relaxing = abschalten, ausspannen, relaxation, etc. = Entspannung, etc. RA 2014 list with 29 categories, other years different lists and questions, multiple answers permitted; some statements are shortened; rankings according to % values for particularly important, holiday travellers among the German residential population aged 14 or older (without foreigners, 1975 and 1985: only West Germans), RA 1972, 1984, U+R 1994, RA 2004, 2014 face-to-face Flirt / erotic adventure (14%) Discovery, risk, etc. (12%) Actively engaging in sports (11%) NIT Kiel, June

85 Trends 2025 regarding holiday motivations and attitudes» Generally speaking, the motives and attitudes elicited in the RA indicate a stable tourism demand in terms of quantity as well as quality. These customers can be relied upon. Holiday travel is at the top of their consumption priorities.» Over the past four decades, the development of the holiday motives and expectations shows that customers have become more demanding. The basic motives for holiday travel are not going to change in the next ten years, either: people want relaxation, no stress, to be able to do what they like, and get away from their everyday life while at the same time finding fresh strength to master it. According to this data, there can be no question of a fundamental change of holiday values.» It is likely that further differentiation will take place regarding the expectations of how these basic motives are to be realized on the specific holiday trip. Here, too, the great travel experience results in knowledgeable customers, which in turn leads to growing and more detailed expectations concerning their holiday.» A characteristic of the future demand is that customers will not only continue to be demanding but will also be very flexible in the way they act, based on a wide range of holiday interests and motives (multi-optionality).» The recent comparison between 2016 and 2008 reveals that the perceived attractiveness of almost all forms of landscape has increased. Only the top types of holiday landscapes, sea and islands in the south find slightly declining acceptance from Germans as a holiday destination.» The analysis of the general holiday motivation helps Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland to understand the German traveller. The holiday motivation and landscape preferences show at the same time challenges and opportunities:» Opportunities regarding important motivations where the NATA destinations have the right product to meet these motivations.» Challenges regarding important motivation where the NATA destination might not have the right product to meet these motivations. NIT Kiel, June

86 Types of holiday: Demand dynamics Sun&beach plus types that offer variety without strain Value 2015 Trend Value 2015 Trend Beach/sunbathing holiday 46% Resting holiday 37% Visiting relatives/friends Fun/Party holiday 13% 13% Nature holiday 28% Family holiday 26% Circular tour 10% Cultural trip 8% Adventure/Expe rience* holiday 24% Health holiday 5% Active holiday 18% Study trip 4% Sightseeing holiday 17% * In German: Erlebnisurlaub Holiday trips (5+ days), type of holiday travel (multiple answers) in %, sparklines without uniform scale, trend: linear regression , German population 14+ years (without German-speaking foreigners), Source: RA face-to-face NIT Kiel, June

87 Types of holiday: Interest dynamics Change rate total interest 2005 vs City break + 49% Ocean cruise + 27% Fun+party holiday + 26% Family vacation + 26% Winter in the sun + 24% Fitness holiday - 34% Health holiday - 30% Medical spa holiday - 27% Winter in the snow - 8% Holiday to relax - 6% Expressed total interest for types of holidays in the next 3 years German-speaking population of 14+ years RA 2005 and RA 2015 face-to-face NIT Kiel, June

88 Definition/Understandings of nature holiday in the German population: distinct environments, sceneries and activities Open statements in categories Nature/ Environment Scenery Activities Holiday forms Quietness/ Relaxing Accommodation Destinations 16% 11% 8% 26% 46% 46% 45% Top statements - (lots of) nature (14%) - (lots of) animals (7%) - fresh/good air (6%) - mountains(16%) - forests (16%) - Lakes (8%) - hiking/trekking (20%) - camping (15%) - cycling (7%)» As the experience of nature is central when travelling to Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland, we have decided to repeat two slides from the 2012 NATA study.» This first slide is about the individual understanding of the term nature holiday in the German population.» Concerning nature holiday, the understandings in the population are most widely connected with:» A distinct environment (nature, animals, fresh air)» A distinct scenery (mountains, forests, lakes)» Distinct activities (hiking, camping, cycling) Food 4% Source: RA 2012: Extra CAPI-Omnibus Survey (9/2011) Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years NIT Kiel, June

89 Product requirements nature holiday of the potential guests to Iceland/Greenland enjoy pristine nature exercise in nature tranquillity relax and rest healthy climate good and healthy food natural nature attractions unspoilt nature food from the region observe animals in their environment learn something about nature designated national/nature parks accommodation in the nature expenditure stays within the region meet people which are close to nature holiday is sustainable unusual activities (e.g. canyoning) visit nature attractions (e.g. zoos) contact with animals in % must be absolutely fulfilled would be desireable Source: RA 2012 face-to-face; Basis: Persons not negative towards a nature holiday:, NIT Kiel, June 2016 Interested in Iceland/Greenland ( almost definitely planning or generally considering ), German-speaking population 14+ years Index* » When taking a nature holiday, for 71% of all persons interested in visiting Iceland/Greenland the product requirement enjoy pristine nature has to be absolutely fulfilled. A further 15% find this characteristic desirable.» The following must-criteria continue in the ranking:» Exercise in nature» Tranquility» Relaxing and resting» Healthy climate» The biggest differences compared to the German population can be found in secondary requirements: * Figures of potential guests to Iceland/Greenland compared to German population» Unusual activities» Natural nature attractions» Expenditure stays in the region

90 Accommodation and trend [ ] [ ] 2025 Hotel, inn Guesthouse, private room Holiday flat, holiday home Tent, caravan, motor home Relatives, friends Other Holiday trips (5+ days), share in %, 1972, 1982: only main holiday trip. German/German-speaking resident population aged 14 years and older in Germany (1972, 1982: only West Germans; from 2010 on: incl. foreigners). RA face-to-face NIT Kiel, June

91 Trends 2025 regarding types of holiday and holiday accommodation» As for the development of the types of holiday trip, we see a continuous process of change which will not be dramatic from year to year, but nonetheless considerable over the long term. A decline is to be expected for resting holidays and health holidays, as are increases in holidays at the beach and sightseeing holidays as well as city travels and wellness holidays.» The trends of the holiday activities are in line with the trends of the types of holiday, the general rule is: Just lazing about is not enough for most holidaymakers. People who are on holiday want to experience something, whether going on outings, enjoying culinary pleasures, shopping, or going swimming. Yet they do not want to overdo their activities only few people engage in real sport when on holiday.» When taking a nature holiday, for 71% of all persons interested in visiting Iceland/Greenland the product requirement enjoy pristine nature has to be absolutely fulfilled. A further 15% find this characteristic desirable. The following must-criteria continue in the ranking: Exercise in nature, Tranquility, Relaxing and resting, Healthy climate. The biggest differences compared to the German population can be found in the secondary requirements Unusual activities, Natural nature attractions, Expenditure stays in the region.» As for holiday accommodation, we expect only minor changes in the market shares: hotels dominate the market and, like holiday flats and holiday homes, will tend to increase their market share, while guest-houses and private rooms will be used less frequently. The various forms of camping and caravanning appear to remain largely stable.» The results of types of holidays are a bit more concrete than the general motivations: Trends here can be a good orientation for marketing decisions of the three NATA destinations on the German market.» The tourism product of Greenland/Faroe Islands/Iceland should fit well with the general trend of not only lazing around but being open for experiences.» Some relevant types of holiday show an upward general trend, some rather a downward trend. This should be considered when taking a closer look at segments of potential guests. NIT Kiel, June

92 Sources of information for the main holiday trip (selection; results for German population) Only German holiday travellers (without foreigners), sources of information for the main holiday trip Base (million) Friends, relatives 33% 42% 52% 55% Travel agency 19% 35% 39% Travel organizer 1 15% 23% 23% 44% Travel guide 6% 12% 13% 15% Articles in the press² 6% 5% 5% 14% Trade fairs 1% 2% 2% 2% "Internet" 6% 32% 51% and 2000: brochures, catalogues , 2000, and 2012 (offline): in newspapers and magazines. Use of selected sources of information for the main holiday trip (5+ days) in 1986, 2000, 2008, and 2012, in %. Holiday travellers among the German resident population aged 14 years and older in Germany, RA face-to-face 1986, 2001, 2009, NIT Kiel, June

93 Sources of inspiration and information for holiday planning (Top 10) flyer/brochure 28% advice in a travel agency website destination website accommodatoin 19% 21% 22% Google etc. online travel portal guide book/travel literature TV travel show/documentary 16% 15% 15% 14% website tour operator adverts in newspapers etc. 11% 11% Online Offline Basis: main holiday trips 2015 (= most important trip 5+ days) of German-speaking population 14+ years Source: RA 2016 face-to-face, Module Inspiration and Information: travellers use of marketing tools NIT Kiel, June

94 Internet use for holiday planning and trend 2025: In 2025 a vast majority of travellers will use the internet for planning Used the internet in the last 12 months to look for holiday travel information Used the internet in the last 12 months to book holiday travel 73 in % [...] 2025 German-speaking population of 14+ years RA 2009 to RA 2016 face-to-face NIT Kiel, June

95 Holiday trip booking channels and trend 2025: Much more than 50% market share in 2025 in % [ ] 2025 Online: Internet travel agencies Online: Other Offline: Travel agencies Offline: Other Holiday trips with pre-bookings (lasting 5 days or more), share in %, German/German-speaking resident population aged 14 years and older in Germany (from 2010 on: incl. foreigners). RA face-to-face. NIT Kiel, June

96 Trends 2025 regarding holiday information and booking» As for gathering information prior to travelling, there has been an inflation of information sources in recent years: nearly all information sources have been used more frequently, and the internet has provided ever more options for obtaining information prior to the holiday.» A central driving force behind the changes in travel preparations is therefore the use of the internet, which has grown considerably in recent years. It is to be assumed that this development will continue until The number of internet users will probably increase further, and mobile internet use will show even stronger growth. Since the number of holiday travellers is likely to remain about the same, it follows that the number of travelling onliners is going to climb. This will be accompanied by a more intensive use of the internet both for obtaining information and for booking trips.» This might signify a further shift towards online booking channels, which would result in a continued loss of market shares of brick-and-mortar travel agencies. This would mean that the majority of holiday travels will be booked online even before 2020.» It is a development that is in line with the expected further decrease of package holidays.» Due to the high dynamics in technology, the dynamics in holiday travel planning are also high.» It is important to know about the nature and also about the speed of these dynamics.» This is why we cover the preferred information and inspiration sources as well as preferred types of online content in the questionnaire, specifically linked with the three NATA destinations. NIT Kiel, June

97 Contact NIT Kiel, June

98 ANNEX: Example how to work with the report (I) Q: What products to offer/which costomers to address outside the high season» As we did not ask for the preferred season and not for products preferred in the low season, we have to approach this question through the backdoor.» A first idea is to focus on activities that fit with the low season, e.g. because they are not so weather sensitive, e.g.» Foodies» Quietness searchers» Culturally interested» Or activities that more or less rely on winter, e.g. snow or ice, e.g.:» Dog sledding» Skiing» Fishing on the sea ice NIT Kiel, June

99 ANNEX: Example how to work with the report (II) Q: What products to offer/which costomers to address outside the high season» A second idea is to look at the reasons against question and concentrate on those who are not cold and weather affected. NIT Kiel, June

100 ANNEX: Example how to work with the report (III) Q: What products to offer/which costomers to address outside the high season» A third idea is to look at the segments and their activities and reasons against.» The lowest rates for cold climate and bad weather can be found with» Special Interest» Ethnophiles» Wilderness Seekers» The preferred activities of these segments suggest, that at least some of them can be attracted to come in the low season.» The segments can also work as a bridge into other market research instruments, e.g. guest surveys.» Guest surveys in Greenland show that the share of segments in high and low season do not differ very much. The only segment with a significantly higher share in the low season is special interest! NIT Kiel, June