Intelligence enquiries relating to the study should be directed to Joanne Cuff, Tourism Analyst at

Transcription

1

2 Contact Details & Republication Notification The Greater Manchester Leisure Visitor Survey 2014 was commissioned by Marketing Manchester with financial support from partners; Transport for Greater Manchester, Heart of Manchester Business Improvement District (CityCo) and Virgin Trains. Intelligence enquiries relating to the study should be directed to Joanne Cuff, Tourism Analyst at The report and the research findings are the property of Marketing Manchester and cannot be reproduced in full or in part without the express consent of Marketing Manchester. Requests for re-publication of any of the research findings can be directed to Abbreviations The abbreviations used in this document are listed below for reference: 1. GMLVS 2014: Greater Manchester Leisure Visitor Survey GM: Greater Manchester. The abbreviation has been used when not referencing a title of an organisation or study. Front cover image: Features The Quays; including the Imperial War Museum North, MediaCityUK and The Lowry. 1

3 Contents Executive Summary... 3 Strategic Context... 6 Aim... 6 Methodology... 6 Key Findings... 7 Visitor Demand... 7 Day and Staying Visitor Split... 7 Geography... 7 Demographics... 7 Socio-economic... 8 Gender... 8 Group Types... 8 Visit Frequency... 9 Liklihood to Return... 9 Accommodation Demand Average Length of Stay Visitor Motivations Motivations to Visit Activities Undertaken Product Appeal Visitor Satisfaction Product Offer Visitor Satisfaction Destination Features Overall Satisfaction with the Destination Accessibility & Movement within GM Information Sources Economic Benefit

4 Executive Summary The Greater Manchester Leisure Visitor Survey 2014 identified the following: Visitor Demand 36% of day visits and 90% of staying visits came from outside the North West. Most geographic markets have maintained their share of visitors from 2010, but there was an increase in 2014 in the share of day visits coming from London and a decrease from Yorkshire. The ageing population is reflected in the visitor market with an increase from 9% to 18% of the 65+ age grouping, whilst the share for the age grouping decreased from 18% to 12%. Manchester city centre continues to have a slightly younger profile with 35% of the sample being under 35, compared to 29% of the GM sample. The average group size (for all visits) was 2.9 (2.2 adults and 0.7 children) and 2014 showed an increase in the proportion of visitor groups with children for both staying and day visits. The most frequently reported visitor group type for day visits was family groups, and for staying visits this was travelling with a partner. 38% of staying visits were generated from family groups; followed by 27% with a partner, 16% with friends, 15% travelling alone and 4% were from other group types. Half of day visits came from family groups (49%); followed by 18% with friends, 17% with a partner, 12% travelling alone and 4% from other group types. 30% of visitors were on their first visit to GM, 64% had previously visited in the last two years, and 6% had previously visited over two years earlier. From the sample of repeat visitors, almost half (49%) had visited six times or more in the previous two years, these most typically being day visits from the UK. 91% of visitors reported that they were likely to return to GM within the next two years, with the highest incidence being from the markets of: year olds (98%), day visitors (96%), repeat visitors (96%) and visitors from the UK (95%). Accommodation Demand 70% of leisure visits to GM required paid-for accommodation and 30% stayed with friends and relatives. In Manchester city centre 75% required paid-for accommodation and 25% stayed with friends and family. The highest demand was for hotel accommodation participating in a grading scheme (1-5 star) at 35% of the staying visitor sample and followed by: a friends and relatives home (30%), travel accommodation i.e., Premier Inn and Travelodge (24%). 3

5 The average length of stay for all staying visits was 3.4 nights, 2.9 nights for those staying in paid-for accommodation, and 4.5 nights for those staying with friends and family. Visitor Motivations Nearly a quarter of staying visits (24%) reported the primary motivation to visit as being just to have a break and a trip away and 15% of day visitors said the same. Day visits saw a higher incidence in the proportion whose main motivation was to visit an attraction, visit a specific exhibition or shopping. 33% of staying visitors were not motivated to visit by a specific reason - 24% of staying visits reporting their motivation as just to have a break and a trip away and 9% reporting to explore the city or town, and therefore are consequently looking for options of things to do. Those visiting just for a break and to shop had general appeal across all visit group types. Visiting attractions and museums or attending a theatre show had higher incidences within the family or friends grouping, visiting a specific arts exhibition had a higher representation from within those travelling with a partner, and exploring the city/town was increasingly cited by those travelling alone. 23% of visitors to GM reported that they were visiting the shops during their visit, 17% eating out and 5% reported that they would spend time in bars and clubs. This increases in Manchester city centre where 28% visited the shops, 18% ate out and 7% spent in bars and clubs. 16% of staying visitors to GM visited more than one GM district and 7% of all visits included time outside GM. 10% of the visits to Manchester city centre visited another district in GM during their stay and 12% of these visited the Quays. Product Appeal Visitors identified particular strengths in the product offer of theatres, galleries and museums, and shopping with two thirds rating these as excellent (67% and 66% respectively). Visitors identified the availability of green spaces less positively overall, but this improved when looking at the sample from within the outer nine districts of GM. The features of the destination scored lower than the product offer overall, but the highest scoring categories were; the transport services and routes available in GM and the overall welcome and service received. This was followed by the feeling of safety and value for money of public transport within GM. The feedback coming from those visiting the newer developments of GM, specifically The Quays, showed that the ratings for cleanliness, signage for getting around on foot and car parking availability scores considerably higher than the GM average. The overall satisfaction rating for GM, from visitors, was 4.5 out of 5, remaining steady with

6 12% of visitors reported that their expectations of their visit had been exceeded, and this increases for adult-only groups (15%), staying visitors (21%), first-time visitors (also 21%) and overseas visitors (24%). Just 1% of visitors expressed that GM had fallen short of their expectations and 86% of visitors had their expectations met, consistent with the 2010 study. Accessibility & Movement within GM Half of all visitors entered GM through private transport using the UK road network, with this rising to 57% for day visits and 41% for staying visits. The next most frequent method used was train for 28% of day visits and 26% of staying visits. The third most cited transportation method for staying visitors was 19% by air and then 8% by bus or coach and this compares to 9% travelling by bus and coach for a day visit, and just 1% by air. The proportion of visitors arriving by train has increased from 20% in 2010 to 27% in 2014 and there was also an increase of those arriving by coach or bus from 6% to 9%. Around a quarter of visitors (26%) used public transport to get around GM during their visit, increasing to 41% of staying visitors and decreasing to 16% of day visitors. Also, 54% of visitors who were visiting more than one district of GM used public transport to facilitate these journeys. When looking at all visits that included the use of transport, the Metrolink tram was the most used public transport method (58%), followed by; bus (38%), train (15%), and Metroshuttle bus (4%). Information Sources 64% of day visits used an information source to inform their trip (either before or during) with the most cited sources being; previous personal experience (by 16%), a recommendation from family and friends (14%), an internet site different to the destination-led sites prompted (11%), VisitManchester.com (8%) and the Manchester Visitor Information Centre (5%). 77% of staying visits used an information source for their trip (either before or during) with the most cited sources being; an other internet site * (by 23%), a recommendation from family and friends (19%), VisitManchester.com (17%), previous personal experience (12%) and the Manchester Visitor Information Centre (also 12%). Visitors travelling with their partner were most likely to use on-line information sources such visitmanchester.com or an other internet site. Economic Benefit The 2014 study showed an average spend of 35 per day visitor and 79 per staying visitor, but this rises to 97 for those staying in paid-for accommodation and falls to 39 for those staying with friends and family. For every staying visitor in paid-for accommodation, the daily spend will be split between on accommodation costs per person per day and spent across the businesses in the wider destination to include; restaurants, bars, attractions, retailers, entertainment venues and public transport. On average a visitor to GM will spend 12 on shopping and this rises to 15 for visitors to Manchester city centre. 5

7 Strategic Context GM is the second most visited sub-region for day visits after Greater London (GB Day Visits Survey 2013; VisitEngland), the second most visited destination in England for domestic visits (Great Britain Tourism Survey 2013; VisitEngland) and the third most visited UK destination, following London and Edinburgh, for international visits (International Passenger Survey 2013; Office of National Statistics and VisitBritain). In 2013 GM s tourism industry generated 7 billion in economic impact (STEAM Scarborough Tourism Economic & Activity Monitor), including the direct economic contribution to GM s businesses and the indirect economic contribution through the extended supply chain providing goods and services to these businesses. The Greater Manchester Strategy Stronger Together identifies a number of sectors critical to the development of GM s economy and these are identified as sectors for reform or growth. Tourism is identified as one of the growth sectors to increasingly support the GM economy. Manchester s tourism offer is being significantly developed The re-developed Whitworth Art Gallery opened February 2015, the new performance and arts venue of Home will open later in 2015, and the new cultural venue of The Factory is in the pipeline. There are also over 2,000 new hotel rooms in the pipeline for the city centre and over 2,400 within GM as a whole, representing a 12% growth in the proportion of visitors that the ten districts can accommodate if appeal, accessibility and market engagement is continually supported. The Greater Manchester Strategy for the Visitor Economy outlines the ambition for the development of the tourism sector to achieve the economic growth referenced in the aforementioned Greater Manchester Strategy Aim The Greater Manchester Leisure Visitor Survey (GMVLS) was commissioned by Marketing Manchester to gain intelligence on the current leisure visitor market; geography, demographics, motivations, spend, to gain feedback on the visitor experience and also on initiatives currently being scoped, as relevant to Marketing Manchester and its partners. It provides an updated evidence base since the previous 2010 study to inform strategy and direct plans for the sector. The 2014 study was funded by Marketing Manchester, Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM), Heart of Manchester Business Improvement District (CityCo) and Virgin Trains, and therefore the intelligence gained has an increased relevance to the remits of these organisations and wider collaborative working than previous studies. Methodology To gain and access a representative sample of the visitor market, face-to-face surveys were the adopted approach and fieldwork shifts, covering 35 sites, were apportioned to each GM district in-line with the volume of visitors measured by STEAM. Fieldwork was undertaken between the end of May and start of November 2014 and those completing the survey needed to meet the screening criteria of being a visitor for leisure reasons and either on a) on a day trip away from home with over three hours spent in the destination and over 20 miles travelled to GM or b) a stay away from home for at least one night. The final GM sample was 757 surveys with 56% of these being gathered in Manchester city centre. 58% of the GM sample was on a day visit and 42% on a staying visit. 6

8 Key Findings Visitor Demand The role of the Greater Manchester Leisure Visitor Survey (GMLVS) was to gain intelligence on the leisure visits market. One of these areas of intelligence is visitor demand. Day and Staying Visitor Split The final sample showed a 42% staying and 58% day visitor profile for GM and a 45% staying and 55% day visitor profile for Manchester city centre. An increased representation within the sample of the staying visitor market is expected due to the increased length of time spent by a staying visitor within the destination and the consequent available time to undertake an increased number of activities and also the increased likelihood to be sampled. There was a higher incidence of overseas visits in the staying visit market with 34% of staying visits being generated by overseas visitors and 66% from the UK, compared to 16% of all visits being from overseas and 84% from the UK. Geography The geographic markets generating the highest levels of visitors were the North West (41%), followed by: Yorkshire & the Humber (7%); and the East Midlands (5%). The North East, West Midlands, Greater London, the South East, the South West and Wales each accounted for 4% of the overall visits. When looking at the day visit market specifically, the North West generated 64% of the visits, followed by: Yorkshire & the Humber (9%); and the East Midlands (5%). The North East and the West Midlands both produced 4% of the day visits sampled. In terms of staying visits the North West generated the highest at 10% followed by the South East at 8%. Greater London, Scotland and the South West each generated 6% and the North East, West Midlands, East Midlands and Wales all generated 5%. When comparing the 2014 geographic profile with those sampled in 2010, although most markets look to be effectively maintained there are a few notable changes. Both Greater London and the East Midlands now represent a greater share of the day visit market than in 2010 with Greater London s share increasing from just 1% to 3% and East Midlands increasing from 2% to 5%. However the opposite trend has been identified for Yorkshire, with a decrease from 14% to 9%. There are no notable changes within the staying visitor market. In terms of the overseas profile the markets most sampled were from the USA: followed by, Germany, Ireland, Australia, Canada and Spain. This is fairly consistent with the International Passenger Survey 2013 (the latest available) that showed the highest incidence levels for leisure visits from Ireland, Australia, Germany, USA, Switzerland and Spain. Demographics Half of all visitors to GM were under 44 years of age (49%) which is consistent with However the biggest change between 2010 and 2014 was for the eldest two age groupings with a decrease from 18% to 12% for the age grouping and a significant increase from 9% to 18% for the 65+ grouping, a 7

9 possible reflection of the UK s ageing population. There were no significant differences between the proportions of day and staying visitors in each age group. Due to the growth of the 65+ market generally this is also feeding through to a significantly increased proportion of the staying market coming from this age bracket. In 2010, 9% of staying visitors were 65+, rising to 16% in Manchester city centre has a slightly younger profile with 35% of the sample being under 35 compared to 29% of the GM sample. Socio-economic The role of the GMLVS is to outline the nature of the visitor market and one of these measures is through socio-economic groupings (SEG). Socio-economic groupings are based on the occupation of the head of the household, for the purpose of drawing conclusions across a wide range of people. ABC1 groupings include those in occupations at higher, intermediate and supervisory levels and C2DE groupings include those who are skilled, semi-skilled manual workers, unemployed and retired. In % were from SEG ABC1 compared to 72% in The SEG that provides a higher incidence of staying visits is SEGB where 44% of visits are staying compared to 28% of day visits. SEGC2 provides a higher incidence of day visits at 18% compared to just 10% of staying visits saw an increase in SEGB staying visits from 37% (in 2010) to 44% and a decrease in SEGC1 staying visits from 38% (in 2010) to 30%. Manchester city centre has a slightly higher proportion of ABC1 visitors of 73%, compared to 68% for GM. Visitors from SEG ABC1 represent 76% of Manchester city centre s staying market and 62% of its day visit market. Gender The gender profile is consistent between staying visits and day visits based on the sample. Group Types The average group size was 2.9 (unchanged from 2010) and this was the case for both the staying and day visit markets. There was an average of 2.2 adults and 0.7 children showed an increase in the proportion of visitor groups with children for both staying and day visits. In terms of group type, 44% of the sample were from within a family group, 21% travelled with a partner, 17% with friends, 14% travelled alone and 4% with an other group type. A family group made up 38% of the staying visit market, 27% travelled with their partner, 16% with friends, 15% travelled alone and 4% were from other group types. Half of day visits came from family groups (49%), 18% from groups of friends, 17% with their partner, 12% travelling alone and 4% were from other group types. The visitor group with considerably higher incidences of staying visits were those travelling with a partner, with 27% of the staying visitor market coming from visitors travelling with their partner, compared to 21% of all visits. The visitor group with the lowest incidences of staying visits were those travelling in a family group, 38% of the staying visitor market compared with a 44% share for all visits. The 2010 to 2014 comparisons show an overall increase in the proportion visiting as part of a group (either a family or friends group) and a decrease in those travelling with a partner. When isolating the 8

10 Manchester city centre sample there was a slight increase of those travelling alone (from 14% to 17%) and a slight decrease of those travelling within a family group to 40% (from 44%). Visit Frequency Of the 757 visitors sampled in GM 30% were on their first visit, 64% had also previously visited in the last two years and 6% had previously visited over two years earlier. This 30% compares favourably with 29% in 2010 and 21% in In terms of staying visits 44% hadn t visited GM before for leisure purposes, showing a sustained level of new staying visitors with the 44% of staying visitors in 2010 that were also new visitors. 20% of 2014 s day visits were made by new visitors to GM, an increase from 14% in % had visited in the last two years and 4% had visited over two years ago. 91% of previous visitors had visited GM in the previous two years and almost half (49%) had visited six times or more in the last two years. These were most typically to be day visits from the UK, and particularly the North West. The economic contribution of these multiple and frequent trips further supported the destination s economy, especially considering that 49% was a significant increase on the 36% in 2010 who had visited six times or more over the two years. These findings show strengths in the destination in attracting new visitors to the area and also in providing a positive experience, and reasons, to encourage visitors to return in the near future. Liklihood to Return Visitors were asked if they were likely to return to GM within the next two years. Overall, 91% reported that they were likely to ( very likely or likely ). The breakdown of those reporting the likelihood to re-visit within two years was: 73% very likely, 18% likely, 2% unlikely, 2% very unlikely and 5% don t know. This is consistent with the 2010 feedback. Visitor markets with a higher incidence of those who were likely to return in the next two years were: year olds (98%), day visitors (96%), repeat visitors (96%) and visitors from the UK (95%). 9

11 Accommodation Demand Demand for accommodation is determined by visitor requirements and the supply available in the marketplace. Supply of accommodation needs to meet demand levels from all potential guests, including both leisure and business markets. In terms of the leisure visitors sampled in this study, 70% required paid-for accommodation in GM and 30% stayed with friends and relatives (SFR). In Manchester city centre 75% required paid-for accommodation and a quarter (25%) stayed with friends and family. 93% of those visiting GM as part of a staying visit were staying in accommodation within GM which compares to 89% in The remaining 7% were staying in accommodation in another part of the UK. The highest demand was for accredited hotel accommodation (1-5 star) at 35% of the full staying visitor sample and followed by: staying with friends/relatives (30%), travel accommodation, i.e. Premier Inn and Travelodge (24%) and B&B/Guest House/Inn at 3%. 2% demand levels were recorded for group hostel accommodation; university lodgings; and caravanning and camping. There was also a 1% demand for serviced apartments and 1% for other self-catering accommodation types from those sampled. When looking at just the demand for paid-for roomed accommodation (excluding SFR, group accommodation, university lodgings and camping and caravanning), the largest level of demand was for travel accommodation (Premier Inn, Travelodge etc.) at 37%. This is followed by: demand at four star level (32%), demand for a 3 star hotel room (19%) and a room in a B&B, Guest House or Inn (5%). Demand for 5 star accommodation, 1 or 2 star hotels, serviced apartments and self-catering establishments each represented under 2% from this particular sample. Average Length of Stay The average length of stay for all staying visits was 3.4 nights, and 2.9 nights for those staying in paid-for accommodation, and 4.5 nights for those staying with friends and family. The 2014 study showed a decreased average length of stay of 3.4 nights from 4.5 nights in the previous 2010 study. The 3.4 average length of stay varies between 2.3 for staying visitors from with the UK and 5.1 from staying visits from overseas. 10

12 Visitor Motivations Sampling Caveat In order to sample a higher proportion of visitors, the sites selected for interviews included a high proportion of attractions and events, and therefore there is likely to be an increased level of response from visitors engaged in this part of the visitor offer. Motivations to Visit Nearly a quarter of staying visits (24%) reported the primary motivation to visit as being just to have a break and a trip away and 15% of day visitors said the same. Therefore a higher proportion of day visits were motivated by a specific purpose. Day visits saw a higher proportion of those whose main motivation was to visit an attraction (35% of day visits to 23% of staying visits), visit a specific exhibition (14% of day visits to 7% of staying) and shopping (8% of day visits to 3% of staying). Apart from the higher incidence of staying visits being motivated by a general break or a trip away (24%) there was also 9% of staying visits whose motivation was to explore the city or town compared to just 2% of day visits. Therefore 33% of staying visits are looking for options of things to do and places to go without there being one specific motivation. This is the segment that are more open to choices both before and on arrival at the destination and require information, at later stages in the visitor journey, to inform their activities and visitor experience. Of note, Manchester city centre has a higher proportion of those visiting whose primary reason for visiting was shopping, at 10%, compared to the GM average of 6%. Manchester city centre also had a higher incidence of those wanting to generally explore the destination. The remainder of GM saw higher incidences of those with primary reasons to book the visit of being due to visiting an attraction or museum or to go to a festival. Higher incidences of visitors travelling with their family or a group of friends were evidenced at attractions and museums and higher incidences of those travelling with their partners were evidenced for those with the primary motivation of being to visit a specific exhibition. Exploring the city/town was a primary motivation particularly for those travelling alone whilst those travelling in a group of family or friends were more likely, than other visitor group types, to be going to see a theatre show. Attending a music event was more common for those travelling alone or with their partner than those travelling in a group. Visiting just for a break and to shop had more general appeal across all visit group types. Activities Undertaken Where the primary motivation shows the pull factors to Manchester and to its product offering, the activities undertaken show the spread of visitors across the business types in the destination and consequently the dispersal of spend from the visitor market. 23% of visitors to GM reported that they were visiting the shops during their visit, 17% would eat out and 5% reported that they would spend time in bars and clubs. This not only shows the important role the shops, restaurants and cafes have to the visitor experience (experienced by 17% to 23% of visitors) but also the income generated to such businesses from the visitor market. This increases for visitors to Manchester city centre, with 28% visiting the shops, 18% eating out and 7% spending in bars and clubs. 11

13 There was a higher incidence of staying visitors across all activities, undoubtedly driven by the longer length of stay within the destination, and consequently an increasingly dispersed spend to the range of businesses within the destination. The primary reason for booking of visiting museums and galleries showed a higher incidence for day visits but when looking at all activities undertaken during a visit, visiting museums and galleries had a higher incidence within staying visits. The National Football Museum, Manchester Museum and BBC Studios and Tour had equal appeal from both day and staying visitors. Some attractions were more frequently visited as part of a staying visit and these were Manchester Art Gallery followed by: the Museum of Science & Industry, the Imperial War Museum North, Manchester United FC Museum, The Lowry and the People s History Museum. As reported, almost a quarter of visitors (23%) included shopping in their visit to GM and this compares to 28% for visits to the city centre. The shopping areas most cited by those sampled in Manchester city centre were the Arndale Centre, Market Street, Deansgate, St. Ann s Square & Exchange Square. The Lowry Outlet Mall and Intu Trafford Centre were the most reported shopping areas outside of Manchester city centre. When looking at specific shops, Marks and Spencer, Primark, House of Fraser, Next, Harvey Nichols and Selfridges were those most visited by city centre visitors. These were also the shops that were quoted by those who cited shopping as their primary motivation and therefore are drivers for leisure visitors motivated to visit by the shop offer. Those visiting Manchester city centre were asked which areas they had visited or planned to visit during their visit. 28% reported they would visit Piccadilly, 13% Chinatown and 12% the Quays (including MediaCityUK). As would be expected, those on a staying visit were more likely to explore a wider area, as time allowed. When looking just at staying visits, 36% reported they would visit Piccadilly, and 19% the Quays (including MediaCity UK), with 18% quoting Chinatown, and 18% for Castlefield. Therefore 12% of all visits to Manchester city centre also visited the Quays and therefore requiring transport connections between the two areas. Just 6% were visiting more than one district of GM during their visit. Further detail shows that 16% of staying visitors incorporated more than one district into their visit compared to just 1% of day visitors, where time available for moving about the sub-region is restricted. The Salford sample, based on the Quays, showed visits to the Quays forming part of a wider visit whilst the Manchester sample showed that just 10% of visits extended to another district. 7% of visits included time in GM and at least one other area and this increases for staying visits to 16%. The most cited area was Liverpool, but still only representing 2% of the 757 sample. Blackpool, The Lake District & Cumbria, Lancashire (outside Blackpool), Yorkshire & Scotland were the next most cited. 12

14 Product Appeal The Greater Manchester Leisure Visitor Survey provides a measurement of visitor satisfaction across the visitor offer its products and its destination features. This is to monitor satisfaction levels and identify strengths and areas for improvement for GM to remain competitive with the wide selection of UK and overseas destinations. Of note, visitors could opt for can t say to any of the categories that they hadn t experienced. Visitor Satisfaction Product Offer At least half of visitors rated excellent for seven out of eight product categories. Visitors identified particular strengths in the cultural offer (theatres, galleries and museums) and also shopping, with two thirds of visitors rating these as excellent (67% & 66% respectively). The pub, bars and nightlife offer was rated excellent by 63%, followed by: the events and festivals (61% rating excellent ), sporting events (60%), the eating offer (59%), and 54% rated the activities and entertainment for families as excellent. All of these categories received predominantly positive feedback whilst also showing areas of the visitor offer that can be further improved or developed to increase the standard to that of GM s highest performing areas. The category receiving a more mixed response was the satisfaction with the available green spaces with 38% reporting this as excellent, and 26% poor. When a scale of 1-5 is applied to the feedback so 1 = very poor and 5 = excellent, the following satisfaction ratings can be produced to determine rankings: Table 1: Satisfaction ratings for product offer Product Offer Average Satisfaction Rating % Rating excellent 1 Cultural offer eg. theatres, galleries and museums 4.58 out of 5 67% 2 Shopping 4.56 out of 5 68% 3 Pubs, bars & nightlife 4.52 out of 5 63% 4 Events and festivals programme 4.50 out of 5 61% 5 Eating offer 4.47 out of 5 59% 6 Sports programme 4.45 out of 5 60% 7 Family activities/entertainment 4.38 out of 5 54% 8 Green spaces 3.86 out of 5 38% Base All respondents excluding those who can t say ( ) When looking at satisfaction ratings by location, shopping, eating offer and pubs, bars and nightlife tended to receive more positive feedback within the city centre, with family activities and green spaces scoring higher outside, and within the wider GM districts. Visitor Satisfaction Destination Features In addition to the visitor product offer the study also gained feedback on satisfaction with a number of destination features. Both the product offer and the features of a destination are essential factors of the 13

15 visitor experience. The visitor experience will directly impact on whether a visitor is likely to return or not and their frequency to visit a destination. A poor experience is also more likely to be communicated through word of mouth and therefore potentially decreasing the destination s growth opportunities. Generally, the features of the destination scored lower than the product offer. Two of the four highest scoring categories were related to GM s public transport with 56% rating excellent for the services and routes available (and achieving the highest overall satisfaction score) and 51% for its value for money (scoring the fourth highest satisfaction score). The second and third highest satisfaction scores were received for the overall welcome and service received and the feeling of safety. The lowest satisfaction levels were received for overall cleanliness and car parking value for money, with the latter being rated poor or very poor by over a fifth of visitors (22%). Table 2 shows the features when a 1-5 rating is applied to the feedback to produce a satisfaction rating and includes the additional categories measured of; car parking availability, overall welcome and service received, feeling of safety and signage for getting around on foot. Table 2: Satisfaction ratings for destination features Destination Feature Average Satisfaction Rating % Rating excellent 1 Public transport services and routes available 4.38 out of 5 56% 2 Overall welcome and service received 4.36 out of 5 47% 3 Feeling of safety 4.31 out of 5 46% 4 Public transport value for money 4.26 out of 5 51% 5 Access to the countryside 4.21 out of 5 51% 6 Signage for getting around on foot 4.16 out of 5 44% 7 Car parking - availability 4.14 out of 5 49% 8 Overall cleanliness 4.03 out of 5 35% 9 Car parking value for money 3.55 out of 5 31% Base: All respondents excluding those answering with can t say ( ) In terms of the features, the city centre scored particularly well for its public transport, specifically in terms of its services and routes, and for its value for money. Due to the higher proportion of the sample in the city centre, in-line with tourism share data, this will have contributed to these being identified as strengths from the full visitor base. The feedback also showed particularly strong levels of satisfaction against these features from the Salford visitor sample. The Salford sample was gathered at sites where the visitor product and consequent footfall would generate strong sample rates. The new developments and investment at The Quays and MediaCityUK provided opportunities for this and the feedback coming from this area was notably more positive when compared to the rest of GM for: overall cleanliness, signage for getting around on foot, and car parking availability. 14

16 Overall Satisfaction with the Destination All visitors were asked to provide their overall rating for their visit to GM. For those who had been interviewed early on in their visit they could opt for can t say. The overall satisfaction rating from the sample of visitors was 4.5 out of 5, and this was the same for staying visitors, whereas the satisfaction rate decreased very slightly for day visitors to 4.4 out of 5. The 4.5 out of 5 overall satisfaction rate remains steady with 2010 (also 4.5 out of 5). 12% of visits reported that their expectations had been exceeded on their visit, with this figure rising to 21% of staying visitors compared to 6% of day visitors. This 12% average of those saying it had exceeded was surpassed by adult only groups (15%), 21% for first time visitors and 24% from overseas visitors, and therefore showing that nearly a quarter of overseas visitors and new visitors had their expectations exceeded. This is particularly positive feedback in terms of potential repeat visits from these visitors but also shows that there are possibly lower expectations of GM with these visitor types and therefore demonstrating the continuing need to change perceptions with effective messaging and PR. The proportion reporting that their expectations had been exceeded shows the potential for visitor lifetime value. Just 1% of visitors reported that GM had fallen short of their expectations and 86% of visitors had their expectations met (with the remaining 12% who had their expectation exceeded). Please note that this totals 99% due to rounding. This is widely consistent with the feedback of

17 Accessibility & Movement within GM The Greater Manchester Leisure Visitor Survey (GMLVS) was co-funded by three organisations, two of which being transport operators. This provided further scope to gain an enhanced understanding of how visitors access GM and how they move about once here. Access to GM Half of all visitors (50%) entered GM through private transport using the UK road network, with this rising to 57% for day visits and decreasing to 41% for staying visits. The next most frequent method used was train (27%), showing consistent levels of usage for both day visitors (28%) and staying visitors (26%). The third most frequently used route then varied between day and staying visitors. Staying visitors reporting travel by air for 19% and travelling by bus and coach by 8%. This compares to 9% travelling by bus and coach, for a day visit, and just 1% by air. When looking at visits to Manchester city centre alone, the proportions arriving by train and those arriving in private transport was exactly the same with 37% reporting for each. There is also an increased proportion arriving by air of 11% compared to 8% for the full GM sample. Although a significant proportion of visitors still arrive in GM by private transport (50%), this has decreased from 62% in 2010 mainly due to an increase in those arriving by train from 20% in 2010 to 27% in 2014, but also an increase in those using a bus or coach, from 6% in 2010 to 9% in The train providers used will be influenced by a number of factors: route availability, route frequency, fare affordability and the strength of appeal to visit GM from the geographic market the provider serves. The most used provider by visitors to GM was Northern Rail (31%) who also brought in a high proportion (43%) of the day visitor market. Virgin Trains were the second most cited provider (by 19% of visitors) and was the provider serving the highest proportion of the staying visitor market (at 27%). First Transpennine Trains and Cross-Country Trains served over 10% of the visitors using the train to reach GM, and Arriva and East Midlands Trains were also reported providers. However it should be noted that 14% of the visitors arriving by train couldn t recall the provider they had used for this particular trip, so the proportions using the named providers could be slightly increased than what is recorded. There were no significant differences in the usage levels of the named providers between the GM and Manchester city centre samples. The primary motivation to visit followed the same pattern for train users as the full sample, with 32% of train users visiting an attraction or museum (compared to 30% of the full sample), 21% visiting just for a break or a trip out (compared to 19% of the full sample), 10% visiting a specific exhibition (compared to 11% of the full sample) and 7% to shop (compared to 6% of the full sample). Visitor Movement Across GM Around a quarter of visitors (26%) used public transport to get around GM during their visit. As would be expected, due to time availability, this increases for staying visitors at 41% compared to 16% of day visitors. The most reported transport used was the Metrolink tram by 58% followed by: bus (38%); train (15%) and Metroshuttle bus (4%). Please note that visitors could provide as many modes of transport as they had taken or planned to take during their visit so the total adds to over 100%. 16

18 54% of visitors who were visiting more than one district of GM used public transport to make these journeys. For those just visiting one district the sample shows that over a quarter still used public transport during their visit. For those visiting more than one district the modes used were: Metrolink tram (66%), bus (36%), train (23%) and Metroshuttle bus (2%). The use of the Metrolink tram was highest for those sampled in Salford, Trafford & Manchester city centre. Smart Ticketing The study was undertaken during a period when Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) was scoping the introduction of a smartcard for GM transport users that could be used on a mix of modes and operators of transport in GM. 42% of visitors reported that a smartcard would provide encouragement to use public transport to get around GM. This rises for those with increased time with over half (52%) of staying visitors reporting they would be encouraged, compared to 35% of day visitors. The visitors who had expressed an interest in using a smartcard were asked at which point in their visit they would be likely to purchase one. There were two common responses; prior to the visit (51%) and on arrival at a train station or the airport (20%). Purchasing a smartcard at a Visitor Information Centre was the third most selected option (7%), with 6% choosing on their inbound journey (i.e. on the train) and 6% at a travel shop within the destination. Just 3% reported purchasing one at hotel accommodation but of course this is only really relevant to staying visitors and when looking just at staying visits this increased to 5%. More information was gathered on the type of travelcard visitors would use and potential incentives, to feed into TfGM s further plans for smart ticketing. 17

19 Information Sources Destination and product offer information is picked up by visitors through a number of on-line and off-line channels. Engagement of these channels vary between consumer types and their needs and therefore it is useful to monitor current usage levels of such information sources and their effectiveness per market on influencing particular parts of the visit decision-making cycle. Visitors were asked which information sources they used for their trip to GM, either before or during. 64% of day visitors used an information source for their trip, the most cited being: previous personal experience (16%), a recommendation from family and friends (14%), an other internet site * (11%), VisitManchester.com (8%) and the Manchester Visitor Information Centre (5%). 77% of staying visitors used an information source for their trip with the most cited being: an other internet site * (23%), a recommendation from family and friends (19%), visitmanchester.com (17%), using previous personal experience (12%) and Manchester Visitor Information Centre (also 12%). All other sources were utilised by less than 4% of visitors. When looking at all visits the most frequently used information sources were; other internet site * (16%), recommendation from friends and family (also 16%) and previous personal experience (14%). The fourth most used source was VisitManchester.com (12%) and this increases to 14% of visits to Manchester, 17% of first-time GM visitors and 22% of first-time GM staying visitors. The fifth most cited information source was the Manchester Visitor Information Centre by 8% of visitors to GM and this increases to 10% of visits to Manchester, 15% of first-time visitors to GM and 17% of firsttime staying visitors to GM. Visitors travelling in a group, either with friends or family or those travelling alone, were most likely to cite that their visit was informed by a recommendation from family or friends or from personal experience. Visitors travelling with their partner were most likely to use an other internet site * or VisitManchester.com, with this market being increasingly accessible on-line and more open to third party information to inform their visit. Although a large proportion are still not using third party information sources, with 30% still using a recommendation from family or friends or a personal experience to inform their visit, this has decreased from 45% in *Other Internet Sites As noted above, 11% referenced that they used an other internet site to those specifically referenced from the Manchester-specific destination sites prompted. When further probed as to which website was sourced this showed that from the 120 visitors sampled selecting other internet sites 23% sourced the specific product site, e.g. a visitor attraction or hotel site: followed by 19% referencing a search engine, 16% referencing TripAdvisor and 10% citing a specific OTA (on-line travel agent). Other OTAs in the marketplace were also cited, as were train ticket booking sites but each represented less than 5% per site. The OTAs most frequently mentioned were Booking.com, Laterooms.com, Trivago.co.uk and Hotels.com. 18

20 Economic Benefit The Greater Manchester Leisure Visitor Survey gathers data from visitors on their spend during their visit to GM. It doesn t extend to the full cost of the visit to the consumer (to include travel to and from GM) and is intended to provide a profile of visitor expenditure for an average day or staying visitor across spending categories and consequently business types in the destination, all attributable to GM s economy. The 2014 study shows that an average day visitor attracted to GM would spend 35 within the local economy. For every visitor staying in paid-for accommodation this equates to 97 per day. Table 3 breaks this down per category of visitor. Table 3: Visitor Expenditure Categories Day visitor Staying visitor Staying in paid-for accommodation visitor Staying with friends and family visitor Average spend (per person per day) Average spend (per person per day) to accommodation provider Average spend (per person per day) to businesses in wider destination Base Note: Spend figures are rounded to the nearest. When looking at spend patterns a day visitor was most likely to allocate the largest proportion of their expenditure ( 11 of 35) to retailers whilst shopping for gifts, souvenirs and personal clothing purchases. For every day visitor to GM, 10 will be received by food and drink businesses, rising to 20 for a couple and 40 for a group or family of four. The next largest allocation from a day visitor was 5 per person on activities and entertainment during their visit, bearing in mind that GM offers a significant number of free entry venues. A visitor staying in paid-for accommodation is the highest yielding and will contribute 97 to the businesses in the destination, including 39 per person on accommodation and 56 to other businesses in the destination (shops, eating establishments and places to see). On average a visitor to GM would spend 12 on shopping (including gifts, souvenirs, clothes etc.) compared to 15 for visitors to Manchester city centre. The above reports on the average spend per head including all visitors, whether spending or not in each category. For the purposes of spend on transport, the analysis has been limited to users only to provide an indication of income potential from each visitor encouraged to use public transport as part of their visit. This shows an average expenditure of 4 per day ( 4.07) on public transport within GM, increasing for a staying visitor and decreasing for a day visitor. Staying visitors with the highest yield in terms of their average daily spend were from the age grouping. The age group were the next highest yielding staying visitor segment. In terms of the day visitor market the age group were the highest yielding when looking at daily spend, with the age group being the next highest. 19

21 Visitor Expenditure Examples The following are examples of visitor expenditure from a range of visitor groups. Table 4: Visitor Expenditure Examples Scenario A family of four visiting GM as day visitors. A couple staying for two nights in paid-for accommodation. A group of three adults staying for 3 nights in paid-for accommodation Spend per person Spend per group per trip 35 x 4 day visitors 140 N/A 97 x 2 staying visitors in paid-for accommodation x 2 nights 97 x 3 staying visitors in paid-for accommodation x 3 nights Further breakdown (if applicable) spend outside accommodation providers within the businesses in the wider destination spend outside accommodation providers within the businesses in the wider destination. Spend patterns in 2014 showed variances from the data gained in the 2010 study. A day visitor in 2014 compared to 2010 spent less on all prompted categories of food and drink, entertainment, travel within GM and shopping but an increase in spend on other expenses. This may suggest that the continuing economic conditions, affecting levels of disposable income, are consequently impacting on available expenditure during visits. Staying visits also showed decreased expenditure for entertainment, travel within GM, and shopping, but increased spend on accommodation, and other expenses, with fairly consistent levels of spend attributable to food and drink. The limitations on disposable spend during a visit suggests a continuing need for value for money and free activities/entertainment to enable visitors to spend in other areas of the destination. It also emphasises the need for affordable transport within the destination. 20