manchester world sport 08 : the economic · 1.1 background: manchester world sport 08 manchester...

Manchester World Sport 08 : The Economic Impact Evaluation Study of the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m)

Research Study Conducted for Manchester City Council and World Swimming Championships 2008 Ltd.

28812

October 2008

Contents

1. Introduction .................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background: Manchester World Sport 08 ....................................................... 1 1.2 Objectives ............................................................................................................ 2 1.3 Background: 9th FINA World Swimming Championship 2008 (25m) : ... 2 1.4 Market Research: Methodology ........................................................................ 3 1.5 Economic Impact: Methodology ..................................................................... 4 1.6 Acknowledgments .............................................................................................. 4

2. Executive Summary ...................................................................................... 5 Economic Impact: Short Term ........................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.1 Publication of Data ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

3. Survey Results ............................................................................................... 7 3.1 Spectators ............................................................................................................. 7 3.2 The Event on the Day of Interview ............................................................... 10 3.3 Visitors to Manchester ..................................................................................... 12 3.4 Visitors to the Area: Overnighters ................................................................. 14 3.5 The Event and Non-Mancunians ................................................................... 17 3.6 Summary ............................................................................................................ 17

4. Economic Impact ........................................................................................ 18 4.1 The Impacts ....................................................................................................... 18 4.2 The Study Area ................................................................................................. 18 4.3 Resident Location of Spectators ..................................................................... 21 4.4 Economic Impact Methodology .................................................................... 22 4.5 Key Expenditure Assumptions/Data Sources ............................................. 28 4.6 Economic Impact ............................................................................................. 33 4.7 Net Impacts ....................................................................................................... 36 4.8 Equivalent Employment .................................................................................. 41 4.9 Longer Term Impacts ...................................................................................... 41 4.10 Summary ............................................................................................................ 42 4.11 The Impact ........................................................................................................ 42

5. MWS ’08 Campaign and the Event .......................................................... 45 5.1 This Event ......................................................................................................... 45 5.2 MWS 08 .............................................................................................................. 46 5.3 Summary ............................................................................................................ 46

Appendices

Statistical Reliability and Presentation of Data The Questionnaire

For Manchester City Council and World Swimming Championships 2008 Ltd.

1

1. Introduction

1.1 Background: Manchester World Sport 08 Manchester World Sport 08 is a generic marketing title for a series of six international sport events, which Manchester is hosting in 2008. It is the biggest year of sport in Manchester since the XVII Commonwealth Games in 2002 and is the City’s most important series of world sports events ever.

Manchester City Council, in partnership with Marketing Manchester (the tourist board for Greater Manchester), Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA), UK Sport and MEN Media has developed a generic marketing and communications campaign to promote the city as a top world sport destination.

Events are a key component of MCC’s Marketing Strategy, and the series of sports events being evaluated in this research link directly to this and the Council’s own corporate aims and objectives.

The series is also aligned to strategies of key stakeholders and partners including UK Sport and NWDA, while the implementation of these events could also have a wider role in ensuring that Manchester’s developing reputation as a global sports city is maintained, particularly in the run-up to London 2012.

The individual sports events are:

UCI Track Cycling World Championships 2008: 26 – 30 March

9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m): 9 – 13 April

Paralympic World Cup : 7 – 11 May

UEFA Cup Final 2008: 14 May

BUPA Great Manchester Run: 18 May

Hi – Tec World Squash Championships Manchester 2008: 11 – 19 October


2

1.2 Objectives The overall project aims are:

to evaluate the economic impact of the Manchester World Sport 08 events on the economy by measuring the immediate direct (and quantifiable indirect and induced) costs and benefits associated with the staging of the Manchester World Sport 08 events; and

to assess the individual impacts of each of the six events and the combined, collective impacts across all six Manchester World Sport 08 events.

Within these overall objectives, the research addresses a number of technical issues:

The net or additional impacts as a result of Manchester hosting the series of events;

The net or additional impacts at the spatial areas of Manchester (City), the rest of the North West region and the rest of the UK;

Analysis of the wider ‘multiplier’ effects from the series of events; and

From an assessment of the costs of public sector support for the events, an analysis of the overall value for money for MCC.

This report covers the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m).

1.3 Background: 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m): The 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m) were held at the Manchester Evening News (MEN) Arena between 9th April and 13th April. Over 32,500 seats were taken during the event making it the UK’s largest ever, ticketed audience swimming event.

In addition to these spectators the event hosted 2,500 officials, guests, VIPs, competitors, team and technical officials, media as well as other people. Importantly, alongside this event a number of supporting activities / events took place which would not have occurred in the absence of the critical mass created by the 9th FINA World Swimming Championship 2008 (25m). These events included:

The FINA Gala Dinner;

FINA Extraordinary Congress;


3

16th FINA World Sports Medicine Congress, Welcome Reception & Dinner; and

Speedo 80th birthday party.

1.4 Market Research: Methodology Fieldwork took place across four days of the Championships from 10th – 13th April 2008 after a specific request was made by organisers not to interview on the first day of the event. Interviewing shifts were scheduled to cover a broad range of times, and to reflect the timetable of the competition. The table below details the days and times of the interviewing schedule:

Day of Interview Shift Times Number of Interviews Achieved

Thursday 10 April 3 x shifts 17.00 – 22.00 58 Friday 11 April 1 x shift 08.30 – 14.30

4 x shifts 17.00 – 22.00 128

Saturday 12 April 2 x shifts 08.00 – 14.00 5 x shifts 15.00 – 21.00

189

Sunday 13 April 5 x shifts 13.30 – 19.30 93

Total 20 shifts 468 There were no screening criteria for respondents – anyone who was at the event was eligible to complete the interview and no quotas set. Only spectators aged 16 and over were interviewed.

The questionnaire took around 7 minutes to complete. No incentives were offered to the respondents for taking part.

Interviewers positioned themselves around the concourse of the MEN Arena so not to interfere with the competition races.


4

The data has been balanced to reflect the different strike rates on the day of interview and the attendance on that day. Attendance was varied across all days of fieldwork, and as such data has been balanced as shown below:

% achieved

sample

% weighted to reflect actual attendance

Thursday 10: 7,965 13 20

Friday 11: 9,880 27 24

Saturday 12: 11,321 40 28

Sunday 13: 11,577 20 28

100 100

This report is based upon a full set of computer tabulations lodged under separate cover with the Council.

1.5 Economic Impact: Methodology The following methodology was utilised:

Briefing meeting with organisers of each event;

Secondary data analysis of event-level data (e.g. costs, event plans, participant/ spectator numbers etc);

Primary data analysis from surveys of spectators for each event;

Consultations with event organisers to clarify all post-event data and information.

1.6 Acknowledgments The team acknowledges the inputs of the following people:

Kathryn Wolstencroft, Manchester City Council;

Steve Flynn, Manchester City Council;

Jennifer Walker and Peter Knowles (Chief Executive) 9th FINA World Swimming Championships (25m)


5

2. Executive Summary The 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 25m were the first ever World Swimming Championships to be held in the UK and the first swimming event in the UK to be held in temporary pools built within a major concert venue.

A record 607 athletes from 116 countries participated in the five day championships which attracted the largest ever spectator attendance (32,500) and the most commercial income (£780,000) for any swimming event ever held in the UK.

Table 1: Summary of total number of individual visitors

Number Manchester Rest

of NW Rest

of UK Overseas

Total Bed

Nights

Competitors 607 <5 <10 25 570 4,250 Team and Technical Officials 450 <5 <10 35 400 3,300

Event staff and volunteers 500 150 150 200 0 1,000

VIP and guests 150 30 20 20 80 1,200 Media 220 20 20 60 120 1,200 Spectators 32,500 Others including ancillary events, seminars etc.

600 150 150 150 150 500

TOTAL 35,027 Source: Based on information provided by the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 and adapted by Experian

There are a number of economic impacts emanating from sports events. This research focuses on the short terms benefits (direct and indirect), in terms of expenditure, GVA and employment. A variety of data sources have been used to assess the economic impact of these championships including spectator and media surveys, event income and expenditure information, information on competitors, delegate and officials as well as on supporting and associated events held before, during and after the championships.

The total net impact associated with the event across the UK is £11.8 million including £7.4 million as net direct impact, £2.1 million as net indirect impact and £2.4 million as net induced impact. This compares favourably with the estimated pre-event direct spend of £4.8 million.


6

The event in total supported a total of 213 full-time equivalent jobs and generated £3.6 million of Gross Value Added across the UK.

Table 2: Economic Impact

Manchester

North West (including

Manchester)

UK (including the North

West)

Output multiplier values

Indirect multiplier values 1.10 1.29 1.87

Induced multiplier values 1.25 1.60 2.70

Types of Impact Net Direct Impact £5,489,282 £5,678,871 £7,398,343 Net Indirect Impact £527,683 £581,760 £2,084,087 Net Induced Impact £871,363 £930,312 £2,356,142 Total Net Economic Impact £6,888,327 £7,190,943 £11,838,571

Net Impacts Full time equivalent jobs 141 147 213

Gross Value Added £2,665,155 £2,763,648 £3,575,588 Source: Experian

© Ipsos MORI North/JN28812 May 2008 0161 240 2401

Sandy Ochojna Tim Martin


7

3. Survey Results

3.1 Spectators 3.1.1 The respondents Individual respondents (rather than the groups for whom they may have been responding) are just as likely to be men as women (52% men vs 48% women) and aged between 35 and 54 (52%). The mean age is 40.

Figure 1 : Respondent demographics Base : All - 468

52%

48%

16%

19%

26%

26%

8%

3%

1%

Male

Female

16-24

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-64

65-74

75+

The vast majority of respondents – 93% – live in the UK.

Gender

Age


8

3.1.2 Their groups The mean group size of spectators is 4.94.

Figure 2 : Group size Base : All – 468

Q3. How many people, including yourself, are in your group today? If you are in an organised party, please state the number in your immediate group only

18%

49%

9%

7%

16%

59%

18%

12%

10%

8%

41%

29%

13%

4%

5%

Adults 1

2

3

4

5+

Children 0

1

2

3+

Adults & Children 1

2

3 to 4

5 to 10

11 to 19

20+

In all:

8% of respondents came on their own

41% of groups have at least one child.

Mean 3.61

Mean 1.34

Mean 4.94


9

Groups are made up predominantly of family (58%) and friends (25%).

Figure 3 : Group composition Base : All attending in a group – 432∅

Q4. Who are you attending the event with today?

21%

58%

25%

7%

2%

2%

Partner/spouse

Family

Friends

Sports club/team

Colleagues (work)

Organised trip

∅ can multi-answer Amongst those stating they were at the event in groups of 20 or more (24 respondents), 21 were with clubs/teams, and 5 described their groups as ‘friends’.

3.1.3 Summary respondents are just as likely to be male as female

the average age is 40 years

93% of respondents live in the UK

8% of spectators come on their own, 41% took at least one child

the overall mean group size is 4.94.


10

3.2 The Event on the Day of Interview 3.2.1 Access The principal means of getting to the MEN Arena was car : 57% travelled by car. However, the train (18%) and Metrolink (12%) were also popular modes of transportation.

Figure 4 : Mode to the venue Base : All – 468

Q5. How did you get to the venue today?

57%

18%

12%

9%

7%

4%

2%

1%

*%

Car

Train

Metrolink

Scheduled bus

Walk

Taxi

Private bus/coach

Bicycle

Other/not stated

can multi-answer

Those who were staying away from home were less likely to reach the venue by car (43% vs 61% of those coming from home) and more likely to walk from their accommodation (22% vs 2%).


11

3.2.2 Spend at the Venue on the Day Respondents considered:

“How much (£), if anything, do you and your group expect to spend at the event venue today on…”

The table below presents the average figures; given the interview setting, and the fact that it is a group estimate, these figures should be treated as being indicative, rather than definitive. Given the wide spread of answers, the average is presented as both the mean and the median.

Table 3: Average spend at the venue on the day of interview Base: All – 468 Average/group Average/person Mean Median Mean Median £ £ £ £

Tickets∅ 98.27 - 26.01 -

Programmes 5.31 - 1.48 - Merchandise 7.66 - 2.01 - Food & Drink 11.95 - 2.72 - Travel to/from the venue 18.25 - 4.97 -

Other 0.80 - 0.36 -

TOTAL 142.24 66 37.55 25 ∅ Ticket revenues is especially indicative since the interview did not distinguish between single and multi-day tickets.

Mindful of all the caveats, the mean spend is £38 per person.

3.2.3 Summary the average daily spend per person at the venue probably lies

between the mean of £38 and the median of £25.


12

3.3 Visitors to Manchester 3.3.1 At Home? Amongst the respondents, three-quarters (74%), are staying at home: a quarter (26%) are spending at least one night away from home.

Figure 5 : Nights away from home Base : All – 468

Q7. Thinking only about attending this event, how many nights, if any, are you spending away from home in…?

45%

29%

22%

4%

2%

None, at home inManchester

None, at home outsideManchester

Staying away : inManchester

: elsewhere in NW

: elsewhere in UK

can multi-answer

Mean no. of nights away

0

0

3 (2.7)

3 (2.7)

3 (2.9)


13

3.3.2 Staying at Home This section considered the spend of those who are staying at home, whether in Manchester or elsewhere: 347 respondents. Again, the caveats set out in Section 3.2 apply.

Table 4: Average spend on the day of interview: away from the venue Base: All staying at home – 347 Q19. Excluding money spent at the venue, how much do you think you and your group will spend today on the following? Average/group Average/person Mean Median Mean Median £ £ £ £ Food or drink 25.98 - 6.19 - Shopping 16.61 - 6.28 - Travel to/from Manchester 9.73 - 2.68 -

Travel around Manchester 0.44 - 0.11 -

Other events/ attractions 0.71 - 0.30 -

Other 0.10 - 0.04 -

TOTAL 53.57 0 15.60 0

The mean spend per home-staying person is £16 per day: the majority is on food and drink and shopping.


14

3.4 Visitors to the Area: Overnighters 3.4.1 Where Staying? Amongst those not staying at home during the event – c.26% of the sample – two-thirds are staying in hotels, and a fifth are staying with friends.

Figure 6 : Overnighters: where staying? Base : All at least one night away from home – 123

Q8. Where are you staying during your time at this event?

Friends/relatives17%

Hotel64%

Self-catering accommodation

12%

B&B4%

Other3%

University accommodation

1%

3.4.2 How Reached the Manchester Area Just over half (56%) came to the Manchester area by car.

Figure 7 : Mode to Manchester Base : All staying away from home – 123

Q9. How did you travel to the Manchester area?

56%

17%

14%

5%

4%

5%

3%

Car

Train

Aeroplane

Scheduled bus/coach

Private bus/coach

Other

Not stated

can multi-answer


15

3.4.3 Days at the Event A fifth (20%) of those staying away from home are attending all 5 days of the event. A quarter is there for one day of the event (24%).

Figure 8 : Days at the event Base : All staying away from home – 123

Q10. For how many days will you be attending this event?

124%

313%

45%

520%

237%

Mean 2.60 days


16

3.4.4 Spend, Away from the Event Respondents considered the question:

“And during your ____ nights away from home to attend this event, how much (£) do you think you and your group will spend in total, away from this venue, on…?”

The table below presents the mean and median spend, with all the caveats expressed at Section 3.2.

Table 5: Average spend away from home Base: All staying away from home – 123 Average/group Average/person Mean Median Mean Median £ £ £ £ Accommodation 283.27 - 94.69 - Food & drink 170.23 - 53.96 - Shopping 51.20 - 18.02 - Travel to/from Manchester 119.50 - 48.89 -

Travel around Manchester 12.08 - 4.05 -

Other events/ attractions 12.35 - 4.82 -

Other 0.59 - 0.13 -

TOTAL 649.22 218 224.56 101

Bearing in mind all the caveats, the mean spend may be around £225 per person staying away from home for reasons of attending the event.

Amongst this group of staying away from home – 123 – respondents:

21% expect to spend additional nights in Manchester, with mean spend of £1,459 per group

4% expect to spend additional time elsewhere in the North West, with mean spend of £185 per group

9% are spending additional nights elsewhere in the UK, with mean spend of £925 per group.


17

3.5 The Event and Non-Mancunians Amongst the total sample of 468 respondents, 123 are visitors who are staying over (see section 4.3) and 210 live outside Manchester. This sample of ‘non-Mancunians’ – 333 respondents – is considered in this section.

For most of them – 91% – the event was the only (80%) or one of the main (11%) reasons for their visiting Manchester.

For 15% it was their first visit to the city: amongst those staying away from home 33% are first time visitors.

In all, 89% rated the quality of their visit as excellent (41%) or good (48%). No doubt as a consequence, 86% see it being very (65%) or quite (20%) likely that they will visit Manchester within the next three years. Of most significance is the finding that of those for whom this visit is their first to Manchester 69% are likely to return.

3.6 Summary 74% of respondents were staying at home

- their mean spend per person away from the venue is £16 per day

26% are staying away from home

- 64% are in hotels

- 17% are with friends and relatives

- they are spending an average of 2.6 days at the event

- they spend an average of £225 per person, while in the area but away from the event venue.


18

4. Economic Impact

4.1 The Impacts There are a number of economic impacts emanating from sports events. These can be short term in relation to activity in the run-up, during, and immediately after the event itself. Other impacts may be long term, around increased visitation levels in future and legacy benefits.

This research focuses on the short terms benefits (direct and indirect), in terms of expenditure, GVA and employment.

4.2 The Study Area For each event, the impact will be assessed at the level of three spatial areas:

Manchester (City) – being overseas visitor spend plus North West and UK visitors plus FINA Swimming Event Operations less displacement/ substitution;

North West region (within the administrative boundaries of the NWDA area of operation, excluding the city of Manchester) – being overseas visitor spend plus UK visitors plus FINA Swimming Event Operations less displacement/ substitution; and

Rest of UK – being overseas visitor spend plus FINA Swimming Event Operations less displacement/ substitution.

Issues related to displacement, substitution and visitor origins are discussed below in the section on methodology/ assumptions. The areas are shown below.


19

Figure 9 : Manchester World Sport 08: Area of Analysis

Source: Experian

The ability to measure impact at spatial levels is reliant on accurate responses in surveys and event delivery procurement data requests. For example it is important a survey respondent understands of the boundaries of the UK, the North West and primarily Manchester. To aid respondent understanding we provided maps during fieldwork. However, there will always be some caveats in relation to:

Some overseas visitors may not be aware of the difference between the administrative boundaries of Manchester City Council area or Greater Manchester;


20

Procurement / budget information available to may not always account accurately for procurement across the spatial areas and/ or may not count sub-contractor activity procured locally; and

The economic base of Manchester is much smaller than the North West hence it is more open to inaccuracies in modelling. That is, in making assumptions on the indirect and induced impacts we must identify the associated supply chain of event expenditure. In doing so, interpretation of employment and output data is more open to error at smaller geographical areas.


21

4.3 Resident Location of Spectators The figure below illustrates the percentage of attendance (by postcode) of survey respondents (event spectators). Although there is a concentration of local and regional visitors there was attendance from all over the United Kingdom. This does not include overseas spectators of which we estimate there were over 2,000.

Figure 10 : Manchester World Sport 08: 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m)

The map demonstrates high level of attendance from the North West represented by the red and dark orange colouring. Our survey results also illustrate high attendance from the North East and Midlands relative to the rest of the UK. Our data also suggests pockets of high attendance from the North East of Scotland and North Wales.


22

4.4 Economic Impact Methodology 4.4.1 Data Used A variety of data sources can be used to assess economic impact and to assess the impact of the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008:

Spectator Surveys;

Media Surveys – aggregating results from both cycling and swimming events to provide more accurate data;

Event income and expenditure information – provided by event organisers to help us understand the value and nature of procurement of goods and services associated with the event;

Information on competitors, delegates and officials – provided by individual event organisers to allow us to understand duration of stay, accommodation usage and likely levels of aggregate expenditure from these sources;

Information regarding supporting and associated events held before, during or after the World Swimming Championships.

4.4.2 Contributing Factors to Economic Impact The economic impact from each of the Manchester World Sport 08 events is derived from a number of routes including:

Pre-event visits, planning and volunteer activities;

Associated activities including other promotional events, gala dinners, fringe conferences/ meetings, etc;

Visits to experience the atmosphere and watch events, and associated expenditure; and

Visiting competitors, VIPs, media, delegates and officials and their associated expenditure.

Although we do not discount the impact of the first two areas, the focus of this research and by far the largest impacts are those generated by fans, spectators, corporate hospitality, media, competitors and delegate visitors to the event. Where possible we also measure the impact of bullet points one and two.


23

4.4.3 Measuring the Economic Impact The source of economic benefits and their conversion to net impacts is illustrated in the figure below.

Figure 11 : Assessing the Net Economic Impact

Source: Experian 4.4.4 Grossing Up – Gross Impact In order to calculate the gross economic impacts we ‘gross-up’ average expenditure data for event attendees of all types. For example if the spectator survey tells us that on average each spectator in a particular group (e.g. those who stay overnight in Manchester) spends an average trip-spend of £100 in Manchester1, we then multiply this £100 by the total population (e.g. 10,000 spectators) to arrive at an estimate of gross expenditure from visitors of £1million (£100 x 10,000).

4.4.5 Leakages Leakage accounts for expenditure which occurs outside the spatial areas identified in figure 1.1 above. For example, accounting for expenditure on goods/ services sold outside Manchester when assessing impacts at Manchester level, or expenditure on flights to the North West with an overseas air carrier where the region and UK does not derive any benefit from this expenditure.

1 Further information on average overnight stay and expenditure is contained in the Section 5.

Spectators

Gross Impacts

Delegates, Officials and Hospitality

Competitors, Media and Organisation

Minus non Additionality (Leakages, Deadweight, Displacement) =

Net Impacts

Plus Multiplier Effect = Total Net Impacts


24

Expenditure has been broken down by:

Accommodation (off-site, that is not at the event location itself);

Food and drink (on-site, that is at the event location, and off-site);

Shopping (off-site);

Travel to/ from Manchester (off-site);

Travel around Manchester (off-site);

Programme and merchandise (on-site);

Trips to other events, tourism attractions and entertainment (off-site); and

Other (on-site and off-site), a catchall for items not included above.

Developing this further, the final location of visitor spending will vary due to differences in supplier locations and where visitors stay or visit, as shown in Table 6 below.

Table 6: Leakage Assumptions – from Manchester

Area of expenditure

Leakage rate assumed

Rationale / Evidence

Accommodation 0% Almost all expenditure on accommodation will remain in the local spatial areas. It is difficult to apportion the extent to which, if any, is ‘lost’.

Food and Drink 0% Almost all expenditure on food and drink will remain in the local spatial areas. It is difficult to apportion the extent to which, if any, is ‘lost’.

Shopping 70% Only part of the total retail expenditure (the margin) will remain in Manchester ultimately. This will be reinvested in staff, buildings, etc that are contained locally.

Travel to/from Manchester

90% Much of the expenditure on travel to Manchester will be lost to the City and the North West region. There will only be marginal amounts which remain from flight costs, rail and car costs. International flights to/from Manchester for the event are assumed to have 100% leakage, as it is impossible to identify where transactions occurred and unlikely that any associated revenue remained in the Manchester economy.


25

Table 6: Leakage Assumptions – from Manchester

Area of expenditure

Leakage rate assumed


Travel around Manchester

0% Almost all expenditure on travel in the City will remain in the local economy. It is difficult to apportion the extent to which, if any, is ‘lost’.

Event Tickets Assumed 100% unless

otherwise stated

This varies for each event. However, for most events ticket income is re-invested as part of the expenditure required to deliver the event, thus leakage from Manchester is high. However, on the assumption that leakage is 100% we account for ticketing expenditure through analysis of expenditure on ‘event operations’.

Programme and merchandise

Assumed 70% unless otherwise

stated

Again this varies by event but in most cases official merchandise and programmes generate income to offset event delivery costs. Unless otherwise stated we count this expenditure in the same manner as ticketing income although we make an allowance for staffing expenditure.

Other events, tourist attractions and entertainment

0% Almost all expenditure on other entertainment is likely to remain in the local areas. It is difficult to apportion what extent, if any, may be ‘lost’.

Other 0% We assume ‘other’ expenditure is likely to remain in the local spatial areas.

Source: Experian. Ipsos MORI, 2008

4.4.6 Deadweight Our consultations confirm that in the absence of investment from stakeholders, this Event would not have proceeded in Manchester. In this sense deadweight can be estimated at zero – that is no proportion of economic activity associated with the event would have happened anyway.

However, we do ask spectators and visiting media questions on their motivation to visit. This information is then used to assess, by respondent type, the proportion of expenditure that may have occurred anyway. For example, we would anticipate a low percentage for overseas visitors and a higher rate for residents of Manchester.


26

Table 7: Deadweight Assumptions

Area of expenditure

Deadweight assumed


UK Resident Spectators

12.5% Survey results

Overseas Resident Spectators

15.5% Survey results

Media 14.5% Survey results Media, Athletes, Officials

Zero The event is their only reason for being in Manchester (i.e. working at / for event)

Event Organisation

Zero Consultations


Deadweight may be higher for UK spectators at the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m) due to the proactive action taken to generate a high number of community oriented spectator visits.

4.4.7 Displacement/ Substitution Displacement is the extent to which economic activity generated from the event is at the expense of economic activity elsewhere in the economy. Levels of displacement are likely to vary considerably between the Manchester World Sport 08 events as a result of the following:

Differences in event timings - expenditure at events held during weekends and evenings is more likely to displace other leisure spend in the city than expenditure at weekday daytime events.

Geographic reach – There is likely to be a positive relationship between the size of the spatial area being considered and the level of displacement experienced.

Nature of expenditure – Displacement levels differ according to the item of expenditure being bought. For example, food and drink expenditure can often have a high degree of displacement (people are likely to consume food regardless of whether or not they attend the event), while expenditure on programmes and merchandise are likely to have lower levels of displacement, as these tend to only be purchased by those who attend the event.

We have provided displacement allowances for UK and Overseas visitors taking account of the aggregate impact of the above considerations. We have also made an assessment of displacement for the organisation of events based on the potential for alternative investment of funding.


27

Where demand for the goods and services of one sector are switched to another, the overall net impact to the economy is negligible. When calculating the economic impact from the event, there is an argument for excluding local resident expenditure from the analysis on the assumption that they have substituted spend around the event for other spend elsewhere in the economy. We have therefore adopted a higher rate of displacement/ substitution for these visitors.

Table 8: Displacement Assumptions

Area of expenditure

Displacement assumed


UK Resident Spectators

25% Previous research, English Partnerships Additionality Guidance

Overseas Resident Spectators

Zero Previous research, English Partnerships Additionality Guidance. There will be no displacement alternative economic activity in the UK.

Overseas Media, Athletes, Officials

Zero Previous research, English Partnerships Additionality Guidance. There will be no displacement alternative economic activity in the UK.

UK Media 10% Previous research, English Partnerships Additionality Guidance. There will be some displacement of alternative economic activity in the UK by local media.

Event Organisation

10% Manchester, 25% North

West & 50% UK

Previous research. There is more likely to be business-oriented displacement at UK level than local level although it remains relatively low given the unique (international) nature of the event.


There is also an argument that overseas visitors or visitors from elsewhere in the UK (other than the North West), have timed their visit to Manchester around the event, but could have been planning on a trip to Manchester/ region in any case. This is very difficult to quantify and there is no evidence available to suggest that this may/ may not be the case. We have not made any further adjustments in this regard.


28

4.4.8 The Multiplier Effect We also account for additional impacts downstream from the event. We refer to these ‘knock-on’ effects as multiplier effects – the further economic activity (jobs, expenditure or income) associated with the additional local income, local supplier and longer term effects, the supplier2 and income3 multipliers. Identifying appropriate multipliers is more complex, depending on the extent to which businesses and their employees purchase goods and services in the Manchester economy.

In order to value these effects we have used Experian’s regional economic impact model across each sector where expenditure occurs in order to ‘convert’ this expenditure to employment. The table below shows the derived multiplier values arising from our event economic modelling for the 9th FINA World Swimming Championship 2008 (25m).

Table 9: Output Multiplier Value

Indirect Induced

Multiplier Values – Manchester 1.10 1.25

Multiplier Values – North West 1.29 1.60

Multiplier Values – UK 1.87 2.70

Source: Experian

4.5 Key Expenditure Assumptions / Data Sources 4.5.1 Operations Event expenditure assumptions have been based on information provided by event organisers. The analysis includes:

Allocation of ticketing and merchandise income;

Travel and accommodation;

Venue/training ground costs;

Promotional costs;

2 Also known as indirect impacts that arise because of purchases made as a result of the event and further purchases associated with linked firms along the supply chain. For example this may include purchase of advertising boards from an exhibition design company which then leads to further benefits to fabricators who make the boards. 3 Also known as induced impacts that arise through expenditure (household expenditure) by employees who derive income from the direct and indirect impacts of the event e.g. employees of the advertising company and the fabricators who then spend their salary in the economy.


29

We have consulted with the event organisers to assess the overall expenditure for the event, and, to assess the economic impact, where this expenditure occurs. In this case expenditure by location has been apportioned based on sector and location by the event organiser, therefore more robust than spatial apportionment by percentage estimate.

Table 10: 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m) Event Operations (£)

Manchester

Rest of North West

Rest of UK Other Total

Construction costs/Set up 1,194,000 14,000 766,000 340,000 2,314,000

Staff salaries4 15,000 25,000 309,000 349,000

Food & Drink 40,000 40,000

Paper, Printing & Publishing 76,000 4,000 80,000

Business Services 938,0005 61,000 280,000 11,000 1,290,000

Hotels and catering 244,000 244,000

Transport 199,000 30,000 229,000

Others 70,000 70,000

Total 2,706,000 100,000 1,389,000 421,000 4,616,000

Source: Based on information provided by the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 and adapted by Experian

The distribution of event income is a particularly important consideration to avoid double counting with spectator expenditure – therefore in most cases where spectator expenditure is also event income we count this impact through event expenditure. An example of this is event-ticketing income, which is expenditure by visitors and part of the income of the event.

The distribution of costs under budget headings varies by event but for this event examples are listed below:

Construction and Set-Up – Event staging including venue build;

Paper, Printing & Publishing – Printed Media, etc;

Business Services – Marketing, Project Management, Media Costs;

Hotels and catering –Accommodation and subsistence for technical staff (does not include athletes and VIPs); and

4 This does not include services which are included elsewhere. 5 £55,000 of expenditure is excluded and counted instead through competitor expenditure. This amount is removed from accommodation and subsistence costs to avoid any potential double counting. This and rounding creates a minor variance between the ‘public’ event budget and that used above.


30

Transport – Coach hire.

4.5.2 ‘Visitors’ The table below provides a summary of the number of individual visitors in attendance used as part of the analysis.

Table 11: Attendance Data (individual visitors) Competitors 607 Team and Technical Officials 450 Event staff & volunteers 500 VIPs & Guests 150 Media 220 Spectators 32,500 Other 600 Total 35,027 Source: The Events Group & Experian / Ipsos Mori (rounded) The constituent elements of the table above are discussed in more detail below.

4.5.3 Spectator Expenditure The assessment of spectator expenditure is based on information provided by event organisers (attendance) combined with the information from the spectator surveys. To generate the most accurate gross impact estimates we have split spectator spending into UK and overseas groupings. This allows us to take account of expenditure profile and visitation patterns but also ensures data is robust and based on suitable sample sizes. We gross up spectator expenditure data using the mean expenditure per person for each type of spectator as discussed above.

We estimate that there were 2,031 international visitors as a result of the event, and 30,469 UK visitors. These are visitors who we count for grossing up expenditure purposes excluding ticketing and programming where exact data is used.


31

4.5.4 Media Expenditure Our assessment of media expenditure is based on primary research from both the UCI Track Cycling World Championships and the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m). The research team undertook this additional primary research to provide better quality data for this group given that typically organisers had less data on stay and expenditure patterns for this group. Typically low survey response rates meant that cycling and swimming data was aggregated to ensure robust results. In terms of the entire economic impact of events ‘media6’ expenditure is a relatively small proportion of total economic impact.

There were 220 media personnel attending the event.

4.5.5 Delegates and Officials Our assessment of delegate and official expenditure is based on information provided by event organisers and publicly available tourism data. Of critical importance is the number of officials and delegates attending each event, these include:

Official Delegations e.g. international governing body representatives;

Representatives of national federations/ governing bodies;

Team management, officials, coaches and associated staff;

Event officials;

Other guests.

Typically event organisers can provide data on number of delegates / officials, their length of stay and their country of residence. As part of this research it has not been possible to gather primary research on expenditure and therefore publicly available data has been used based on the typical duration of a trip.

There were 600 delegates and officials attending the event (includes FINA guests).

6 Excluding broadcasting costs.


32

4.5.6 Competitors It is rare for competitors (elite) to be surveyed as part of an event evaluation primarily because their focus is inevitably winning the competitions that are part of the event. In order to analyse expenditure associated with competitors, we have used information provided by event organisers.

There were 607 competitors in the event.

4.5.7 Associated Event Activity There can also be associated off-site activities taking place around events. These ‘fringe’ events may not be included as part of the event organising budget but are unlikely to take place in the absence of the event in question. For example:

Gala dinners

Promotional events / spin-off events

Conferences / exhibitions

Volunteer activities

Charitable activities / fundraising

Event activities counted as part of the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 economic evaluation are:

Medical Conference & Extraordinary Congress;

Championship Welcome Reception;

LOC / British Swimming Lunch;

Event Closing Party;

FINA Gala Dinner;

SPEEDO 80th Birthday Party; and

Partner Social Programme.

Impacts generated from these activities are included under ‘Other’ in the subsequent analysis.


33

4.6 Economic Impact This section presents the economic impact of the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m). The results presented include:

‘gross impacts’ – that is all expenditure associated with the events.

‘net local direct impacts’ – that is all direct expenditure associated with the event discounted to allow apportionment to different spatial areas.

‘net direct impact’ – discounted at spatial area and accounting for deadweight and displacement.

‘Total net impact’ – adding the multiplier effect or indirect and induced effects associated with expenditure at each spatial area.

4.6.1 Gross Impacts: Spectators

All On-Site Expenditure Estimates of expenditure data are gathered from the surveys undertaken over the course of the events. The table below shows our estimate of on-site expenditure by spectators during the event.

Table 12 : On-site Expenditure (£)

Type of Impact Tickets7 Programmes Merchandise Food and

Drink

Travel to / from the

venue

Other Items Total

On-Site UK 323,438 15,000 60,328 80,438 148,078 11,883 639,164 On-Site Overseas 21,563 1,000 5,606 7,861 13,752 163 49,944 Total On-Site 345,000 16,000 65,934 88,298 161,830 12,045 689,108

Source: Experian

In total we estimate that around £690,000 was spent on-site by spectators and 93% of this was spent by UK visitors. At 50%, ticketing costs account for the greatest proportion of expenditure. While this is presented as gross expenditure above we exclude this later as it is accounted for within the operational budget for the event.

7 Tickets and programmes are presented as rounded actual income as data was available from the event organiser. This data allows a more accurate assessment than grossing up although we later discount ticketing income and count this impact through event organisation.


34

All Off-Site Expenditure The table below shows our estimate of off-site expenditure by spectators as part of their trip to the event.

Table 13: Off-site Expenditure (£) - Spectators

Type of Impact Accom Food and Drink

Shopping Travel to /

from Manchester

Travel around

Manchester

Other events,

attractions, etc

Other Total

Off-Site - Staying in Manchester - UK Expenditure

166,040 71,369 5,217 23,065 295 596 4 266,586

Off-Site - Staying in Manchester - Overseas Expenditure

114,419 62,861 2,612 27,123 483 348 0 207,847

Off-Site - Staying in North West - UK Expenditure

37,791 12,066 2,242 9,071 59 32 0 61,261

Off-Site - Staying in North West - Overseas Expenditure

12,687 5,178 547 5,197 47 9 0 23,664

Off-Site - Staying in Rest of UK - UK Expenditure

13,368 1,952 127 920 28 29 0 16,422

Off-Site - Staying in Rest of UK - Overseas Expenditure

33,658 6,283 232 3,951 167 61 0 44,351

Off-Site - Staying at Home 0 150,014 152,195 64,950 2,666 7,270 969 378,065

Other Off-Site - Manchester 182,554 152,450 26,625 0 11,329 11,965 1,761 386,683

Other Off-Site - North West 30,243 18,761 8,327 0 1,640 474 52 59,496

Other Off-Site – UK 256,319 72,727 11,270 0 18,653 9,976 0 368,945 Total Off-Site 847,079 553,660 209,392 134,277 35,366 30,761 2,786 1,813,321Source: Experian

In total around £1.8m was spent off-site by spectators. The largest areas of expenditure were on accommodation and retail expenditure by visitors.


35

4.6.2 Other Groups: On-Site Expenditure (Media Only) The table below shows our estimate of on-site expenditure by media during the event. We have assumed that hospitality, officials and competitors / athletes will have no on-site expenditure given the nature of their attendance.

Table 14: On-site Expenditure (£)

Type of Impact Tickets Programmes Merchandise Food and

Drink

Travel to / from the

venue

Other Items Total

On-Site UK 0 0 118 368 712 0 1,197

On-Site Overseas 0 0 937 1,613 733 867 4,150

Total On-Site 0 0 1,054 1,981 1,445 867 5,347

Source: Experian

Off-Site Expenditure Off-site expenditure by competitors /athletes, hospitality, delegates and media attendees is shown in the table below.

Table 15: Gross Off-site Expenditure (£) - Manchester8

Type of Impact Accom9 Food and Drink

Shopping

Travel to / from

Manchester

Travel around

Manchester

Other events,

attractions, etc

Other Total

Competitors 1,000,693 140,033 24,456 11,560 10,406 10,991 1,617 1,199,756 Corporate Hospitality n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Officials / Delegates 359,371 138,418 24,174 11,426 10,286 10,864 1,279 555,818

Media10 33,737 5,647 173 841 37 7 132 40,574

Total 1,393,801 284,098 48,803 23,827 20,729 21,862 3,028 1,796,148

Source: Experian

The largest off-site impact was generated by the competitors and event officials /delegates, with expenditure collectively amounting to £1,755,000.

8 These estimates are based on information provided by the Event Organisers. Based on our review of this and where accommodation is provided, we assume that 100% of gross expenditure is at the Manchester level. 9 Accommodation for competitors and officials counted from data provided by the event organiser and is therefore accurate. ’Other data is again grossed up from spend per head data. There is some minor leakage into the North West from Manchester in accommodation expenditure e.g. for those staying in the Lowry (just in Salford) although this is likely to be around 2% or lower. 10 Includes Media staying at home.


36

4.6.3 Event Delivery Organisation costs for the Event were reported as £4,616,000, and of this amount around 57% was spent in Manchester.

4.6.4 Total Gross Expenditure The table below summarises the total gross expenditure associated with the Event.

Table 16 : Total Expenditure

Total (£)

Spectators (or Fans) 2,502,429 Delegates / Officials 555,818 Media 45,921 Corporate Hospitality 0 Competitors 1,199,756 Event Organisation 4,616,000 Other 234,325 Total 9,154,249 Source: Experian The total gross impact from the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m) is over £9.15m. £2.5 million or 27% of this is expenditure is by spectators attending the Event, and £4.6 million or 50% on organisation of the Event itself.

4.7 Net Impacts The net impacts of the event are the economic impacts after the effects of leakage, deadweight, and displacement/ substitution have been accounted for.


37

4.7.1 Net Local Impact (After Leakages) The table below shows the impact (expenditure) associated with the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 following leakages from the local economy.

Table 17: Net Local Impact (£) - Leakage

Manchester Only

The Rest of the North

West Other UK Total

Spectators (or Fans) £1,292,057 £123,800 £417,195 £1,833,052

Delegates / Officials £528,614 £0 £0 £528,614

Media and Broadcasters £42,335 £1,619 £352 £44,305

Corporate Hospitality £0 £0 £0 £0

Competitors / Athletes £1,172,233 £0 £0 £1,172,233

Event Organisation £2,706,000 £100,000 £1,389,000 £4,195,000

Other Impacts £163,807 £3,510 £52,233 £219,550

Total £5,905,046 £228,928 £1,858,780 £7,992,754 Source: Experian The impact of leakage results in a reduction to just under £8 million of expenditure, £5.9 million or 75% of which is in Manchester.


38

4.7.2 Net Impacts i.e. After Deadweight – Expenditure The next adjustment is to account for expenditure that would have happened anyway.

Table 18: Net Local Impact (£) - Deadweight

Manchester Only


West Other UK Total

Spectators (or Fans) £1,124,377 £107,767 £363,827 £1,595,970

Delegates / Officials £527,335 £0 £0 £527,335

Media and Broadcasters £6,196 £,384 £01 £7,880



Event Organisation £2,706,000 £100,000 £1,389,000 £4,195,000

Other Impacts* £163,807 £3,510 £48,747 £216,064

Total £5,728,429 £212,660 £1,801,875 £7,742,964 Source: Experian The nature of the event (i.e. its sporting importance) means that the levels of spectator deadweight are low. Our consultations suggest that without financial support from event funders the event would not have gone ahead, meaning zero deadweight for the other groups.


39

4.7.3 Net Impacts i.e. After Displacement/ Substitution - Expenditure The table below shows the impact of the event after displacement/ substitution effects (i.e. economic activity ‘lost’ because of the Event).

Table 19: Net Local Impact (£) – Displacement/ Substitution

Manchester Only


West Other UK Total

Spectators (or Fans) £886,750 £84,755 £281,454 £1,252,959 Delegates / Officials £527,335 £0 £0 £527,335 Media and Broadcasters £34,676 £1,324 £271 £36,270



Event Organisation £2,706,000 £100,000 £1,389,000 £4,195,000 Other Impacts* £163,807 £3,510 £48,747 £216,064

Total £5,489,282 £189,588 £1,719,472 £7,398,343 Source: Experian

Following these adjustments, the total net impact of the event is £7.4 million at the UK level, comprised of £5.5 million in the Manchester, and additional amounts in the rest of the North West (£0.19 million) and the rest of the UK (£1.7 million).


40

4.7.4 Total Net Impacts i.e. the Multiplier Effects - Expenditure We model the type (sector) and location of expenditure to estimate the total net impacts and therefore the impacts are not shown by group. The table below shows the total net impact of the Event i.e. the impact of the Championships including the indirect and induced impacts on the Manchester, North West and UK economies.

Table 20: Total Net Impact (£) - Multipliers

Manchester Only


West Other UK Total

Total Direct 5,489,282 189,588 1,719,472 7,398,343 Total Indirect 527,683 54,078 1,502,326 2,084,087 Total Induced 871,363 58,949 1,425,830 2,356,142

Total Net Impact 6,888,327 302,616 4,647,628 11,838,571 Source: Experian The total net impact including the multiplier effects is £11.8 million at the UK level, of which £6.9 million is contained in Manchester. Further impacts of £0.3million and £4.6 million were generated in the rest of the North West and UK economies.


41

4.8 Equivalent Employment We also assess the level of Full Time Equivalents (fte) employment and GVA supported by the additional expenditure generated by the Event. From the surveys, we have apportioned this aggregate spend across the key sectors benefiting from the Event – ‘food and drink’; ‘retail’, ‘hotels and catering’, transport’ and ‘business services’ (for example marketing, advertising).

The table below summarises the additional FTE jobs and GVA supported by the Event-expenditure.

Table 21: Total Net Impact

Manchester Only


West Other UK Total

Total Direct FTE Employment 117 4 27 149

Total Indirect FTE Employment 7 1 19 27

Total Induced FTE Employment 16 1 20 38

Total FTE Employment 141 6 67 213

Total GVA 2,665,155 98,493 811,939 3,575,588 Source: Experian On account of the boost to the economy from the Event, an equivalent of 213 fte jobs are supported with more than half being in the Manchester economy. This equates to a total of £2.7 million of GVA in the Manchester economy and £3.6 million at the UK level.

4.9 Longer Term Impacts In terms of the longer term impacts emanating from the Event, we cannot model these on account of uncertainties in terms of future tourism activity and behaviour.

Previous research on events suggests that an event has a positive impact on a region from increased media recognition, exposure and brand recognition as a result of hosting an event. For example, Manchester, post 2002 Commonwealth Games, had greater recognition in the European Cities Monitor (Cushman & Wakefield). The Manchester World Sport 08 events are also an important factor in ensuring Manchester remains at the forefront of international ‘sporting cities’11.

11 The Sports Business – ‘The Ultimate Sport City’ .


42

A second source of long term impact is the extent to which people attending an event return at a later date. Most previous research cannot quantify these impacts however, from the survey we know that 88% of UK visitors and 66% of overseas visitors are ‘very or quite’ likely to visit Manchester again in the next three years. If we use a conservative estimate that UK residents will be day trip only visitors, in total UK and overseas visitors are likely to spend around a further £1.1 million in Manchester over the next three years. 11% of UK visitors to Manchester were on their first visit while 62% of international visitors were on their first trip to the City.

4.10 Summary The 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m) was the second event held under the Manchester World Sport 08 series of six international sports events hosted in the city. It was held at the Manchester Evening News Arena between 9th and 13th April 2008 and 32,500 individual spectators attended.

The results of this economic impact analysis indicate that this event contributed to additional economic activity in the short term, predominantly at the Manchester city level of analysis. The sources of this beneficial activity are:

Spectators – 32, 500 visitors

Media Personnel – 220 visitors

Delegates, Officials, Guests – 600 visitors

Competitors / Athletes – 607 visitors

4.11 The Impact From the benefits above, we assessed the impact of the Event, looking at actual average expenditure drawing on the results of spectator and media surveys over the course of the Event.

We then adjust the estimates of gross expenditure to account for the deadweight or reference case (the level of expenditure that could occur regardless of the Event happening) leakage (our assessment of the benefits that are outside of the target area), displacement/ substitution (our estimate of the proportions of benefits that are at the expense of activity elsewhere) and multiplier effects (the additional economic activity as a result of additional local income and supplier effects.


43

4.11.1 Key Findings – Short Term The main source of benefit is from spectators attending the Event. There was £0.69million of event-related expenditure on-site on tickets, programmes, food and drink and merchandise and travel to/ from the Event. We include local travel expenditure here as it relates to the Event, though it could be accounted for in estimates of off-site expenditure.

Off-site, this group spent an additional £1.8million.

The table below summarises the gross on-site and off-site expenditure by each source. It shows that the gross expenditure associated with the event is just under £4.3 million.

Table 22: Summary of Gross Expenditure (£)

Source of Benefit On-site Off-site Spectators 689,108 1,813,321 Media 5,347 40,574 Competitors - 1,199,756 Corporate - n/a Officials/ Delegates - 555,818

TOTAL 694,455 3,609,469 Source: Experian Expenditure on delivering and operating the Event totals just over £4.61 million across items such as set-up costs, salaries, hotels/ catering and transport costs etc.

We then adjust this expenditure to account for deadweight, displacement, and leakage as well as to reflect the indirect and induced impacts at the host areas (Manchester, the region (North West) and UK levels:

The total net direct impact from the Event is £7.4 million;

The total net indirect impact from the Event is £2.1 million;

The total net induced impact from the Event is £2.4 million.

This means that the total net expenditure associated with the Event is £11.8 million.

Adjusting this figure further, using our estimates of ‘productivity and output per fte employee per sector’, the Event supports a total of 213 fte jobs and £3.6 million of Gross Value Added (GVA).


44

The table below summarises the total net direct impact of the 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m) across each area of the analysis. Over half of the total is contained in the host area.

Table 23: 9th FINA World Swimming Championships 2008 (25m) Net Impact by Area

Net Impact Manchester North West UK TOTAL Expenditure (%) £6.9m (58%) £0.3m (3%) £4.6m (39%) £11.8m FTE Jobs 141 6 67 213 GVA £2.7m £0.1m £0.8m £3.6m Source: Experian 4.11.2 Key Findings – Long Term In the long term we estimate that as a result of attending the Event, and based on spectators’ intentions to return to the area, the long term impacts could be at least £1.1 million of gross expenditure.


45

5. MWS ’08 Campaign and the Event

5.1 This event Respondents were asked how they found out about the events. Interviewers recorded their first response, and then any other responses. The first response is likely to be the medium with the most ‘cut-through’. The main way of finding out about this event was through sports clubs/organisations (34%), word of mouth (15%) and the internet (14%).

Figure 12 : How first found out about this event Base : All main mentions – 468

Q20. How did you find out about the event?

34%

15%

14%

10%

5%

3%

3%

5%

2%

2%

1%

1%

Through sportsclubs/organisers

Word of mouth

Internet

National TV

Posters/billboards

Specialist sport media

First mention

Other mentions


46

5.2 MWS ‘08 A third – 33% – had heard of Manchester World Sport 08, and nine out of ten were aware of at least one component of the offer.

Figure 13 : MWS ’08 events Base : All – 468

Q22. Did you know that Manchester is hosting/has hosted the following events this year?

71%

43%

62%

67%

24%

90%

7%

7%

8%

13%

5%

27%

UCI World Track CyclingChampionships

Paralympic World Cup

UEFA Cup Final 2008

BUPA Great ManchesterRun

Hi-Tec World SquashChampionships

Any event

AwareExpect to go/have been

After being shown advertising material for Manchester World Sport 08, a third saw it either definitely (24%) or probably (11%).

Figure 14 : MWS ’08 events Base : All – 468

24%

11%

60%

5%

Yes, definitely

Yes, I think so

No

Not stated

5.3 Summary The main event information sources are :

- through sports clubs/organisations, word of mouth and the internet

33% are aware of MWS ’08.

nine out of ten were aware of at least once component offer.

Appendices

Statistical Reliability and Presentation of Data

The Questionnaire

A. Statistical Reliability and Presentation of Data

A.1 Presentation and Interpretation of Data

Where percentages do not sum to 100, this may be due to computer rounding, the exclusion of “don’t know” categories, or multiple answers. Throughout this volume, an asterisk (*) denotes any value of less than half a per cent, but greater than zero.

A.2 Statistical Reliability A sample of 468, rather than the entire population, has been interviewed for this survey. All results are therefore subject to sampling tolerances, which means that not all differences in findings are statistically significant. The respondents to the questionnaire are only samples of the total “population”, so we cannot be certain that the figures obtained are exactly those we would have if everybody had been interviewed (the “true” values). We can, however, predict the variation between the sample results and the “true” values from a knowledge of the size of the samples on which the results are based and the number of times that a particular answer is given. The confidence with which we can make this prediction is usually chosen to be 95% - that is, the chances are 95 in 100 that the “true” value will fall within a specified range. The table below illustrates the predicted ranges for different sample sizes and percentage results at the “95% confidence interval”.

Approximate sampling tolerances applicable to percentages at or near these levels

10% or 90% 30% or 70% 50%

Interviews 100 6 9 10 300 3 5 6 468 3 4 5 500 3 4 4 1000 2 3 3

Source: Ipsos MORI North

For example, with a sample of 468 where 30% give a particular answer, the chances are 19 in 20 that the “true” value (which would have been obtained if the whole population had been interviewed) will fall within the range of plus or minus 5 percentage points from the sample result.

When results are compared between separate groups within a sample, different results may be obtained. The difference may be “real”, or it may occur by chance (because not everyone in the population has been interviewed). To test if the difference is a real one – i.e. if it is “statistically significant”, we again have to know the size of the samples, the percentage giving a certain answer and the degree of confidence chosen. If we assume “95% confidence interval”, the differences between the two sample results must be greater than the values given in the table overleaf:

Differences required for significance at or near these percentage levels

10% or 90% 30% or 70% 50%

Size of the samples compared 100 and 100 8 13 14 100 and 200 7 11 12 100 and 300 7 10 11 100 and 400 7 10 11 100 and 500 7 10 11 500 and 500 4 6 6

Source: Ipsos MORI North

manchester world sport 08 : the economic · 1.1 background: manchester world sport 08 manchester...

Documents