positioning and potentials of greenland, iceland and the faroe … · 2012. 11. 22. · iceland »...

1

Positioning and potentials of Greenland, Iceland

and the Faroe Islands on the German holiday

travel market

Report for

October 31, 2012

Ulf Sonntag, NIT/FUR

2

Introduction

» NATA commissioned this report to find out about the position and potentials of the three North Atlantic holiday

destinations Faroe Islands, Greenland and Iceland on the German holiday travel market.

» The central aim is to get a thorough and complete picture on the volume, the structure, the attitudes and

developments of the market potential in Germany, in order to provide a sound basis for the future strategic

planning of the three destinations concerning their marketing efforts, product development and communication on

this market.

» Basis for the analyses in this report is the German Reiseanalyse 2012, the most established syndicated study on

holiday travel demand in Germany.

» The results displayed in this report rely on two different surveys within the Reiseanalyse 2012:

RA 2012 face-to-face

field time: January 2012; 7,703 personal interviews;

representative for the German-speaking population

14+ years in Germany

» General market overview and trends

» Holiday trips to North-Western Europe:

developments and travel behaviour

» Development of volume and structure of the

potential guests to Iceland/Greenland*

» Attitudes and interests of potential guests to

Iceland/Greenland*

» Competition of Iceland/Greenland* with other

destinations in the mind of the potential guest

» Focus: nature holidays

RA online 5/2012

field time: May 2012; 2,515 online interviews;

representative for the German-speaking population

14-70 years in Germany

» Awareness, interest and experience with Faroe

Islands, Greenland and Iceland in Germany

» Structure and Internet use of prospective travellers

to the Faroe Islands, Greenland and Iceland

» Image of the Faroe Islands, Greenland and

Iceland

» Competition of the Faroe Islands, Greenland and

Iceland with other Nordic destinations

» Reasons against travelling to Iceland in the low

seasons

* As NATA commissioned this report after the completion of the RA 2012 face-to-face survey, it was not possible to include the

Faroe Islands explicitly in this survey. Still, from the overlapping of potential guests (chart 26) it is legitimate to assume that more

than 60% of the potential Faroe Islands guests are covered by the joint potential of Iceland/Greenland.

3

» This report on “Positioning and potentials for

Greenland, Iceland and Faroe Islands on the

German market” displays a lot of information and

conclusions about the joint and individual positions

and potentials of the three destinations on the

German market. At least to our knowledge, this

information has never before been available in this

detail for the German market.

» In a generally very stable holiday market with a quite

positive outlook for the future, the development of

the demand for North-Western European

destinations has also been very stable in the past.

On the other hand, the interest for many of these

destinations, among them Iceland/Greenland has

increased significantly in recent years.

» By actual demand, Greenland, Iceland and Faroe

Islands are all very small destinations in the German

holiday market. Within the three destinations, Iceland

has a quite dominating position. On the other hand,

the interest in each of the destinations is huge

compared to the actual demand. The overlapping of

interests for the three destinations is substantial, as

is the overlapping with other Nordic and Non-Nordic

destinations.

» The potential guests for the three destinations do not

differ very much from each other. Comparing the

potential guests to Iceland/Greenland with the

population, you find a high significance of younger

(up to 39 years) and mature persons (40-59 years)

without kids, with a comparatively high social status.

» These results are further refined by the analysis of

the potential guests according to the Sinus-Milieus.

These help to characterise the potential guests as

“explorative” and “curious”.

» The analysis of the attitudes, motivations and

interests of the potential guests give important hints

what topics are well-suited to address these persons

successfully. They also already show the huge

importance of nature and nature-related aspects in a

holiday trip.

» These findings are confirmed and refined by the

results of the image analysis of the three holiday

destinations in the German minds and the potential

guests’ product requirements concerning a nature

holiday.

» The competition analysis shows a very fierce

competition of the three destinations within the

Nordic destinations as well as within worldwide

holiday destinations.

» Altogether these findings show a positive

outlook for all three destinations on the German

holiday travel market. All the information

provided in this report can help Greenland,

Iceland and the Faroe Islands to successfully

compete for the German holiday traveller!

General summary of findings

4

Outline: Reiseanalyse 2012 report for NATA

1. General Market Situation and Trends page 5

2. Nordic Destinations on the German Holiday Market page 14

3. Market Potentials of Greenland/Iceland/Faroe Islands in Detail page 22

3.1 Volume page 22

3.2 Socio-demographic structure page 30

3.3 Developments and Sinus-Milieus page 41

3.4 Holiday related attitudes, motivations and interests page 51

4. Image of Greenland/Iceland/Faroe Islands page 57

5. Focus: Nature Holiday – Product Requirements page 66

6. Competitive situation page 73

7. Reasons against Iceland in the Low Season page 80

8. Reiseanalyse 2012: Study profile page 84

5

Holiday travel propensity (holidays = 5+ days)

Stable demand on high level

52%

78%

72% 76%

74% 76%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

54 64 74 84 95 96 2000 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011

» 2011 was a good year for

travelling. The number of

German holiday makers and

their holiday expenditure

has never been higher than

in the past year.

» The holiday travel

propensity reached more

than 76%. This is the

proportion of the population

(70.3 million people: 14+

years, German-speaking in

private households) which

has undertaken at least one

holiday trip of 5 days and

more.

» This figure has been very

stable over the last 15

years.

Share (in % of the population), who went on at least one holiday trip (5+ days) per year

Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years; until 1990 only West Germany;

until 2009 only Germans 14+ years

Key figures of tourism demand 2010 2011

Population14+ (million) 70.5 70.3

Travel propensity (in % of population) 75.7 76.2

Travellers (million) 53.4 53.6

Holiday trips (million) 69.5 69.5

Holiday travel expenditure (billion €) 58.7 60.3

1. General market situation and trends

6

Holiday destinations 1954 until 2011: In the past 15 years quite stable

on today‘s level of 69% international and 31% domestic holidays

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1954 62 66 70 74 78 82 86 90 94 98 2000 2005 2008

%

» Continuous increase of

international travel until

1989.

» A short boom of domestic

trips shortly after the

reunification.

» Since then stagnation

around the level of

30% domestic vs.

70% international holidays.

» The travel year 2011 again

fits perfectly in this scheme

with a market share of

69% international trips vs.

31% domestic.

International: 69%

Domestic: 31%

2011

Basis: All holiday trips (5+ days) of the German-speaking population 14+ years;

until 1990 only West Germany; until 2009 only Germans 14+ years

German

reunification


7

Holiday destinations 2011:

about 1/3 Germany, 1/3 Mediterranean, 1/3 „Rest of the World“

» With a market share of

approximately one third of

all holiday trips, Germany

remains the most popular

holiday destination. A

further third of holiday trips

2011 led to destinations

around the Mediterranean,

the last third to other

destinations around the

world.

» This distribution has proven

very stable over the years.

» Significant changes are not

to be expected for the near

future.

» Market share of North-West

Europe of around 5%.

» Decrease for North-West

Europe 1995-2005. Since

then small increase.

Explanation:

Alps = Regions of the Alps in CH, AT, FR, IT und DE

North-West Europe = NO, SE, FI, DK, IE, UK, IS, GL


until 2009 only Germans.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Germany Mediterranean Alps North-WestEurope

EasternEurope

Long Haul

1995

2000

2005

2011


8

Holiday landscape preferences: 20% prefer Sea/Coast and 16%

Islands in the NORTH – stable over the past 20 years

» Sea/Coast and Islands in the

SOUTH are the most

preferred holiday landscapes

of the Germans, when asked

in what kind of landscape

they want to spend their

holidays.

» Sea/Coast and Islands in the

NORTH are preferred by

20% and 16% of the

population.

» The figures for Sea/Coast

and Islands in the NORTH

remained stable over the

past 20 years.

» Big increases for Sea/Coast

and Islands in the SOUTH,

Lakes, Plains and Cities.

» Decreases for Hills and

Mountains.

46%

41%

26%

20% 17% 16% 16%

14% 13% 11%

1987

2008

Basis: German population 14+ years

Question: Which of the following landscapes/sceneries do you prefer for a holiday?


9

13%

21%

7%

8%

44%

14%

28%

15%

7%

35%

Transport carrierdirectly

Accommodationdirectly

Internet portal

Tour operatordirectly

Travel agency

Holiday organisation and booking: Structural change!

» Holiday makers more

frequently use the rising

number of convenient options

for direct bookings, especially

via Internet: As a result, tour

packages and travel agencies

have lost market shares in the

past years, but are still the

most important organisation

form and booking channel by

far.

» Accommodation providers and

Internet portals have increased

their market share.

17%

6%

11%

27%

48%

16%

5%

13%

33%

43%

No advance booking

Other servicesseparately

Ticket separately

Accommodationseparately

(Modular) tourpackages

2011

2005

Holiday organisation („how?“) Booking channels („where?“)

Basis: Holiday trips (5+ days) of the German-speaking

population 14+ yrs., 2005 only Germans

Basis: Holiday trips (5+ days) with advance booking of

the German-speaking population 14+ yrs., 2005 only

Germans


10

3/4 of the German population with Internet access –

More than three times as many as 2000

» The share of the population

with Internet access (at

home, at work or elsewhere)

has increased dramatically

over the past decade.

» Since 2000, Internet access

has more than tripled from

22% of the population to

73% in January 2012.

» Nowadays, the Internet is of

very high importance when

it comes to holiday travel

decision making,

information and booking.

22%

39%

47%

54%

62%

68%

73%

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years; until 2010 only Germans 14+ years


11

10

29

45

51 55

2

11

24

29 33

2000 2004 2008 2010 2012

39

45

16

23

2010 2012

Growing importance of the Internet concerning

holiday information and booking

in %

Internet for information

concerning holiday trips

therein

within the last 12 months

Internet for booking of

holiday trips

therein

within the last 12 months

» 55% of the population

already used the Internet for

holiday information. Since

2000, this figure grew by

factor 5. More than 80% of

these persons looked for

holiday information online

within the last year.

» 33% of the population

already used the Internet to

book holiday travel services

at least once in their life.

In 2000, this was still an

absolute novelty.

» Two thirds of the Internet

bookers also booked online

during the last year.



12

2012 to be another good year for the German holiday market

58% 58%

32% 32%

11% 11%

2011 2012

NO

undecided

YES

Decision status

concerning going on

holiday trips 2012

(Status: January 2012)

» In 2012, the ‘wanderlust’ in

Germany is at the same level

as last year. Many have

concrete travel plans.

» Most are planning with the

same holiday budget as the

year before, 12% want to

spend even more.

» Nevertheless, the outlook on

the economic situation has

become somewhat less

optimistic.

» However, travel plans are

rather made on the basis of

the personal economic

situation and these figures

have remained stable

compared to the previous year.

=

=

=

Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years


13

General long-term trends on the German market until 2020

Volume of holiday travel: Stability with some growth potentials and risks

Destinations: Larger regions have well-defined positions

Leeway for countries/destinations

Duration: Shorter

Seasonality: Declining

Expenditure: Higher price consciousness

Accommodation: Higher quality

Multi-optional consumer: Increasing number of destinations and holiday forms in the relevant set

Combination of more types of holiday in a single trip

Demographic change: More seniors are travelling more

But of course there are more target groups around

Holiday motivation: Stable basic holiday motivation

With higher expectations on fulfillment

Information and decision: Parallel use of many information sources

Private information is replacing professional information


14

1. General Market Situation and Trends

2. Nordic Destinations on the German Holiday Market

3. Market Potentials of Greenland/Iceland/Faroe Islands in Detail

4. Image of Greenland/Iceland/Faroe Islands

5. Focus: Nature Holiday – Product Requirements

6. Competitive situation

7. Reasons against Iceland in the Low Season

8. Reiseanalyse 2012: Study profile

15

About 5% joint market share of North-West European destinations:

Quite stable during the past decade

» 4.6% of all holiday trips

2011 (5+ days) of the

German population went to

North-West Europe

(Finland, Sweden,

Denmark, Norway, UK,

Ireland, Iceland, Greenland)

» This equals around 3.2

million holiday trips.

» During the last 10 years the

market share of North-West

Europe has been quite

stable on a level between

4% and 5%.

3,9%

4,4% 4,2%

4,7% 4,8% 4,6%

2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011

Accumulated market share of North-West European

Destinations (Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, UK, Ireland,

Iceland, Greenland) of all German holiday trips (5+days)


until 1990 only West Germany; until 2009 only Germans 14+ years

2. Nordic destinations on the German holiday market

16

Holiday trips

in North-West

Europe 2011

Importance of holiday trip

» 74% main holiday trip

» 26% additional holiday trip

* Average of all holiday trips 2011

[3.2 million]

Seasonality

» 15% spring; 58% summer;

22% autumn; 6% winter

Duration

» 11.8 days (Ø: 12.4 days*)

Expenditure per person

» 872 € (Ø: 868 €*)

Organisation

» 43% accommodation separately

» 33% package/modular

» 19% ticket separately

» 16% no advance bookings

Means of transport

» 58% car etc.

» 21% plane

» 10% bus

» 10% ship

Accommodation

» 44% holiday apartment/house

» 29% hotel/inn/pension

» 9% camping

» 5% cruise ship

Type of holiday

» 32% nature holiday

» 28% holiday to relax

» 27% adventure/experience holiday

» 27% family holiday

» 20% activity holiday

Holiday trips 2011 to North-West European destinations: Rather high

seasonality, quite big importance of nature and adventure holidays.

Basis: All holiday trips (5+ days) 2011 of the German-speaking population 14+ years

to 8 North-West European destinations [see Chart 15]


17

Travellers to North-West Europe last 3 years: Denmark and UK are

still the biggest destinations despite decreases in recent years

0,3%

0,6%

1,1%

2,4%

2,9%

3,2%

5,5%

Iceland/Greenland

Finland

Ireland

Sweden

Norway

UK

Denmark

2012

1996

» For the German population,

Denmark is the most important

destination in North-West

Europe, followed by UK,

Norway and Sweden.

» 1% or less of the German

population visited Ireland,

Finland and Iceland/Greenland

within the last 3 years.

» Within the North-West Europe

destinations, there have been

some dramatic changes in

Germany demand since 1996.

» UK, Finland and Denmark lost

a lot of German tourists.

» Norway and Iceland/Greenland

had significant increases on

the German market.

- 12%

- 33%

+ 21%

- 8%

- 8%

- 33%

+ 50%

Travellers last 3 years; Set of 59 destinations abroad.


Explanation:

Change 1996 2012 in %


18

Nordic destinations: Almost 40% have ever been to “the North”.

Most popular are Sweden and Norway.

0.4%

2%

4%

12%

14%

15%

15%

17%

26%

34%

Greenland

Faroe Islands

Iceland

Wales

Finland

Ireland

Canada

Scotland

Norway

Sweden

» 39% of the German population

have been to at least one of

these ten Nordic destinations

at least once in their life.

» Within these all-time travellers

to Nordic destinations, Sweden

is by far the most popular

destination (34% have been

there), followed by Norway

(26%).

» Scotland, Canada, Ireland,

Finland and Wales follow, all

on a similar level of 12% to

17%.

» Of the all-time Nordic visitors,

4% have ever been to Iceland,

2% to the Faroe Islands and

0.4% to Greenland.

39% of the German population have

been at least to one of these ten

Nordic destinations at least once in

their life (= 100%)

Source: RA online 5/2012

Basis: German-speaking population 14-70 years;

All-time travellers to 10 Nordic destinations


19

4%

6%

7%

9%

11%

12%

14%

Iceland/Greenland

Finland

Ireland

UK

Sweden

Norway

Denmark

2012

1996

- 1%

+ 22%

+ 29%

-14%

+ 9%

+ 17%

+ 34%

Potential travellers to North-West Europe within the next 3 years:

Huge potentials compared to the actual travellers’ figures

» The figures of potential

travellers to North-West

Europe (“definitely planning”

plus “generally considering” to

visit destination within the next

3 years) are much higher than

the numbers of travellers in the

last 3 years There is space

for marketing.

» Denmark’s potential is 2.5x

bigger than its actual market

share.

» The “smaller” the destination,

the bigger this factor: The

potential for Iceland/Greenland

is 13x higher than the actual

market share.

» With the exception of UK and

Denmark, the potential for all

destinations grew significantly

since 1996.

Potential travellers next 3 years (“definitely planning” plus “generally considering”);

Set of 59 destinations abroad.


Explanation:

Change 1996 2012 in %


20

7%

8%

17%

18%

21%

36%

37%

39%

40%

44%

Faroe Islands

Greenland

Wales

Finland

Iceland

Norway

Sweden

Ireland

Scotland

Canada

80% of the German population

would like to go to at least one of

these ten Nordic destinations in the

next 5 years (= 100%)

Nordic destinations: 80% would like to go “North”. Iceland more

popular than Finland and Wales. Greenland in front of Faroe Islands.



these ten Nordic destinations in

the next 5 years.

» Within this potential, Canada is

the most popular destination

(44% would like to go there).

» Scotland, Ireland, Sweden and

Norway follow, all on a similar

level of 36% to 40%.

» With 21% all the potential Nordic

guests, Iceland is more popular

than Finland and Wales.

» 8% would like to go to

Greenland, 7% to Faroe Islands.

» The contrast in ranking of the

actual and the potential guests is

quite striking. This highlights

today’s advantages of some

destinations in terms of

perceived attractiveness.



Prospective travellers to 10 Nordic destinations

Explanation: The differing volume figures of the potentials in the two surveys

(Chart 19 and 20) are intentional and due to different questions and competitive sets.


21

Summary

» Destinations in North-West Europe (Finland,

Sweden, Denmark, Norway, UK, Ireland, Iceland,

Greenland) attracted about 5% of all holiday trips

2011 (5+days) of the German population.

» This market share has remained rather stable over

the past decade.

» The holiday travel behaviour to North-Western

Europe is characterised by a rather high seasonality

and a quite big importance of nature and

adventure/experience holidays.

» In both rankings of the actual demand for the North-

Western European and Nordic destinations we see

Iceland, the Faroe Islands and Greenland on the last

places.

» The ranking of North-Western European destinations

is led by Denmark, UK and Norway.

» The ranking of Nordic destinations is led by Sweden,

Norway and Scotland.

» Since 2006, only Norway and Iceland/Greenland

improved their actual market share, the other five

North-Western European destinations lost.

» The look at the market potentials of the North-

Western European and Nordic destinations show

much higher figures than for the actual demand.

» This indicates space for marketing for each of the

destinations.

» The ratio of market share to market potential varies

very much with the “size” of the destination on the

German market: Denmark’s potential is 2.5x bigger

than its actual market share. The potential for

Iceland/Greenland is 13x higher than the actual

market share.

» The market potential ranking of North-Western

European destinations shows Iceland/Greenland on

the last place. The ranking is led by Denmark,

Norway and Sweden.

» The market potential ranking of the Nordic

destinations shows a more differentiated picture with

Iceland ranking 6, behind Norway, but in front of

Finland and Wales. Greenland and the Faroe Islands

can be found on the last two positions. The ranking

is led by Canada, Scotland and Ireland.

» Since 2006, Iceland/Greenland experienced the

biggest increase of interest of all North-Western

European destinations.


22




3.1 Volume

3.2 Socio-demographic structure

3.3 Developments and Sinus-Milieus

3.4 Holiday related attitudes, motivations and interests






23

A person has to be aware of a holiday destination

to be able to consider it for a holiday trip.

Source: RA online 5/2012;

Awareness of 10 Nordic destinations

Only if a destination is in the consideration set of

a person, this person is likely to eventually travel

to this destination.

Source A: RA online 5/2012; Prospective travellers Greenland,

Iceland, Faroe Islands (“would like to go within the next 5 years”)

in a set of 10 Nordic destinations.

Source B: RA 2012 face-to-face; Potential visitors

Iceland/Greenland 2012-2014 (“almost definitely“ or “generally

considering“) in a set of 59 destinations worldwide.

When dealing with “small” destinations, it makes

sense to identify the visitors of a longer timespan.

Source A: RA online 5/2012; All-time visitors Greenland, Iceland,

Faroe Islands in a set of 10 Nordic destinations.

Source B: RA 2012 face-to-face; Visitors 2009-2011 to

Iceland/Greenland in a set of 59 destinations worldwide.

Awareness

Potential

Visitors

Visitors

The concept to measure awareness, interest and actual demand

for Greenland, Iceland and Faroe Islands in the Reiseanalyse

In the following analyses we use the

wording „prospective travellers“

when referring to the results of the

RA online and „potential guests“

when referring to the results of the

RA face-toface.

3.1 Market potentials: Volume

24

Awareness for Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands as

holiday destinations: Almost everybody knows Iceland and Greenland.

61%

86%

88%

Faroe Island

Greenland

Iceland


are aware of Iceland as a

holiday destination, almost as

many are aware of Greenland.

» The awareness of the Faroe

Islands (61%) is significantly

lower.

» For all three countries the

awareness figures in the

German population are

sufficient to provide a solid

basis for potential visitors.

» A campaign to stimulate the

awareness of each destination

does not seem necessary.


Basis: German-speaking population 14-70 years

Question: Now we are talking about holiday destinations in the North. Using this list,

please tell me which of these holiday destinations do you know, if only by name?


25

Interest for Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands as

holiday destinations in the future

» 2.7 million persons (or 3.9% of

the German population 14+

years) are “almost definitely

planning” or “generally

considering” Iceland/Greenland

as a holiday destination in the

next 3 years.

» 12.6 million persons (or 20.9%

of the German population 14-70

years) “would like to go” to

Greenland, Iceland or the Faroe

Islands within the next 5 years:

» 10.0 million (16.7%) would like to

go to Iceland.

» 3.8 million (6.3%) would like to go

to Greenland.

» 3.4 million (5.6%) would like to go

to the Faroe Islands.

» The differing volume figures of

the potentials in the two

surveys are intentional and due

to different questions and

competitive sets.

Prospective travellers

Greenland/Iceland/Faroe

Islands „would like to go

within the next 5 years“


set of 10 Nordic destinations

Potential guests

Iceland/Greenland 2012-

2014 „almost definitely“ or

„generally considering“

Source: RA face-to-face 2012;

set of 59 destinations worldwide

Population

2.7

million

12.6

million

10.0 million 3.8

million

3.4

million

Potential visitors for each

destination „would like to

go within the next 5

years“



Source: RA 2012 face-to-face; RA online 5/2012

Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years resp. 14-70 years


26

Interest for Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands as holiday

destinations in the next 5 years: Overlapping and ratios

Prospective

travellers to the

North-Atlantic

Islands

12.6 Mio.

a

b

c

d

e

f g

Basis: 12.6 million

prospective travellers to

the North-Atlantic Islands % million

a 10% 1.3

b 11% 1.4

c 5% 0.7

d 1% 0.1

e 8% 1.1

f 11% 1.3

g 54% 6.8



» Most of the persons (54%)

interested in a holiday on the

North-Atlantic Islands are

interested in Iceland only (g).

» 10-11% of the prospective

travellers to the North-Atlantic

Islands are interested in all

three Islands (a), in Iceland

and Greenland (b) and Faroe

Islands only (f).

» 8% are interested in

Greenland only (e), 5% in

Iceland and Faroe Islands (c)

and 1% in Greenland and

Faroe Islands (d).

» Overall you can see heavy

overlapping of prospective

travellers of the three

destinations and a certain

domination by Iceland:

80% of the total potential are

interested in Iceland!


27

Travellers to Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands in the past


the German population 14+

years) have visited

Iceland/Greenland as a holiday

destination in the last 3 years.


the German population 14-70

years) have been to Green-

land, Iceland or the Faroe

Islands at least once in their

life:

» 0.9 million (1.4%) have been to

Iceland.

» 0.5 million (0.8%) have been to

the Faroe Islands.

» Less then 0.1 million (0.1%) have

been to Greenland.

All-time visitors to

Greenland/Iceland/Faroe

Islands



Travellers to

Iceland/Greenland

2009-2011

Source: RA face-to-face 2012;

set of 59 destinations worldwide

Population

1.3 million

All-time visitors for each

destination



0.3 million

0.9

million

0.5

million

<0.1

million

Source: RA 2012 face-to-face; RA online 5/2012

Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years resp. 14-70 years


28

Ratio of awareness, interest and experience with the holiday

destinations Greenland, Iceland, Faroe Islands

87,8%

16,7%

1,4%

Awareness Interest All-time visitors

-81% -92%

86,0%

6,3% 0,1%


-93% -98%

61,0%

5,6% 0,8%


-91% -86%

» On the step from awareness to

interest, the three destinations

can “keep” only 7%

(Greenland), 9% (Faroe) and

19% (Iceland) of the persons

who know the destination as

potential guests.

» On the step from potential to

actual travel, only 2%

(Greenland), 4% (Faroe) and

8% (Iceland) of the potential

guests have ever visited the

respective destination.

» In contrast: For Sweden, 32%

of the persons aware of this

holiday destination are

potential guests and 45% of

the potential guests have been

to Sweden.




29

Summary

Awareness:

» 88% of the German population are aware of Iceland

as a holiday destination.

» Almost as many know Greenland (86%).

» The figure for the Faroe Islands (61%) is somewhat

lower.

Market Potential:

» 2.7 million persons (or 3.9% of the German

population 14+ years) are “almost definitely planning”

or “generally considering” to visit Iceland/Greenland

as a holiday destination in the next 3 years.


population 14-70 years) “would like to go” to

Greenland, Iceland or the Faroe Islands within the

next 5 years: 10.0 million to Iceland, 3.8 million to

Greenland and 3.4 million to the Faroe Islands.

» Overall, you can see heavy overlapping of the

prospective travellers of the three destinations and a

certain domination by Iceland: 80% of the whole

potential are interested in Iceland!

» The differing volume figures of the potentials in the

two surveys are intentional and due to different

questions and competitive sets.

Travel Experience:


population 14+ years) have visited Iceland/

Greenland as a holiday destination in the last 3

years.


population 14-70 years) have been to Greenland,

Iceland or the Faroe Islands at least once in their life:

0.9 million have been to Iceland, 0.5 million to the

Faroe Islands and less then 0.1 million to Greenland.

Relation of Awareness/Potential/Experience:

» On the step from awareness to interest, the three

destinations can “keep” only 7% (Greenland), 9%

(Faroe) and 19% (Iceland) of the persons who know

the destination as potential guests.

» On the step from potential to actual travel, only 2%

(Greenland), 4% (Faroe) and 8% (Iceland) of the

potential guests have ever visited the respective

destination.

» In contrast: For Sweden 32% of the persons aware

of this holiday destination are potential guests and

45% of the potential guests have been to Sweden.


30

Prospective travellers to Faroe Islands/Greenland/Iceland:

Sex & Age

German

population

Male 50%

Female 50% 53%

47%

49%

51%

51%

49%

German

population

14-19 years 9%

20-29 years 16%

30-39 years 16%

40-49 years 22%

50-59 years 19%

60-69 years 18%

Ø (years) 42.7 42.6 39.8 40.5

18%

17%

20%

19%

22%

4%

11%

15%

24%

18%

27%

5%

13%

18%

23%

17%

21%

9%


Basis: German-speaking population 14-70 years; prospective travellers to

Faroe Islands, Greenland, Iceland within the next 5 years.

» The prospective travellers to

the 3 North Atlantic destinations

are quite evenly distributed on

both sexes.

» Only for the Faroe Islands you

can see a slightly more female

potential.

» The majority of prospective

travellers to the 3 destinations

is 20-49 years old:

» Faroe Islands (61%)

» Greenland (69%)

» Iceland (61%)

» Consequently, the prospective

travellers to Greenland are the

youngest, the ones to the Faroe

Islands are the oldest.

» For all 3 destinations, the age-

group of 20-29 years is over-

represented, the 14-19 years

are under-represented. For

Greenland and Iceland, the 60-

69 years are under-

represented.

Sex

Age

3.2 Market potentials: Socio-demographic structure

31


Education and Marital Status

German

population

Basic (up to 9 school years)

39%

Realschule (10 school years)

33%

Abitur (13 years,

university entry level) 10%

University Graduation 18% 20%

18%

30%

33%

20%

16%

35%

30%

23%

14%

31%

32%

German

population

Living alone (not married before)

31%

Living with partner 12%

Married 45%

Living alone (married before)

12% 12%

41%

14%

32%

9%

39%

17%

35%

12%

37%

15%

36%

Education

Marital status


the 3 North Atlantic destinations

have a comparatively high level

of education.

» Compared to the 28% in the

German population with Abitur

or better, you find:

» 38% for Faroe Islands

» 36% for Greenland

» 37% for Iceland

» Concerning their martial status,

the biggest group of

prospective travellers to the 3

destinations is married, almost

as many are living alone (with

no prior marriage).

» Compliant to the age structure

of the prospective travellers,

those living alone (with no prior

marriage) and those living with

partner (without being married)

are over-represented.





32


Profession

German

population

Self-employed 8%

Employee 21%

Civil Servant 17%

Worker 12%

Student 16%

Not working 13%

Retired 14% 9%

16%

11%

6%

16%

27%

14%

» Concerning their profession,

the biggest group of

prospective travellers to all

three destinations is made of

employees (26%-27%),

compared to 21% in the

population.

» For the Faroe Islands, the

next important groups of

professions are civil servants,

not working and self employed,

the self employed being over-

represented.

» For Greenland, the next

important groups are students,

self employed and civil

servants, the self employed

being over-represented.

» For Iceland the next important

groups are students and civil

servants.

11%

12%

18%

10%

17%

26%

6%

10%

12%

15%

11%

13%

26%

13%

Profession





33


Monthly household net income

German

population

Up to 1,000 € 12%

1,001-1,500 € 13%

1,501-2,000 € 13%

2,001-2,500 € 18%

2,501-3,000 € 15%

3,001-4,000 € 18%

4,000+ € 12%

Ø (€) 2,596 2,548 2,636 2,536

13%

11%

19%

19%

11%

16%

12%

» The income structure of

prospective travellers to the

three destinations is very

similar to that of the German

population.

» With an average income of

2,640 €, the prospective

travellers to Greenland are

above the population mean.

With 2,550 € resp. 2,340 € the

prospective travellers to the

Faroe Islands and Iceland are

very little below the population

mean.

» For Greenland the income

group of 4.000+ EUR is over-

represented. For the Faroe

Islands and Iceland the income

group of 2,500 to 3,000 € is

over-represented. 12%

15%

18%

16%

12%

12%

15%

16%

15%

16%

15%

13%

11%

15%

Income





34


Place of residence by federal state

German

population

Schleswig-H. 3%

Hamburg 2%

Niedersachsen 10%

Bremen 1%

NRW 22%

Hessen 7%

Rheinland-P. 5%

Baden-W. 13%

Bayern 15%

Saarland 1%

Berlin 4%

Brandenburg 3%

Mecklenburg-V. 2%

Sachsen 5%

Sachsen-A. 3%

Thüringen 3% 2%

2%

3%

3%

3%

4%

1%

16%

14%

6%

6%

20%

0%

13%

4%

3%

» Most prospective travellers to

all three destinations live in the

four most populated federal

states [NRW, Bayern, Baden-

W., Niedersachsen]:

» 63% Faroe Islands

» 60% Greenland

» 55% Iceland

» For the Faroe Islands,

Niedersachsen and Hamburg

is slightly over-represented.

» For Greenland, Bayern,

Baden-W., Schleswig-H.,

Berlin and Brandenburg are

over-represented. NRW is

under-represented.

» For Iceland, Baden-W.,

Schleswig-H., Rheinland-P.

and Brandenburg are over-

represented. NRW and Bayern

are under-represented.

1%

2%

4%

2%

5%

7%

0%

19%

15%

6%

6%

15%

0%

11%

2%

5%

3%

2%

4%

4%

5%

5%

1%

12%

16%

7%

8%

18%

1%

9%

2%

5%

Federal state





35


Frequency of general Internet use

German

(online)

population

» As we were asking the questions

to identify prospective guests to

the three destinations in the RA

online, all interviewees obviously

have Internet access.

» This leads to a certain bias

concerning all questions about

Internet use.

» Hence, the figures on the next

charts can be interpreted as

slightly inflated, as prospective

travellers without Internet access

are not covered in the basis.

» The results show that Internet

use is something natural and

almost everybody is online at

least once a day, most of the time

even several times daily:

» 88% Faroe Islands

» 92% Greenland

» 91% Iceland

72% 74% 77% 76%

17% 14% 15% 15%

7% 10% 6% 8% 4% 2% 2% 1%

Once a week or less

2 to 5 times per week

Once per day

Several times daily





36


Internet use for holiday information and holiday bookings

German

(online)

population


all three destinations show a

very high use of the Internet

for holiday travel information

and booking.

» The figures are even above

the already high figures of the

German (online) population.

» Hence the Internet can be

seen as a central source for

communication.

» ATTENTION: Still you should

not limit your communication to

“online-only”, because every

prospective guest uses many

on- and offline sources

simultaneously when planning

a holiday.

79% 89% 85% 83%



Faroe Islands, Greenland, Iceland in the next 5 years.

62% 70% 68% 69%

Internet use for holiday

travel information [ever]

Internet use for holiday

travel bookings [ever]


37

Prospective Travellers Faroe/Greenland/Iceland:

Mobile Internet

German

(online)

population

37% 38% 49%

40%

15% 16%

12%

16%

48% 46% 39%

44%

No Mobile Internet

Mobile Internet withother Devices

Mobile Internet withSmart Phone



Faroe Islands, Greenland, Iceland in the next 5 years.

» A little more than half of the

German online population

have mobile access to the

Internet, 37% via smart

phones, 15% only with other

mobile devices.

» The figures for the prospective

guests to the Faroe Islands

and to Iceland are similar.

» The prospective guests to

Greenland have a higher

mobile Internet access rate:

49% via smart phone and a

further 12% with other mobile

devices.


38

Use of the mobile Internet during holidays: The link back home and

handy for holiday related information.

» While on holiday, the most

important function of the

mobile Internet is the link back

home via e-mail and news and

social networks.

» The mobile Internet also

provides important information

for a successful holiday - from

the weather forecast to the bus

timetable.

» More advanced mobile

applications with location

based or personalised

information are so far used

comparatively less.

» The same is true for holiday

bookings via mobile Internet

while on holidays.

2%

3%

6%

4%

9%

15%

15%

23%

23%

24%

37%

17%

26%

31%

48%

Other bookings

Transport booking

Accommodation booking

Personalised information

Location based information

Other tourist topics at destination

Public transport

Destination in general

Orientation and navigation

Attractions/events at destination

Weatherforecast

Other non-tourist use

Social networks

News online

E-Mails

59%

non-tourist

information

50%

tourist

information

11%

location based /

personal

8%

booking


Basis: German-speaking population 14-70 years with mobile Internet access and (short)

holiday travel in the last 12 months


39

People consider the Mobile Internet very helpful for getting the

information they need on their trips in the future.

» Concerning the mobile

Internet, we not only wanted to

know how many are using it,

but also how it is considered to

help with typical information

needs in future holidays.

» So we asked everybody (not

only those with mobile Internet

access) about typical

information needs during a

holiday and if they thought the

mobile Internet could help

them with these information

needs in the future.

» The biggest information needs

are concerning “activities and

leisure offers”, “gastronomy”,

“transport” and “local

conditions”.

» In every case more than 80%

of the population consider the

mobile Internet useful in the

future.

Activities and

leisure offers

49%

Gastronomy

28%

Local

conditions

11%

Transport /

Navigation

25%

Accom

modati

on

8%

YES, mobile

Internet

helpful

NO, mobile

Internet not

helpful

Desti-

nation

7%

Typical

situations in a

holiday, when

you need

information

and tips

Could the

mobile Internet

be helpful in

the future?




40

Summary

Socio-demography:

» For almost all socio-demographic factors, the

structures of the prospective travellers to the Faroe

Islands, to Greenland and to Iceland do neither differ

very much from each other nor are there big

differences compared to the population.

» The majority of prospective travellers to the 3

destinations are 20-49 years old. For all 3

destinations the age-group of 20-29 years is over-

represented, the 14-19 years are under-represented.

For Greenland and Iceland the 60-69 years are

under-represented.

» The prospective travellers to the 3 North Atlantic

destinations have a comparatively high education.

» With an average income of 2,640 € the prospective

guests of Greenland are above the population mean.

With 2,550 € and 2,340 € the prospective guests of

the Faroe Islands and of Iceland are very little below

the population mean. For Greenland the income

group of 4.000+ EUR is over-represented. For the

Faroe Islands and Iceland the income group of 2,500

to 3,000 € is over-represented.

» Most prospective guests of all three destinations live

in the four most populated federal states [NRW,

Bayern, Baden-W., Niedersachsen].

Internet Use:

» Due to methodological reasons (online survey), all

interviewees have Internet access. This leads to a

certain bias with slight overestimates concerning all

questions about Internet use, since persons without

Internet access are not covered in the basis!

» For the prospective travellers with Internet access,

the use of the Internet is something natural and

almost everybody is online at least once a day, most

of the time even several times daily.

» They show a very high use of the Internet for holiday

travel information and booking. The figures are even

above the already high figures of the German

(online) population.

» Hence, the Internet can be seen as on central source

of communication. ATTENTION: Still you should not

limit your communication to “online-only” because

every prospective guest uses many on- and offline

sources simultaneously when planning a holiday.

» A little more than half of the German online

population have mobile access to the Internet, the

figures for the prospective travellers to the Faroe

Islands and Iceland are similar. The prospective

travellers to Greenland have a higher mobile Internet

access rate of 61%.


41

Long-term development of interest and experience with

Iceland/Greenland: Upward trend with some setbacks in the past

2,4

2,9

2,5 2,3 2,2

3,1

3,6 3,6 3,3

2,9

4,3

3,9 3,9

0,1 0,2 0,3 0,2 0,2 0,3 0,3 0,2 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,2 0,3

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

in % interest next 3 years experience last 3 years

Source: RA 2012 face-to-face


Explanation:

Interest = “almost definitely planning” or “generally considering”

» 3.9% of the German

population 14+ years are

“almost definitely planning” or

“generally considering”

Iceland/Greenland as a holiday

destination 2012-2014.

» This figure increased from

2.4% in 2000 with some

setbacks in the years 2002-

2004 and 2008-2009.

» The development of the actual

travellers to Iceland/Greenland

pretty much follows the same

dynamics, yet the figures are

too small to serve as a basis

for reliable analyses.

» The 3.9% potential guests to

Iceland/Greenland are divided

in 0.4% “hard” potential

(“almost definitely planning”)

and 3.5% “soft” potential

(“generally considering”).

3.3 Market potentials: Developments

42

Life cycle potential guests Iceland/Greenland:

Young and mature persons without kids are most important.


Basis: Persons interested in Iceland/Greenland 2012-2014 (“almost definitely planning”

or “generally considering”), German-speaking population 14+ years

» The life cycle approach

aggregates age, marital status

and children in the household.

» Most important for Iceland/

Greenland are younger (14-39

years) and mature (40-59

years) persons without children.

» These life cycle segments are

over-represented.

» Within these groups, the young

singles and the mature couples

are the most important.

» Families and seniors (60+

years) are comparatively less

important and significantly

under-represented.

» From 2005 to 2012 the

structure of the potential guests

to Iceland/Greenland has

remained quite stable – only the

senior and the mature

segments grew a little on cost

of the young.

25% 29% 25%

13% 15%

11%

8% 5%

8%

9% 6% 7%

24% 21% 24%

7% 11% 9%

10% 9% 11%

4% 4% 5%

2005 2009 2012

senior singles

senior couples

mature single people

mature adult couples

family with olderchildren

family with smallchildren

young couples withoutchildren

young single people

52

57

123

114

71

89

159

151

Index*

* Figures of potential guests to

Iceland/Greenland (RA 2012)

compared to German population


43

Place of residence of potential guests Iceland/Greenland: Most from

Southern and Western Germany. East Germany over-represented.

» 16% of the potential guests to

Iceland/Greenland are living in

the North-West of Germany,

35% in the West, 28% in the

South and 21% in the East.

» Within the potential guests, the

East-Germans are over-

represented, the West-

Germans are about average,

South and North-West are

slightly under-represented,

compared with the population

structure.

» From 2005 until 2012 this

structure of the potential

guests to Iceland/Greenland

did not change much: Most

noticeably is the growth of the

South from 24% to 28% on

cost of the West.

16% 15% 16%

40% 42% 35%

24% 21% 28%

20% 22% 21%

2005 2009 2012

East [MV, BR, B,SA, S, TH]

South [BY, BW]

West [NRW, HE,RP, SL]

North-West [SH,NI, HH, HB]

133

80

105

81

Index*








44

Social class potential guests Iceland/Greenland:

The top classes are most important.

22% 23% 19%

19% 24%

20%

20%

19%

17%

15%

18%

23%

12% 6%

9%

7% 6% 8%

5% 4% 4%

2005 2009 2012

Grade 7

Grade 6

Grade 5

Grade 4

Grade 3

Grade 2

Grade 1

35

59

57

112

107

169

174

Index*




» The social class approach

aggregates income, education

and profession. “Grade 1” is the

highest class, “grade 7” the

lowest.

» Most important for Iceland/

Greenland are “grades 1 and 2”

representing 39% of the

prospective visitors and “grades

3 and 4” representing 40%.

» “Grades 1 and 2” are highly

over-represented, “grades 3

and 4” are slightly over-

represented.

» From 2005 to 2012 “grades 3

and 4” grew from 35% to 40%

mainly on cost of “grades 5 to

7”.

» “Grades 5 to 7” can be

neglected.





45

Potential guests Iceland/Greenland:

Sinus-Milieus introduction

Source: Sinus-Institute 2012


» This target group segmentation

is based on an analysis of

everyday life within our society.

It groups together people with

similar attitudes and ways of life.

» Basic values as well as attitudes

towards work, family, leisure,

money and consumption all play

a part in the analysis.

» The higher the location of the

milieu in this chart, the higher

the level of education, income

and occupational group of its

members.

» The further to the right its

position, the more modern their

basic values in a sociocultural

sense.

» Within this ‘strategic map’, it is

possible to plot products, brands

and media, etc.

Tradition Modernisation / Individualisation Re-orientation

Basic orientation

New middle class milieu

Established conservative

milieu

Liberal intellectual milieu

Socio-ecological milieu

High achiever milieu

Movers and shakers milieu

Adaptive pragmatist milieu

Escapist milieu

Traditional milieu

Precarious milieu

Soci

al s

tatu

s

Low

er c

lass

M

idd

le c

lass

H

igh

er c

lass

7% 7%

7% 10%

6%

14%

15% 15%

9%

9%

© SINUS 2012

3.3 Market potentials: Sinus-Milieus

EPE.pptx

HED.pptx

BÜM.pptx

KET.pptx

TRA.pptx

LIB.pptx

PER.pptx

SÖK.pptx

PRE.pptx

PRA.pptx

46

Sinus-Milieu Descriptions: Upper classes

Established

Conservative

Milieu

Liberal Intellectual

Milieu

High Achiever Milieu

Movers and Shakers

Milieu

10.3%, 7.3 million

The classical

establishment

7.2%, 5.1 million

The fundamentally liberal

7.0%, 4.9 million

Multi-optional, efficiency-

oriented top performers

6.3%, 4.4 million

The unconventional

creative avant-garde

» responsibility and

success ethic

» aspirations of

exclusivity and

leadership versus

» tendency towards

withdrawal and

seclusion

» holiday travel demand

above average

» relaxing very important

but without being idle

» culture/nature

» enlightened educational

elite with post-material

roots

» desire for self-

determination

» an array of intellectual

interests

» holiday travel demand

above average

» high expectations

towards their holidays

» culture/relaxing/nature

» with a global economic

mindset and

» a claim to avant-garde

style

» high level of IT and

multi-media expertise

» milieu with the highest

holiday travel demand

» highest holiday travel

spending

» very high expectations

towards their holidays

» active holidays

» hyper-individualistic

» mentally and

geographically mobile

» digitally networked and

» always on the lookout

for new challenges and

change

» high holiday travel

demand

» high holiday spending

» experience/adventure/

curiosity


47

Sinus-Milieu Descriptions: Middle classes

Middle Class Milieu Adaptive Pragmatist Milieu Socio-Ecological

Milieu

14.0%, 9.9 million

The modern mainstream with the

will to achieve and adapt

8.9%, 6.3 million

The ambitious young core of

society

7.2%, 5.1 million

Idealistic, discerning consumers

with normative notions of the

‘right’ way to live

» general proponents of the social

order

» striving to become established at

a professional and social level

» seeking to lead a secure and

harmonious existence

» holiday travel demand below

average

» no characteristic holiday

interests and motivations

» with a markedly pragmatic outlook

on life and sense of expedience

» success oriented and prepared to

compromise, hedonistic and

conventional

» flexible and security oriented

» average holiday travel demand

» a little higher expectations towards

their holidays

» fun/curiosity/sun&beach

» pronounced ecological and social

conscience

» globalisation skeptics

» standard bearers of political

correctness and diversity

» holiday travel demand above

average

» holiday travel spending below

average

» culture/nature/relaxing


48

Sinus-Milieu Descriptions: Lower classes

Traditional

Milieu

Precarious

Milieu

Escapist

Milieu

15.3%, 10.8 million

The security and order-loving

wartime/post-war generation

8.9%, 6.3 million

The lower class in search of

orientation and social inclusion

15.1%, 10.6 million

The fun and experience-oriented

modern lower class/lower-

middle class

» rooted in the old world of the

petty bourgeoisie or that of the

traditional blue-collar culture

» holiday travel demand below

average

» all holiday motivations and

activities way below average

» with strong anxieties about the

future and a sense of resentment

» keeping up with the consumer

standards of the broad middle

classes in an attempt to

compensate for social

disadvantages

» scant prospects of social

advancement

» a fundamentally delegative/

reactive attitude to life, and

withdrawal into own social

environment

» least holiday travel demand of all

milieus

» living in the here and now

» shunning convention and the

behavioural expectations of an

achievement-oriented society

» average holiday travel demand

and spending.

» important: fun/curiosity/flirt

» not important: nature/health


49


Sinus-Milieus

» This graph shows the structure

of the potential guests according

to the Sinus-Milieus.

» The ‘high achievers’ and ‘movers

and shakers’ are important

milieus with 15% resp. 14%

share of the potential guests –

both are highly over-

represented.

» The ‘escapists’ (18%), the

‘established conservative’ (13%)

and the ‘socio-ecological’ (12%)

have substantial sizes and are

slightly over-represented.

» The remaining milieus are all

comparatively small and

considerably under-represented.

Tradition Modernisation / Individualisation Re-orientation

Basic orientation © SINUS 2012

Soci

al s

tatu

s

Low

er c

lass

M

idd

le c

lass

H

igh

er c

lass

new middle

class

established

conservative

liberal

intellectual

socio-ecological

high

achiever

movers

& shakers

adapted pragmatist

escapist

traditional

precarious

© SINUS 2012

6% 15%

12%

13% 14%

6%

18%

5%

4%

7%

[Index: 36]

[Index: 124]

[Index: 39]

[Index: 51]

[Index: 120]

[Index: 174]

[Index: 89]

[Index: 201]

[Index: 226]

[Index: 72]





50

Summary

Volume developments:

» 3.9% of the German population 14+ years are

“almost definitely planning” or “generally considering”

Iceland/Greenland as a holiday destination 2012-

2014.

» This figure increased from 2.4% in 2000 with some

setbacks in the years 2002-2004 and 2008-2009.

Structure developments:

» Looking at the life cycles of the potential guests to

Iceland/Greenland, younger (14-39 years) and

mature (40-59 years) persons without kids are most

important. Within these groups the young singles

and the mature couples are the biggest.

» From 2005 to 2012, the structure of the potential

guests to Iceland/Greenland has remained quite

stable – only the senior and the mature segments

grew a little on cost of the young.

» 16% of the potential guests to Iceland/Greenland are

living in the North-West of Germany, 35% in the

West, 28% in the South and 21% in the East.

» From 2005 until 2012 this structure of the potential

guests to Iceland/Greenland did not change much:

Most noticeably is the growth of the South from 24%

to 28% on cost of the West.

» Concerning the social class of the prospective visitors

of Iceland/ Greenland the highest classes are most

important: “grades 1 and 2” representing 39% of the

prospective visitors and “grades 3 and 4” representing

40%.

» From 2005 to 2012 “grades 3 and 4” grew from 35% to

40% mainly on cost of “grades 5 to 7”.

Sinus Milieus:

» The Sinus-Milieus group together people with similar

attitudes and ways of life. Basic values as well as

attitudes to work, family, leisure, money and

consumption all play a part in the analysis. The milieu

data can be a valuable addition to a socio-

demographic or product related customer

segmentation.

» For Iceland/Greenland, the “high achievers” and

“movers and shakers” are important milieus with 15%

resp. 14% share of the potential guests – both are

highly over-represented.

» The “escapists” (18%), the “established conservative”

(13%) and the “socio-ecological” (12%) have

substantial sizes and are slightly over-represented.

3.3 Market potentials: Developments and Sinus-Milieus

51

47%

32%

50%

individualplanning

modularbooking

packageholiday


Preferences concerning holiday organisation and comfort

» For product development and

distribution it can be helpful to

know the preferences of

potential guests concerning

holiday organisation and

comfort.

» Concerning the organisation of

holidays the potential guests

are split almost exactly half in

preferring package holidays

resp. individual planning. 32%

prefer modular holidays.

» Concerning the comfort of the

holiday accommodation the

vast majority of potential

guests prefer basic or

comfortable lodging.

» Even though the share of 22%

preferring luxury is highly over-

represented compared to the

population.

111

125

97

197

100

104

Index*




Preferences

concerning the

organisation of a

holiday [figures for

“totally agree” and

“agree”].




43%

48%

22%

basic/lowbudget

comfortable/mid budget

luxury/highbudget

Preferences

concerning the

holiday

accommodation

comfort [figures

for “totally agree”

and “agree”].

3.3 Market potentials: Holiday related attitudes, motivations and interests

52

11%

12%

41%

25%

10%

absolutelydisagree

disagree

undecided

agree

totally agree


Preferences concerning the sustainability of holidays

» Sustainability and CSR are

widely discussed topics for

tourism providers these days.

» This graph shows the demand

side of this topic: The degree

of which the potential guests to

Iceland/Greenland agree that

“their holiday should be as

ecologically compatible,

resource saving and

environmentally friendly as

possible”.

» 35% of the potential guests

have a positive attitude

towards a sustainable holiday,

41% are undecided, 23% have

a negative attitude.

» Compared to the population,

the positive statements are

slightly over-represented, the

negative ones slightly under-

represented.

118

109

99

90

95

Index*




My holiday should

be as

ecologically

compatible,

resource saving

and

environmentally

friendly as

possible.





53


Holiday motivations

„very important“ % Index*

relaxation, no stress, no pressure 75 111

freedom, free time 73 133

recuperate 72 121

get away from daily routine 71 110

fun, amusement, enjoy myself 68 117

discover something totally different 67 166

sun, warmth, good weather 67 101

enjoy nature 65 132

travel around, be on the move 59 164

new experiences 59 147

get to know other countries 58 178

spend time with people close to me 57 111

rest, do nothing, be lazy 57 105

do something cultural and educational 52 185

spoil myself, treat myself to something 52 112

healthy climate 51 119

do something with nice people 48 128

1

17

„very important“ % Index*

gentle sports or games/ fitness 42 136

meet new people 41 122

meet the locals 38 139

do something for my appearance 38 124

do something for my health 36 105

be entertained 33 127

adventure, take risks,

do something extraordinary 30 269

escape from pollution 29 179

relive memories of a place 26 86

sports 25 258

flirt, holiday romance, sex 22 158

play with the children, 18 95

18

29








54


Holiday activities

„very often or often in the past 3 years“ % Index*

trips, excursions 75 111

swimming in a lake or the sea 75 128

eating local specialities 69 116

window shopping, shopping 66 113

visiting cultural or historical attractions 59 166

rest, relax, catch up on sleep 56 128

visiting natural attractions 56 171

swimming in a pool 54 137

walking tours 47 136

gentle sports 46 131

making new friends 42 150

cycling 37 175

visiting amusement parks 23 150

playing with the children 22 113

used spa facilities 19 156

downhill skiing / snowboarding 12 168

fishing 11 226

cross-country skiing 5 131

golf (not miniature golf) 3 259

1

19








55


types of holiday

“almost definitely planning”

or “generally considering” % Index*

beach/sunbathing holiday 69 119

adventure/experience holiday 62 204

city trip 62 162

round trip 54 241

holiday to relax 52 110

nature holiday 51 177

winter holiday in the sun, warm countries 48 302

activity holiday 47 218

cruise 44 304

winter holiday in the snow 41 270

family holiday 41 118

cultural trip 40 314

wellness holiday 39 191

fun-/party holiday 37 250

health holiday 33 187

study trip 32 419

club holiday 31 251

spa holiday (with medical treatments) 29 201

fitness holiday 24 316

1

19

“almost definitely planning”

or “generally considering” % Index*

holiday apartment 73 135

holiday home 61 166

holiday on a farm/in the countryside 29 307

motor caravan holiday 29 331

caravan holiday 26 329

holiday camp, holiday park, Center Parc 26 197

camping holiday (tent) 25 307

bus/coach tour 24 117

1

8








56

Summary

Holiday Preferences:

» Concerning the organisation of holidays the potential

guests are split almost exactly half in preferring

package holidays resp. individual planning. 32%

prefer modular holidays.

» Concerning the comfort of the accommodation the

vast majority of potential guests prefer basic or

comfortable lodging. 22% prefer luxury, highly over-

represented compared to the population.

» 35% of the potential guests have a positive attitude

towards a sustainable holiday, 41% are undecided,

23% have a negative attitude. Compared to the

population, the positive statements are slightly over-

represented, the negative ones slightly under-

represented.

Holiday Motivation:

» The most important holiday motivations of the

potential guests to Iceland/Greenland are

“relaxation”, “freedom”, “recuperate” and “leaving the

daily routine”. In this they do not differ much from the

rest of the German population.

» The biggest differences can be found with

“adventure”, “sports”, culture” and “curiosity” – these

topics might be helpful for the profiling of tourism

products and their communication.

Holiday Activities:

» The most important holiday activities of the potential

guests to Iceland/Greenland are “excursions”,

“swimming”, “local specialities” and “shopping”. In

this they do not differ much from the German

population.

» The biggest differences can be found with the niche

activities “golf” and “fishing”. Other significant

differences relate to “visiting natural resp. cultural

attractions and spa facilities” – these topics also

might give hints for the development of tourism

products and their communication.

Types of Holiday:

» The potential guests to Iceland/Greenland are most

interested in “sun&beach”, “adventure/experience”,

“city trips” and “round trips”.

» The biggest differences compared to the German

population can be found with “study trips”, “cultural

holidays”, “camping” and “farm holidays”.

ATTENTION: All preferences, attitudes and interests are

connected with the persons, not with the destination

Iceland/Greenland. Hence these results give hints, which

can be used for product development and communication,

but also hints what competition Iceland/Greenland faces

in the minds of the potential guests.


57









58

Image Greenland: Unique destination for nature, scenery, wildlife

» Persons aware of Greenland

as a holiday destination name

on average 4.7 of the 20

characteristics in the question.

» The key image factors of

Greenland are:

» Unspoiled nature (48%)

» Stunning scenery (43%)

» Not too touristic (43%)

» Natural phenomena (43%)

» Unique (37%)

» When asked for THE most

distinguishing characteristic,

the same factors prevail, yet

the ranking differs a little:




» Unique (10%)

» Greenland is not widely known

for its culture/history, its

hospitable people or for being

a round trip destination.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

especiallyapplies toGreenland

mostdistinguishingfor Greenland

unspoiled nature

stunning scenery

not too touristic

quietness

interesting city destination

interesting culture and history

experience of special natural phenomena

hospitable people

stop-over destination to America

round trip

good opportunities for wildlife watching

good opportunities for wellness

good opportunities for adventure tourism

great variety of outdoor activities

very special and unique destination

expensive destination

cumbersome journey

changeable weather

only suitable for travel during the summer

none of these/don‘t know


Basis: German-speaking population 14-70 years,

aware of Greenland as a holiday destination

Question:

a. Please tell me which of these characteristics do

you think particularly apply to Greenland?

b. And which of these is in your opinion the most

distinguishing characteristic of Greenland?

4. Image as holiday destinations

59

Image Greenland: Potential guests with a much more detailed and

positive picture than persons who do not want to visit.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Interest totravel toGreenland

NO Interest totravel toGreenland

unspoiled nature

stunning scenery

not too touristic

quietness




hospitable people


round trip







cumbersome journey

changeable weather


none of these

» Persons with interest to travel to

Greenland name on average 6.7

of the 20 characteristics in the

question.

» Persons with NO interest name

4.4 characteristics.

» The image profiles in both groups

run almost parallel with higher

figures for the prospective

Greenland guests.

» The most striking differences can

be found with some of the most

important characteristics:

» Stunning scenery (+25%-pts.)

» Unique (+25%-pts.)

» Natural phenomena (+24%-pts.)

» Hospitable people (+23%-pts.)

» Concerning the negative

characteristics of Greenland

(expensive, cumbersome,

weather, only summer) the

figures of both groups are almost

on the same level.



aware of Greenland as a holiday destination

Question:


you think particularly apply to Greenland?


distinguishing characteristic of Greenland?


60

Image Iceland: Destination to experience nature and scenery

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

especiallyapplies toIceland

mostdistinguishingfor Iceland

unspoiled nature

stunning scenery

not too touristic

quietness




hospitable people


round trip







cumbersome journey

changeable weather



» Persons aware of Iceland as a

holiday destination name on

average 5.0 of the 20


» The key image factors of

Iceland are:




» Quietness (39%)


» Outdoor activities (33%)

» Unique (31%)


distinguishing characteristic,

the three top factors prevail,

yet the ranking differs a little:




» Iceland is not widely known as

a stop-over to North-America,

as a city destination, to be

cumbersome to reach.



aware of Iceland as a holiday destination

Question:


you think particularly apply to Iceland?


distinguishing characteristic of Iceland?


61

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Interest totravel toIceland

NO Interest totravel toIceland

unspoiled nature

stunning scenery

not too touristic

quietness




hospitable people


round trip







cumbersome journey

changeable weather


none of these

Image Iceland: Potential guests with a much more detailed and

positive picture than persons who do not want to visit.


Iceland name on average 6.9 of

the 20 characteristics in the

question.



» The image profiles in both groups

run quite parallel with higher

figures for the prospective Iceland

guests.





» Unspoiled nature (+23%-pts.)


» Natural phenomena (+23%-pts.)

» Concerning most negative

characteristics of Iceland

(cumbersome, weather, only

summer) the figures of both

groups are almost on the same

level.




Question:


you think particularly apply to Iceland?


distinguishing characteristic of Iceland?


62

Image Faroe Islands: Quietness in great nature and scenery

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

especiallyapplies to FaroeIslands

mostdistinguishing forFaroe Islands

unspoiled nature

stunning scenery

not too touristic

quietness




hospitable people


round trip







cumbersome journey

changeable weather





aware of the Faroe Islands as a holiday destination

» Persons aware of the Faroe

Islands as a holiday destination

name on average 3.7 of the 20


» The key image factors of the

Faroe Islands are:



» Quietness (34%)



distinguishing characteristic, the

same four factors prevail:




» Quietness (9%)

» The figure for “none of

these/don’t know” (20%) as

the most distinguishing

characteristic is quite striking.

Even many persons aware of

the Faroe Islands are not too

sure what to expect there.

Question:


you think particularly apply to the Faroe Islands?


distinguishing characteristic of the Faroe Islands?


63

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Interest totravel to FaroeIslands

NO Interest totravel to FaroeIslands

unspoiled nature

stunning scenery

not too touristic

quietness




hospitable people


round trip







cumbersome journey

changeable weather


none of these

Image Faroe Islands: Potential guests with a much more detailed

and positive picture than persons who do not want to visit.


the Faroe Islands name on

average 6.1 of the 20




» The image profile of the

prospective Faroe Islands guests

is quite sharp and well

developed.

» The image profile of persons with

NO interest is very unspecific.






» Outdoor activities (+26%-pts.)

» Wildlife watching (+22%-pts.)

» Even the negative characteristics

receive higher figures with the

prospective guests.



aware of the Faroe Islands as a holiday destination

Question:


you think particularly apply to the Faroe Islands?


distinguishing characteristic of the Faroe Islands?


64

Image comparison: Similar images with emphasis on nature and

scenery but with possibilities to differentiate

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Faroe Islands

Greenland

Iceland

unspoiled nature

stunning scenery

not too touristic

quietness




hospitable people


round trip







cumbersome journey

changeable weather


none of these



aware of the three holiday destinations

» Similar images of the three

destinations.

» Greenland and Iceland with an

average of around 5

characteristics per person.

Faroe Islands with an average

of less than 4.

» Key image factors of all three

destinations are nature and

scenery.

» Greenland is seen as most

unique and with good wildlife

watching.

» Iceland gets the highest

nominations for outdoor

activities and a variety of

secondary characteristics,

e.g. wellness, city destination,

round trip.

» The Faroe Islands’ figures are

always below at least one of

the other destinations; within

its image, “quietness” and “not

touristic” are striking.

Question:


you think particularly apply to … ?


distinguishing characteristic of … ?


65

Summary

Image Greenland:

» In the mind of the people who are aware of

Greenland as a holiday destination, it is known for its

uniqueness, its unspoiled nature, natural

phenomena, the stunning scenery and wildlife.

» It is not widely known for its culture/history, its

hospitable people or for being a round trip

destination.

» Persons with interest to travel there much more often

associate Greenland with stunning scenery,

uniqueness, natural phenomena and hospitable

people than persons with NO interest to travel there.

Image Iceland:

» In the mind of the people who are aware of Iceland it

is a holiday destination, to experience natural

phenomena, a stunning scenery and quietness.

» It is not widely known as a stop-over to North-

America, as a city destination or to be cumbersome

to reach.


associate Iceland with uniqueness, unspoiled nature,

stunning scenery and natural phenomena than

persons with NO interest to travel there.

Image Faroe Islands:

» In the mind of the people who are aware of them, the

Faroe Islands are a holiday destination off the

beaten track where you can experience quietness in

a great scenery and nature.

» It is striking, that even many persons aware of the

Faroe Islands are not too sure what to expect there.


associate the Faroe islands with a stunning scenery,

uniqueness, outdoor activities and wildlife than

persons with NO interest to travel there.

Image comparison of the three destinations:

» The images of the three destinations are quite

similar. Key image factors of all three destinations

are nature and scenery.

» Greenland is seen as most unique and with good

wildlife watching.

» Iceland gets the highest nominations for outdoor

activities and a variety of secondary characteristics,

e.g. wellness, city destination, round trip.

» The Faroe Islands’ figures are always below at least

one of the other destinations; within its image

“quietness” and “not touristic” are striking.


66









67

Nature holiday: Key figures about the German market

» Nature is an important aspect

for the German population

when it comes to holidays.

» The Reiseanalyse covers

different dimensions of nature

and holidays:

» As a holiday motivation

» As a holiday activity in the

past 3 years

» As a form of holiday in the last

3 years

» As a form of holiday in the last

year

» As a form of holiday in the

next 3 years

» In the Reiseanalyse 2012

there was a special focus on

the topic of nature holiday with

extra questions on:

» Definition/Understanding of

nature holiday

» Product requirements for

nature holidays

4.0 million Nature holiday 2011

(predominantly) (6%**)

15.3 million Nature travellers

2009-2011 (22%*)

20.2 million Potential nature

travellers 2012-2014

(29%*)

34.9 million Holiday motivation:

“enjoy nature” (50%*)

70.3 million German Population

14+ years (100%*)


Basis: *German-speaking population 14+ years;

**Holiday-tips (5+days) of the German-speaking population 14+ years

5. Focus: Nature holiday

68

Nature holiday: Quite stable long-term demand and interest.

The recent drop of 2012 leaves a question mark.

33

36 39

35 36

39 38

29 26

28 31

28 30

32 30

22

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

in % interest next 3 years experience last 3 years



Explanation:



14+ years are “almost

definitely planning” or

“generally considering” a

nature holiday 2012-2014.

» This figure has been oscillating

around 35% in the past

decade. The recent drop thus

leaves a question mark, if we

really see the beginning of a

downward trend or not.

» The development of the actual

nature travellers very much

followed the same dynamics,

oscillating around 30%.

» The small difference between

demand and interest shows

that there is a huge likelihood

that someone interested in a

nature holiday will actually go

on this kind of trip.


69

Definition/Understandings of “nature holiday“ in the German

population: distinct environments, sceneries and activities

4%

8%

11%

16%

26%

45%

46%

46%

Food

Destinations

Accommodation

Quietness/Relaxing

Holiday forms

Activities

Scenery

Nature/Environment

» Traditionally, the Reiseanalyse

does not give definitions for

any form of holiday in the

questionnaire, but rather

understands it in the broad

definition of the interviewees.

» Once in a while it makes sense

to test if the German

population and the analysts of

the Reiseanalyse have the

same concepts of a holiday

form.

» Concerning nature holiday,

the understandings in the

population are most widely

connected with:

» A distinct environment

(nature, animals, fresh air)

» A distinct scenery

(mountains, forests, lakes)

» Distinct activities

(hiking, camping, cycling)

Open statements in categories

- mountains(16%)

- forests (16%)

- Lakes (8%)

- (lots of) nature (14%)

- (lots of) animals (7%)

- fresh/good air (6%)

- hiking/trekking (20%)

- camping (15%)

- cycling (7%)

Top statements

Source: RA 2012: Extra CAPI-Omnibus Survey (9/2011)



70

The destination „Iceland/Greenland“ and the topic „nature“

fit together very well.

» 65% of all persons

interested in visiting


2014 (“almost definitely

planning” or “generally

considering”) have the

holiday motivation “enjoy

nature”.

» 51% are interested in a

nature holiday 2012-2014.

56% have visited nature

attractions, 47% went

hiking/trekking as a holiday

activity 2009-2011.

» All these figures are

significantly above the level

of the German population,

stressing the importance of

the nature-topic for the

potential guests of

Iceland/Greenland.

50%

29% 33% 34%

65%

51%

56%

47%

holiday motivation:enjoy nature

interest natureholiday 12-14

holiday activity: visitnature attraction

holiday activity:hiking/trekking

population potential travellers Iceland/Greenland 12-14

1.8

million

35

million 1.4

million

1.5

million 1.3

million 20

million 23

million

24

million


Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years; Persons interested in Iceland/Greenland

2012-2014 (“almost definitely planning” or “generally considering”)

Explanation:



71

11

11

17

20

22

22

24

24

25

26

34

38

40

47

51

58

61

71

71

38

43

37

41

35

40

39

45

38

41

39

39

40

27

29

16

16

11

15

contact with animals

visit nature attractions (e.g. zoos)

unusual activities (e.g. canyoning)

holiday is sustainable

meet people which are close to nature

expenditure stays within the region

accommodation in the nature

designated national/nature parks

learn something about nature

observe animals in their environment

food from the region

unspoilt nature

“natural” nature attractions

good and healthy food

healthy climate

relax and rest

tranquillity

exercise in nature

enjoy pristine nature

in % must be absolutely fulfilled

would be desireable

Product requirements nature holiday

of the potential guests to Iceland/Greenland

108

125

111

92

97

104

157

115

133

123

129

133

126

149

140

113

199

85

91

Index*

» When taking a nature

holiday, for 71% of all

persons interested in visiting


2014 the product

requirement “enjoy pristine

nature” has to be absolutely

fulfilled. A further 15% find

this characteristic desirable.

» The following must-criteria

continue in the ranking:

» Exercise in nature

» Tranquility

» Relaxing and resting

» Healthy climate

» The biggest differences

compared to the German

population can be found in

“secondary” requirements:

» Unusual activities

» “Natural” nature attractions

» Expenditure stays in the

region

Source: RA 2012 face-to-face; Basis: Persons not negative towards a nature holiday:,

Interested in Iceland/Greenland 2012-2014 (“almost definitely planning” or “generally

considering”), German-speaking population 14+ years


Iceland/Greenland compared

to German population


72

Summary

Nature and holidays:

» Nature is an important aspect for the German

population when it comes to holidays.

» Concerning nature holiday, the understandings in the

population are most widely connected with a distinct

environment (nature, animals, fresh air), a distinct

scenery (mountains, forests, lakes) or distinct

activities (hiking, camping, cycling).

» The actual demand for nature holiday (in the last 3

years) has been oscillating the past decade around

30% of the population. The interest for nature holiday

oscillated around 35% of the population.

» The small difference between demand and interest

shows that there is a huge likelihood that someone

interested in a nature holiday will actually go on this

kind of trip. On the other hand there is not much

room for growth in this segment.

» Looking at the nature motivation, the interest for

nature holiday and nature-related holiday activities of

the potential Iceland/Greenland guests, all figures

are significantly above the level of the German

population. This stresses the importance of the

nature-topic for the tourism product of

Iceland/Greenland.

Nature holiday product requirements:

» Looking at the product requirements for a nature

holiday, for 71% of the potential Iceland/Greenland

guests to “enjoy pristine nature” has to be absolutely

fulfilled. A further 15% find this characteristic

desirable.

» The following must-criteria continue in the ranking:

Exercise in nature, tranquility, relaxing and resting,

healthy climate

» Compared to the German population the potential

guests far more often require unusual activities and

“natural” nature attractions and want to be assured

that their expenditure stays in the region to make

their nature holiday a success.

ATTENTION: Again, these product requirements are

connected with the persons, not with the destination

Iceland/Greenland. Hence these results give hints, which

can be used for product development and communication,

but also hints what competition Iceland/Greenland faces

in the minds of the potential guests.


73









74

Population

Potential travellers

North-West Europe*

Potential travellers

Iceland/Greenland

Number of destinations

visited 2009-2011

Number of destinations

interested in 2012-2014

Fierce competitive situation for Iceland/Greenland:

Potential guests have also many, many other travel options in

mind.

» A person living in Germany

has been to an average of 2.3

holiday destinations in the last

3 years and is interested to

visit 6.2 holiday destinations in

the next 3 years.

» The figures for potential guests

to North-West Europe are

much higher: 2.9. resp. 13.0.

» Potential travellers to

Iceland/Greenland have been

to 3.8 destinations and are

interested in 28.3 (!)

» This clearly shows the very

fierce competition, that

Iceland/Greenland is facing on

the German market.

» Iceland/Greenland has made it

into the consideration set of

these persons, but has to

compete against 27 other

destinations!

3.8

2.9

2.3

28.3

13.0

6.2

Explanation:

North-West Europe = NO, SE, FI, DK, IE, UK, IS, GL

Source: RA 2012 face-to-face. Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years; Persons

interested in North-West Europe resp. in Iceland/Greenland 2012-2014 (“almost

definitely planning” or “generally considering”); Set of 59 destinations abroad.


75

Potential guests to Iceland/Greenland:

They also like to go basically everywhere else on holiday.

52%

54%

55%

57%

58%

58%

60%

60%

63%

66%

66%

67%

69%

70%

72%

73%

79%

Turkey

Portugal

Greece

Canada

Ireland

USA

Great Britain

Switzerland

Austria

France

Italy

Finland

Germany

Denmark

Spain

Sweden

Norway

» As described earlier, 4% of the

German population are „almost

definitely planning“ or

„generally considering“ a

holiday in Iceland/Greenland

2012-2014.

» 79% of these persons also

would like to visit Norway in

the same time, 73% Sweden,

72% Spain.

» The list again highlights the

fierce competitive situation of

Iceland/Greenland on the

German market.

» The high ranks of Spain,

Germany, Italy, France,

Austria, USA etc. also shows

that the competitors of

Iceland/Greenland are by far

not only destinations with a

similar product.


are „almost definitely planning“ or

„generally considering“ a holiday in

Iceland/Greenland 2012-2014 (= 100%).

Source: RA 2012 face-to-face. Basis: German-speaking population 14+ years; Persons

interested in Iceland/Greenland 2012-2014 (“almost definitely planning” or “generally

considering”); Set of 59 destinations abroad.


76

Source: RA 2012 face-to-face; Basis: Persons not negative towards a nature holiday:,

Interested in Iceland/Greenland 2012-2014 (“almost definitely planning” or “generally

considering”), German-speaking population 14+ years

German

population

Canada 35%

Scotland 32%

Ireland 31%

Sweden 29%

Norway 29%

Iceland 17% 100%

Finland 15%

Wales 14%

Greenland 6% 100%

Faroe Islands 6% 100%

41%

52%

49%

57%

63%

65%

60%

65%

58%

36%

46%

58%

69%

65%

60%

69%

69%

69%

19%

26%

36%

36%

53%

50%

62%

60%

53%


14-70 years “would like to go” to

Greenland, Iceland or the Faroe

Islands within the next 5 years.

» As described earlier, 21% of the

German population would like to

go to the Faroe Islands,

Greenland and/or Iceland in the

next 5 years.

» Prospective travellers to the

Faroe Islands are interested to

travel to 5.1 other Nordic

destinations within the next 5

years, most often to Scotland,

Sweden and Norway.

» Prospective travellers to

Greenland are interested to travel

to 5.4 other Nordic destinations

within the next 5 years, most

often to Iceland, Canada,

Scotland, Ireland.

» Prospective travellers to Iceland

are interested to travel to 4.0

other Nordic destinations within

the next 5 years, most often to

Ireland and Scotland.

Prospective Travellers Faroe/Greenland/Iceland:

They are also very keen to travel to other Nordic destinations.


77



these 8 Nordic destinations in the

next 3 years (= 100%).

North-Western Europe: In the German mind Denmark is the least,

Iceland/Greenland the most “exchangable” destination.

» The Germans are increasingly

interested in various destinations

and holiday types. They are

‘multioptional’ and thus open to

different possibilities for realising

their holiday needs.

» As a result, destinations and

holiday types are becoming

increasingly exchangeable, even

if they differ from each other from

an objective point of view.

» The more alternative destinations

potential customers for a certain

destination have in mind, the

more exchangeable the

destination is.

» Within the destinations in North-

Western Europe, it can be seen

that Denmark, with 2.1

alternatives, is the least

exchangeable destination.

Iceland/Greenland, in

comparison, is the easiest to

exchange.



Procpective travellers to 10 Nordic destinations

4,1

3,8

2,9

2,7

2,7

2,5

2,1

Iceland/Greenland

Finland

Ireland

Sweden

Norway

UK

Denmark

Number of alternative destinations in North-West Europe [Basis: Interest for

the 8 shown destinations] among persons interested those 8 destinations

Inte

res

t n

ex

t th

ree

ye

ars

fo

r …

Exchangeability = Number of alternative destinations

in North-West Europe


78



these ten Nordic destinations in the

next 5 years (= 100%).



Procpective travellers to 10 Nordic destinations

5,4

5,1

4,4

4,2

4,0

3,3

3,3

3,2

3,2

2,6

Greenland

Faroer Islands

Finland

Wales

Iceland

Norway

Sweden

Ireland

Scotland

Canada

Number of alternative Nordic destinations [Basis: Interest for the 10 shown

destinations] among persons interested those 10 destinations

Inte

res

t n

ex

t th

ree

ye

ars

fo

r …

Exchangeability = Number of alternative

Nordic destinations

Nordic destionations: In the German mind Canada is the least,

Greenland the most “exchangable” destination.

» The Germans are increasingly

interested in various destinations

and holiday types. They are

‘multioptional’ and thus open to

different possibilities for realising

their holiday needs.

» As a result, destinations and

holiday types are becoming

increasingly exchangeable, even

if they differ from each other from

an objective point of view.

» The more alternative destinations

potential customers for a certain

destination have in mind, the

more exchangeable the

destination is.

» Within these Nordic destinations,

it can be seen that Canada, with

2.6 alternatives, is the least

exchangeable destination.

Greenland, in comparison, is the

easiest to exchange.


79

Summary

» Potential travellers to Iceland/Greenland have been

to 3.8 different destinations in the last 3 years and

are interested to travel to 28.3 (!) destinations in the

next 3 years.

» Compared to a German average of 2.3 destinations

in the past and 6.2 destinations interested in the

future. This clearly shows the very fierce competition,

that Iceland/Greenland is facing on the German

market.

» Iceland/Greenland has made it into the consideration

set of its potential guests, but has to compete there

against 27 other destinations!

» 79% of the potential guests to Iceland/Greenland

also would like to visit Norway in the same time, 73%

Sweden, 72% Spain.

» The high ranks of Spain, Germany, Italy, France,

Austria, USA etc. also show that the competitors of

Iceland/Greenland are by far not only destinations

with a similar product.

» Looking at the situation of each of the 3 North

Atlantic destination compared to its Nordic

competitors:

» Prospective travellers to the Faroe Islands are

interested to travel to 5.1 other Nordic

destinations in the next 5 years, most often to

Scotland, Sweden and Norway.

» Prospective travellers to Greenland are

interested to travel to 5.4 other Nordic

destinations in the next 5 years, most often to

Iceland, Canada, Scotland, Ireland.

» Prospective travellers to Iceland are interested

to travel to 4.0 other Nordic destinations in the

next 5 years, most often to Ireland and Scotland.

» As a result of an increasing number of destinations

each German is interested to travel to, these

destinations are becoming increasingly

exchangeable, even if they differ from each other

from an objective point of view: The more alternative

destinations potential customers for a certain

destination have in mind, the more exchangeable the

destination is.

» Within the 7 destinations in North-Western Europe,

Denmark is the least exchangeable. Iceland/

Greenland, in comparison, is the easiest to

exchange.

» Within the 10 Nordic destinations, Canada is the

least exchangeable destination. Iceland is ranked 6,

the Faroe Islands and Greenland are the easiest to

exchange.


80









81

Reasons against travelling to Iceland in the low season:

Bad weather, coldness and darkness

20%

23%

4%

7%

7%

9%

9%

9%

13%

20%

28%

29%

Not thought of going in the off-season

There is no objection

Poor air links

Lack of services (eg, in hotels)

Nothing on/boring

Limited availability of natural attractions

Limited opportunities for activities

Too expensive

Other destinations are more interesting

Darkness

Cold

Bad weather » 23% of the persons who are

aware of Iceland as a holiday

destination have no objections

to travel to Iceland in the low

season (not June/July/August).

» 20% have not (yet) thought of

going there in the low season.

» 57% have concrete reasons

for not travelling to Iceland in

the low season.

» Climatic reasons are the

strongest barriers to travel to

Iceland in the low season,

much more significant than

direct limitations of the tourism

product during these times,

compared to the summer

months.




Question: What, in your view, are reasons against a vacation to Iceland in the off-

season (ie not in June/July/August)?

7. Reasons against Iceland in the low season

82

Reasons against travelling to Iceland in the low season:

High similarities between potential guests and not interested persons

17%

26%

7%

8%

5%

12%

12%

9%

9%

24%

25%

29%

Not thought of going in the off-season

There is no objection

Poor air links

Lack of services (eg, in hotels)

Nothing on/boring

Limited availability of natural attractions

Limited opportunities for activities

Too expensive

Other destinations are more interesting

Darkness

Cold

Bad weather

Interest to travelto Iceland

NO Interest totravel to Iceland

» When looking at the image of

the holiday destination Iceland

earlier, we found high

discrepancies between

prospective travellers to

Iceland and persons with no

interest to travel there.

» This is not true for the barriers

against travelling to Iceland in

the low season.

» Figures and ranking of the

barriers are very similar in both

groups.

» A slight but potentially

important difference are the

higher concerns of the

prospective travellers

concerning limitations of the

tourism product (activities,

attractions, service).




Question: What, in your view, are reasons against a vacation to Iceland in the off-

season (ie not in June/July/August)?


83

Summary

» When asked for the potential barriers to travel to

Iceland in the low season, 23% of the persons who

are aware of Iceland as a holiday destinations have

no objections of travelling to Iceland in the low

season (not June/July/August).

» 20% have not (yet) thought of going there in the low

season.

» “Only” 57% have concrete reasons for not travelling

to Iceland in the low season.

» Climatic reasons are the strongest barriers to travel

to Iceland in the low season, much more significant

than direct limitations of the tourism product during

these times, compared to the summer months.

» When looking at the image of the holiday destination

Iceland earlier, we found high discrepancies between

prospective travellers to Iceland and persons with no

interest to travel there.

» This is not true for the barriers against travelling to

Iceland in the low season.

» Figures and ranking of the single barriers are very

similar in both groups.

» A slight but potentially important difference are the

higher concerns of the prospective travellers

concerning limitations of the tourism product

(activities, attractions, service).


84









85

RA 2012 face-to-face

Universe

70.33 million German speakers

over 14 years in private households

in Germany

Net

sample 7,703 people from the universe

Selection

method Random sample (Random route)

Data collection

method

Oral questioning as single study /

survey which covers not only

subjects directly linked to holidays,

but also related subject areas

Period of data

collection January/February 2012

Study profile: Reiseanalyse 2012

Responsible for study FUR - Forschungsgemeinschaft Urlaub

und Reisen e.V.

Field work Ipsos GmbH, Hamburg/Mölln

Scientific partner and organisation NIT - Institut für Tourismus- und

Bäderforschung in Nordeuropa GmbH, Kiel

RA 2012 online 5/2012

Universe

60.3 million German speakers over

14 to 70 years in private

households in Germany

Net

sample 2,515 people from the universe

Selection

method

Random sample

(Online Access Panel)

Data collection

method

Online survey as part of the

Reiseanalyse 2012

Period of data

collection May 2012

8. Study profile

86

Reiseanalyse 2012: Modular concept

8. Study profile

87

Reiseanalyse 2012: further characteristics

» Annually since 1972

» Vast data basis for analysing developments and trends

» extensive experience and methodological compentence

» Non profit: Run by tourism industry association: FUR e.V.

» Multi client: 30 institutions share the costs (around EUR

750.000 per year)

» User influence on RA developments

» Very flexible: Exclusive questions and Modules fit the

survey to your needs

FUR Forschungsgemeinschaft

Urlaub und Reisen e.V.

Fleethörn 23

D-24103 Kiel

Germany

Tel.: +49 431 88 88 800

Fax: +49 431 88 88 679

[email protected]

www.reiseanalyse.de

8. Study profile

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.reiseanalyse.de/

positioning and potentials of greenland, iceland and the faroe … · 2012. 11. 22. · iceland »...

Documents