Report MEGA Tourism Initiative

Transcription

Scott Wayne/ SW Associates, Final Report for SOW #3 -- MEGA Tourism Mission
May-September, 2010
Copyright of these written materials is owned or controlled by The Urban Institute. This information may be
used for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required. In the
event that these materials are changed in any way without the express written permission of the Urban
Institute, the following disclaimer shall be added: "The text of the original document has been altered and the
conclusions, recommendations and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the original
author."
May-September, 2010
Final Report for
MEGA Program Tourism Mission:
Zajecar, Novi Sad, Sombor and Pecinci
September 28th, 2010
Submitted by: Scott Wayne
Tourism Development Consultant to USAID MEGA
SW Associates, LLC
Washington, DC
Municipal Economic Growth Activity (MEGA) in Serbia
Task Order No: EPP-I-02-04-00036-00
Page 2 of 82
May-September, 2010
Contents
I. Summary ..........................................................................................................5
A. Project...........................................................................................................5
B. UI Technical Monitor .....................................................................................5
C. Background...................................................................................................5
D. Purpose of Mission .......................................................................................6
E. Methodology .................................................................................................7
F. Local Tourist Office Survey ...........................................................................8
1.
Relations between the NTO and municipal tourism offices ..................8
2.
Local Tourist Office Survey Highlights................................................11
3.
Local Tourist Office Survey Conclusions ............................................14
4.
Recommendations..............................................................................16
G. Local Survey Results..................................................................................17
1.
Sombor ...............................................................................................17
2.
Zajecar ...............................................................................................26
3. Pecinci .....................................................................................................32
4. Novi Sad ..................................................................................................34
H. Development and launch of the International Visitor Survey ......................41
1.
Evolution of the Survey.......................................................................41
2.
Steps for Launching the Survey..........................................................42
3.
Promotion of the Survey .....................................................................46
Page 3 of 82
May-September, 2010
Annex 1 – National Survey of Local Tourism Offices ..........................................57
Annex 2 – Serbia Visitor Survey .........................................................................63
Annex 3 – List of Social Media and Travel Sites for Promoting the Survey ........72
Page 4 of 82
May-September, 2010
Note: The field portions for this SOW were May 11th-18th and May 28th-June
3rd, 2010, in Pecinci, Sombor, Zajecar and Novi Sad.
Section I (Sub-sections A to the first half of sub-section E) is the same as Trip
Report #3, so scroll to Section I, sub-section E, Methodology for additional
reporting.
I. Summary
A. Project:
Serbia: Municipal Economic Governance Activity (MEGA),
Project # 07765-002-00
B. UI Technical Monitor:
Jelena Bojovic, MEGA LED Team Leader; Mladen Cvetanovic, LED Implementer
C. Background
MEGA has been working with 32 municipalities throughout Serbia towards
accomplishing the following four main goals:
1) Stimulate public-private partnerships
2) Stimulate job growth
3) Attract investment
4) Generate new business
All 32 municipalities expressed an interest in tourism for economic development
with several municipalities applying for support of tourism development projects.
USAID/MEGA approved the following projects:
Page 5 of 82
May-September, 2010
1) City of Novi Sad, project title "Danube bank revival"
2) Municipality of Pecinci, project title "Revival of Obedska Bara”
3) Municipality of Sombor, project title "Ethno houses reconstruction, old crafts
and organic food production"
Although the project proposal from the City of Zajecar was not approved for
USAID/MEGA grant, the Program's management decided to include City of
Zajecar in this special initiative due to significant tourist potential of this city. A
rapid assessment of tourism in four municipalities was undertaken with the
MEGA’s overall project goals and remaining time of approximately six months in
mind.
D. Purpose of Mission
To help maximize the positive impacts of these projects, as well as Zajecar’s
efforts to develop tourism, MEGA contracted Scott Wayne (SW Associates, LLC)
through DAI in February-March 2010 to provide the below:
1) Rapid assessments of existing municipal capacities and resources with
regard to destination marketing, destination management, and designing
tourist products in Zajecar, Novi Sad, Pecinci and Sombor.
2) Provide recommendations to the Municipalities regarding improvements
in each of these areas.
3) Provide recommendations to MEGA Program staff on best ways to use
any additional discretionary resources to further future tourism development
in these municipalities.
The second Scope of Work focused on the third activity of the MEGA Tourism
Initiative:
4) Direct support to municipal counterparts in implementing selected
activities (e.g.,provide training, facilitate discussions, develop demand
scans, develop and analyze surveys).
Page 6 of 82
May-September, 2010
By assisting the municipalities with the development of their market research
capacity, they will be better prepared to understand target markets and
customers, and develop products and plans more precisely and effectively. They
also would be better able to target their limited resources towards attracting
visitors.
With the first National Tourism Forum organized by the National Tourism
Organization (NTO) at Kopaonik Mountain from May 13th to 16th, over 100
stakeholders and representatives from 35 municipalities and other organizations
around Serbia participated. The Forum offered a useful opportunity to assist both
municipalities and the NTO through learning more about tourism market
surveying and being surveyed to determine common priority issues and areas for
possible collaboration.
With this third scope of work the consultant will update the survey results and
expand the analysis conducted during the second scope of work. The consultant
will then provide some final recommendations and next steps for stakeholders to
use in further growing sustainable tourism in Serbia.
E. Methodology
Considering MEGA’s project goals, the goals and time frame of the scope of
work and remaining time for MEGA (approximately two to four weeks at the time
of writing), it was important to follow-up on the first and second visits and
subsequent survey efforts with final analysis of the results.
In particular, the Consultant working closely with Mladen Cvetanovic has through
this Scope of Work:
1. Conducted final analysis of the international and municipal survey results
based on work completed in SOW #2 and the latest survey results
available as of September 2010
Page 7 of 82
May-September, 2010
2. Provided the NTO with recommendations for follow-up actions based on
the national survey of municipal tourism offices that was conducted at the
Kopaonik Forum in May.
F. Local Tourist Office Survey
1. Relations between the NTO and municipal tourism offices
a. As we mentioned in Reports #2 and #3, to further assist the NTO in
understanding the needs and capacity of local offices, we launched a
survey of these offices at the Forum and continued with an online
version that is posted at Google documents in Serbian and available
for easy completion. The survey can be seen at:
http://tiny.cc/4hz22
Page 8 of 82
May-September, 2010
As of mid-September 2010, we received results from 41 local tourism offices.
While this represents about 37% of the 111 offices, the offices that responded
represent the main destinations in Serbia (in bold below) and thus receive most
of the country’s tourism. For example, in 2008, 34% of the country’s tourism
was concentrated just in Belgrade and Novi Sad. It is not possible to tell from
the Statistical Yearbook, though, how many visitors overnighted in other cities
and towns on the same trip.
Here is the list of offices that responded (as of mid-September):
Aleksinac
Arandjelovac
Bač
Bačka Palanka
Bačka Topola
B.Basta
Beograda
Cacka
Despotovac
GornjiMilanovac
Irig
Ivanjica
JP"Valjevoturist"
Kladovo
Koceljeva
Kosjerić
Page 9 of 82
May-September, 2010
Kragujevca
Kraljeva
Krusevca
Lebane
Ljubovija
Loznice
Majdanpek
Medveña
Mladenovca
Nisa
Novog Sada
Oplenac Topola
Raška
Senta
Sjenica
Smedereva
Sombora
StefanNemanja
Temerin
Trstenik
Uzica
VelikoGradiste
Vranje
Zlatar
Zlatibor
Page 10 of 82
May-September, 2010
2. Local Tourist Office Survey Highlights
Most of the tourist offices were established over the past decade, but two offices
stand out as the oldest -- Belgrade and Smedereva – both established in 1953.
Among the other respondents, no other tourist office was established until 1980
(Kosjerić) and then no other offices until 1994. So, tourism is quite a new sector
for most of the country’s municipalities.
•
Only seven LTOs have 10 or more employees. Belgrade, understandably,
has the largest number.
•
73% expect an increased budget for 2011 ranging from 6% to 20%.
•
Budgets for these 43 tourism offices totaled 630,518,104 RSD
(US$7,848,689) in 2010. Belgrade has the largest budget at 120,000,000
RSD (US$1,493,760 = 19% of total).
Over half of this total budget is accounted for by just five tourist offices:
Belgrade, Zlatibor, Novi Sad, Basta, and Raska.
May-September, 2010
•
24 offices (56%) receive some private sector support with about a third
receiving non-financial support and a quarter receiving some marketing
and promotion support.
•
30% have received some form of donor assistance. Donors include
USAID (Mercy Corps, SEDP, MEGA and other programs and projects.)
•
24 of the local tourism offices claim that they conduct some sort of visitor
research, although apparently they are not providing these results to the
NTO.
•
24 have tourism information centers.
•
29 offices have English-speaking staff whereas 16 have German
speakers, nine offices with French and Russian speakers, two Spanish.
No Chinese or Japanese speakers – yet!
•
Nearly a fifth of the offices surveyed do not have any staff who speaks
other languages.
•
All but four have websites.
•
About half of them (23) indicate that they have local tourism plans or
strategies.
•
Almost two thirds (26) do not have marketing plans.
•
More than half say that they provide tourism investment project
information to prospective investors, although it was not possible to tell
from this survey the quality of this information.
Page 12 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
About a third indicated that culture and nature-based tourism are the most
important forms of tourism for them.
Cultural events and monuments 35%
Preserved nature 30%
Business / Business Travel 16%
Sports facilities 0%
Spa and wellness guide 5%
Visits to friends and relatives 0%
Wine Tours 0%
Other
•
Nearly two thirds maintain a database of overnight stays.
Page 13 of 82
May-September, 2010
3. Local Tourist Office Survey Conclusions
•
Relatively few public staff are allocated for tourism, although a majority of
municipalities seem to consider tourism a priority. Trained personnel for
tourism offices are a priority need for developing tourism in communities.
•
With 72% of the respondents expecting budget increases for tourism, this
bodes well for the sector. They believe that their messages about the
importance of tourism to their communities are getting through.
•
With about a third receiving private sector support, their examples could
be beneficial for the other tourist offices, possibly models for them to
replicate.
•
70% of the respondents are not receiving any donor support. We believe
that one of the main reasons for this could be a lack of awareness. Tourist
offices are not taking full advantage of the donor assistance that is
available. In fact, relatively few are tapping this resource.
•
This is an area for further research.
•
Over a third are collecting visitor data, but very little of this data, if any, is
flowing to the NTO. This is a data source that could be valuable to the
NTO. It would also be helpful if guidelines for research are provided by the
NTO to the local offices so that data can be compared.
o MEGA’s tourism assistance with the four municipalities and this
LTO survey all help move in the direction of greater consistency
and coordination in marketing, promotion and tourism development
overall.
•
Tourism information centers are important for the municipalities. With 24
reporting that they have centers, their respective experiences could be
valuable for one another on lessons learned and best practices.
Page 14 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
It is useful to know that a majority have English-speaking staff, but still a
fifth of the LTOs have no foreign language speaking staff, so there is
certainly room for improvement.
•
Four offices reported having no websites, which is a serious handicap for
them, one that could be remedied for nearly free.
•
With nearly half of the offices reporting that they have local tourism plans,
again these are possible sources of shared knowledge that could benefit
other municipalities.
•
Almost two thirds reported having no marketing plans. In most cases, the
main purpose of local tourist offices “is” marketing and promotion, so one
has to wonder what these offices consider as their main purpose. Again,
an area of serious need and improvement.
•
It is promising that more than half provide investment information to
prospective investors, but tourism investment in Serbia has been very
slow, so it is worth reviewing how the municipalities are presenting their
projects. There is definitely room for improvement in this area as well.
•
Culture and nature-based tourism rank as the most important segments –
at least from the perspective of the local offices. This is not surprising
given that these are the country’s chief tourism selling points. The LTOs
report that about a third of all visitors visit cultural and nature sites.
o It is very surprising that no tourism offices are reporting that
wine tourism, visits with friends and families and visits for
sports activities as activities of interest – all of these are
potentially strong tourism segments in Serbia.
•
It is also helpful that nearly two thirds maintain a database of overnight
stays – this could be an excellent source of data for future planning,
especially in coordination with the National Tourism Organization.
Page 15 of 82
May-September, 2010
4. Recommendations
•
Local tourist office training materials should be made available online by
the NTO through their website. The UNWTO offers some materials for
free, which could be useful to local offices.
•
Whenever a local office’s budget is increased, this is news that should be
circulated among all 111 offices.
•
Collect examples of private sector support from the offices that indicated
having received this support and share these examples through an NTO
intranet for tourist offices – a central website maintained by the NTO for
the local offices; access by password only.
•
Perhaps arrange for roundtable discussions between the offices that
received support and those that did not, so they compare notes and
identify opportunities for collaboration, particularly among the 30%+ of
offices that claim to already be conducting some market research.
•
The NTO should ask the local offices for samples of the data that they
have collected. The samples should be factored into the NTO’s action plan
for working with the local offices.
•
Opportunities for donor assistance should be circulated via an electronic
newsletter from the NTO.
•
Best practices on the establishment, organization, management and
funding of tourism information centers should be circulated by the NTO
among the 111 offices.
Page 16 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
Free English lesson podcasts are available online and could be offered or
at least linked to by the NTO website via a special area that is only for the
local offices.
•
Marketing plan outlines for local tourist offices are also something that
could be made available by the NTO on their website.
•
Although more than half of the offices provide information on investment
opportunities, none of this information is being conveyed to the Serbia
Investment and Export Promotion Agency (SIEPA). SIEPA does not list
tourism as a “key industry” and this does not provide any tourism
investment information. Their tourism investment brochure dates from
2005.
•
The lack of interest in wine tourism is especially surprising since the
NTO has invested in marketing and promoting wine tourism around the
country. It is potentially one of the country’s strongest tourism competitive
advantages, but the local tourism offices do not seem to be recognizing
this.
•
The database on overnight stays, which is maintained by two thirds of the
offices, is a potential gold mine of data for helping to organize tourism
development in each municipality.
G. Local Survey Results
1. Sombor
In Sombor in May 2010, we conducted a workshop that resulted in the formation
of a local task force for conducting a visitor survey. Headmaster Dragomir Miljic
volunteered his students as interviewers, but Eleonora Cvejic, Director of the
Sombor Tourist Office, said that they will manage the process.
Participant
Organization
Page 17 of 82
May-September, 2010
Participant
Organization
Angelina Nadj
Turisticka organizacija Sombora
Eleonora Cvejic
Direktor TO Sombor
Dragan Visekrunic
Turisticka organizacija Sombora
Ernest Viselovski
KLER
Jelisaveta Besiznji
Backi Monostor
Mario Danic
Backi Monostor
Avarka Hornjak Mijic
Dida Hornjikov Salas
Dragomir Miljic
Direktor srednje ekonomske skole
Milan Vojnovic
TO Sombor
The Committee took action and began implementing the visitor survey that we
helped them develop. Below are the results of the survey and some
recommendations.
Sombor Results
Who was the typical respondent to the survey?
As of mid-September 2010, Sombor had received 86 responses to their survey.
The typical respondent to the survey was a day visitor (91% of respondents),
most of whom (58%) were visiting for the first time with a majority (48%) visiting
for leisure and a substantial number (29%) visiting for a study program. 37%
were repeat visitors
Page 18 of 82
May-September, 2010
Nearly half of the visitors came through a travel agency and 13% through a
package tour. We assume, however, that those visitors who booked through a
travel agency were actually on a packaged tour, so the question may have been
misinterpreted.
The majority of visitors (83%) came by bus with only 15% arriving by car.
Interestingly, although the nearby river port of Apatin, which is south of Bezdan,
is a stop for some ships, no visitors were surveyed from cruise ships. This is a
gap that is worth filling for future survey efforts.
Of the total 59% were Serbian and the rest were mainly Austrian and Hungarian
visitors. Two thirds were female with 58% of total respondents 45 years and
above and married. And two thirds had an undergraduate or graduate degree
with 46% of the total describing themselves as professionals.
Activities
Most visitors visited the Prefecture to see the Battle of Senta painting, the City
Museum, City Library and Churches. Unfortunately, very few visitors visited the
Milan Konovic or Sava Stojkov galleries or the Gornje Podunavlje protected area
or Backi Monostor.
Page 19 of 82
May-September, 2010
The nearby offers rich ecotourism possibilities such as forest walks and bike
rides, but very few respondents pursued these activities.
Historical and cultural heritage sites ranked high as the places to visit with 47%
and 20% respectively visiting these sites.
•
•
•
•
•
More than of these visitors were satisfied with the cultural attractions
they visited in Sombor. 35% also ranked food quality as high.
54% were very satisfied with their tour guide and 57% were very
satisfied with their travel experience to Sombor.
However, only 24% felt that their experience in Sombor was “unique.”
A very good sign that 38% want to visit Sombor again.
16% of these visitors felt that restaurants were lacking while 61%
indicated “Other” in response to this question, but did not indicate
what.
Spending
Page 20 of 82
May-September, 2010
Most visitors did not answer the spending questions. Of those who did respond
(25% of total), 15% (13 respondents) spent between 10 and 30 euros in
restaurants and cafes, thus generating approximately 200 euros. Assuming a
similar level of spending among the remaining 75%, then about 800 euros was
directly spent.
How did they find out about Sombor?
Most of the respondents learned about Sombor through word-of-mouth (28% of
respondents), television (26%), online (22%), and/or publications (17%).
The Tourism Organization of Sombor and the National Tourism Organization
were cited by only 7% and 3% respectively of respondents as sources of
information about Sombor.
However, the latter facts are not quite accurate because the websites of these
organizations were indicated as prime sources of information for the majority of
visitors. So, visitors are differentiating between obtaining information directly from
these organizations and their websites – or the connection between the two is
not realized. For example, 41% of respondents obtained information from
www.sombor.rs , which is a bit odd since there does not appear to be much
information available on this website.
A quarter of these visitors learned about Sombor either through word of mouth or
through television. Only 15% relied on websites, which is a bit odd since about a
third were planning to post videos and photos of their visits to their Facebook
pages. We wonder whether Facebook is being considered more “word-of-mouth
from family and friends” than internet as a source.
Nearly a third of these visitors were planning to post photos and videos of their
visits to Sombor on Facebook with 53% indicating “Other” for the same.
Page 21 of 82
May-September, 2010
Sombor Conclusions
First the positives…
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Sombor is attracting both domestic and foreign visitors and is receiving
high marks from both groups for their visits.
Most of these visitors are well educated, above 45 years, women and just
visiting for the day on tours organized by travel agencies or tour operators.
o This is usually a demographic that is willing to spend money in a
destination. According to our estimates, each visitor spent only
about 10 euros in Sombor. With more to buy, we believe that this
group would probably have purchased more local goods. Definitely
a missed opportunity!
Over a third are repeat visitors, which bodes well for tourism to Sombor
and thus sends a message that Sombor is building a “following.” Repeat
visitors are also the best source for “spreading the word” about Sombor.
They seemed to enjoy the limited number of places they visited. Repeat
visitors are golden for a destination.
Most of the visitors are arriving by bus on organized trips, so connecting
with the tour organizers before they arrive could help maximize the
potential benefits of their visits. The local tourist office should maintain a
list of the tour organizers and keep them informed of events and activities
in Sombor that might appeal to their customers.
Most of the visitors were interested in historical and cultural sites, thus
generating support for site preservation and management.
A third of these visitors want to share their Sombor experiences online,
especially via Facebook. Over half want to share their experiences
through other means.
Then the negatives…
• These visitors do not seem to be spending much money, which is often a
factor for day visitors who do not find opportunities to spend money in the
destination.
Page 22 of 82
May-September, 2010
• According to some respondents, restaurants need to be better.
• None of the visitors bought souvenirs. A missed opportunity for local
businesses!
• In addition, their visits seem to be mainly limited to the Prefecture, the City
Museum and City Library. Why are they not also visiting other attractions
in and around Sombor? This is a question for their tour organizers.
Perhaps their day trips are too short? Tour organizers are unaware of
Sombor’s other attractions? These visitors are interested in historical and
cultural sites, but are missing some of Sombor’s main sites.
Sombor Recommendations
•
To increase spending, two key recommendations:
o Encourage overnights, perhaps weekends in Sombor, as the
VisitSombor.org website is encouraging. However, the latter needs
to provide information in English and German. Unfortunately, this is
the message that one currently sees on the website:
Page 23 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
o Expand souvenir sales, particularly at the museums where books,
postcards, and other items produced in Sombor could be sold.
One of the best examples in the world is the New York
Metropolitan Museum of Art Store, which sells a wide range
of items based on the art in the museum:
http://store.metmuseum.org/?utm_source=main+homepage
&utm_medium=text+link
The “Somborski kotlić” or bowl (a seafood stew) served in a traditional
bowl should not be missed. This is reason enough to visit Sombor!
Page 24 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
•
Encourage the tour organizers to add the museums and galleries, as well
as Backi Monostor, to their itineraries.
o Including information in English on the visitsombor.org website
would be helpful.
Take advantage of Facebook, YouTube and Flickr
o Over a third of the respondents said that they would be sharing
photos and videos of their Sombor visits online. The tourist office
needs to take advantage of this through having a Facebook page,
YouTube and Flickr sites.
Post photos and videos of Sombor on these sites.
Especially take advantage of these sites in promoting – in
advance – cultural events in Sombor.
•
Feedback, feedback, feedback! Make the visitor survey a permanent
feature on the VisitSombor.org website. Otherwise, how will you learn
why visitors are not going to some of the best sites in the region? Why are
they skipping the galleries, the Gornje Podunavlje protected area and
Backi Monostor.
•
The local tourist office should have copies of the survey available for
visitors to their office and should make it available to local hotels,
museums and galleries.
Page 25 of 82
May-September, 2010
2. Zajecar
In Zajecar in May 2010, we introduced the below participants to the development
of a visitor survey, including discussion of estimating sample size and
determining a venue and target markets for the survey. The group then divided
into two teams, which worked on suggesting questions specific to Zajecar that
could be integrated into a national level visitor survey. Finally, the participants
were asked to form a tourism research committee/task force to begin conducting
a survey this summer. The LED Office took the lead on this process because the
Director of Tourism said that he did not have the capacity to do so. We followed
up with the LED Office, which formed a research committee and began
implementing a visitor survey, which received 43 responses to the online version.
Participant
Organization
Zoran Stamenkovic
Tourist Organization of Zajecar
Saša Petrović
Ekonosmka škola Zaječar
Jelena Milosavljević
Ekonosmka škola Zaječar
Nenad Atanasijević
Član gradskog veća
Sidonija Jelesijevic
RARIS
Suzana Vujić
Kancelarija za LER
Darjan Tošić
Kancelarija za LER
Marija Djordjev
Kancelarija za LER
Ankica Agic
Kancelarija za LER
Jelena Vučković
Kancelarija za LER
Ivana Zivić ðorñević
Kancelarija za LER
Zajecar Results
Page 26 of 82
May-September, 2010
As of mid-September, Zajecar had received 43 responses to their survey – no
change since July. Unfortunately, the Director of Tourism did not become
involved in the process, even making the minimum effort of distributing the
survey from the tourist office, although the MEGA program contacted him
repeatedly. Consequently, the respondent pool for this survey was smaller than
we would have liked.
Most of the respondents (58%) spent only a day in Zajecar, but in a striking
difference compared with Sombor, 23% spent more than five nights. And very
few stayed between one and five nights, which we first thought suggested that
they were visiting for weeklong therapy at the Gamzigradska Spa, but actually
only one person visited the spa among those who stayed more than five nights.
Most visitors (44%) indicated they came for leisure.
Page 27 of 82
May-September, 2010
40% of the respondents have visited Zajecar more than three times and 37%
indicated that this was their first visit.
Since 84% of these visitors came independently by car and none indicated bus
as the mode of transport, participants on organized tours were evidently not
surveyed. One of the main sites in Zajecar, Felix Romuliana, receives tour
groups who presumably arrive by bus, so apparently these types of visitors were
not approached. This is a shame because one of the challenges facing Zajecar is
how to attract group tour visitors into the city. This is a serious gap that should be
addressed during future surveying.
Nearly half of the visitors were families and two thirds of the respondents were
living permanently in Serbia. The visitors were mostly 18 to 24 (33%), followed by
25-34 (19%) and less of other age groups.
Over half (58%) were males, almost two thirds (63%) had university degrees,
28% were professionals.
The international visitors came from France, Czech Republic, Russia, Denmark,
Austria, Germany, Finland and Canada.
Activities
44% reported that their visits were for leisure purposes and only 19% for
business – an important fact considering that the local tourist office wants to
Page 28 of 82
May-September, 2010
promote more business travel, which makes sense especially during the slower
months. Nearly half visited the City Museum and just over half visited Felix
Romuliana.
58% spent only a day in Zajecar with 23% spending more than five nights. We
thought that the latter would probably be visitors to the Gamzigradska Spa, but
only 14% reported visiting the Spa. Another option would be visits with family and
friends, but only 16% said that was their purpose of visit, so this result is a bit of a
mystery.
Lastly, nobody reported visiting Lake Grliško, Lake Sovinac, or Popova Beach
and 2% reported visiting the Radul Begov Gallery, the Ski paths at Kraljevica.
And nobody reported coming to Zajecar for special events. The latter could have
been due to the timing of the survey. However, Zajecar’s natural attractions are
not generating much interest.
Some of this lack of interest may be due to a lack of signage, which was cited by
56% of the respondents as an issue.
Zajecar ranked high on cultural attractions, especially historical attractions (70%
cited high satisfaction), perhaps in part due to local guides who were rated highly
by 47%. And the food quality received three out of five stars from 28%, four stars
from 33% and five stars from 14%.
Spending
Only 19% spent more than 10 euros, but less than 30, on accommodations and
meals during their visits. And 30% bought souvenirs with 16% spending less than
10 euros and 14% spending between 10 and 30 euros.
How did they find out about Zajecar?
42% of Zajecar’s visitors came as a result of recommendations from friends and
family (“word of mouth”) with 18% and 13% using television and internet as their
main sources of information.
Page 29 of 82
May-September, 2010
Popular internet sites for Zajecar information included: Serbia.travel (20%),
zajecar.info (23%), VisitSerbia.org (17%), and Facebook (23%). The local tourist
office and NTO were not cited as sources, although Zajecar.info and
Serbia.travel are the sites for each organization. As with Sombor, respondents
differentiated between the websites and the host organizations of these sites.
Also, as with Sombor, over half (58%) indicated that they would be posting
photos and videos to Facebook. 23% indicated that they would be posting to
other sites.
Zajecar Conclusions
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Almost a quarter of Zajecar’s visitors spent more than five nights. The
reasons for this are not clear; no one pattern could be seen.
The town’s leisure and cultural attractions were the chief attraction for
visitors with 44% citing leisure as their reason for visiting.
Significantly, as with Sombor, Zajecar is attracting multiple repeat
visitors – 40% of the respondents. It was also a good sign that 37%
were visiting for the first time.
And given that nearly half of the respondents were families, there
seems to be potential for attracting more families.
Significantly, nearly a third reported having bought souvenirs.
Word of mouth played an important role in attracting 37% to Zajecar;
the city generally has a very good reputation for tourists.
Although the numbers were limited, it is a very positive sign that
visitors to Zajecar were attracted from several countries.
Also a very positive sign that 58% of visitors planned to post photos
and videos of their visits online.
And related, it is notable that 23% learned about Zajecar from
Facebook and/or Zajecar.info.
Page 30 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
With no visitors from tour groups reporting and yet tour groups are
visiting Felix Romuliana, it is unfortunate that tour group visitors to this
major site were probably not surveyed. An important group was left out
of the survey.
The local tourist office is targeting business travelers, but less than
20% cited business as the purpose of their visit.
Most of the visitors visit only for the day and, although a third bought
souvenirs, most do not spend much money.
Nor are they visiting much more than the City Museum and Felix
Romuliana. Zajecar’s natural attractions were not visited by this group
of respondents.
Gamzigradska Spa was visited by only 14% of respondents.
Signage is cited more than once as an issue.
Food quality and cleanliness are also cited as issues.
Local guides seem to be highly appreciated.
Zajecar Recommendations
• The survey needs to be administered with tour group visitors to Felix
Romuliana. In discussions with stakeholders in May, apparently most
visitors to Felix Romuliana were bypassing the town – a significant lost
opportunity for local businesses and cultural attractions.
• Identify these tour groups and reach out to them, not only for the
survey, but also to encourage them to add the town to their itineraries.
If the local tourist office is not already reaching out to the tour
operators and travel agencies that are selling visits to Felix Romuliana,
they should be. Just getting information to them about the variety of
attractions that Zajecar has to offer should generate more visitors.
• Take advantage of Facebook, YouTube and Flickr
o Over a half of the respondents said that they would be sharing
photos and videos of their Zajecar visits online. The tourist office
Page 31 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
•
•
needs to take advantage of this through a Facebook page of its
own, YouTube and Flickr sites – which could be linked to the
pages and sites of past visitors to Zajecar.
Post photos and videos of Zajecar on these sites.
Especially take advantage of these sites in promoting – in
advance – cultural and sports events in Zajecar.
Make the visitor survey a permanent feature on the Zajecar.info
website.
The local tourist office should have copies of the survey available for
visitors to their office and should make it available to local hotels and
the National Museum.
While it is not fair to generalize too much about tourism to Zajecar
based on only this survey, combined with the strategic planning and
brainstorming sessions organized by MEGA earlier in the year, it
seems that Zajecar is missing some opportunities to expand tourism.
3. Pecinci
The workshop process was repeated in Pecinci with similar results – a tourism
research task force was formed. Six students from the “ucenik Srednje turisticke
skole” actively participated in the workshop – asking questions, brainstorming
questions for a Pecinci/Obedska bara specific questionnaire, and participating in
the discussion. If their parents were in the room, they would have been very
proud. The students were expected to be interviewers for the local survey, which
would be conducted at Hotel Obedska bar. A local task force was being led by
Radmila Saric of the LED office. However, there was not enough tourism to
Pecinci to conduct the survey.
Workshop participants included:
Participant
Organization
Page 32 of 82
May-September, 2010
Participant
Organization
Cvetan Jankovic
Hotel Obedska bara
Jovan Voluevski
Kulturni centar Pecinci
Mara Milovanovic
Udruzenje Sremica
Peter Slobodan
referent zdp "Obedska bara"
Djordje Pejakovic
referent zdp "Obedska bara"
Vladimir Sofrensic
Vojvodina sume
Lait Milovan
Lovacko udruzenje "obedska bara"
Dragana Babic
ucenik Srednje turisticke skole
Katarina Mikic
Aleksandra Ivosevic
Jelena Celebic
Peter Medic
Dordje Sofrenic
Radmila Saric
KLER
Page 33 of 82
May-September, 2010
4. Novi Sad
Again, as with the other municipalities, the participants successfully organized a
task force and drafted an action plan for implementing a local visitor survey. The
local task force conducted an adapted survey in collaboration with a local
university. As of mid-September, they had received 200 responses, but these
were not accessible online and the results were not yet made available.
Below are the participants in the workshop:
Participant
Organization
Bela Muhi
Fakultet poslovne ekonomije
Edukons
Jelena Kovacevic
Fakultet poslovne ekonomije
Edukons
Igor Stamenkovic
PMF departmant za turizam i hotelski
menagment
Dragana Cirakovic
TONS
Danica Ivancevic
Muzej grada Novog Sada
Tihana Vidakovic
TONS
Biljana Ristic
Galerija Matice srpske
Slavica Kalic
TONS
Page 34 of 82
May-September, 2010
Participant
Organization
Marina Klaric
TONS
Gorona Todorovic
EXIT Tim
Biljana Marceta
MAGELAN
As of mid-September 2010, Novi Sad had received 313 responses to their
survey.
Over half (56%) of respondents said that they were planning to stay more than
three nights in Novi Sad: 27% plan to stay for 4 nights and 29% for 6-10 nights.
Most (62%) were visiting for the first time with a majority (51%) visiting for the
EXIT Festival and a substantial number (30%) visiting for other tourist attractions.
Page 35 of 82
May-September, 2010
Most visitors arranged their own trip (83%) with over 36% coming by car, 32% by
bus and 24% by train.
Of the total, 24% were British and the rest were mainly Serbian or Dutch. Almost
two thirds were male and 15-24 years old. And 68% had an undergraduate or
graduate degree.
Over half (58%) said that their living standard was average, while 28% said it
was high. Around 50% have relatively low monthly salary with about a quarter
earning less than 300 euros per month, and 20% 300-600 euros. This is not
surprising given that most of the respondents were students.
Activities
Most respondents visited Novi Sad for the EXIT Festival, although many also
visited other popular attractions such as the Old City Center.
Page 36 of 82
May-September, 2010
Spending
Among the respondents, spending overall seemed very limited with most
spending just on food and drink, again probably a function of the young age and
relatively low incomes of most of the respondents:
•
•
•
•
71% spent up to 25 euros on food and drink
Only 20% bought souvenirs
46% spent up to 25 euros on accommodations and 41% spent nothing on
accommodations.
46% spent up to 25 euros on nightlife and 29% spend nothing in nightlife.
Page 37 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
55% spent nothing in tickets while 30% spent up to 25 euros.
How did they find out about Novi Sad?
Most of the respondents learned about Novi Sad through friends (54%), and
websites (22%). As with Sombor and Zajecar, as well as with the overall online
visitor survey, word of mouth is a very important source of learning about the
destination. It also implies that people who have visited Novi Sad had generally
positive experience and thus recommended it to friends. The most popular
websites visited are www.exitfest.org (51.5%) and Facebook (15%).
Respondents rated most aspects of their experience in Novi Sad well -- nightlife,
general atmosphere, ambiance during the day, evening views of the city earned
more than 4 out of 5 points. Other features received more than 3 points, except
public toilets which received less than 3 points.
Visitors generally agreed that their experience was positive. They said that they
would return and recommend Novi Sad to friends and family.
Again, as with Sombor and Zajecar, a high percentage (55% for Novi Sad) said
that they were planning to post photos and videos of their experiences on
Facebook with 25 % indicating that they would post to “Bez odgovora.”
Novi Sad Conclusions
•
Novi Sad is attracting both domestic and foreign visitors and is receiving
high marks from both groups for their visits.
Page 38 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
Most of these visitors are well educated, around 15-24 years, men and
stay long on self-organized visits.
•
Over a third are repeat visitors, which bodes well for tourism to Novi Sad
and thus sends a message that Novi Sad is building a “following.” Repeat
visitors are also the best source for “spreading the word” about Novi Sad.
•
Most want to share their Novi Sad experiences online, especially via
Facebook.
•
•
•
•
•
Most of the respondents were students with relatively low income and thus
not spending much money.
The quality of the public toilets is lacking.
At least for EXIT Festival attendees, more souvenir sales would have
been expected. Why is the figure only 20%?
And why did only 45% buy tickets with over half attending EXIT.
Lastly, since this survey was conducted around the time of the EXIT
Festival, the results are skewed and cannot be considered representative
of visitors who come at other times.
Novi Sad Recommendations
Among the respondents, most of whom were EXIT Festival attendees, spending
was low on just about everything and yet the Festival attracted 165,000 visitors.
Spending levels of other visitors, particularly cruise ship passengers, need to be
surveyed.
At least for the EXIT Festival attendees, it would be beneficial to explore ways to
increase spending. Surely more than 20% of EXIT Festival attendees bought
souvenirs from the EXIT Shop?
Page 39 of 82
May-September, 2010
EXIT has become a Novi Sad brand that is probably sellable all year long. EXIT
souvenirs should be made available before and after the Festival and online.
As with Sombor, Zajecar and the international survey, Facebook, YouTube and
Flickr are a major source of information and thus outlet for destination marketing.
The local tourism office and Vojvodina online would benefit from leveraging
social media. Currently, neither is offering any information via any social media
channels – at least none that we could find.
Given that most respondents said that they would be sharing photos and videos
of their Novi Sad visits online, the tourist office should leverage these Novi Sad
fans, encourage them to return, follow activities and events in Novi Sad, buy
souvenirs online and, most importantly, and spread the word.
Page 40 of 82
May-September, 2010
H. Development and launch of the International Visitor
Survey
Note: Sections 1 and 2 are unchanged from the previous report because they
provide useful background on the development of the survey. Section 3 has been
slightly updated. And Section 4 provides the latest results.
1. Evolution of the Survey
Page 41 of 82
May-September, 2010
2. Steps for Launching the Survey
The following steps were pursued for developing and launching an international
visitor survey of past visitors to Serbia:
•
A general international visitor survey was drafted based on international
standards and advice from Dr. Doug Frechtling.
Page 42 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
The survey was reviewed by the National Tourism Organization and some
adjustments were made.
•
The survey was posted and adjusted for Google Documents, a free and
efficient service for administering surveys.
•
Each question was scrutinized for effective presentation and again some
adjustments were made.
•
We presented the survey to the National Tourism Organization and
received their agreement with posting the survey on their website and
informing their public relations representatives in Germany, Austria, Italy,
Spain, the Netherlands and the UK. As of the first week of August, the
representatives were expected to encourage tour operators in their
markets to distribute the survey to their past customers who visited Serbia.
Page 43 of 82
May-September, 2010
This has never been done before, so we do not have any precedent for
comparison.
•
In order to track and monitor visits to the survey, we embedded the survey
in a blog specifically established only for the survey. See the following
screenshot from the blog.
To track visitors, we embedded Google Analytics tracking code into the site, so
that reports such as the following will be generated:
Page 44 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
In addition to seeking survey responses, we realized that the survey could
also be used to generate increased traffic to the NTO’s Serbia.travel
website by embedding the blog into a dedicated page on their website:
o http://www.serbia.travel/serbiantourismsurvey-eng.html
Page 45 of 82
May-September, 2010
3. Promotion of the Survey
•
Serbian Tourism Survey pages set up on and/or promoted through
Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, YouTube, TravBuddy, TripAdvisor and many
others.
Page 46 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
Our Facebook page generated a fair amount of conversation and attracted
63 “friends.
•
As of mid-September, the Facebook page has been overflowing with
activity from people interested in Serbian tourism.
Page 47 of 82
May-September, 2010
•
•
•
To increase responses, the Magelan Tour Company in Novi Sad agreed to
post the survey on their website and offer a free weekend in Belgrade as a
prize for a drawing. With less than 100 responses, we did not feel that the
promotion succeeded, so the drawing remains open.
The Internet Serbia Travel News published an article and link to the
survey in their twice monthly newsletter the first of July. The newsletter
was circulated to 9,450 Serbia travel fans.
Page 48 of 82
May-September, 2010
However, even with all of the promotion of the survey, the effort did not succeed
to the extent that we hoped. One of the biggest lessons learned was that
competition for eyeballs and attention online is fierce and unpredictable – unless
linked to celebrities and sports figures. In short, our survey effort was just not
compelling enough, although those who responded were avid fans of Serbia with
most intent on returning.
Results of the Survey
As of mid-September 2010, only 78 responses had been received, which is an
insufficient sample size. We had originally estimated that a sample size of about
300 would be helpful. However, if combined with the visitor surveys for Sombor
(86), Novi Sad (313), and Zajecar (43), a total of 520 visitors were surveyed,
which is a workable sample size, the minimum recommended by Dr. Doug
Page 49 of 82
May-September, 2010
Frechtling for a visitor survey. The survey responses could not, however, be
combined because the questions for the international survey were not site
specific.
Facebook ranked high with all respondents as a source of information and a site
for sharing their experiences – higher than accessing information from local
tourist offices and the NTO, although their websites were distinguished from the
organizations as sources of information. Regardless, the results reaffirm the
importance of an online presence, particularly via social media.
Another key trend was repeat visits. Serbia is blessed by this trend – a trend that
destination marketers worldwide crave.
The survey respondents were 56% male, over half between the ages of 25 and
44, 60% single and 83% with a university degree. Over a third (37%) were selfemployed or owned a company, professionals (36%) or were managers (12%).
Page 50 of 82
May-September, 2010
More than a third (36%) stayed for more than five nights and a remarkable 59%
were repeat visitors with 41% having visited more than three times. The survey
respondents were evidently very supportive of Serbian tourism.
Page 51 of 82
May-September, 2010
The majority of respondents (70%) visited Serbia independently with about half
arriving by plane and 42% traveling alone.
No single nationality dominated the responses. At least 14 countries were
represented.
Activities
Page 52 of 82
May-September, 2010
With nearly a third (29%) reporting their purpose as visits with friends and
relatives, this is a substantial proportion that merits further analysis. Spending
among this segment generally tends to be significantly lower. None of these
respondents reported spending any money in hotels or restaurants, which is
generally not typical; usually some money is spent at least in restaurants. An
investment in marketing to this segment could be worthwhile.
With such a high percentage of travelers visiting Serbia independently, the
website is especially important – the main source of destination information for
travelers, especially independent travelers, today. TripAdvisor tops the list of
sources according to online travel research firm PhocusWright.
52% of potential travellers search 3 or more sites before booking
their airfare, according to a recent survey by Bing Travel. 42% of
travellers spend between 1 and 4 weeks weighing their travel
options and 17% spend more than a month.
Page 53 of 82
May-September, 2010
Between 40% and 50% of respondents visited small towns and villages, historical
places and cultural heritage sites. Surprisingly, wine tasting attracted only 7%,
bird-watching 2% and taking a cruise only 9% -- all activities in which Serbia
could have an international competitive advantage.
Art exhibits and musical performances attracted over a third (35%) of
respondents – a positive sign for an area in which Serbia also has an
international competitive advantage. Walks and hikes attracted 21% of
respondents – definitely a segment to watch.
Prices
Page 54 of 82
May-September, 2010
Almost two thirds (58%) found Serbia to be moderate and over a quarter (27%)
found the country inexpensive.
What were your main sources of information about Serbia?
Although internet use is less than what Bing Travel estimated in their survey,
42% is a very significant figure, one that further underscores the importance of
internet marketing for reaching visitors. Word-of-mouth is also often linked to
Page 55 of 82
May-September, 2010
internet access since social media channels are fast becoming popular means of
obtaining recommendations for places to visit.
Again, as with the survey results in Sombor and Zajecar, the NTO was not
considered a prime source of information about Serbia – only 4%. And yet,
Serbia.travel – the NTO’s website – was listed by almost a third (31%) as one of
the sites visited for information.
Other popular sites included VisitSerbia.org (48%), Facebook (27%), Lonely
Planet (23%) and TripAdvisor (16%).
Page 56 of 82
May-September, 2010
As with respondents in Sombor and Zajecar, more than 20% (28% among this
group) planned to post photos and videos to Facebook and 13% to Flickr.
Serbia rates well as a destination with the majority of respondents. Nearly half
gave their travel experience in Serbia five stars, but less (37%) gave five stars to
the uniqueness of their experience. And 56% rated their visit as “better than
expected.”
Annex 1 – National Survey of Local Tourism
Offices
Survey for National Tourism Forum Participants
The purpose of this survey is to assist the National Tourism Organization and
Forum participants with planning and developing their tourism. This survey will
only require 10 minutes to complete. The results will hopefully be presented at
the Forum.
Note: Only one respondent is needed per organization or business.
Name of respondent and position:
Name of Business or Organization:
When was it established:
Number of full time staff:
Number of part time staff:
Page 57 of 82
May-September, 2010
1. What was the office’s total budget for 2009 and 2010?
2009 ___________
2010 ___________
Do you hope for an increased budget in 2011?
Yes
No
If yes, what %_________ increase?
2. Does the office receive any private sector support or sponsorship?
Yes
No
If yes, what support did you receive?
Financial
In-kind support
Marketing and promotion
Other ____________
3. Has your organization received financial support for tourism projects from
international donor organizations?
__USAID, __EU, __Others
If yes, which organizations , what projects, how much support and what results
have you achieved?
Page 58 of 82
May-September, 2010
________________________________________________________________
_
________________________________________________________________
_
4. Does your municipality conduct visitor surveys?
A. Never
B. once a month
C. once a year
D. randomly
5. Do you have someplace where visitors can get information?
A. Tourism Information Center
B. Kiosk on Bus or Train station
6. Do you provided printed information to visitors
Yes
No
7. Does all your staff speak English languages?
Yes
No
8. Does your staff speak other languages?
A. English
B. German
C. Spanish
Page 59 of 82
May-September, 2010
D. French
E. Chinese
F. Japanese
G. Turkish
9. Do you have a website with visitor information? If so, what is the
address_____________________
10. Do you have a local tourism strategy plan?
Yes
No
11. Do you have a local tourism marketing plan?
Yes
No
12. Do you have information available for domestic and international about
potential tourism investments such as such as hotels, spas, aqua parks, sport
facilities, and restaurants?.....
Yes
No
13. How many new accommodations have been built over past two years?
Number of facilities
Number of rooms
Hotels
Hostels
Overnight stay or Salaš
Page 60 of 82
May-September, 2010
Campgrounds
Not applicable
Tourist apartments
14. What are the main reasons people visit your municipality and attractions?
(Please rank these in order of importance from 1 (most important) to 8 (least
important):
A. Cultural sites
____
B. Winery visits
____
C. Parks or other natural areas
____
D. Sports activities
____
E. Spa and wellness
____
F. Business
____
G. Visits with friends and relatives
____
H. Other (please state)_________
____
15. What is the estimated average daily expenditure of a visitor in your
municipality? Please indicate in EUROs.
Domestic
Foreign
________
________
I don't know
16. In 2009, what approximate percentage of visitors traveled to your sites by
Page 61 of 82
May-September, 2010
a.
b.
c.
d.
Bus
____%
Car
____%
Rail
____%
Do not know __
17. In 2009, how many and what percentage of your visitors were
a. Serbian
____%
b. Foreign
____%
a. Which countries?
c. Do not know __
18. Does the municipality obtain visitor data from hotel registration cards?
Yes
No
Page 62 of 82
May-September, 2010
Annex 2 – Serbia Visitor Survey
The purpose of this survey is to help develop and increase tourism in Serbia. As
a past visitor to Serbia, your feedback through this short survey is very valuable
and greatly appreciated. This survey is being conducted for the National Tourism
Organization with the support of the US Agency for International Development’s
through Municipal Economic Growth Activity program in Serbia.
1.
Have you visited Serbia since January 2008? A. Yes B. No
2.
Before your first visit to Serbia, how did you hear about Serbia?
(Please select all that apply)
a. Television b. Word of mouth c. Guidebooks /Magazines/Newspapers
d. Internet e. Tour Brochure f. Tour operator
Organization h. other (please specify)_______
g. National Tourism
3. How many times have you visited Serbia?: a. 1 time
times d. more than three times
Page 63 of 82
b. 2 times
c. 3
May-September, 2010
4 . Thinking of your most recent trip to Serbia, how long did you stay?: a. day trip
(no overnight stay) b. one night c. two nights
d. three nights
e. four
nights
f. five nights
g. More than five nights
5 . What was the main Purpose of your most recent visit to Serbia: a. business
b. leisure c. study/attend school d. visit friends or relatives
e. other (please specify)_______
6. How was your travel to Serbia organized on your most recent trip ? a.
Package tour b. Independent tour c. Other (Please specify)__________
7. What transportation did you use to arrive in Serbia on this trip ? : a. Airplane,
b. Car, c. Bus, d. Train, e. Ship/Boat f. Other (please specify) _____________
How many people traveled with you on this trip, where you shared expenses ? a.
None-I traveled alone b. One other, c. Two or more others
8. Please record below how much your travel party (individual, couple or family)
spent in Serbia during your trip on (Euros).
Hotel ________
Meals_________
Admissions_______
Souvenirs______
Page 64 of 82
May-September, 2010
Entertainment _____
Other miscellaneous___
TOTAL:__________
9. Please indicate the cities /attractions that you visited while in Serbia on your
most recent trip. (Select all that apply)
a. Belgrade b. Zajecar c. Novi Sad
list]___
d. Sombor
e. Pecinci
f. other_[add
[SEPARATE SETS OF QUESTIONS ARE INCLUDED ONLINE FOR EACH OF
THESE CITIES]
10. What activities did you participate in during your most recent visit to Serbia?
(Please highlight all that apply)
a. Visiting small towns and villages
b. visiting historical places c. visiting
cultural heritage sites
d. attending art or musical performance
e. wine tasting
f. bird-watching
g. bicycling
h. taking cruise
i. skiing j. extreme sports and k. other (please specify)_______
11. For your most recent trip to Serbia, please rate below your satisfaction of
following travel attributes on a five-point scale.
Page 65 of 82
May-September, 2010
(1- least satisfied 3-neutral
1
5- most satisfied)
2
3
4
5 No opinion
Nature
Culture
History
Safety/security
Food
Nightlife
Service standards
Hotel, restaurant and other service employees
Cleanliness
Lodging facility
Signage
Transportation
Page 66 of 82
May-September, 2010
12. For your most recent visit to Serbia, please rate your satisfaction of the
following specific tourist activities on a five-point scale. (1- least satisfied 3neutral 5- most satisfied)
1
2
3
4
5 No
opinion
Wine tasting
Bird watching
Bicycling
Cruise
Spas
Art/music performance
Visit local community
Skiing
Extreme sports
Other (please specify) ____
Page 67 of 82
May-September, 2010
13. What do you think about the prices during your most recent visit to Serbia?
a. Inexpensive b. Moderate d. Expensive e. Very expensive f. Don’t know
14. Please rate the following statement on a five-point scale (1-strongly disagree,
3-neutral, 5- Strongly agree)
1
4
2
3
5
My travel experience to Serbia was positive
My travel experience in Serbia was unique
Serbia is better than my perception before visiting
I want to visit Serbia again
I was disappointed in my visit to Serbia
I will tell my family and friends to visit Serbia
3.
Where do you permanently live (Country)? _[add drop down list]_______
Page 68 of 82
May-September, 2010
4.
Gender:
a. male
5.
Age: a. under 18 years old
d. 35-44 years
6.
b. female
b. 18-24 years
e. 45-54 years
f. 55 years or older
Marital status:
a. Single, never married b. Married
7.
c. 25-34 years
c. Widowed or divorced
What is the highest level of education you completed?
a. High School b. Vocational trade school c. College/university bachelor’s
degree d. Post-graduate degree
8.
What is your profession? _[add drop-down list of possibilities, extract from
online jobs site]___________:
Self-employed / owner of company
Management, business and financial operations
Page 69 of 82
May-September, 2010
Professional and related (engineers, scientists, doctors, teachers,
lawyers, artists, entertainers, athletes, etc.)
Sales and office
Service occupations (business, personal, protective, health, and
hospitality)
Construction, maintenance and natural resources
Production, transportation and materials
Active duty military
Unemployed, looking for work
Not in labor force (includes students and retired)
15. I have posted or will post videos and/or photos from my visit to the following
Internet sites:
Facebook
MySpace
YouTube
Flickr
Page 70 of 82
May-September, 2010
Shutterfly
Other___
None of the above
Please feel free to send us links to your photos and videos. (provide hot link to
URL here)
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION IN OUR SURVEY
Page 71 of 82
May-September, 2010
Annex 3 – List of Social Media and Travel Sites for
Promoting the Survey
Directory of Serbia-Related Travel Websites
I. General Social Networking
II. General Travel Resources
III. Travel Blogs
IV. Travel Sites
V. Interest/Culture Sites
VI. Serbian Related Associations
I.
Website
Facebook
Page: EXIT
Festival
Facebook
Page:
Bird watching
Serbia
Facebook
Community
Page:
Belgrade,
Serbia
Facebook
Description
-64, 544 like this
page
General Social Networking
Location
http://www.facebook.com/#!/exit.festival?v=wall&re
f=search
-16 like this page
-Bird watching Serbia
is an organization
which provides bird
watching in real
nature environment in
the Serbia.
-3,140 like this page
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3658744
3&id=6901254#!/pages/BirdwatchingSerbia/323343564726?v=info&ref=ts
-989 like this page
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Belgrade-
http://www.facebook.com/pages/BelgradeSerbia/109920975697736?v=desc&ref=ts
Page 72 of 82
Contact
Jelena
White
jelena_3x
@yahoo.
com
+3826768
2798
May-September, 2010
I.
Website
Community
Page: Novi
Sad, Serbia
Facebook
Page: Serbia
Facebook
Page:
Beautiful
Serbia
Facebook
Group:
Serbiatourism
Facebook
Group:
Beautiful
Serbia
MySpace
Flickr
One World
YouTube
Hi5
Yahoo Buzz
Twitter
Description
-175,430 like this
page
-10,871 like this page
Created by:
http://www.viabalkans
.com/en/
-258 members
-travel group
-4,010 members
-In English & Serbian
-US-created social
media site that
includes bulletins,
group, and individual
pages
-image and video
posting online
community
-TV/video database
that has group and
people pages
-video posting online
community
-US-created social
networking site
-community based
news article website
-online community
Location
Serbia/109920975697736?v=stream&ref=ts#!/pag
es/Novi-Sad-Serbia/106342896071173?ref=ts
Contact
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Serbia/183798787
01?ref=search&sid=5313307.1766445192..1
http://www.serbia-online.info/
http://www.facebook.com/pages/BeautifulSerbia/50430808084?ref=search&sid=5313307.17
66445192..1
http://www.facebook.com/search/?init=srp&sfxp=&
q=serbia&o=69&c1=4&c2=76#!/group.php?gid=24
7387582554&ref=search&sid=5313307.17664451
92..1
http://www.facebook.com/search/?init=srp&sfxp&q
=serbia&o=69&c1=4&c2=76#!/group.php?gid=735
38382574&ref=search&sid=5313307.1766445192.
.1
http://groups.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=
groups.listgroups&lang=en&searchString=serbia&s
earchType=Key&CategoryId=25&Country=UK&Sta
te=0&miles=&zipcode=&OrderBy=2
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=serbia
http://tv.oneworld.net/search/serbia
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ser
bia&aq=f
http://hi5.com/friend/processBrowseSearch
.do?searchText=serbia
http://buzz.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=Amgb6Y9EuOO
h4r9ePjFDTKxzfNdF?p=serbia
http://twitter.com/#search?q=serbia
Page 73 of 82
mitrovicb
ojan82@
yahoo.co
m
sd.sladja
na@gmai
l.com
May-September, 2010
Website
Badoo
SkyRock
Copains
Davant
Net Log
Serbian
Nostalgia
LinkedIn
MocoSpace
Nexopia
Wikipedia
Google Buzz
Newsvine
Digg
Trombi
Lexode
Viadeo
I.
Description
with micro blogging
-online dating
-French social media
site, similar to
Facebook
-15 groups for Serbia
-French site used to
search for old school
friends
-blogging/social
media site available
in all languages/
countries
-Serbian social media
site
-professional
networking site
-mobile social
network site
-Canadian social
networking site
-free encyclopedia
-social networking
and messaging tool
-community powered
collaborative
journalism
-social news website
-French networking
site to find old
classmates
-French social media
site for ages 12-24
-professional
networking site used
Location
http://badoo.com/
http://www.skyrock.com/search/groups/?q=serbia
http://copainsdavant.linternaute.com/
http://sr.netlog.com/
http://serbiannostalgia.ning.com/
http://www.linkedin.com/
http://www.mocospace.com/
http://www.nexopia.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbia
http://www.google.com/buzz
http://www.newsvine.com/
http://digg.com/search?s=serbia
http://www.trombi.com/
http://www.lexode.com/home/
http://www.viadeo.com/en/connexion/
Page 74 of 82
Contact
May-September, 2010
I.
Website
Travelistic
Description
in France
-travel videos
Location
Contact
http://www.travelistic.com/places/6683/Serbia-andMontenegro
**Note: There are 181 Serbian Travel Group Pages on Facebook.**
Website
U.S. State Dept.
International
Student Identity
Card
Serbian EmbassyU.S.
CIA World
Factbook
Serbian EmbassyU.K.
WHO
CDC
Website
Travelblog.org
II. General Travel Resources
Description
Location
-official site
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5388.ht
m
-official site
http://www.isic.org/studenttravel/events/Europe/Serbia/CityofBelgr
ade/Belgrade/AllCategories.aspx?page
=1
-official site
http://www.serbiaembusa.org/
-official site
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/t
he-world-factbook/geos/ri.html
http://ukinserbia.fco.gov.uk/en/about-us/
-official site
-travel health
information
-travel health
information
http://www.who.int/countries/srb/en/
http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/destinations
/serbia.aspx
III. Travel Blogs
Description
Location
-directory of travel blogs http://www.travelblog.org/Europe/Serbia
in Serbia
/
Page 75 of 82
May-September, 2010
Hospitality Club
Trip Advisor
Forum
Lonely Plant
Thorntree
IGoUGo
Where Are You
Now?
Virtual Tourist
Passport Stamp
TravBuddy.com
Travellerspoint
Wordpress
Hotel Blogs
-international, internetbased hospitality
service
-forum about travel in
Serbia
-web based travel
forum operated by
Australian travel book
company
-online travel
community and travelplanning resources
-social networking site
to unite travelers from
around the globe
-travel oriented
community website
including forums,
photos, reviews, and
social media
-2573 members visited
-112 Serbia travel blogs
-social media travel site
-travel forum, blogs,
photos
-blogs with travel
sections
-how to book last
minute travel
-insider scoop on hotels
http://secure.hospitalityclub.org/hc/travel
_guide.php?wgInfo=Serbia
http://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowForumg294471-i4872-Serbia.html
http://www.lonelyplanet.com/thorntree/fo
rum.jspa?forumID=15&keywordid=247
http://www.igougo.com/travel_guidel8835-Serbia_tourism.html
http://www.wayn.com/waynsplash.html
http://www.virtualtourist.com/travel/Euro
pe/Republic_of_Serbia/TravelGuideRepublic_of_Serbia.html
http://www.passportstamp.com/place/se
rbia
http://www.travbuddy.com/Serbia-travelguide-c277
http://www.travellerspoint.com/guide/Se
rbia/
http://en.search.wordpress.com/?q=ser
bia
http://www.hotel-blogs.com
Page 76 of 82
May-September, 2010
Business Travel
Logue
Website
Hostel World
Student and
Youth Travel
Association
(SYTA)
STA Travel
SYTA Youth
Foundation
Yahoo Travel
National Tourism
Organization of
Serbia
Visit Serbia
Jat Airways
Attitude Travel
WikiTravel
Discover Serbia
-provides details about
how to “make the most
of work related travel”
http://www.businesstravellogue.com/?s
=serbia
IV. Travel Sites
Description
Location
-hostel information
http://www.hostelworld.com/countries/se
rbiahostels.html
-non-profit professional http://www.syta.com/
trade association that
promotes student and
youth travel
-discount student travel http://www.statravel.com/
agency
-philanthropic sister
http://www.sytayouthfoundation.org/inde
organization to SYTA
x.php
-travel guides and
http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguidecheap trip planning
473736-yugoslavia_vacationsresources
i;_ylt=AkEJpefohrjysDHmEjI2eJ78xmoA
-official website
http://www.serbia.travel/
-travel site for Serbia
-national airline of
Serbia
-low fare flights to
Serbia
-travel information
about Serbia
-travel information
http://www.serbia-visit.com/
http://www.jat.com/active/en/home.html
http://www.attitudetravel.com/serbia/low
costairlines/
http://wikitravel.org/en/Serbia
http://www.discoverserbia.org/en
Page 77 of 82
May-September, 2010
World Tourism
Directory
iGuide
iGuide Flights
Belgrade Nikola
Tesla Airport
City Index
about Serbia
-travel directory for
Serbia
-travel information
about Serbia
-list of airlines that fly to
Serbia
-official airport website
-hotels in Serbia
Venere
-hotels in Serbia
Serbia Tourist
Guide
Real Adventures
-unofficial Serbian
tourism website
-eco tourism travel site
TravelSerbia.info
-travel information
about Serbia
-travel planning
information including
reviews and photos
-Serbian cruises
Travel With
Gusto!
VOYAGES
Vacations To Go
Go To Serbia
Archer’s Direct
Budget Travel
-discount Serbian
cruises
-Danube cruises
-trips to Serbia,
including cruises
-budget travel
http://www.worldtourismdirectory.com/di
rectory/europe/serbia/index.html
http://iguide.travel/Serbia
http://iguide.travel/Serbia#Flights
http://www.beg.aero/code/navigate.php
?Id=54
http://cityindextravel.com/serbia/index.ht
ml
http://www.venere.com/serbiamontenegro/belgrade/
http://www.serbiatouristguide.com/
http://realadventures.com/vacations/103
196_ecotour-serbia-montenegro.htm
http://www.travelserbia.info/
http://www.gusto.com/serbiaandmonten
egro/Country221Search.html
http://www.alvoyages.com/articles/euro
pe/serbia-and-montenegro.html
http://www.vacationstogo.com/cruise_p
ort/Belgrade__Serbia.cfm
http://www.gotoserbia.eu/Danube_cruisi
ng.php
http://www.archersdirect.co.uk/serbia
http://budgettravel.com/bt-
Page 78 of 82
May-September, 2010
information
Hostels.net
Contiki
Cruisemates
Kayak
cFares
Hotel Book
Triporama
Boots n All
Planet Ware
Real Travel
Website
Belgrade.com
-hostel information in
Serbia
-Serbia vacation
information for 18 to 35
year olds
-cruise information,
blogs, and reviews
-travel search engine
-travel website with low
fares
-alternative hotel
options
-group trip planning
-one stop indie travel
guide
-travel guide for around
the world
-voted as one of best
12 travel sides
-obtain and share
information from other
travelers
srv/search_results.html?cx=002665807
832156606386%3Azhe9ptqkco&cof=FORID%3A10%3BNB%3A1
&ie=UTF-8&q=serbia#892
http://www1.hostelworld.com/countries/s
erbiahostels.html
http://contiki.com/search?terms=serbia
http://www.cruisemates.com/
http://www.kayak.com/
http://www.cfares.com/
http://www.hotelbook.com/en/
http://www.triporama.com/
http://www.bootsnall.com/
http://www.planetware.com/
http://www.realtravel.com
V. Interest/Culture Sites
Description
Location
-Serbian cuisine blog &
http://www.belgraded.com/food/articles/
information
serbian-cuisine
Page 79 of 82
May-September, 2010
EXIT Festival
National
Geographic
Music
Serbian Football
B92
Blic
Bird Watching
Serbia
Info Hub
Wild Serbia
Fat Birding
Visit Serbia
Bird Watching
Breaks
Website
National Tourism
Association of
Serbia
-official site for music
festival
-music information for
Serbian artists
-information about
Serbian football team
-Serbian news site
-popular Serbian news
sites
-tours and information
on Serbian bird
watching
-tours and information
on Serbian bird
watching
-information and guide
about bird watching in
Serbia
-information about
Serbian bird watching
-section of website
about bird watching
-bird watching
information and tours
http://www.exitfest.org/
http://worldmusic.nationalgeographic.co
m/view/page.basic/country/content.coun
try/serbia___montenegro_879
http://www.serbianfootball.com/
http://www.b92.net/eng/
http://www.blic.rs/ww.blic.rs
http://www.birdwatchserbia.com/
[email protected]
http://www.infohub.com/travel_package
s/birding_serbia_221.html
http://www.wild-serbia.com/milan_ruziceng.html
http://www.fatbirder.com/links_geo/euro
pe/serbia.html
http://www.visitserbia.org/Birdwatching93-32-1
http://www.birdwatchingbreaks.com/Ser
bia.htm
VI. Serbian Related Associations
Description
Location
-official tourism
http://www.serbia.tr
association of Serbia
avel/
Page 80 of 82
Contact
[email protected]
vel
May-September, 2010
Serbian Council
of Great Britain
British Council
-organization for Serbs
in the UK
in the UK
http://www.serbianc
ouncil.org.uk/
http://www.britishco
uncil.org/serbia.htm
Serbian-French
Brotherhood
in France
http://fraternitefs.fre
e.fr/
MOSAIK
-association/networking
site for professional
Serbs in France
-sport and culture
association, in French &
Serbian
http://mosaikfrance.fr/
info@britistcouncil
.rs
(p) +381 11 3023
80
[email protected]
(p) +33 (0) 618
181 787
contact@mousaik
-france.fr
http://www.orlovi.co
m/
webmaster@orlov
i.com
Youth Hostels
Association of
Serbia
-hostel association
http://serbiahostels.org/
[email protected].
yu
(p)324-85-50 i
322-07-62
Camping
Association of
Serbia
Institute for
Nature
Conservation of
Serbia
Bird Study and
Protection
Society of
-camping association
http://www.camping
.rs/en/
[email protected]
(p)+38111324857
7
-official site, under
construction
http://www.naturepr
otection.org.rs/
-network of active
members concerned
with protection of birds
http://www.pticevojv mtucakov@eunet.
odine.rs/
rs
+381
Sport and Culture
Association of
Serbia
Page 81 of 82
May-September, 2010
Vojvodina
League for
Ornithological
Action of Serbia
Birds of Prey
Protection
Foundation
Belgrade
Serbian Cycling
Federation
214896306
-dedicated to protection
of birds, increasing
education, and
educating Serbia
-official site, no English
translation
-official site, no English
translation
http://www.ptica.org [email protected]
/engl/index.htm
+381 (0)63
7669239
http://www.vulture.o [email protected]
rg.rs/
c.rs
+ 381 11
2078352
http://www.bss.rs/
[email protected]
+381 11 3234616
European Cycling -official site
Union
http://uecfederation.eu/
National
Association of
Ecotourism
Serbia
http://www.ecotouri
smserbia.com/
-official site
Page 82 of 82
[email protected]
(+41) 44 912 04
46,
[email protected]
+381 22 617
522

Report MEGA Tourism Initiative

Transcription

Similar documents

When I think about Internet

texas a venue louisiana street milam street capitol street

HIP-Petrohemija is the largest producer of petrochemicals in the

PSI Presentation - Peaceful Schools International

Tourism program brochure

- MEGA Sign Inc.

INTECAP, Guatemala