Synergy between retail and leisure

Synergy between retail and leisure A study of cinemas, casinos and bowling centers in retail areas Willem van der Ven 14 October 2008 MRE 2005‐2007 External coordinator Internal coordinator drs. J.W. Speentjes MRE drs. J.J. Sentel 1 2 Executive summary The ambition to combine leisure and retail is present in many real estate developments in The Netherlands. Yet, it is often unsure whether these ambitions are advisable from a market point of view. Many of the publications on synergy between retail and leisure, often based on large‐scale developments abroad, may have been too positive on the applicability of results to the Dutch market. This study examines synergy from the viewpoint of an operator: what (if any) are the advantages for a retail or leisure operator to be part of a retail environment, as compared to a stand‐alone operation? The central question of this study is defined as: “Can a combination of independently functioning retail and leisure components within a real estate development lead to synergy?” The focus in this study is on three different forms of magnet leisure, meaning operations that are often included in a retail environment, but are also viable operations in a stand‐alone situation. The three leisure components are cinema, casino and bowling center. For each of these, interviews were held with selected operators, and over 1.000 questionnaires were analyzed from leisure visitors to 11 different venues. The questionnaires focused on the potential footfall and turnover benefits from a combination of retail and leisure. The existence of combination visits is one of the main important indicators for synergy effects and one of the more important conclusions from this study. Synergy effects were measured along four indicators: (1) increase of catchment area, (2) increase in visit duration, (3) higher spend per visit and (4) increase in repeat visits. For cinemas, the results from this study generally confirm results in earlier publications. There is high level of combination visits (approximately 60%) between cinemas and retail in the surrounding area. Combined with a high average retail spend of cinema visitors, and the large number of footfall generated by cinemas, this means that cinemas potentially represent a significant turnover opportunity for adjacent retail. Likewise, the survey showed that consumers are more inclined to visit cinemas within a retail area, because of the possibility to combine a visit to the cinema with shopping. The level of repeat visits is high (19 times per year), and the cinema clearly has a positive effect on the visit duration. Literature research showed no evidence of synergy potential between retail and casinos. This has been sharply contradicted by research in this study. Of all casino visitors, more than 70% are inclined to combine their visit with retail. Together with a high average retail spend, the high level of combination visits means that there is a 3 large synergy potential between casinos and retail. Casinos also score high on two other synergy indicators: the average frequency of casino visits is 60 times per year, while the average visit duration is 2 ½ hours. As is the case with casinos, literature research did not yield any results on possible synergy effects between retail and bowling centers. The results of this study show that the synergy potential is much higher than would be expected from previous studies, although lower than for cinemas or casinos. Levels of combination visits and retail spend by bowling visitors are lower than for other leisure components, but much more significant than in previous studies. Although visit frequency and visit duration are relatively high, this yields a less unambiguous result than for cinemas and casinos due to varying visiting motives. Competive bowlers, the group that visit most frequently, are less likely to be interested in visiting the retail in the area. To a varying extent, this study demonstrates synergy effects in the combination cinemas, casinos and bowling centers with a retail environment. In particular the high levels of combination visits indicate that both retail and these leisure components benefit from each other’s presence in the vicinity to a much larger extent than shown in previous studies. 4 Preface The last ten years have seen an increase in publications on the relation between leisure and retail, and its consequences for the real estate industry. Many of the publications focused on case studies of large‐scale entertainment centers, mostly in the USA or UK. It has proven difficult to translate the results of these studies to projects on a smaller scale, or to the smaller Dutch market. As a result, opinions on potential synergy between retail and leisure vary widely, as do ambitions and policies on local government level. Being involved as developer in several projects that include both retail and leisure, the potential synergy between the two has been of great interest to me. Why would a retailer profit from being located near a multiplex cinema? Is it beneficial for a casino to have its operation within a shopping center? Do leisure and retail profit from each other’s proximity, not only through basic factors such as efficient use of parking space but also through increased footfall and actual turnover potential? To obtain answers to these questions, the cooperation of a large number of leisure operators and retail experts was essential. The genuine interest of these experts and the willingness to help in getting more grip on this subject was very much appreciated. I am much indebted to Mr. Jan Willem Speentjes from Corio, coordinator on behalf of the Amsterdam School of Real Estate, particularly in his assistance in structuring the research and maintaining the focus on the subject. Also, thanks goes to Mr. Jos Sentel of Third Place in providing his expertise on the relation between leisure and retail. And to Mrs. Janneke Schreuder of the ASRE for her relentless insistence that I finish this Masterproof on time. And last but not least, to Twan for his support during that shear never‐ending, relaxing period that we call MRE‐study. To all those interested in the synergy potential between leisure and retail, I hope that this study presents new insights and inspiration. Driebergen, October 2008 Willem van der Ven 5 6 Table of contents Executive summary 3 Preface 5 Table of contents 7 1. Introduction 9 1.1 Research objective and central question 1.2 Leisure 1.3 Synergy 1.4 Research questions 1.5 Methodology 1.6 Outline of the study 2. Theoretical framework 2.1 Synergy references in literature 2.2 Empirical research on synergy effects 2.3 Conclusions 3. The leisure components 3.1 Cinema 3.2 Casino 3.3 Bowling 4. Synergy effects measured 10 11 14 15 16 17 19 19 22 27 29 29 31 34 37 4.1 Cinema 4.2 Casino 4.3 Bowling 38 40 44 5. Conclusions 47 5.1 The leisure functions 5.2 Synergy components 5.3 Conclusions 47 50 53 List of Appendices 55 Appendix A: Literature 57 Appendix B: Survey bowling 59 Appendix C: Survey Casino 61 Appendix D: Survey Cinema 63 Appendix E: List of interviewed operators 65 Appendix F: Location of selected leisure operations 66 7 8 1. Introduction The ambition to combine leisure and retail is present in many real estate developments in The Netherlands. The motivations for this ambition are diverse and often initiated by municipalities. Over the last years, a large amount of development programs that include sizable volumes of leisure space has been put forward by city officials to the real estate market. The list includes such diverse locations as the Arena Boulevard in Amsterdam, Scheveningen Haven, Almere Poort, and the Bavelse Berg in Breda. In many cases, the initiative to include leisure in area developments or real estate developments comes from the city, and not from real estate parties or leisure operators. This raises the question whether the ambitions to combine leisure and retail are advisable from a market point of view. Effects of leisure City officials view leisure as a means to revitalize urban areas, improve the image of locations, attract new visitors or increase employment. Metz (2002) describes three effects of leisure that appeal to municipal authorities: 1. Social cohesion; the perception that leisure provides a meeting place improves interaction between the inhabitants of a city. 2. Providing identity: Leisure functions are assumed to attract new visitors to the City, thereby enhancing the appeal and marketing image of the area. Leisure is also perceived as installing a sense of pride with the users of an area. 3. Economic anchor: This argument is based both on stimulating employment, as well as increased spending in the area due to the attraction of new visitors. Leisure is often perceived as bringing economic value to a city. The rise of the experience economy 1 is often used as background for the inclusion of leisure functions in retail projects. Over the last 10 years, this has become a ‘hot item’ for cities and real estate parties in The Netherlands. Municipal ambitions now focus on a new central area for a city, whereas in the past ambitions talked about a new shopping center. The container concept ‘urban entertainment’ is often included in municipal development programs, without a clear understanding of the type of leisure use that should be included or its market viability (Kooijman, 2002). The first articles in professional publications, in which leisure was linked with retail, appeared around 1995. An authoritative study by various experts 2 expressed high hopes for the retail‐leisure combination for the Dutch market, as researchers expected the 1
cf. Pine and Gilmore (1999) Toorn Vrijthoff a.o. (1998) in a study on the future of the Dutch retail market. The study was supervised by representatives from a broad group of public and private parties, including the Technical University of Delft, ING Real Estate, Multi Vastgoed, WBN (predecessor of Corio), Jones Lang, Kolpron (predecessor of Ecorys) and Rodamco. 2
9 total volume of leisure within and close to main retail areas to grow 3 . Due to consumer preferences, the distinction between retail and leisure was expected to become less clear. Researchers therefore advised to combine retail and leisure on one location, and partly within the same building. As argued by Kooijmans and others, much of these early publications on synergy effects between leisure and retail may have been too positive on the applicability of results from large entertainment centers in the USA to the Dutch market. Synergy potential? Synergy is often used as ‘magic word’ in these arguments. A much‐used perception is that leisure, catering and retail mutually reinforce each other. Various publications 4 provide a more balanced judgment, whereby in many cases there is little real synergy between retail and leisure. The simple fact that both retail and leisure attract visitors does not necessarily mean that they profit from being located alongside each other. Retail‐focused visitors may not be interested in visiting leisure functions, and vice versa. In these cases, there is little advantage for retail to be located next to leisure as it does not lead to higher footfall or turnover. In addition, there is a lot of uncertainty among parties on the risks and benefits of integrating retail and entertainment. Both Bastiaansen and Kooijman (2002) and Ruis (2003) describe a lack of enthusiasm among real estate developers and investors to invest in leisure. The difficulty in realizing synergy in a multifunctional project, the absence of established and proven leisure operators and the lack of knowledge with real estate parties about leisure lead to a reserved attitude. The same attitude is visible on the side of retail operators, who are unsure on the benefits of being located in a multifunctional development that includes leisure. If the benefits in terms of additional footfall and turnover are unclear, why would a retail operator choose to be located next or close to leisure uses? Knowledge on leisure is fragmented, and there is both optimism and uncertainty regarding its future potential. 1.1 Research objective and central question The objective of this study is to examine the actual synergy between retail and leisure functions. Synergy is understood to refer to the situation where one or both elements perform better when combined than in stand‐alone developments. This study examines synergy from the economic viewpoint of an operator: what (if any) 3
Total space occupied by leisure and services was 30% of total retail space in 1995, and was expected to grow to 50% by 2015. 4
Zijl (2000), Cornet (2001), Ecorys (2004), Goudappel Coffeng (2004) 10 are the advantages for a retail or leisure operator to be part of a multifunctional development, as compared to a stand‐alone operation? In other words: is there an added value for an operator when situated in a multifunctional development compared to being situated in a monofunctional shopping center? To reach the research objective, the central question of this study is defined as: Can a combination of independently functioning retail and leisure components within a real estate development lead to synergy? When examining this central question, a clear definition of the terms ‘leisure’ (including the first two underlined phrases) and ‘synergy’ is required. 1.2 Leisure The term ‘leisure’ is a container notion that lacks a universal definition in literature. Depending on the scope of the study, authors refer to leisure time, activities, offers or industry (Cornet, 2001). Any scientific text on the subject should therefore clearly define what is understood by the term leisure. Van der Toorn Vrijthoff (1998) uses a much‐quoted definition in studies that include leisure and retail: “Leisure contains all elements that can improve the attractiveness of a retail area, but are not considered core retail activities.” This is of course a very broad definition that includes much more than the independently functioning leisure components mentioned in the central question to this study. A definition used by Beekers (2000) is narrower and appears workable in this context: “Leisure is a commercial form of spending free time, in specially developed accommodations, whereby the ‘fun‐element’ is key and there is an increased interrelation between retail, food & beverage and entertainment.” This definition largely fits the central question in this study, as it is limited to leisure activities in physical, purpose‐built locations and addresses the potential synergy between retail and leisure. However, it is broader than the scope of this study, as it also includes leisure uses that do not have an autonomous appeal and are dependent for their operation on adjacent retail functions. Independently functioning Depending on the definition, also the quality of public spaces, the experience value of a shopping center or the innovativeness of shop fronts may be termed leisure. A 11 frequently used distinction (GLA, 2006) in leisure components focuses on its main purpose: 1. Ambient leisure is aimed at increasing the amount of time people spend shopping and their enjoyment of the shopping center This may include the provision of toilets, food courts and attractive elements in the public space. The purpose of ambient leisure is to increase the amount of time people spend shopping, and their enjoyment of the shopping experience. 2. Tourist‐destination leisure 5 refers to instances when retail is located close to a tourist destination and, as a result, has the spin‐off advantage that customers visiting the tourist site spend money on the nearby retail outlet. 3. Magnet leisure 6 refers to stand‐alone leisure attractions that function independently, such as cinemas or bowling alleys. Although their effect may be to increase revenues or visitors to adjacent retail, their main purpose is a successful commercial enterprise of the leisure function itself. Independently functioning retail and leisure components can be defined as having sufficient volume and appeal to not be dependent on other functions. This excludes supporting functions that no not have an autonomous appeal on customers, such as lunchrooms in shopping centers or souvenir shops in theme parks. This study focuses on operations that are able to function in a development where retail and leisure are not combined, i.e. that have sufficient stand‐alone appeal. The combination between retail and leisure is not a necessity, but might lead to synergy. In this division, the category magnet leisure fits the purposes of the study, as the research question is limited to independently functioning leisure components. By adding this element to the leisure definition by Beekers (2000) mentioned above, the following definition of leisure for this study is reached: “Leisure is a commercial form of spending free time in specially developed accommodations, which has a stand‐alone operational viability, whereby the ‘fun‐
element’ is key and there is an increased interrelation between retail, food & beverage and entertainment.” 5
GLA (2006) terms this category ‘heritage‐destination’, implicitly limiting it to heritage sites. Tourist‐
destination appears a better term to use, as the described effects on retail are not limited to heritage sites but to touristic destinations in general. The gift shop of the Museum of Modern Art in New York (clearly not a heritage site) is one of the most frequently cited examples in this category. 6
Beyard (2001) uses a slightly different division in a study that is based on references in the USA. Comparable to ‘magnet leisure’, the term destination entertainment is more common in the USA. This category draws enough traffic to be self‐supporting. Therefore, it is often included in multifunctional development not because it needs the footfall that is present there, but because it acts as anchor that provides the footfall needed for other functions. Beyard cites sport stadiums, cultural centers, casinos and cinemas as prime examples of destination entertainment. 12 Food and beverage (F&B, such as cafés and restaurants) is not included under leisure in this definition. This is a deliberate choice. The distinction between leisure and F&B is in line with the concept of Trinity of Synergy (described in paragraph 2.1), which is an important underlying concept in the leisure center development that originated in the USA. Secondly, the separation of F&B from leisure leads to a concentrated focus on magnet leisure as described above. Like the term ‘leisure’, the term ‘F&B’ itself is a container notion that incorporates many different types of operations. Leisure components Most references in literature and studies performed on the synergy between retail and leisure focus on large‐scale, multifunctional centers, mostly located in the USA or UK. This study focuses on the presence of synergy effects on the Dutch market, where project sizes and composition are substantially different (and smaller) than on the American market. Instead of focusing on large‐scale leisure centers, this study provides an analysis of synergy effects between leisure and retail on the scale of individual leisure components. Three magnet leisure components are examined that frequently occur both in a stand‐alone operation and in combination with retail: cinema, casino and bowling. Several criteria were used in selecting these components 7 : •
They are among the leisure types most present in the Dutch market and most frequently combined with retail in multifunctional developments. The regular presence on the Dutch market enables a comparison between locations and quantification of the study results. •
The three components are proven leisure destinations over a long period of time. For all three, solid operators are present on the Dutch market. •
Because they are viable as stand‐alone operations (unlike smaller retail‐
related leisure elements), there is a choice involved in deciding whether or not to settle in a multifunctional development that includes retail. •
All are commercial functions, and not dependent on government subsidies 8 . Thus, no market distortions due to government interference (for example, subsidies to libraries or public swimming pools) are incorporated in the result. 7
A fourth leisure component that fits these criteria is the health club. After preliminary interviews with both health club and retail operators and a study of relevant literature, this element was removed from the scope of this study. Both results from literature and interviews showed that synergy between retail and health clubs is very small. A large difference between health clubs and the other leisure components is the motive of visitors. Generally, health club visitors pay regular visits to the same health club on basis of memberships. The time spent in the vicinity outside the health club is short, as is the amount spent on other uses (see chapter 3). 8
The specific nature of Holland Casino, a state‐owned enterprise, is treated in chapter 4. Despite its ownership structure, Holland Casino can be considered a commercial, profit‐driven enterprise. 13 For all three leisure components, several operations are analyzed in this study to determine a synergy between the leisure operation and surrounding retail. 1.3 Synergy Synergy between retail and leisure functions is understood to refer to situations where one or both of the functions perform better when combined, than when separated. To enable a judgment on whether or not synergy effects are reached, a clear understanding of the term synergy is required. Functional and locational synergy Synergy can be divided (Ecorys, 2004) in functional and locational synergy. Functional synergy concerns the direct advantages of concentrating functions, thereby increasing combination visits by consumers and leading to higher revenues. Locational synergy contains indirect effects of clustering, and has relatively little relevance in answering the research question in this study. The most obvious example of such indirect effect is more efficient use of parking places. While this positive effect is widely recognized in literature, it does not promote synergy in terms of a mutual reinforcement as defined in the previous chapter. Its importance lies in improving the points of departure for both retail and leisure operators, and in reducing the investment costs in realizing new developments. Elements in functional synergy The realization of synergy in the form of a mutual reinforcement for leisure and retail operators depends on the presence of functional synergy. Howard (1990) provides four components of functional synergy. These components have been regularly used in other publications to analyze synergy effects between retail and leisure. 1. Increase of catchment area An increase of the catchment area leads to an increase in footfall, in case leisure functions attract visitors from a broader area than retail. 2. Increase in visit duration Howard (1990) shows that leisure visitors stay at their destination considerably longer than retail‐focused visitors. Also, the visit duration is extended if visitors combine more than one activity during the same trip. 3. Higher average spend per visit Addition of leisure may lead to higher spending in the area. The presence of combination visitors, that combine visits to leisure and retail, is an important element when analyzing synergy. 14 4. Increase in repeat visits Leisure functions may lead to a higher visit frequency and more repeat visits. This might occur because of a high visit frequency of the leisure component itself, or because a visit to leisure might familiarize the visitor with the retail in the area (or vice versa), leading to a repeat visit that might not have occurred in the absence of the initial visit. The elements (2) – (4) are mostly influenced by the presence of combination visits, where consumers visit more than one function in the same area. The presence of combination visits is therefore a major indication of synergy, as shown in chapters 2 and 4 of this study. Based on these synergy determinants, Howard concludes that there are indeed synergy effects between leisure and retail. However, these effects may not always be as substantial as presented by policy makers or real estate parties. This is confirmed by studies presented in chapter 2, which focus more specifically on the Dutch market. For purposes of this study, the determination of synergy effects is limited to the four elements listed above. These are the most direct components of synergy from the economic point of view from an operator 9 . An often‐cited determinant of synergy is the strengthening of the marketing image, which might have an indirect effect on the performance of retail and leisure elements 10 . An improved marketing image may lead to an increase of the market area and attract visitors that otherwise might have selected not to come. This synergy component is not included in this study, as it has at best an indirect effect on the performance of retail and leisure components. The direct positive effects of this component are included in the four synergy components (larger catchment area, higher spending, repeat visits) that are included in this study. 1.4 Research questions Paragraphs 1.2 and 1.3 provide the demarcation of the scope of this study, which is used to answer the central question. In order to do so, a number of research questions must be answered first: 9
A fifth synergy element is provided by Barendse (2005). He argues that synergy may surface in attracting new target groups within the current catchment area, leading to an increased footfall. 10
Van Zijderveld (2006) examines the link between leisure functions and city marketing, using Amsterdam as a case study. He concludes that the development of leisure is one of the possibilities to improve the attractiveness of a city. Because leisure is not geared towards one specific target group, it has a broad appeal and a positive impact on the local economic vitality. Leisure plays an important role in city marketing and offers cities an opportunity to distinguish themselves from the competition. Analysis shows that leisure opportunities are an important factor in choosing a city as location for 60% of the businesses in the creative industry. This is of course one of the reasons why city officials are eager to promote developments that include leisure, even when the market feasibility of such developments is unclear. 15 1. What insight is offered in relevant literature on the existence of synergy effects between retail and leisure? 2. What are relevant references of leisure operations that are adjacent or in the immediate vicinity of retail funtions? 3. To what extent has this combination resulted in a synergy that reinforces one or both components? Using the three different leisure functions and the four synergy indicators, the simplified end result of the study is a 3x4 matrix as shown below, that summarizes the results. Leisure component Synergy indicator Longer Higher duration spend Cinema Bowling Casino Repeat visits Catchment area Overall synergy 1.5 Methodology Various methods are used to answer the problem definition and research questions. Literature study A review of relevant literature is important particularly in dealing with the first research questions. This part of the study focuses both on the ambitions and ways in which retail and leisure can reinforce each other, as well as on insights from theory on the feasibility of positive effects. Interviews Interviews have been taken with several key operators that deal with the combination of retail and leisure, and are used to answer the second research question. Case studies of reference projects Analysis of reference projects provides answers to the third research question. A number of leisure operations for all three components have been selected for analysis of a potential synergy with retail functions. Surveys have been taken with visitors of the leisure operation to determine the presence of synergy effects. All selected leisure operations are located either within a shopping center or in the close vicinity of retail. The objective of this study is to analyze if, in cases where leisure and retail are combined, synergy effects between the two functions 16 materialize. Obviously, no synergy effects will be present in case of a stand‐alone leisure operation with no retail in the surrounding area 11 . 1.6 Outline of the study The outline of this study is largely organized according to the research questions mentioned above. Chapter 2 provides the theoretical framework of this study and serves to answer the first research question defined above. What insights does literature offer on synergy effects between retail and leisure, and what are experiences in this field both in The Netherlands and in other markets? An overview of empirical research on synergy effects between retail and leisure in the Dutch market is presented. Various research results have been published in recent years that are relevant to the research questions in this study, primarily on the likeliness of combination visits between the components. The leisure components that are selected for further study are described in chapter 3. Results from interviews of the selected cinema, casino and bowling operators are included in this chapter, which provides answers to the second research question. Chapter 4 provides the results of visitor surveys at the leisure operations. These surveys are geared directly towards answering the third research question, and serve to complement the insights provided by literature and interviews in chapters 2 and 3. An analysis of all available data and conclusions with regard to the central research questions are given in chapter 5. 11
Thus, a comparison between the turnover of a stand‐alone leisure operation and a leisure operation that is combined with retail does not fit within the scope of this study. 17 18 2. Theoretical framework This chapter provides an overview of references in literature on potential synergy between retail and leisure, and of a number of studies that were performed in recent years and geared specifically towards the Dutch market. 2.1 Synergy references in literature The process of combining leisure and retail on a substantial scale started in the 1980s and originated in the USA. Kooijman (2002) cites the West Edmonton Mall (opened in 1985) as first real example of an integrated retail and leisure environment. Kooijman terms this development a ‘third retail revolution’ due to its significance for the way retail is distributed and planned 12 . The West Edmonton Mall claimed to be a completely new phenomenon: ‘Tourists will no longer have to travel to Disneyland, Miami Beach, the Epcot Park, …, the Grand Canyon, because it’s all here at the West Edmonton Mall. Everything you’ve ever wanted in a lifetime and more.’ Fokkink (2003) claims that entertainment has been used by retail operators as a customer magnet for centuries. He describes the history of the retail‐leisure combination, linking medieval market places to shopping passages, department stores and modern mixed‐use entertainment centers. There is little difference in principle between the way market salesman in the past used attractions to lure customers, and the way leisure is used in modern times to make shopping centers more appealing. Trinity of Synergy The synergy potential between retail, catering and leisure in a modern context was recognized as early as the 1980’s in the USA and is commonly known as Trinity of Synergy (Beyard, 2001). In this format, the three elements all become part of the same consumer visit. Leisure is a type of ‘experiential consumption’ in which the consumer pays for the opportunity to experience something that is pleasurable, yet ephemeral. Catering provides a type of ‘literal consumption’ in which the consumer pays to consume food or drink at the destination. And shopping is a type of ‘acquisition consumption’ in which the consumer purchases objects to take home and use for later enjoyment. In leisure concepts, not only are these three 12
The first retail revolution refers to the rise of the distribution sector, whereby the supply of goods was separated from the producers. The second retail revolution took place in the 1950s, where new concepts like supermarkets, self‐service stores and shopping centers emerged. 19 components compatible, but they are complementary and provide synergy effects 13 . Important stimulants for this concept are the long travel distances in the USA, and the long visit durations at the leisure destination. With the combination of retail, catering and leisure, visitors are offered a complete package of activities and experiences during their stay. USA references White (1996) studied the potential added value of integrating leisure concepts in retail centers. In his view, leisure in shopping centers encompassed (cinema) theaters, video arcades and amusement rides, as well as high‐technology formats involving virtual reality, motion simulation and other games. Locational synergy was quickly recognized because during most times of the year, theaters can effectively share parking with shopping centers. Peak theater hours seldom conflict with the busiest shopping hours. Having established locational synergy, his study focused on the presence of functional synergy. The combination of retail and leisure was not yet widespread in the USA in 1996, and there were only a few case studies available for White to study. In the Mall of America (opened in 1992) in Minneapolis, entertainment worked to attract visitors from long distances. White cites research 14 that shows that the combination of entertainment and retail increased the attendance in the shopping mall, as well as the average visit duration and consumer spend. The Mall is a combination of a retail center and tourist attraction and in 1996 had an average customer stay of three hours (three times the US average) and an average spend of $84 (compared with $35 at a typical mall). The share of tourists in the total amount of visitors (35‐40 million visits annually) is between 35‐40%. Kooijman (1999) analyses that this is due to the large share of leisure in the center 15 . This makes the Mall more attractive for visitors that live further away, thus increasing the catchment area. White credits the integration of retail and entertainment with a large part of the success of the Mall of America. Increasingly, leisure components are used as anchors in a multifunctional retail/leisure complex. The role of department stores as magnets for customers is partly filled by multiplex cinemas, theaters and theme parks. 13
This concept is still embraced by real estate developers. For ING Real Estate, developer of the Getz Entertainment Center in Amsterdam, the trinity of synergy is one of main underlying concepts in the development (ING Real Estate, 2000). 14
Urban land (April 1993), Mall of America: Confounding the skeptics 15
Approximately 32% of total lease space is occupied by leisure uses. In a standard shopping center, approximately 15% has a leisure function. This figure is even more impressive considering the Mall’s size of over 400.000 m2 lease space. 20 In a more recent study, Beyard (2005) contends that the original concept of mixed‐
use entertainment centers has evolved in a slightly different direction than originally envisaged. The addition of leisure in (American) centers has not only been in the form of specific entertainment attractions, but also on creating entertaining retail environments. In the terms used in paragraph 1.2 of this study: not only in the form of magnet leisure, but also by increasing the ambient leisure in retail centers. The four synergy components The well‐known four synergy components that were put forward by Howard (1990) are outlined in paragraph 1.2 of this study. These components have been regularly used in other publications on synergy between retail and leisure. Many of these studies tend to focus on a few large‐scale retail/entertainment schemes. Leisure is often treated as a container concept, whereby little distinction is made between the various components of leisure. In an overview below, the results from various studies have been grouped along the four synergy components presented by Howard. 1. Increase of catchment area An increase in the catchment area has been shown in case studies such as Metro Center (Gateshead, UK), and CentrO (Oberhausen, Germany), where 40% or more of the visitors travel longer than 30 minutes to arrive at the centers. According to Zijl (1999), the addition of leisure functions has an impact particularly on attracting visitors from the tertiary catchment area 16 . An extension of the catchment area appears to be present mostly during holiday periods. 2. Increase in visit duration Leisure visitors stay at their destination considerably longer. Howard (1990) estimates that after 2 ½ hours, 75% of the retail‐focused visitors have left, compared to only 50% of the leisure‐driven visitors. Beekers (2000) confirms that leisure stimulates a longer stay per visit, and states that the longer visit duration has a positive impact on the average spend per visit 17 . 3. Higher average spend per visit When the consumer visits a center with a broader offering of uses, the total spend is expected to be higher. Harinck (1998) estimates that visitors who 16
In his case‐study of CentrO in Oberhausen, Zijl (1999) shows that 60% of visitors travel more than one hour to visit the center. For the commercial success of CentrO, this group is more important than the primary catchment area. The leisure functions are an important visiting motive for this group. 17
This argument is linked with an increase in catchment area. For customers that are willing to travel longer to a destination, it is likely that the duration of the visit will also be longer and, as a result, the average spend will be higher. 21 come primarily for leisure functions spend five times less in retail outlets, compared to retail‐focused visitors. Their spend on food and beverage, on the other hand, is three times as high. 4. Increase in repeat visits Harinck (1998) shows that 11% of the retail‐focused visitors consider the presence of leisure functions an important asset. This suggests that the appeal of a retail destination is increased with the addition of leisure, and thus the chance of repeat visits. The fact that leisure and retail functions may not be visited by the same consumer at the same time, does not conclude an absence of synergy. Beekers (2000) states that attractive leisure uses, while perhaps not combined by its customers with adjacent retail during the same visit, leads to a higher acquaintance of consumers with the center and stimulates repeat visits. As described by Beyard (2001), this synergy factor is held to be particularly important for cinemas. There are almost no multifunctional retail/leisure developments in either the USA or Europe that do not include a cinema. Although the earnings per volume of cinemas are relatively low, they have the ability to attract repeat visitors because the leisure offering is constantly refreshed with the release of new films. 2.2 Empirical research on synergy effects In recent years, a number of studies have been conducted on synergy effects between retail and leisure that are relevant to this study. The scope, approach and applicability of the results vary widely. Most studies can be grouped in two categories. The first focuses on the presence of combination visits: do consumers spend time at both retail and leisure functions during the same visit? The second group addresses issues of economic value. Main question is whether the presence of a certain leisure function leads to an economic value for adjacent functions. In other words: does the presence of a leisure function improve the turnover of adjacent retail? Combination visits: Goudappel Coffeng The extent to which visitors combine retail and leisure functions within one visit is included in a study by Goudappel Coffeng (2004) 18 . Their research on spending patterns provides insight in the changes in consumer behavior and the functioning of retail areas. The study cites the increased combination of retail‐ and leisure visits, as one of the reasons for the changes in consumer behavior. Combination visits are 18
The study covered the Dutch provinces of Zuid‐Holland, Utrecht and the southern part of Noord‐
Holland. This includes Amsterdam Zuid and Zuidoost, but excludes the innercity and other parts of Amsterdam. 22 recognized as an aspect in the appeal of shopping centers, but do not have a major impact on the focus of the study. Figure 2.1: Combination visits (Goudappel Coffeng, 2004) Combination visit leisure and… Leisure function Runshopping No combination 77% 35% Cinema 1% 8% Bowling 0% 0‐1% Casino 0% 0‐1% Café / restaurant 20% 47% Funshopping Goudappel Coffeng makes the common distinction between run‐ and fun (or recreational) shopping. Run shopping includes the daily or weekly shopping, focusing on supermarkets and other food retail. Funshopping includes the less frequent shopping trips, which have a recreational and more time‐consuming character. A combination between leisure and run shopping was shown to be almost non‐
existing. This result has a simple logic. Consumers that are interested in quick, daily purchases are not expected to combine this motive with spending time at leisure‐
activities. With recreational (fun) shopping, a combination visit with leisure functions was made on 65% of all retail visits. Goudappel Coffeng includes F&B in their definition of leisure. Of the 65% mentioned, 47% alludes to F&B. From the stand‐
alone leisure functions, most combination visits (8% of retail consumers) were to a cinema. When asked about the frequency in cases of combination visits, 13% of the respondents that combine retail and cinema responded to do this often, 55% sometimes and 32% seldom. Combination visits with a casino or bowling were very low (<1%), but with a higher frequency than for a cinema. This means that only a few of those surveyed combine retail with a casino or bowling, but those that do combine, do so more frequently than those combining retail and cinema. It is important to note that the extent of combination visits was not the primary focus of this study. The primary focus was to analyze the origin of purchasing visitors for shopping centers within the study area. It is important to note that the extent of combination visits was not the primary focus of Goudappel Coffeng, and that this study covers all retail centers in the study area. This includes the retail centers where no combination with leisure functions is available. In the absence of an offering of a retail/leisure combination, obviously no combination visit is possible. Still, even taking the above into account, the results of 23 the study shows that the amount of combination visits for leisure components other than a cinema is very limited. The results from Goudappel Coffeng are slightly more conservative than an earlier study by Cornet (2001). Cornet points out that although consumers with primarily a retail‐motive indicate to appreciate additional leisure functions, the translation of this appreciation to actual combination visits remains low. Cornet cites research by Healey & Baker (2000), which shows that 18% of retail visitors is inclined to combine a visit to the cinema 19 with shopping. Other leisure functions show worse statistics 20 . This appears to be confirmed by Zijl (1999) en Poell (2001), who claim that a casino and bowling center have almost no interaction with retail, as the visiting motives and times between the functions vary too much. Combination of retail and cinema visits The relatively high link between cinema and retail visits is confirmed by GLA (2006), where cinema visitors shop at nearby retail outlets as part of their trip 21 . Doury (2000), expansion manager for cinema operator AMC, explains the benefits from integrating a multiscreen cinema in a retail center from an operator’s point of view. The combination of different activities helps to extend the catchment area and trading hours, increase the spend per visit and promote repeat business. This is the reason why AMC, along with many of its competitors, view retail‐ and entertainment centers as good locations for new cinemas. Doury identifies several retail types that mix well with retail, citing culture and sport‐related retail concepts such as mega‐
bookstores, record and video stores, sports clothing or hi‐fi/computer stores. This can be extended with lifestyle brand stores that appeal to the target audiences for the other leisure uses in the area. Combination visits in Rotterdam The municipal development company OBR (2006) studied the synergy effects between retail and leisure in Rotterdam. The study focuses on the leisure economy and provides insight in the way different functions are used by visitors to the city. In the report, fun shopping is included as one of the elements in the leisure economy and is, in fact, the number one reason for recreational visits. It should be noted that 19
Note that this does not mean that 18% of total retail consumers combines with a visit to the cinema, but rather that 82% of retail consumers never combines with a visit to the cinema. 20
According to Healey & Baker (2000), only 6% ever combines retail and bowling and 5% participates in health & fitness and retail in one trip. Combination visits with a casino were not included. 21
GLA (2006) also studies the extent in which leisure functions are included in retail building applications in the Greater London Area. Of the cases where leisure was included in such application, 30% included a cinema, while only 2% included a casino and 1% included a bowling alley. Apart from catering, cinemas were easily the most popular leisure function to be included in a retail building application by developers or investors. Health clubs were not included in the study. 24 there is no information on the locations of the survey. The level of combination visits reported in this study is high, so it is to be expected that the locations are largely limited to main retail areas. Figure 2.2: Combination visits in Rotterdam Main purpose of visit Funshopping Combination with Lunch / Theater / dinner concert Cinema Funshopping x 74% 61% 66% Lunch / diner 32% x 49% 35% Theater / concert 8% 15% x 9% Cinema 13% 15% 13% x The largest leisure function in Rotterdam in terms of attracting visitors is, in accordance with other studies mentioned above, the cinema. The four cinemas in the city combined attracted 2 million visitors in 2004. As shown in figure 2.2, there is a large share of combination visits between fun shopping and both cinema and restaurants/cafés. More than half (66%) of cinema visitors also visit retail functions, while 13% of visitors with a primary retail motive also visit a cinema. Part of this high level of synergy can be explained by the fact that three of the four cinemas are located in the center of the city, at close proximity to the core retail area. However, the largest cinema (near football stadium De Kuip) is located across the river, relatively far from the city center. This cinema accounts for around 60% of all cinema visitors. The high level of combination visits in Rotterdam means that the presence of cinemas in the city leads to a significant additional footfall for the retail function. Economic value of leisure functions A study on the economic value of leisure functions for the surrounding area was performed by Ecorys (2004). Ecorys distinguishes added value into employment effects and positive effects on turnover in the area. Naturally, the results in the study are highly dependent on the presence of retail in the surrounding area. In several cases, this presence is very limited. Seven different leisure functions are included, the first three of which are relevant to this study. It must be noted that the Ecorys study suffers from a very limited set of references. While seven distinct leisure components are studied, the data set is limited to one reference for each component. Generalization of the results from this study 25 therefore merits caution 22 . The highest direct economic value (see figure 2.3) to the surrounding area is generated by the cinema and the music venue. The lowest values are generated by the hotel, casino and health club 23 . Figure 2.3: Economic Value (Ecorys, 2004) Leisure use Total direct economic value on surrounding area Health club € 50.000 Casino € 20.000 Cinema € 920.000 Music venue € 550.000 Museum € 90.000 Hotel (five‐star) €10.000 Café‐restaurant € 100.000 Ecorys also investigated the combination visits with retail for the seven leisure uses included in the study. The results are presented in figure 2.4 and differ from the results in terms of economic value in figure 2.3. This is because economic value also includes employment effects, and because a large part of the combination visits concern food & beverage, and not retail. Figure 2.4: Combination Visits (Ecorys, 2004) Leisure use Combination visits with retail Health club Average, primarily with a large sport retail outlet and supermarket. Casino None. Cinema None. As mentioned, this study only includes one reference per leisure function. In case of the casino there is no retail located in the vicinity, hence the absence of combination visits. The absence of combination visits in case of the cinema is remarkable, and 22
For example: the single casino reference that is studied is located in Breda, where it is combined in one development with a theater. There is almost no retail in the immediate vicinity. The fact that this study shows no positive impact of casino visitors on the retail turnover is, in the near‐absence of retail outlets, not particularly surprising. 23
The positive effect on retail turnover by the health club is caused by the proximity of a large sports store. Health club operators generally do not view the proximity of retail as important for their visitor number or turnover. Fitness First (one of the largest health club chains worldwide, having over 20 outlets in The Netherlands and over 500 outlets worlwide) prefers proximity to prime retail centers as locations for new health clubs (De Soet, 2007), but not for turnover purposes. The high traffic in these areas is considered an advantage for the health club, due to a higher visibility and a more attractive environment for the visitors to the health club. 26 contradicts the results of other studies presented above and of the research for this study presented in chapter 4 24 . 2.3 Conclusions The perception of synergy effects between retail and leisure originated in the USA. Large‐scale multi‐use developments like The West Edmonton Mall and the Mall of America are frequently cited as trendsetting centers, where the addition of leisure to a retail center has improved its appeal to customer groups and increased profitability. This notion is the basis of the Trinity of Synergy, a concept that states that a combination of retail, catering and leisure is not only compatible, but also complementary. The three elements become part of the same consumer visit, thus increasing visitor numbers, the time visitors stay and the average spend per visit. It is questionable whether the US‐based references on positive synergy effects between retail and leisure are also applicable to the Dutch market, in the absence of large‐scale mixed use centers. Many of the studies that were mentioned focus on the same large‐scale centers (Mall of America, West Edmonton Mall, CentrO, Gateshead) and tend to not distinguish between different types of leisure, but rather use leisure as a container notion. Research on synergy between retail and leisure in The Netherlands is fragmented and inconclusive, and analysis of the various results does not lead to a clear view on the (absence of) synergy effects. The research methods in the studies that are cited in this chapter vary significantly. In the case of Goudappel Coffeng, a large number of visitors were interviewed, while the Ecorys study is limited to interviews with operators and city officials. This varying methodology may well have had an impact on the results of these studies. One conclusion that appears out of most studies is that, of all leisure functions, the cinema has the highest synergy potential with retail. Various studies estimate that a range of 8‐15% of retail‐focused visitors combine with a visit to the cinema, while a majority of cinema visitors combine with a visit to retail outlets. These figures present a significant synergy effect in terms of combination visits between cinemas and retail. The results for other leisure functions are less positive. With a few exceptions, no research results on the relationship between bowling and retail have been encountered. Synergy effects between retail and casinos are very low in the studies 24
Part of the differing results may have been caused by the research methodology. Ecorys has limited itself to interviews with operators and municipality officials, while other studies (including this study) have held extensive interviews with visitors to cinemas. 27 that are analyzed. Still, there is a clear demand for operators of these leisure components to be located within a shopping area, or in its immediate vicinity. This implies that, from the perspective of an operator, there is something to be gained from being located near retail. Additional field research is required to answer the research questions to this study. The leisure components that are analyzed are described in chapter 3, while the results of this research are presented in chapter 4. 28 3. The leisure components There are a large number of sources in literature that acknowledge the synergy potential between retail and leisure. However, the results of previous empirical studies do not provide conclusive answers to the research questions in this study. This chapter presents the leisure components that are the subject of additional research in this study. Three leisure components are included that frequently occur both in a stand‐alone operation and in combination with retail in a real estate development. These are among the leisure components that are most present in the Dutch market and are most frequently combined with retail in multifunctional developments. Because these functions are also viable as stand‐alone operations (unlike smaller retail‐
related leisure elements), there is a choice involved in deciding whether or not to settle in a multifunctional development that includes retail. The examined leisure components are cinema, casino and bowling center. For each leisure function, several operations have been selected. The selection has been carefully made with regards to geographical spread and includes different operators. This is important to enable generalization of the results of this study. For each operation, research includes interviews with operators as well as visitor surveys. The results of the interviews are presented in this chapter, while results from the surveys are shown in the next chapter. Appendix E contains a list of operators that were interviewed. 3.1 Cinema A visit to the cinema is one of the premier leisure activities in The Netherlands. A total of 243 cinemas (with 694 screens and 121.000 seats) were active on the Dutch market in 2005. The amount of cinema visits in The Netherlands has come under pressure in recent years. In a 2005 survey (NVB, 2006), 40% of respondents indicated to have reduced the amount of visits to a cinema. In that year, a total of 20.6 million visits were recorded, compared to 24.9 million in the peak year 2003. On average, the Dutch consumer brings 1.3 visits to a cinema each year. The four largest players in the Dutch cinema industry were responsible for more than 70% of total visits in 2005 (see figure 3.1). Surveys have been held at two cinemas from different operators. 29 Figure 3.1: visitor totals per major operators (2005) Operator % visitors # cinemas # seats seats per cinema Pathé 34.6% 13 25.044 1.926 Jogchem’s 17.1% 30 22.973 766 Minerva 12.4% 30 17.799 593 Wolff 8.6% 13 17.308 1.331 Other 27.3% 157 37.906 241 Total 100% 243 121.030 498 Pathé Theatres Pathé is Theatres is the largest cinema operator on the Dutch market, operating 13 multiplex theaters and attracting 35% of all Dutch cinema visits in 2005. The average size of a theatre is much larger than that of its competitors. In the top‐10 of cinemas according to visitor numbers, nine were operated by Pathé in 2005 25 . •
Location Spuimarkt The Hague; Pathé Spuimarkt was opened in April 2008, and is part of a 25.000 m2 retail/leisure development in the center of The Hague. Spuimarkt is located at the Grote Marktstraat, one of the main shopping streets in the city and address of the major department stores. The Spuimarkt building itself hosts a casino, health club and 15 retail outlets in addition to the cinema. Merral Cinemas Merral is a smaller cinema operator on the Dutch market. Merral operates six cinemas, all in relatively small cities. The operator works with two different cinema concepts, both the ‘classic’ system with halfway‐breaks and the ‘service’ system. In the latter concept, food and drinks are served at the visitors seats throughout the movie. •
Location De Boreel Deventer; The Merral cinema in Deventer is located in De Boreel entertainment center. This project was completed near the end of 2007 and includes a cinema, casino, bowling, restaurant and retail 26 . Merral operates both the cinema and bowling in a sublease from Krijco casino and in close cooperation with the restaurant and casino in De Boreel. Therefore, marketing puts a large emphasis on package deals and combination visits between the various leisure components. The cinema has four screens, one of which uses the service system. The cinema in Deventer is expected to attract around 160.000 visitors in 2008, its first full year of operation. 25
Since the publishing of the 2006 NVB report, Pathé opened the multiplex cinema Spuimarkt in The Hague. 26
Mostly large‐scale retail, including Media Markt, Kruidvat, a Jumbo supermarket and a sports department store. Although De Boreel is located within walking distance (<10 minutes) from the core retail area in Deventer, the pedestrian link suffers from poor visibility. 30 3.2 Casino In The Netherlands (as in many countries) the impact of government regulations on the casino industry is very high. Commonly, a distinction is made between casinos (the state‐owned organization Holland Casino) and gaming centers (operated by a sizeable number of private companies). The main differences between Holland Casinos and gaming centers are: 1. ‘live gaming’ is only permitted in Holland Casinos 2. Gaming centers are not permitted to serve alcohol. 3. Holland Casinos are allowed higher maximum bets and returns on machines. 4. Holland Casinos fall under the jurisdiction of the national Ministry of Justice, while gaming centers fall under jurisdiction of local municipalities. These factors lead to large differences in the characteristics of the casino establishment, size and visitor profile between Holland Casinos and its private competitors. Typically, Holland Casinos are much larger, attract more visitors and have a more stand‐alone characteristic than gaming centers. Turnover in the approximately 280 gaming centers in The Netherlands has declined by approximately 10% between 2003 and 2006, dropping from €433 to €391 million 27 . A new gambling tax that has come in effect in 2008 does not improve expectations for the industry 28 . For purposes of this study, operations of both Holland Casinos and gaming centers are labeled casinos. Surveys have been held at six casinos from two different operators. For Holland Casino, interviews with operators have been conducted. Holland Casino The fourteen establishments of Holland Casino attracted 7.5 million visitors (an increase of 20% since 2003) in 2007. The average consumer visits Holland Casino around five times a year. As mentioned above, most casinos have little or no link with retail in the area. The only exceptions are Eindhoven, Enschede and (to a lesser extent) Rotterdam. Logic dictates that other establishments of Holland Casino have less potential synergy with retail. • Location Eindhoven; The operation in Eindhoven is one of the few Holland Casinos that is located in a shopping center, the Heuvelgalerie. It attracted 455.000 visitors in 2007 (a 12% increase since 2003), making it the 8th largest 27
VAN (2007 and 2008), KPMG (2005). Fittingly, the branch organisation VAN subtitled its 2007 Annual Report “Dark clouds, stormy weather”. Instead of a 19% VAT, the companies are now charged 40.85% gambling tax on their turnover. 28
31 Holland Casino in terms of visitor numbers. The casino has 29 playing tables and 454 slot machines, much larger than any of the gaming centers included in this study but well under the Holland Casino average. Based on interviews with representatives from Holland Casino, the table below presents the main results for the various synergy components. Synergy component Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Catchment area Holland Casino, Eindhoven Average stay is around three hours, with a peak in the evenings. Visitor frequency during retail hours is low. Low level of combination visits, but higher spend inside the casino than visitors of gaming centers. Visitor frequency on average is around 4 ½ times a year Holland Casino attracts visitors from a broad catchment area of about 45 minutes travel time to all sides. Previous internal research shows a very limited level of combination visits with retail. Peak visiting hours have little overlap with retail opening hours, as attendance is much higher in the evenings. There appears to be a higher barrier for casual visitors to enter a Holland Casino than one of the gaming centers. This is likely due to the compulsory registration of visitors, the €5 entrance fee and the more upmarket ‘feel’ of Holland Casino, which is more associated with a ‘night out’ than with a quick and casual gaming visit. Holland Casino has an extended visitor registration method. Examination of block times shows no indication of a link with retail hours. For example, there is no increase in visitor numbers directly after closing of the retail, or during evening openings of retail. Furthermore, a comparison between ten of the casinos shows that the evening retail opening has no effect on visitor numbers or profile. In five of these the retail opening is on Thursdays, and in the other five on Fridays. The percentage of week visitors on either one of these days is independent of whether or not there is a retail opening 29 . Neither does the proportion of fixed and casual visitors 30 vary significantly. This would have been an indication that less frequent, retail‐focused visitors combine their retail visit with the casino. Holland Casino participates in the promotional activities of the combined retailers in the shopping centers, and sponsors events and festivals. However, this is indicated to result in little extra visitors or turnover. The proximity to retail traffic is not considered an important criterion in choosing a location for Holland Casino. There is 29
On average, Thursdays attract 12% of week visitors and Fridays attract 17%. This holds for all ten casinos, irrespective of a Thursday or Friday retail evening opening. 30
Customers that have visited at least four times within a one‐year period are termed ‘fixed visitors’ by Holland Casino and are registered as such. They do not pay the normal €5 entrance fee. 32 a stronger link with F&B, hotels and other leisure functions (primarily cinemas). Holland Casino does not view the proximity of these functions as a major consideration for visitor numbers or turnover, although they are viewed as beneficial in terms of quality of the area, with a relatively limited spin‐off for the casino itself. Hommerson Casinos Hommerson operates eight casinos in The Netherlands and ranks in the top‐5 of Dutch casino operators. According to internal Hommerson research, the average visit time is 1.75 hours, while visitors are willing to travel 22 minutes to one of casinos. The average frequency of visits is 1.4 times per week. The average visitor spend in the area is €43 per visit, in addition to the spending inside the casino. This implies that the casino has a significant economic value to adjacent retail, F&B and entertainment establishments. Hommerson estimates a high level of combination visits by casino visitors to adjacent establishments of just over 60%. •
Location Zaandam; The Zaandam casino is part of the Rozenhof shopping center, located within the core retail area of Zaandam. Hommerson claims that the addition of the casino has improved the operations of the shopping center, particularly because it has led to an improvement in the perceived security of the area by visitors 31 . The Zaandam casino attracts approximately 125.000 visitors annually and has 175 slot machines. Krijco Casino & Leisure Krijco operates 19 casinos in The Netherlands and, like Hommerson, has an age limit of 21 years and above. Krijco has a preference for locations that link into retail areas, although sufficient parking is an important condition. Visiting numbers and turnover at the casino increase in case of markets, events and the weekly retail opening evening, suggesting at least some measure of combination visits from retail‐focused visitors to the casino 32 . Still, Krijco estimates that its visitors are mostly destination‐
driven for the casino itself, with the excitement of gaming mentioned as the primary visiting motive. Average visit frequency is around twice a week. •
Location Zeist: The Krijco casino in Zeist is located within the main retail area and has 100 slot machines. •
Location Rotterdam Alexandrium; The Rotterdam casino is located within the peripheral shopping center Alexandrium. The casino currently has 140 slot machines, but discussions with owner Corio on expansion of the casino are ongoing. 31
This argument is frequently made by casino operators. The establishment of a casino leads to an improvement in the security situation in the area, as a casino employs security officials, usually has an age limit of 21 years and leads to activity in the evening hours, after retail closes. Hommerson policy is to close its casino 30 minutes before bars in the area close, to avoid potentially troublesome visitors. 32
To accommodate these retail‐focused visitors –and for security purposes‐ Krijco and other casino operators offer lockers for storage to its visitors. 33 •
Location Deventer; The casino in Deventer is part of entertainment center De Boreel, completed near the end of 2007 (see above under Cinema De Boreel). Krijco is the main lessee of the entertainment center, and sublets the cinema and bowling to Merral. According to Krijco, the casino in Deventer attracts visitors from a relatively broad area due to the absence of high‐quality and sizeable casinos in the area. The casino has 152 slot machines. 3.3 Bowling Like cinemas and casino, bowling operations on the Dutch market exist both stand‐
alone and in multifunctional areas that include retail. Empirical research quoted in chapter 2 shows no evidence on synergy effects between bowling and retail. The first bowling centers in The Netherlands were opened in 1961. As of 2006, approximately 135 professional purpose‐built bowling centers were present on the Dutch market, focusing on both competitive and recreational bowling. In addition, there are approximately 100 recreational bowling facilities that are part of holiday resorts or hotels. The average amount of lanes in a bowling center is 9.7. The age category 30‐
50 years is represented strongest within members of the Dutch Bowling Federation, although the number of visitors under 21 years has been growing in the last ten years. Globally, bowling is a popular sport particularly in the USA, Taiwan and Japan. The Netherlands takes the 11th position on the list of bowling lanes relative to the size of the population 33 . Bowling Huizen The bowling center in Huizen is part of a leisure complex that is located in the town center and was opened in 2000. The leisure complex consists of seven operators and includes a cinema, night club, library and several bars and restaurants. The main shopping area in Huizen is no more than five minutes walking, but the routing and visibility of the leisure complex from the retail area (and vice versa) is problematic. This leads to a low level of combination visits with retail, also because prime visiting hours at the bowling have little overlap with retail opening hours. On four of the five weekdays, the bowling opens at 4 PM, less than two hours before the retail closes. The visitors in Huizen (and at Bison Bowling in Maarssen, described below) can be grouped in four categories: 1. Competition bowlers 2. Group arrangements (both families/friends and business) 3. Children’s parties 4. Casual bowlers 33
Source: The Dutch Bowling Federation. 34 The most frequent visitors (1‐2 times per week) are the competition bowlers, who amount to approximately 10% of total visits. Group arrangements form 30%, and children’s parties 10% of total visitors, with both categories recording low visit frequencies. The casual bowlers (group sizes varying from 2‐6 people) are almost half of the total visitors and have a visit frequency that varies from very low (once a year or less) to quite regular (twice a month). The average visit duration in the bowling center is around two hours. This duration is increased by roughly an hour in those cases where visitors also dine in the restaurant. The level of combination visits between the bowling and other leisure or catering functions in the area (largely located in the same building) varies between the four visitor categories mentioned above. For competition bowlers, group arrangements or children’s parties the level of combination visits is low. These groups come almost exclusively for the bowling and are not interested in other activities. The casual visitors, especially in the weekend, show a much higher level of combination visits with other leisure uses. While many bowling centers close before midnight on weekends, Huizen is open until 2 AM. The 12‐lane bowling center attracts approximately 200.000 visitors annually. The presence of sufficient (and free) parking places is considered an important asset by the operator. The catchment area for the bowling center is large, as visitors come from a wide range around Huizen. Roughly 30% of visitors come from Almere, while the bowling also attracts visitors from the area Het Gooi. Bowling Bisonspoor, Maarssen This bowling center is located in the shopping center Bisonspoor in Maarssen. Bisonspoor services the municipality of Maarssen and its surroundings, and offers a broad range of retail that includes all regular branches. Despite this location, there is a low level of interaction with retail, according to the operator. The bowling is located on the upper floor of the shopping center, away from the main retail routing. As in Huizen, the bowling does not open before 4 PM (except on Wednesdays) and peak visiting hours are in the evenings and during weekends. Almost all visitors (>90%) reserve bowling lanes before their visit, thus eliminating the possibility of impulse visits by shopping consumers. Visitor profiles are comparable to the bowling center in Huizen. The 16‐lane bowling center attracts approximately 80.000 visitors annually. Merral Bowling Deventer Merral Bowling is part of the entertainment center De Boreel (see under Merral Cinema above). It is a joint operation with the cinema, and in fact the only bowling that is operated by Merral. The length of the bowling lanes is approximately five 35 meters shorter than the official length. This was prompted partly by specifications of the building, and partly by the ambition to attract more casual players. Due to the shorter lane length, the game is made easier than at regular bowling centers. According to Merral, the bowling attracts few competitive players (for whom the shorter length is a disadvantage) but a lot of fun‐oriented casual players and families (as the shorter length makes it easier for children). In terms of turnover, this is considered an advantage by the operator because casual players tend to spend more on food and drinks than competitive players. In its marketing activities, Merral focuses on package visits, combining the bowling in De Boreel with the cinema, casino and restaurant. The 10‐lane bowling center has been operational since November 2007 and has attracted approximately 70.000 visitors since the opening. 36 4. Synergy effects measured The synergy effects of three different leisure functions with retail are subject of this study. For each leisure function, several operations have been selected, described in the previous chapter. The surveys that have been held at each of the 11 operations are included as appendix B‐D to this study 34 . The amounts of returned questionnaires that have been received per operation are listed in figure 4.1. In total 1.170 questionnaires have been completed by leisure visitors. For several individual locations (particularly several of the casinos), the amount of respondents is too small to draw conclusions on the individual location. However, the total amount of respondents per leisure function is sufficient to draw conclusions on the levels of the three leisure components. It has proven more difficult to obtain cooperation for the survey from visitors to casinos than for cinema and bowling. Figure 4.1: received completed questionnaires per leisure operation Leisure component Cinema Pathé Spuimarkt 164 350 Merral De Boreel 186 Casinos Hommerson Zaandam 43 246 Krijco Rotterdam 64 Krijco Zeist 27 Krijco Deventer 69 Krijco Harderwijk 25 Krijco Amersfoort 18 Bowling Merral De Boreel 239 574 Bison Bowling Maarssen 187 35
148 Operation Bowling Center Huizen
Amount It should be noted that the surveys were conducted in July – September 2008. This summer period may not reflect the average visitor pattern throughout the year. For this reason, various operators have suggested that the survey be repeated at a later date. Not only will this make the results of this study more complete, it also provides operators insight in the differences of their visitors during peak season and summer period. All operators have lower visitor numbers in the summer months, due to the 34
In several locations (Deventer, the Krijco casinos and the bowling centers), surveys were organised by the operators and included times during the week outside retail openings. At Pathé and the Hommerson casinos, surveys were held at various times, but always during retail opening hours (including evening retail opening). This might have had an impact on the level of combination visits. 35
At the request of the operator, questions 9‐14 and 20‐21 of the bowling survey were deleted.
37 indoor nature of the leisure functions, and of course the fact that many visitors are away on holidays in the summer. A main indicator of synergy is the level of combination visits between the leisure function and retail in the vicinity. In the results, a percentage is presented of those visitors that indicated to combine leisure and retail either always, often or sometimes. The latter distinction measures the intensity of combination visits and is important; obviously, the synergy is higher if leisure visitors combine visits always or often, than if they only do so sometimes. The results of the surveys are presented both for each individual location, and aggregated 36 for each of the three leisure components. 4.1 Cinema A total of 350 completed questionnaires were received from cinema visitors. As described in chapter 2, literature suggests that a cinema has a relatively high level of synergy with retail. The synergy component ‘longer duration’ is treated differently in the cinema questionnaires than in those for casinos and bowling centers. The visit duration at a cinema is of course determined by the length of the film that is viewed. In the survey, the question was changed to asking visitors how much time they spend at or near a cinema before and after viewing of film. Pathé Spuimarkt The high level of synergy with retail is confirmed by the survey at Pathé Spuimarkt. There is a significant amount (71%) of combination visits between the cinema and adjacent retail. Of those that responded to combine a visit to the cinema with retail, 24% indicated to do so always, 19% often and 57% sometimes. The level of combination visits is in line with the 66% quoted for the Pathé Schouwburgplein cinema in Rotterdam in earlier research 37 . The average retail spend of €25 (including visitors with a zero spend in retail) means that cinema visitors generate a significant turnover for adjacent retail. Although the primary visiting motive was the viewing of the film itself (46%), just under 30% of the respondents indicated that they would visit the cinema less frequently if it were not located within the core retail area. At the least, this indicates that the visitor numbers and turnover for the cinema benefit from the proximity to retail at the location. The cinema clearly leads to a longer duration of the visit to the area. Aside from the duration of the film itself, the average visitor spends around 23 minutes in the area 36
For casinos, weighted averages relative to the number of respondents have been used, due to the variance in number of respondents per location. 37
OBR (2006). 38 around the cinema before and after the film. This is an interesting result, as it indicates that visitors spend more time in the area than the minimum stay that is determined by the length of the film. In the case of Pathé Spuimarkt, there is no evidence of an extension of the catchment area with an average travel time of 25 minutes. This is logical, as the catchment area for the core retail area in The Hague is of course much larger than of local or regional shopping centers. Synergy component Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Catchment area Pathé Spuimarkt, The Hague Visitors spend almost 23 minutes at the cinema before and after the film, leading to a visit duration of almost 2½ hours. High level of combination visits (71%), with an average spend of €25 on retail by all (including non‐combining) visitors. High frequency of visits (20 times per year). Average travel time 25 minutes. This fits within the existing catchment area of The Hague city center. The average visitor frequency of 20 times per year is higher than was to be expected from the results of previous research. There is a clear difference between those polled on Saturdays and those polled during the week (including retail evening opening). The visitor frequency on Saturday is higher, while the average age is lower. Also, the level of combination visits and the average retail spend of Saturday visitors is significantly higher than that of weekday visitors. Merral De Boreel, Deventer The potential synergy level between cinema and retail appears lower in the Merral cinema in De Boreel than at Pathé in The Hague, as just under 50% of respondents indicated to combine their visit to the cinema with retail. Of those who combine visits, a large majority (81%) does so only sometimes. The average retail spend of cinema visitors in Deventer (including those who do not combine visits) is €18. Synergy component Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Catchment area Cinema Merral De Boreel, Deventer Visitors spend more than 30 minutes at or near the cinema before and after viewing the film. Medium level of combination visits (45%) and average retail spend (€18). High frequency of visits (19 times per year). Average travel time 23 minutes. Visitors spend a large amount of time (more than 30 minutes) at or near the cinema before and after viewing the film, thus having a positive impact on the average duration of a visit. Including the viewtime of the film, visitors spend approximately 2½ hours at the cinema. The frequency of visits is similar to Pathé, at 19 times per year. The catchment area appears similar to that of other functions in De Boreel, with an average travel time of 23 minutes, also comparable to Pathé. 39 4.2 Casino As was to be expected, the results of the surveys at the six casino gaming centers differ significantly from the results of the interviews at Holland Casino. This can largely be subscribed to factors as outlined in paragraph 3.2. Figure 4.2: key results from casino surveys Group size Travel time Stay duration Visit frequency Age % combination Retail spend Amersfoort 1.44 16 157 75 40 78 37 Deventer 2.25 20 168 65 41 85 25 Harderwijk 1.72 22 104 65 36 64 29 Rotterdam 1.38 17 167 60 52 64 24 Zaandam 1.74 15 120 42 45 72 24 Zeist 1.82 16 161 58 53 94 37 Average 1.75 18 150 60 45 74 27 Casino The key results from surveys taken at the casinos are shown in figure 4.2, and are highly consistent with each other. The time that people travel to the casino is lower than for cinemas and bowling centers, with an average of 18 minutes and a variance between 15‐22 minutes. Noteworthy is the high level of repeat visits to casinos. On average, visitors come 60 times per year, more than once every week. The group size of visitors to casino is much lower than for cinemas or bowlings, as visitors often come by themselves. The average group size is 1.75 persons, ranging from 1.44 to 2.25 between the casinos. Figure 4.3: combination visits in casinos Combination visits
Average
Rotterdam
Harderwijk
Amersfoort
Zeist
Deventer
Zaandam
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
An important result for this study is the high level of combination visits between the casino and retail in the surrounding area. This level is above 60% for all casinos that 40 were surveyed, with a weighted average of 74.4% (see figure 4.3). Compared to other leisure uses, the level of combination visits are consistently and significantly higher. Hommerson Zaandam Although the lowest recorded for all casinos, the visitor frequency in Zaandam is significantly higher than for other leisure components. On average visitors come to the casino 42 times a year, almost once every week. The backbone of the visitors are ‘regulars’ with a high level of repeat visits. Most regulars come from a relatively small distance, as the average travel time to the casino is 15 minutes. Of all respondents, an overwhelming majority (70%) lives in the city of Zaandam. This means that the casino increases the amount of repeat visits to the area, but does not lead to a larger catchment area. There is a large level of combination visitors (72%), in line with earlier internal Hommerson research mentioned in chapter 3 of this study. When asked how often visits were combined, 54% replied ‘often’ and 46% replied ‘sometimes’. The average spending on retail of all casino visitors (including the ones that do not combine the casino and retail) is €24. Synergy component Hommerson, Zaandam Average stay is two hours Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Average spend in retail of all casino visitors is €24, with >70% of the visitors combining with retail. High frequency of visits: 42 times a year on average. Catchment area Average travel time 15 minutes, most visitors from Zaandam. While ‘fun’ and ‘excitement of the game’ are mostly mentioned as reasons for visiting the casino (almost 80%), the proximity of retail is considered an advantage by over 60% of respondents. In fact, 53% of the visitors indicated they would come to the casino less often if it were not located within the retail area of Zaandam. On the other hand, only 11% of respondents indicated they would visit the retail less frequently in absence of the casino 38 . These results indicate a close link between the casino and retail in the immediate vicinity. Although the primary visiting motive is the activity in the casino itself, both the casino and adjacent retail appear to profit from each other’s presence. Krijco Deventer The casino in Deventer is located within the retail and entertainment center De Boreel. The percentage of visitors that combine the casino with retail is more than 38
A reason for this response could be that a second casino, Flamingo, is also located in the retail area and could serve as an alternative. 41 80%, which is among the highest of all casinos included in this study. Of those combining visits, 60% indicated to do so sometimes, while 28% combines regularly and 12% always combines a visit to the casino with retail. Synergy component Krijco, Deventer Average stay is 2¾ hours Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Average spend in retail of all casino visitors is €25, with a high level (>80%) of combination visits. High frequency of visits: 65 times a year on average. Catchment area Average travel time 20 minutes. The average spend in retail of casino visitors (including those who do not combine visits) is €25, in line with other casinos. Unlike other locations, De Boreel has a limited number of retail outlets, but the average unit size is large. The Jumbo supermarket (mentioned by 70% of respondents) and Media Markt electronics (30%) in particular profit from casino visitors. Around 30% of visitors stated that they would visit these stores less frequently without the presence of the casino. Likewise, the casino would be visited less frequently by almost 40% if the stores were not located in the immediate vicinity. Compared to other casinos, visitors in Deventer stay longer and come in larger groups. The average group size of visitors in 2.25, making it the only casino that exceeds a group size of 2. The average stay is close to three hours, which is longer than other casinos. The frequency of visits is in the upper range of all casinos, at 65 times per year. Krijco Amersfoort The number of respondents in Amersfoort (19) is too small to draw conclusions. However, the results are included in the general conclusions that can be drawn for casinos. Synergy component Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Catchment area Krijco, Amersfoort Average stay is 2½ hours Average spend in retail of all casino visitors is €37, with a high level (>75%) of combination visits. High frequency of visits: 75 times a year on average. Average travel time 16 minutes, visitors come mostly from within Amersfoort. The results in Amersfoort are generally consistent with those in other casinos. The casino has an average visit duration of 2½ hours, and attracts visitors from a range of 15‐20 minutes travel time. Those surveyed showed a significant synergy with retail, as more than 75% combined a visit to the casino with retail, and indicated an 42 average retail spend of €37. A large part of the visitors in Amersfoort come alone, leading to a low average group size of 1.44. Krijco Zeist Like Amersfoort, the number of respondents in Zeist (17) is too small to draw conclusions. Zeist fits within the general view of other casinos, with a high frequency (around once a week), a small catchment area (average travel time 16 minutes) and an average stay of more than 2½ hours. Synergy component Krijco, Zeist Average stay is more than 2½ hours Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Average spend in retail of all casino visitors is €37. Almost all respondents indicated to combine the casino with retail visits. High frequency of visits: just over once a week. Catchment area Average travel time is 16 minutes. With one exception, all of the respondents combine a visit to the casino with retail, with the overwhelming majority doing so sometimes (as opposed to ‘always’ or ‘often’). Around 30% would visit the casino less frequently is there were no retail in the area, and vice versa. Krijco Harderwijk Like Amersfoort and Zeist, the number of respondents in Harderwijk (25) is too small to draw independent conclusions. The results in Harderwijk largely mirror the average for casino locations in this study, although the average stay is relatively low at just under 2 hours. Visitors come from within a range of approximately 20 minutes travel time, and almost two‐thirds of respondents indicate to combine a visit to the casino with retail, with 60% doing so either ‘sometimes’ or ‘often’. The average retail spend of all casino visitors is €29, close to the average for all casinos. Synergy component Krijco, Harderwijk Average stay is 1¾ hours Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Average spend in retail of all casino visitors is €29, with 64% of visitors combining a visit to the casino with retail. High frequency of visits: 65 times a year. Catchment area Average travel time is 22 minutes. Krijco Rotterdam Although located within the large shopping center Alexandrium in Rotterdam, the level of combination visits is below the average for all casinos, at 64%. Of those, 39% of respondents indicating to combine visits ‘sometimes’ and 19% doing so ‘often’. The average retail spend of €24 is just below the casino average. Only 14% of 43 respondents indicated that they would visit the casino less frequently if there were no retail in the area, and 27% responded they would visit the retail less frequently if the casino were not present. These percentages are lower than the results for other casinos, which is remarkable in view of the large shopping center in which the Rotterdam casino is located. Synergy component Krijco, Rotterdam Average stay is 2¾ hours Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Average spend in retail of all casino visitors is €24, with 64% of visitors combining a visit to the casino with retail. High frequency of visits: 60 times a year. Catchment area Average travel time is 18 minutes. The average stay per visitor is relatively high, at almost three hours per visit. Other indicators are in line with the average for the casinos. The catchment area in Rotterdam includes visitors from the city and neighboring municipalities (primarily Capelle), as the average travel time is 18 minutes. 4.3 Bowling A total of 574 questionnaires were received from visitors to the three selected bowling centers. The average group size at bowling centers is higher than for the other leisure functions. On average, a visitor group consists of 5.9 persons. An important difference in visitor profiles with cinema or casino is the varying motive for visiting a bowling center between various groups. These include competition bowlers (visiting almost on a weekly basis) and group arrangements (visiting much less frequently, often once a year or less). This is reflected in the results from the surveys taken at the three bowling centers. At Merral Bowling in Deventer, the length of the bowling lanes is shorter than official competition regulations, thus largely excluding regular competition bowlers. In Maarssen and Huizen, the lanes fit competition regulations and competition bowlers are an important part of total visitors. Merral Bowling De Boreel, Deventer Although less than in cinemas or casinos, there is a relatively high level of combination visits between Merral Bowling and surrounding retail. Almost 60% of visitors indicated to combine bowling and retail at least sometimes. The frequency of combination visits is lower. Of all respondents that indicated to combine visits, a large majority (64%) does so only sometimes, while 25% responded ‘often’ and 10% ‘always’. The average retail spend of bowling visitors (including those who do not combine bowling and retail visits at all) is €18, which is lower than for cinema and casino visitors. 44 Synergy component Merral Bowling De Boreel Average stay is around 1¾ hours. Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Relatively high level of combination visitors (57%), but low frequency of combination visits. Average visit frequency of 33 times per year. Catchment area The average travel time is 25 minutes. Around 44% of respondents view the proximity of retail to the bowling center as an advantage. The main advantage cited was ‘a more pleasurable environment’, in contrast to casino visitors where the possibility to combine visits was considered an important advantage. A quarter of the bowling visitors indicated that they would visit the adjacent retail less often if the bowling were not present. The average visit frequency is more than twice per month (33 times per year), while the average travel time to the bowling is 25 minutes. This leads to the conclusion that the bowling does not increase the catchment area of entertainment center De Boreel, but does have a positive impact on the frequency of visits. Bison Bowling, Maarssen Bison Bowling is located within the shopping center Bisonspoor in Maarssen. As in De Boreel, almost 60% of respondents indicated to combine retail with a visit to the bowling. However, the frequency of these combination visits is much lower. Only 25% of those who combine visits, indicated to do so always or often, while 75% only combines visits sometimes. The average retail spend of all visitors (including those that do not combine bowling and retail) is €19. Synergy component Bison Bowling, Maarssen Average stay is just over two hours. Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Relatively high level of combination visitors (58%), but low frequency of combination visits. Average visit frequency of 33 times per year. Catchment area The average travel time is 21 minutes. Although the frequency with which bowling visitors combine with retail is low, a significant 34% of all respondents considered the proximity of retail as an advantage. The possibility of combination visits was most frequently cited as main advantage. The average visit frequency (33 times per year) and travel time (21 minutes) are similar to the results at bowling De Boreel 39 . It can be concluded that the bowling 39
The fact that the bowling lanes in Deventer do not comply with competition regulations and thus excludes competition bowlers, does not have an impact on visitor frequencies that might have been expected. 45 does have a positive impact on repeat visits to the shopping center, but does not increase the catchment area. Bowling centrum Huizen While the results from the bowling centers in Deventer and Maarssen are largely comparable, the results from Huizen show different results. As described in the previous chapter, this is most likely due to the poor link between the retail center in Huizen and the entertainment complex in which the bowling is located. There are almost no (3%) visitors that combine bowling with retail. There is, however, a large percentage (61%) of visitors that combine bowling with other entertainment uses in and around the building. This is in agreement with the interview with the operator (paragraph 3.3). Many of the more frequent visitors do not combine visits at all; logic suggests that these are largely competition bowlers, who come exclusively for the bowling game and are not interested in other activities. Synergy component Bowling centrum Huizen Average stay is two hours. Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Almost no combination visits between bowling, but high (61%) level of combination visits with other entertainment uses. Low average visit frequency of 13 times per year. Catchment area The average travel time is 18 minutes. The average visit frequency (13 times per year) is significantly lower than in Deventer and Maarssen. This may be due to the fact that the survey was held in Huizen 2‐3 weeks earlier than in Maarssen, in a period when the competition season for bowling was just starting. As suggested by the operator, a relatively large share of visitors consists of business events and family parties that tend to have a low visit frequency. 46 5. Conclusions The central question to this study is: Can a combination of independently functioning retail and leisure components within a real estate development lead to synergy? In chapter one, research to answer this question was limited to the magnet leisure functions cinema, casino and bowling. The term synergy was operationalized, using the classic four elements of synergy that were put forward by Howard (1990): 1.
2.
3.
4.
Increase in visit duration Higher average spend per visit Increase in repeat visits Increase in catchment area Various methods have been employed in this study. The results of literature research have been presented in chapter 2. Interviews with operators (as well as the context of selected leisure operations) are the subject of chapter 3, while chapter 4 contains the results of the 1.170 surveys that were conducted for this study. This concluding chapter combines the results of the previous chapters. First, the results are presented for the three leisure functions, followed by the results grouped by the four synergy elements. Lastly, the two are combined in the 3x4 matrix that summarizes the findings of this study. 5.1 The leisure functions There are significant differences in visitor profiles for the three leisure components that are analyzed in this study. The main visitor characteristics are presented below. Figure 5.1: Visitor characteristics 40
Casino Age Male/ % by Group Travel Stay 41 Visit % com‐
Retail female car size time duration frequency bination spend Cinema 32 55/45 48 3.50 24 148 19 58 21 Casino 45 56/44 52 1.75 18 150 60 74 27 26 42
19 Bowling 33 51/49 70 5.87 21 119 58
40
Travel time and stay duration are expressed in minutes, visit frequency is expressed in times per year. The percentage combination visits includes all visitors who indicate to combine a visit to the leisure function with retail either always, often or sometimes. 41
In the cinema surveys, visitors were asked how much time is spent at or near the cinema before and after the film. The result from that question is added to an estimated 120 minutes viewing time. 42
This figure represents the average of the bowling centers in Deventer and Maarssen, and excludes Huizen. 47 Cinema The only leisure function for which literature research yielded clear results on its synergy with retail was the cinema. Sources agreed that a significant share of retail‐
focused visitors combine their shopping trip with a visit to the cinema (8‐15%), while a much larger share of cinema visitors combine with retail. The study by OBR (2006) with a combination visit of 66% is confirmed by the surveys conducted in this study, where just under 60% of cinema visitors combined their visit with retail. Together with the high amount of visitors to multiplex cinemas, the average retail spend of €21 (including visitors who do not combine retail with cinema) means that cinemas have a substantial impact on retail turnover in the area. Although the average Dutch population only visits a cinema 1.5 times per year, those who do visit cinemas do so frequently. The amount of repeat visits is high, with an average visit frequency of 19 times per year. An interesting result of the surveys was that visitors spend a considerable amount of time (close to 30 minutes) in or around the cinema before and after viewing the film. Synergy component Longer duration Higher spend Cinema High effect; cinema visitors are at or near the cinema almost 30 minutes before and after viewing the film. High (approximately 60%) level of combination visits. Repeat visits Cinema visitors visit frequently, around 20 times per year. Catchment area No clear extension of the catchment area. There is little evidence that the cinema enlarges the catchment area. The average travel time encountered in the questionnaires does not exceed 25 minutes, which is not more than for the retail at the locations that were surveyed. Casino Literature research yielded no evidence at all on synergy between casinos and retail. According to Goudappel Coffeng (2004) and Ecorys (2004), the level of combination visits between casinos and retail was less than 1%. The literature research was sharply contradicted by results both from interviews and field research at gaming centers. Casino visitors were interviewed at six locations. On average, more than 70% of casino visitors responded that they combine their casino visit with retail at least sometimes. The average retail spend by casino visitors (including those that do not combine with retail) is €27, the highest for all three leisure components. Importantly, these conclusions are valid for all individual casino operations that were analyzed. The lowest level of combination visits encountered was 64%, while the 48 lowest level of retail spend by casino visitors was €24. The results are also in line with previous research conducted by Hommerson Casinos, which showed a combination visit level in excess of 60% and an average spend on retail and F&B combined of €37. Synergy component Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Catchment area Casinos High effect; average stay is 2‐3 hours. High effect: combination visit level of >70% at gaming centers, but low at Holland Casino. High effect: average visit frequency at gaming centers is more than once a week, but only 5 times per year at Holland Casino. No extension of the catchment area of gaming centers, but a larger catchment area for Holland Casino. Two other factors are favorable indicators for synergy potential. The average stay duration of casino visitors is high at 2 ½ hours. There is also a high level of repeat visits, as casino visitors come more than once a week. These figures are confirmed both in the surveys and interviews. Again, indicators for stay duration and repeat visits hold for all individual casinos that were part of this study. There is little variance between casinos for both stay duration (1¾‐2¾ hours) and visitor frequency (42–65 times per year) 43 . The results in the study show that there is a clear difference in visitor profile and synergy potential between Holland Casino and the gaming centers. The level of combination visits is estimated to be much lower at the Holland Casino in Eindhoven, which is the location that has the best link with retail. Repeat visits at Holland Casino are less frequent, as visitor frequency is 4 ½ times per year. The only synergy component in which Holland Casino scores better than gaming centers is the enlargement of the catchment area. While the average travel of gaming center visitors is low (18 minutes, with a minimal variance between different locations), Holland Casino attracts visitors from a much broader area. Bowling As with casinos, literature research has yielded no evidence of synergy potential between bowling centers and retail. This has partly been contradicted by the interviews and surveys conducted at the bowling centers. The results from the three locations are varying, with the largest levels of interrelation between a bowling center and retail encountered in Maarssen and Deventer. The results from Huizen are strikingly different, with combination visits 43
A high exception is the casino in Amersfoort, where visitor frequency is 75 times per year. This figure should be treated with caution due to the low number of respondents in Amersfoort. 49 between retail and bowling being almost non‐existent, but a high level of synergy between bowling and other entertainment uses. It would appear that the poor link between retail and the bowling center in Huizen is the main reason for this low level of combination visits. Synergy component Longer duration Higher spend Repeat visits Catchment area Bowling Medium effect; average stay is 1 ¾ hours. Medium effect: relatively high level of combination visitors, but lower frequency of combination visits and lower average retail spend than at casinos or cinemas. No combination visits in Huizen. No clear effect: some groups have high visit frequencies, but these are typically the groups that are less interested in retail. Limited effect. It can be concluded that the synergy with retail is least at the bowling for the three leisure uses. The level of combination visitors, frequency of combination visits and average retail spend for bowling visitors are lower than for casino or cinema visitors. Nevertheless, particularly in the cases of Maarssen and Deventer, the synergy potential is much higher than would be expected from previous studies and review of literature. 5.2 Synergy components In this section, the results of this study are analyzed for each synergy component. Increase in visit duration All methods used in this study confirm that the addition of leisure to a retail location increases the time that visitors spend in the area. As shown in the literature research, this was one of the main principles in the development of mixed‐use centers in the USA, UK and Europe, and one of the main elements in the Trinity of Synergy that was the underlying philosophy for these developments. The effect was confirmed on the smaller scale of reference projects and individual leisure functions in this study. The average stay duration for the leisure functions that were surveyed varies between 1¾ and 3 hours, meaning that people spend significantly more time in the area than they would in the absence of these leisure functions. Higher average spend This synergy indicator depends on both the extent to which visitors combine leisure and retail, and the average spending. The level and frequency of combination visits 50 (divided in always, often, sometimes or never) in the results from the surveys are presented for each leisure component in figure 5.1. Figure 5.1: level and frequency of combination visits Bowling
Always
Often
Casino
Sometimes
Never
Cinema
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
A high level of combination visits (between 58‐70%) was established for cinemas in both literature research and the surveys that were conducted. For casinos in the category of gaming centers and for bowlings, there was a sharp contrast between literature and field research. While previous studies showed no evidence of combination visits, the interviews and surveys showed a very high level (>70%) of respondents that indicated to combine their visit to the gaming center with retail. Also, a significant share of casino visitors responded that they would visit the retail in the vicinity less frequently if the casino were not present. The low level of combination visits for Holland Casino, expected on basis of literature research, was confirmed in interviews. For two of the three bowling centers that are included in this study, a high level of combination visits (58%) was established, contradicting literature research. The low level in the third bowling center can likely be subscribed to the poor link between the bowling center and the retail area in Huizen. The average retail spend of leisure visitors is consistent for cinemas and casinos, between €20‐30. While this figure is not much lower for bowling centers, it is less relevant due to the lower frequency of combination visits. It can be concluded that the presence of cinemas and casinos in the category gaming center can have a direct and significant impact on retail spending in the area. This effect is much lower for bowling centers and Holland Casino. Contribution to retail turnover The contribution to retail turnover by leisure visitors depends on the average spend and the frequency of combination visits. The average retail spend was subject of the surveys. Also, visitors were asked if they combine leisure visits with retail and if they 51 do so always, often, sometimes or never, without quantifying these terms. To estimate the contribution to retail turnover, the results of the surveys have been used as follows: Contribution to retail turnover Retail and leisure combined during every leisure visit. Always Often Retail and leisure combined during 1 out of 3 leisure visits. Sometimes Retail and leisure combined during 1 out 5 leisure visits. Never Retail and leisure never combined. This quantification method has a subjective aspect, as respondents were not asked to quantify how many times they considered combination visits to be ‘often’ or ‘sometimes’. Using the above factors, an estimate can be given on the total contribution to retail turnover (CRT) by leisure visitors. Leisure function Retail spend CRT / visitor Estimated Total CRT / €6.50 visitors / yr 1.200.000 year €7.8 mln Cinema / visitor €21 Casino €27 €9.00 300.000 €2.7 mln Bowling €18 €5.50 150.000 €0.8 mln The contribution to retail turnover is the highest for casinos, at €9 per visitor. This leads to the conclusion that a casino with 300.000 visitors per year generates €2.7 million in turnover for the retail in the area. For cinemas, the contribution to retail turnover per visitor is lower, at €6.50. However, visitor numbers to particularly the Pathé cinemas are higher than for gaming center casinos. Thus, with an estimated 1.2 million visitors, the Pathé cinema in Spuimarkt generates an estimated €7.8 million in retail turnover. Bowling centers have the lowest average retail spend and the lowest contribution to retail turnover per visitor at €5.32. Also, they generally have fewer visitors per year than a casino or cinema. In case of a bowling center with 150.000 visitors annually, €800.000 in retail turnover is generated. Increase in repeat visits Visitors to cinemas and particularly gaming centers can be characterized as regulars, with an average visit frequency of almost twice a month for cinemas and more than once a week for gaming centers. This is in agreement with Beyard (2001), who argued that particularly cinemas generate repeat visits because the leisure offering is constantly refreshed with the release of new films. 52 The average visitor frequency for bowling centers is 26 times per year. However, this figure should be treated with caution as there is a large variance between types of bowling visitors. The most regular visitors (competitive bowlers) tend to be the ones that have the lowest level of combination visits with retail. Still, with the exception of Holland Casino, the high visitor frequency for leisure functions clearly has a positive impact on this synergy indicator. Increase in catchment area In many consumer centers, particularly the large scale mixed‐use developments described in chapter 2, an extension of the catchment area is one of the primary motives to add leisure to the location. This is true for both the large centers in the USA, and for European centers such as CentrO Oberhausen. On the smaller scale of the reference projects and leisure functions that were analyzed in this study, the effect of an increase in catchment area was much smaller. For cinemas, bowling centers and gaming centers, the average travel time of visitors varies between 15‐25 minutes. The surveys do not show a significant share of visitors from outside the primary catchment area. In the case of Holland Casino, visitors come from a larger area including locations that are at 45 minutes travel time. Thus, the effect of leisure on the catchment area of locations is very limited for the leisure functions that are within the scope of this study. 5.3 Conclusions The conclusions in the previous two paragraphs enable the presentation of the main findings of this study in the form of the 3x4 matrix below. Synergy component Leisure Longer Higher Repeat Catchment Overall function duration spend visits area synergy Cinema Medium‐high High High Limited High Casino Medium‐high High High Limited High Bowling Medium‐high Low High Limited Low‐medium The results from interviews (chapter 3) and surveys (chapter 4) are generally consistent. There is, however, a significant gap between these results and results from previous research (chapter 2) for all leisure components except cinemas. The synergy potential as shown in this study appears much higher than shown in previous studies. 53 One of the most important results of the surveys undertaken for this study is the high level of combination visits that were recorded for cinema and casino visitors. Previous research has led to comparable results for cinemas, but not for casinos. Approximately 60‐70% of those visitors indicated that a visit to the leisure function is combined with a visit to adjacent retail at least sometimes. With an average retail spend of €20‐30, this leads to a significant turnover potential for retail outlets in the surrounding area. For two of the three bowling centers, an unexpectedly high level of combination visits with retail (58%) was also established. However, with a lower frequency of combination visits, average retail spend and visitor totals, the positive effect of bowling on retail turnover appears lower than for casinos or cinemas. Likewise, proximity to retail was shown to have a positive impact on visitor numbers at cinemas or casinos. A majority of the visitors responded to consider this proximity an advantage, while a significant part indicated that they would visit the leisure function less frequently in the absence of retail located nearby. The high level of visitor frequency leads to a large number of repeat visits to the area. The lowest visitor frequency recorded is 19 times per year (cinemas), while the highest level is 60 times per year (gaming centers). The only synergy indicator on which the leisure components do not have a positive effect is the extension of the catchment area. Interestingly, this is the indicator that was shown to be significant in literature research, particularly for large‐scale entertainment centers in the USA and UK. This difference can be subscribed to the types of leisure components that were analyzed in this study; these are more regular and less unique leisure attractions than included in some of these large‐scale centers. This study has investigated the synergy between retail and leisure on a different scale than often encountered in previous studies. Rather than investigating large‐
scale entertainment centers, the focus was on individual leisure components that have a stand‐alone appeal. But to a varying extent, the combination of these leisure components with a retail environment was shown to lead to synergy effects. In particular the high levels of combination visits indicate that both retail and these leisure components benefit from each other’s presence in the vicinity to a larger extent than shown in previous studies. 54 List of Appendices A B C D E F Literature Survey bowling Survey casino Survey cinema List of interviewed operators Locations of selected leisure operations 55 56 Appendix A: Literature 1. Barendse, F. (2005), Leisure in het gebiedsontwikkelingsproces 2. Bastiaansen, J. and D.C. Kooijman (2002), Leisure: veranderend begrup in onzekere context, in Real Estate Magazine nr. 23, p 22‐27. 3. Beekers, G. (2000), Leisure en retail natuurlijke bondgenoten in slag om consument, in Retail Magazine nr. 11 4. Berenschot (2006), Citymarketing Amsterdam Zuidoost 5. Beyard, M.D., R.E. Brain, H. McLaughlin, P.L. Phillips and M.S. Rubin (2001), Developing retail entertainment destinations. 6. Beyard, M.D. (2005), Entertaining development, in Urban Land, nr.1 p 54‐58 7. Cornet, S. (2001), Multi‐use leisure centers; lessons in leisure development 8. Delft, A. van, M. Draijer, P. Guyt, H. de Jonge and W. van der Toorn Vrijthoff (1998), Werk aan de winkel: de toekomst van de winkelmarkt 1995‐2015. 9. Doury, N. (2000), Succesfully integrating cinemas into retail and leisure complexes: an operator’s perspective. In Journal of Leisure Property, vol 1 no 2, pp 119‐126. 10. Ecorys (2004), Zeven keer leisurewaarde 11. Ecorys (2008), Getz Entertainment Center: Raming bezoekersaantallen. 12. Fokkink, J. (2003), Let me entertain you! Retailtainment, verleden, heden en toekomst voor HBD. 13. Goudappel Coffeng (2004), Koopstromenonderzoek Randstad 2004 14. Greater London Authority (2006), Retail and leisure in London 15. Harinck, E. (1998), Prestaties leisure in nevelen gehuld, Vastgoedmarkt, nr 5. 16. Haringsma, J. and H.Gianotten (2006), De veranderende stad; pijlers van retaildynamiek op weg naar 2020, NRW, Utrecht. 17. Holland Casino (2008), Jaarverslag en jaarrekening 2007. 18. Howard, E. (1990), Leisure and Retailing, the Oxford Institute of Retail Management. 19. ING Real Estate (2000), Getz ideologie & filosofie 20. Kooijman, D.C. (1999), Machine en theater; ontwerpconcepten van winkelgebouwen 57 21. Kooijman, D.C. (2002), De derde detailhandelsrevolutie: over de betekenis van leisure en urban entertainment voor detailhandel en vastgoed, in BOSS magazine, nr. 15, p.24‐28. 22. KPMG Business Advisory (2005), Onderzoek kengetallen speelautomatenbranche. 23. Metz, T. (2002), Pret! Leisure en landschap. 24. Mommaas, H. (2000), De vrijetijdsindustrie in stad en land; een studie naar de markt van belevenissen. 25. Nederlandse Vereniging van Bioscoopexploitanten (2006), Jaarboek 2006 / Jaarverslag 2005. 26. Ontwikkelingsbedrijf Rotterdam (2006), Plezierige zaken in Rotterdam 2006: vrijetijdseconomie in cijfers. 27. Pine, J.B. and J.H. Gilmore (1999), The experience economy: work is a theatre & every business is a stage, Harvard Business School Press, Boston. 28. Poell, E.A. (2001), Leisure in ontwikkeling. 29. Ruis, A. (2003), Leisure geeft vastgoed juist karakter en kwaliteit in BOSS magazine nr. 18, februari, p.46‐47. 30. Soet, J. de (2004), Visies op winkelvastgoed 31. Soet, J. de (2007), Visies op winkelvastgoed 2007. 32. Toorn Vrijthoff, W. van der et al (1998), Werk aan de winkel, de toekomst van de winkelmarkt 1995‐2015 33. Urban Land (1993), Mall of America: confounding the skeptics. 34. VAN Speelautomaten Branche‐Organisatie (2008), Jaarverslag 2007: Donkere wolken, zwaar weer. 35. VAN Speelautomaten Branche‐Organisatie (2007), Jaarverslag 2006: Rollenspel. 36. White, J.R. and K.D. Gray (1996), Shopping centers and other retail property 37. Zijderveld, D. van (2006), Leisure and citymarketing 38. Zijl, S. (1999), Leisure en retail: een onderzoek naar de risicobepalende factoren van een investeringsbeslissing tussen leisure‐ en retailfuncties binnen winkelcentra,, thesis , TUD 39. Zijl, S. (2000), Leisuretrend kan ook doorschieten, in Vastgoedmarkt, nr. 5 p.87. 58 Appendix B: Survey bowling 1. Met hoeveel personen bent u hier? ________ personen 2. Hoe vaak komt u hier ongeveer? … Meer dan 1 keer per week … Ongeveer 1 keer per kwartaal … Ongeveer 1 keer per week … 1‐2 keer per kaar … 1‐3 keer per maand … Minder dan 1 keer per jaar 3. Hoe lang blijft u gemiddeld in de bowling? … Minder dan 1 uur … Tussen 2 en 3 uur … Tussen 1 en 2 uur … Langer dan 3 uur …Fiets / lopend 4. Hoe bent u hier gekomen? … Auto … Openbaar vervoer 5. Hoe groot is de reistijd van uw huis naar de bowling? … Minder dan 15 minuten … Tussen 45 minuten en 1 uur … Tussen 15 en 30 minuten … Tussen 1 en 2 uur … Tussen 30 en 45 minuten … Meer dan 2 uur 6. Wat is/zijn de belangrijkste reden(en) van uw bezoek (meer antwoorden mogelijk) … Plezier / gezelligheid … Combinatie met ander bezoek, bv. winkels … Spanning van het spel … Vrienden of familie ontmoeten … Anders, nl: ______________________ 7. Hoeveel geeft u gemiddeld uit tijdens een bezoek aan de bowling? … Minder dan €10 … Tussen €25 en €50 … Tussen €10 en €25 … Meer dan €50 8. Welke andere activiteiten bezoekt u voor of na uw bezoek aan de bowling?. … Horeca … Uitgaan (bv. theater, casino, bioscoop) … Winkels … Geen, ik kom alleen voor de bowling. 9. Hoe vaak bezoekt u, voor of na de bowling, de winkels in de omgeving? … Altijd … Vaak … Soms … Nooit 10. Zoja, welk soort winkels bezoekt u (meer antwoorden mogelijk). … Supermarkt … Drogist / parfumerie … Mode … Muziek / electronica … Sport … Anders, nl: _____________________ 59 11. Hoeveel besteedt u (bij benadering) per bezoek in de winkels? … Minder dan €10 … Tussen €25 en €50 … Tussen €10 en €25 … Meer dan € 50 12. Als de bowling hier niet zou zijn, zou u dan vaker naar deze winkels gaan? … Vaker … Minder vaak … Maakt niet uit 13. Vindt u het een voordeel dat de bowling dichtbij winkels is gevestigd? … Ja … Nee … Geen mening 14. Zoja, waarom vindt u dat een voordeel (meer antwoorden mogelijk)?. … Makkelijk te combineren … Plezieriger omgeving … Geeft een veiliger gevoel … Anders, nl: ________________________ 15. Als de bowling niet dichtbij de winkels was gevestigd, zou u dan:. … Vaker naar de bioscoop gaan … Minder vaak … Maakt niet uit Tot slot stellen we u nog een paar vragen over uw persoonlijke leefsituatie. Deze vragen worden uiteraard geheel anoniem verwerkt. 16. Geslacht: … Man 17. Leeftijd: ________ jaar 18. Waar woont u? Plaatsnaam … Vrouw ______________________ Postcode ___________ 19. Bent u: … Alleenstaand … Alleenstaand/samenwonend met kinderen … Samenwonend … Woont bij ouders 20. Wat is het totale bruto maandinkomen van uw huishouden? … < € 1.500 … € 1.500 – 2.800 … €2.800 – 4.600 … Meer dan € 4.600 21. Wat is uw hoogst afgeronde opleiding? … Lager onderwijs … Middelbaar (MAVO, HAVO, VWO) … Lager beroepsonderwijs (LBO, LTS) … Middelbaar beroeps (MBO, MTS, MEAO) … Hoger beroepsonderwijs (HBO, HTS, HEAO) … Wetenschappelijk onderwijs (Universiteit) … Geen afgeronde opleiding Vriendelijk bedankt voor uw medewerking! 60 Appendix C: Survey Casino 1. Met hoeveel personen bent u hier? ________ personen 2. Hoe vaak komt u hier ongeveer? … Meer dan 1 keer per week … Ongeveer 1 keer per kwartaal … Ongeveer 1 keer per week … 1‐2 keer per kaar … 1‐3 keer per maand … Minder dan 1 keer per jaar 3. Hoe lang blijft u gemiddeld in het casino? … Minder dan 1 uur … Tussen 2 en 3 uur … Tussen 1 en 2 uur … Langer dan 3 uur …Fiets / lopend 4. Hoe bent u hier gekomen? … Auto … Openbaar vervoer 5. Hoe groot is de reistijd van uw huis naar het casino? … Minder dan 15 minuten … Tussen 45 minuten en 1 uur … Tussen 15 en 30 minuten … Tussen 1 en 2 uur … Tussen 30 en 45 minuten … Meer dan 2 uur 6. Wat is/zijn de belangrijkste reden(en) van uw bezoek (meer antwoorden mogelijk) … Plezier / gezelligheid … Combinatie met ander bezoek, bv. winkels … Spanning van het spel … Vrienden of familie ontmoeten … Anders, nl: ______________________ 7. Hoeveel geeft u gemiddeld uit tijdens een bezoek aan het casino? … Minder dan €10 … Tussen €25 en €50 … Tussen €10 en €25 … Meer dan €50 … Geen antwoord 8. Welke andere activiteiten bezoekt u voor of na uw bezoek aan het casino?. … Horeca … Uitgaan (bv. theater, bioscoop) … Winkels … Geen, ik kom alleen voor het casino. 9. Hoe vaak bezoekt u, voor of na het casino, de winkels in de omgeving? … Altijd … Vaak … Soms … Nooit 10. Zoja, welk soort winkels bezoekt u (meer antwoorden mogelijk). … Supermarkt … Drogist / parfumerie … Mode … Muziek / electronica … Sport … Anders, nl: _____________________ 61 11. Hoeveel besteedt u (bij benadering) per bezoek in de winkels? … Minder dan €10 … Tussen €25 en €50 … Tussen €10 en €25 … Meer dan € 50 12. Als het casino hier niet zou zijn, zou u dan vaker naar deze winkels gaan? … Vaker … Minder vaak … Maakt niet uit 13. Vindt u het een voordeel dat het casino dichtbij winkels is gevestigd? … Ja … Nee … Geen mening 14. Zoja, waarom vindt u dat een voordeel (meer antwoorden mogelijk)?. … Makkelijk te combineren … Plezieriger omgeving … Geeft een veiliger gevoel … Anders, nl: ________________________ 15. Als het casino niet dichtbij de winkels was gevestigd, zou u dan:. … Vaker naar het casino gaan … Minder vaak … Maakt niet uit Tot slot stellen we u nog een paar vragen over uw persoonlijke leefsituatie. Deze vragen worden uiteraard geheel anoniem verwerkt. 16. Geslacht: … Man 17. Leeftijd: ________ jaar 18. Waar woont u? Plaatsnaam … Vrouw ______________________ Postcode ___________ 19. Bent u: … Alleenstaand … Alleenstaand/samenwonend met kinderen … Samenwonend … Woont bij ouders 20. Wat is het totale bruto maandinkomen van uw huishouden? … < € 1.500 … Meer dan € 4.600 … € 1.500 – 2.800 … €2.800 – 4.600 … Geen antwoord 21. Wat is uw hoogst afgeronde opleiding? … Lager onderwijs … Middelbaar (MAVO, HAVO, VWO) … Lager beroepsonderwijs (LBO, LTS) … Middelbaar beroeps (MBO, MTS, MEAO) … Hoger beroepsonderwijs (HBO, HTS, HEAO) … Wetenschappelijk onderwijs (Universiteit) … Geen afgeronde opleiding Vriendelijk bedankt voor uw medewerking! 62 Appendix D: Survey Cinema 1. Met hoeveel personen bent u hier? ________ personen 2. Hoe vaak komt u hier ongeveer? … Meer dan 1 keer per week … Ongeveer 1 keer per kwartaal … Ongeveer 1 keer per week … 1‐2 keer per kaar … 1‐3 keer per maand … Minder dan 1 keer per jaar 3. Hoe lang voor start van de film bent u in de bioscoop of in de omgeving? … Minder dan 15 minuten … Tussen 30 minuten en een uur … Tussen 15 en 30 minuten … Langer dan 1 uur 4. Hoe bent u hier gekomen? … Auto … Openbaar vervoer …Fiets / lopend 5. Hoe groot is de reistijd van uw huis naar de bioscoop? … Minder dan 15 minuten … Tussen 45 minuten en 1 uur … Tussen 15 en 30 minuten … Tussen 1 en 2 uur … Tussen 30 en 45 minuten … Meer dan 2 uur 6. Wat is/zijn de belangrijkste reden(en) van uw bezoek (meer antwoorden mogelijk) … Plezier / gezelligheid … Combinatie met ander bezoek, bv. winkels … Ik wil doelgericht deze film zien … Vrienden of familie ontmoeten … Anders, nl: ______________________ 7. Hoeveel geeft u gemiddeld uit tijdens een bezoek aan de bioscoop? … Minder dan €10 … Tussen €25 en €50 … Tussen €10 en €25 … Meer dan €50 8. Welke andere activiteiten bezoekt u voor of na uw bezoek aan de bioscoop?. … Horeca … Uitgaan (bv. theater, casino) … Winkels … Geen, ik kom alleen voor de bioscoop. 9. Hoe vaak bezoekt u, voor of na de bioscoop, de winkels in de omgeving? … Altijd … Vaak … Soms … Nooit 10. Zoja, welk soort winkels bezoekt u (meer antwoorden mogelijk). … Supermarkt … Drogist / parfumerie … Mode … Muziek / electronica … Sport … Anders, nl: _____________________ 63 11. Hoeveel besteedt u (bij benadering) per bezoek in de winkels? … Minder dan €10 … Tussen €25 en €50 … Tussen €10 en €25 … Meer dan € 50 12. Als de bioscoop hier niet zou zijn, zou u dan vaker naar deze winkels gaan? … Vaker … Minder vaak … Maakt niet uit 13. Vindt u het een voordeel dat de bioscoop dichtbij winkels is gevestigd? … Ja … Nee … Geen mening 14. Zoja, waarom vindt u dat een voordeel (meer antwoorden mogelijk)?. … Makkelijk te combineren … Plezieriger omgeving … Geeft een veiliger gevoel … Anders, nl: ________________________ 15. Als de bioscoop niet dichtbij de winkels was gevestigd, zou u dan:. … Vaker naar de bioscoop gaan … Minder vaak … Maakt niet uit Tot slot stellen we u nog een paar vragen over uw persoonlijke leefsituatie. Deze vragen worden uiteraard geheel anoniem verwerkt. 16. Geslacht: … Man 17. Leeftijd: ________ jaar 18. Waar woont u? Plaatsnaam … Vrouw ______________________ Postcode ___________ 19. Bent u: … Alleenstaand … Alleenstaand/samenwonend met kinderen … Samenwonend … Woont bij ouders 20. Wat is het totale bruto maandinkomen van uw huishouden? … < € 1.500 … € 1.500 – 2.800 … €2.800 – 4.600 … Meer dan € 4.600 21. Wat is uw hoogst afgeronde opleiding? … Lager onderwijs … Middelbaar (MAVO, HAVO, VWO) … Lager beroepsonderwijs (LBO, LTS) … Middelbaar beroeps (MBO, MTS, MEAO) … Hoger beroepsonderwijs (HBO, HTS, HEAO) … Wetenschappelijk onderwijs (Universiteit) … Geen afgeronde opleiding Vriendelijk bedankt voor uw medewerking! 64 Appendix E: List of interviewed operators Bison Bowling Maarssen Bowling centrum Huizen Holland Casino Hommerson Leisure Development Krijco Amusement Merral (cinema and bowling) Pathé Theatres Mr Bas van Oldenburg Mr Constant Wirtz Mr Igor Houben Mr Edgar van der Veer Mr Adri Bax Mrs Corry van Amstel Mr Jacob du Boeff Mr René van der Steen Mr Youri Bredewold 65 Appendix F: Location of selected leisure operations This appendix provides information on the location of the various selected leisure operations, where surveys were held for this study. In all maps, the blue‐colored streets are for pedestrian access only, and are usually the main retail streets. De Boreel, Deventer Surveys were held at the casino, bowling and cinema in entertainment center De Boreel. It is located near the city center of Deventer. Spuimarkt, The Hague Surveys were held at the casino and cinema in Spuimarkt. It is located in the city center of The Hague. 66 Holland Casino, Eindhoven Interviews were held with Holland Casino, focusing on the operation in Eindhoven. The casino is located in the city center, within shopping center De Heuvelgalerie. Krijco casino, Rotterdam The casino is located on the edge of shopping center Alexandrium, in the periphery of Rotterdam. Krijco casino, Zeist The casino is located in the city center, on one of the main shopping streets. 67 Hommerson casino, Zaandam The casino is located in the city center, on the edge of the main retail area within the shopping center Rozenhof. Bowling centrum Huizen The bowling center is located in the city center, next to the town hall and at five minutes walking of the main shopping streets. Bison bowling, Maarssen The bowling center is located within shopping center Bisonspoor. 68