Destination Marketing Plan 08-06-13

285
286
2013-14 Destination Marketing Overview
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (''the City" or "Carmel") underwent extensive primary
research from January - June 2013 focusing on how to target ways to increase revenue
through transient occupancy tax (TOT) and ensure long-term sustainability. The research
emphasized increasing overnight visitors and group business during slow periods defined
as mid-week (Sunday-Thursday) and off-season (January-March), while maintaining the
City's charm and small-town feel.
After more than 400 hours of primary and secondary research and analysis, the results
revealed that the City has a loyal core of visitors who return regularly and has positive
'brand equity' among leisure visitors.
However, the research also identified that the City's occupancy rates are lagging slightly
behind its competitive set, especially in the first quarter (January-March), by an average
of about 5.2% but is only 1.8% behind annually from 2010-2012 (this data came from
Smith Travel Research, an industry specialist). To keep this data in perspective, the
research notes that the City is spending less than its competitors on marketing. Given
the occupancy rates and the relatively modest marketing expenditures, the City is doing
remarkably well in terms of generating overnight visitors.
Lastly, the research identifies that Carmel competes with neighboring Monterey with its
large chain hotels and famous attractions such as the Monterey Bay Aquarium and
Fisherman's Wharf. As a result, Carmel could be losing overnight visitors to Monterey
who may only visit Carmel for a day trip.
The final research recommendations were used to develop the City's 2013-14 strategic
marketing priorities and initiatives.
Research Recommendations
1. Do not invest additional monies in the Sunset Center with the goal of attracting
group meetings
2. Target visitors age 55+ for off-season overnight visitors
3. Reallocate current marketing budget to support more Internet media
287
Research Recommendation Clarification
1. The City is not pursuing any additional renovation expenses at Sunset Center but
supports the Hospitality Improvement District (HID) that is actively selling and
marketing to meeting planners in the group meeting industry.
2. The City will continue to market to the 55+ age group for mid-week and off-
season room nights but wants to also expand the visitor base to include 25-34 and
35-54 age groups for long-term sustainability.
3. The City will reallocate a majority of its traditional media such as TV and radio to
Internet media such as Google Adwords and Network to better target each visitor
audience and increase website traffic and room nights.
Strategic Marketing Priorities
1. Focus on mid-week and off-season overnight visitors
2. Expand visitor base through integrated marketing
3. Create a brand "buzz" to compete with competitive set
4. Redirect potential Monterey Peninsula visitors to Carmel with targeted Internet
media and coop media
Performance Measurement Indicators
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) & Retail Tax
Website and social statistics
Innkeeper statistics
HID group bookings and PR statistics
Brochure and visitor guide fulfillment
Annual accolades such as CN Traveler
Competitive set statistics (Smith Travel Research) - TBD
2
288
2013-2014
MARKETING PLAN
289
BRAND VISION
Inspire visitors to experience
the California Coast's most
amazing city.
& MISSION
Increase visitor business through
integrated marketing strategies
that maximize the year-round
visitor base and enhance the
visitor experience to generate
more return visitors year after year.
290
BRAND PILLARS
World-Renowned Ambiance
Picturesque White Sand Beach
Charming Hotels & Inns
Incredible Restaurants
Walkable Wine Tasting
Unique California Heritage
Top-Rated Performing Arts
Boutique & Brand-Name Shops
First-Class Art Galleries
Pampering Spas & Salons
291
STRATEGIC
PRIORITIES
Focus on mid-week and
off-season overnight visitors
Expand visitor base through
integrated marketing
Create a brand "buzz" to
compete with competitive set
Redirect potential Monterey
Peninsula visitors to Carmel
with targeted Internet
and coop media
292
Off-season and mid-week marketing focus geared to increase room nights
SEARCH HOTELS & INNS
All ..,.
Exclusive Offers
Romance Packages
Aquari um Packages
Beach Packages
Wine Packages
Culinary Packages
Amenities &. Services ..,. Property Type
~ Pet Friendly Sort Alphabet>cal Oear Filter
CARMEL COUNTRY INN
Dolores Street &. Third Avenue
(831) 625-3263 website
For that Special Occasion or "Just Because"
Package
Print Offer

Expanded offers and packages wit h new website will increase room night s and longer stays
MARKETING
STRATEGY #l
Goal: Focus on mid-week and
off-season overnight visitors
Marketing initiatives:
Focus on Oct-May campaigns
Expand seasonal & mid-week offers
Add popular travel packages
Add mid-week senior offers
Support HID sales & marketing
Use Visitor Channel for ongoing promos
Participate in MCCVB coop marketing
Measured Outcomes:
Webs ite and social statist ics
Innkeeper stat istics
. Competitive set statistics (Smith Travel Research)
293
C...-n:elby-thc:ScG 11 l)lac.e to get. ewr, from It an Without sacrirtdhq l:tJc b1gc.tT clfen'qS of
t, thc!at:er, rruu:::, shopplftg. cpac, and 'fou can flneCl nll! Olt 01 nu.,be:r ot four-.mr
or at the bc:ot h. You ccl}ca crt or j.,st covet rt end Drtlfectt ct
lXJ and l r"'tl(t.A! ci'IOps, and vou can Duy anytn_ng frOm tnniC.elS to Tiffanys.
Even tho$c: w'"lo trevc:l the world re u"15kcly to encounter e'lOthcr ptDo:: thot has so much to do
II\ onP kx:::::lti D'1
New website provides expanded content, offers and packages
Coogle AdWords
S.arch ad partners,

r ---
TI!e <>00!11 -k rp<;he>
over aoe;. of Internet U$MS
wcridw16o"
Contont publllhert,
-
i@MA
- aa
Target 3 visitor segments via Google Network Enhance the visitor experience and increase
spend with the in-room visitor cha nne l
MARKETING
STRATEGY#2
Goal: Expand visitor base through
integrated marketing
Marketing Initiatives:
Launch new website & social networks
Expand Internet outreach to attract
3 visitor segments: 25-34, 35-54 and 55+
Revise all creative to mirror styling and
messaging of the new branded website
En hance visitor experience with rich
content on the Carmel Visitor Channel
Integrate all marketing with HID & PR
Measured Outcomes:
Website and soci al statistics
Competitive set statistics (Smith Travel Research)
294
Is a place to get away from it a!l without sacttftclng the biqdty offerings of
the..-er, mU$k, din ng, shoppiniJ, sp.n,, and tn\)re. You can tine.ct;ne at a number of four-star
Of e.:at al fresco at the belch. You can cotlcct art or just covet art and art'facts at
almost 100 gallerie'!i o\nd anbQuc Shops, and you can buv anyth1ng from tnr kcts to liffanys.
Even tho.o:c who travef t'lc world are unlikely to encounter another place that has so much to do
tn one locatiOn.
IIIH!:doll. offtn Miittt \of
...... t.....
New website provides more social media, content, and offers to engage with visitors
MARKETING
STRATEGY#3
Goal: Create a brand "buzz" to compete
with competitive set
Expand social media interactions
Increase opt-in email list & eblasts
Expand website offers & packages
to increase room nights & sales
Increase visitor spend and return visits
with the new Carmel Visitor Channel
Use "world-renowned" position
Promote accolades
Measured Outcomes:
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) & Retai l Tax
Website and social statistics
Brochure and visitor guide fulf illment
. Competitive set statistics (Smith Travel Research)
295
Go ugle mon,...yboyaquarlum
fi2nti !'!V Bg Aquartum

h..__.,..,. AquwtuM, Mltw _.d a ..:wid-f.,.... c.o...._ ia rw
_
45 ****1 2170oog51.--..,. Wo1aa,......,OoogrotHft
-.
(I:J1)14&-411XJ
llWJI UyeWeb Cgmt
POCkUI1, Wtol..lbtwyltldMen
tl'ltJ.tonteyBayAQuMum. .
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Exhlb!ll
WCIImiCior!Cft ...... arill:toh

- HouCI & Ctlondar Q.altv Shgwt I Aclly11ot
o.iyrtenll, fMCtingahowl , and
trlining-eiotMIN . ,
Thl Monlwt)' ltr AQuM..m ..._ 11114 ltld II locttlid on tM
ab - .a Nrdlnt canntry onc:.nnwy IM Pacific: Oc..M
,San,Ji"anciscoCO,roni&

SF Gate

q e .tpu CDm 0 \INCI SeMft tJtt TAHOOI 0 .. MIIH
Monterey-carmel
Dtl.ol, S, Gatt
Finding Ol d California at
Mi ssi on San Antonio de Padua
In Jolon
The Rtrt time 1 nw Mlu lol\ San Antofl iO
Or'l ot wl'llm, bt UI!oiSC
twas at tt'lt: moment- t wu boMed
! .... !IUrty
t 66'F
1 - Scatt11rcd
I c""""
I
Info
Kips
Coutal State P&rb
Aquarium
J -------- _I
'fOUR PHOTOS
Reader PhatM: Monterey Carmel
... --
__ .. ,._...,.
.,.. __ "-.,._,_ ....
-.. S..,Aquoltu!o
Redirect visitors to Carmel using Internet and coop media
T'NIHit PhcltD GlleriM (( )t
Dbt*ytng 13 of 40
On wnd, k:IM!d "owtDge.lott
AnMI f'WUf'Qfn t1X15: In tf'le JU It,.
O' KHi'ft The orwoM'l fllyvtl
lri Hawal
... --. ..
- w.et the Oftleat f'tiWI Sfte M wn tanalltanfon'til
...... Mt
__...._ ..........
MARKETING
STRATEGY#4
Goal: Redirect potential Monterey Peninsula
visitors to Carmel with targeted Internet
and coop media
Google Adwords campaign focusing
on visitors searching for top att ractions,
such as "Monterey Bay Aquarium"
Partici pate in MCCVB coop marketing
Google Remarket ing campaign that
"cookies" CarmelCalifornia_com visitors for
30-60 days serving up dynamic banner ads
Measured Outcomes:
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) & Retai l Tax
Website and social stat ist ics
HID group booki ngs and PR stati st ics
Annual accol ades such as CN Traveler
Competitive set statist ics (Smith Travel Research)
296
MottE I THlttG!o lO 00
THINGS TO DO IN CARMEL
Whether you have a day- or two or Carmelby-lheSea will
reward you wnh some of I he world's fines I scenery. hi\IOric \lies. an
g.-lertes, restaurf'nts, .-nd bouti(;ue shops On foot , by C41r, or bo:h, there's
no lack of thong to do
SHOPPING AR.T GAllfRIS
WINET.UnNG SPAS L SAlONS
CULTURALACliVInlS BAOt a ourooott
lnNfftAitiU ATTRACTIONS N[.ut CARMH
-
i I .
- ..

TIH 1./t.NUr
1\LJ(, c;r n
C..,.,ctC .. , o ....... <J... ..
ltoW1 1,e&liolfk towll'-"'itU""" ...

PHOTO. VIOtO GAlU:U
-
JUt Offi CIAL CIT'I" GU1Dt ..
NEXT STEPS
Media Calendar:
Prepare FY14 Marketing & Media
Calendar to meet strategic priorities
Creative Development:
Launch new website
Expand new and existing social networks
Educate businesses about new website
Maximize Visitor Channel content and
promotional capabilities
Create dynamic banner ads with animation
and range of messages for rotation of
remarketing banner ads
Update all other creative where needed
Execution & Measuring Outcomes
Place media and provide all new art
Develop a social media plan
Create measurement review process
297
298
Confidentiality Notice
This document is presented for informational purposes only. It is not intended to be,
and is not, a prospectus, offering memorandum or private placement memorandum.
The information in this business plan may not be complete and may be changed,
modified, or amended at any time by the City, and is not intended to, and does not,
constitute representations and warranties of the City. This business plan contains the
City's confidential and proprietary information and may not be copied, faxed, re-
produced or otherwise distributed by you, and the contents of this business plan may
not be disclosed by you to anyone, without the City's expressed written consent.
1
299
Executive Summary
Purpose
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea ("the City" or "Carmel") has three primary sources of
revenue from which to fund its services and personnel costs: (1) property tax (2) sales
tax, and the (3) transient occupancy tax (TOT). The focus of our project has been on
how to target ways to increase revenue through the TOT. More specifically, our
Executive MBA strategic management research (SMR) team has been asked to provide
strategic recommendations as to how the City can attract more overnight visitors and
groups during slow periods (defined as Sunday through Thursday nights, and in
January, February and March), while maintaining a delicate balance of the City's small-
town feel for residents and without making material changes to the City. We were also
asked to perform a segmentation analysis so as to understand the demographic and
psychographic profile of visitors to the City.
We conducted over 400 hours of primary and secondary research and analysis, which
revealed many positive things about the current positioning of the City. The City has
projected a balanced budget through 2018, and our research shows that the City has a
loyal core of visitors, as well as positive 'brand equity' among leisure visitors. Given
that the City is looking to ensure the sustainability of its TOT revenue, we hypothesized
that it could increase visitors during slow periods by attracting corporate groups and
younger visitors. However, our research did not support these hypotheses.
In sum, we recommend:
(a) The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea not invest additional monies in the Sunset
Center for the goal of attracting group meetings because of the high costs and
limited return possible, the feedback gathered from meeting planners, and
the myriad other venues available for group meetings in Monterey County;
(b) The City target visitors 55 years and older for off-peak travel (e.g. during the
winter months and weekdays);
(c) The City reallocate existing marketing budgets to the Internet to attract new
visitors, to strengthen the City's loyal visitor base, which will help sustain
TOT revenues.
2
300
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............. ......................................................... ....... ....... ........... ................................... 5
1.1.a City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Overview ................................................................................... ... ....... 5
1.1. b Business Issue ..... ...................................................................... ............. ................................... 5
1.1.c Project Scope .. .......... ........................... ...... .................................. ... ........ .... ...... ........................ 7
2.0 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................... .......................................................... 9
2.1.a Group Travel Research .......... .. ... ....... ..... ..................... .......... ...... .................................................. 9
2.1.b Group Travel Data Analysis ....................................................................................................... 9
2.2.a Leisure Visitor Profile Research ........................ ..................................... ..................................... 10
2.2.b Leisure Visitor Profile Analysis ...................... ....... ......................... .................. ........................ 11
2.3.a Competitive Set Research ..................................................................... ... ....... ........................ 12
2.3.b Competitive Set Data Analysis ............... .. ... ............... .............. .. ... ...................... .................... 13
2.4.a Marketing Spend Research ......................................................................................................... 14
2.4.b Marketing Spend Analysis .......... ........ ........... ....................................................................... ... 15
3.0 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS .............................. ........... ... ................. ............. ... .... .... ......... 17
3.1.a Recommendation #1: .. .......... .. .......... .. ....... ... ...... ... ... ................... .............................. .. .... ... .... 17
3.1.b Recommendation #2: .... ...... ... ........ .. ... ... ......... .. .... ... ... ...................... .... .................................. 19
3.1.c Recommendation# 3: ................................................................................................... .......... 20
4.0 EXHIBITS ................................................................... ..... .. .................................... ........... ................. 23
Exhibit 1 - Fiscal Year 2013-2014 City Council Budget Workshop Five Year Financial Forecast.. ........... 23
Exhibit 2- Meeting Planner Survey ....... ................................................................................................... 24
Exhibit 3 - CBTS on the street Survey (Current Visitors) ......................................................................... 28
Exhibit 4 - Survey for Potential Visitors (On the street interviews in Northern California and Southern
California) .......................................................................................................................... .... .................. 32
Exhibit 5 - Web Blast Survey (Past Visitors) ............................................................................................ 36
5.0 APPENDICES ...... ......... ....... ... ... .. .... ............................... ... ..... ........... .. ................. ........... .................. 41
Appendix A - Meeting Planner Survey Analysis ..................................................................................... 41
Appendix B- Current Visitors, Recent Visitors, and Potential Visitors Profile Analysis ......................... 43
Appendix C- Competitive Set Analysis .............. ......... ............................................................................ 66
Appendix D- Marketing Spend Analysis ................................................................................................ 71
Appendix E- 3 Year Financial Projection of Investment in Sunset Center for Purposes of Attracting and
Supporting Group Meetings ...... ........................................... .................................................................. 76
3
301
Appendix F- Websites Used for Research ............................................................................................. 78
4
302
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1.a City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Overview
Carmel-by-the-Sea (the "City" or "Carmel") was established in 1916 as a community in
a beachside city on the road to the Carmel Mission. The City is a quaint, picturesque
seaside village on the Monterey Peninsula in northern California with world-class retail
shopping, art galleries, restaurants, wine-tasting rooms, and myriad outdoor
experiences for tourists. Carmel-by-the-Sea is an area that encompasses just over one
square mile of land, bordered to the west by the Pacific Ocean, approximately 120 miles
southwest of San Francisco. The town is home to approximately four thousand
residents with a median age of 59.2 years old.
Carmel-by-the-Sea is currently ranked #10 in the world as a tourist destination by the
Readers' Choice Awards in Conde' Nast Traveler Magazine. There is a vibrant wine-
growing community in Carmel Valley and the surrounding area, as well as
unsurpassed opportunities for hiking in Big Sur and neighboring areas. The adjacent
community of Pebble Beach also draws many visitors to the area, as it offers among the
finest golf courses, resorts, and restaurants in the world. Additionally, Carmel-by-the-
Sea and Pebble Beach host annual world-renowned festivals, including the AT&T Pro-
Am golf tournament, the Bach Festival, Pebble Beach Food & Wine, and the famous
event for automobile aficionados, Concours d'Elegance, which draw thousands of
visitors annually.
The City has established goals consisting of enduring objectives and annual key
initiatives. The City's objectives are community character, long-term vitality,
organizational effectiveness, and fiscal stability. Growing the visitor market is seen by
the City as a way to meet the City's objectives.
1.1.b Business Issue
Currently the City is not facing an immediate financial challenge. In fact, the City is
financially solvent and anticipates an $800,000 surplus for FY 2013 and a balanced
budget through FY 2018 (The Carmel Pine Cone, Pages SA and 12A, March 22, 2013). Per
the Fiscal Year 2013-2014 City Council Budget Workshop Five Year Financial Forecast
(see Exhibit 1), the City is forecasting an increase in expenditures related to capital
projects to reduce deferred maintenance of several large buildings, increasing street and
road maintenance, and reducing the City's debt service. As a proactive effort, the City
5
303
of Carmel by-the-Sea is interested in developing and implementing a strategic plan that
will yield long-term revenue growth so as to avoid a future budget deficit which would
mean higher taxes for residents. The City has three main sources of revenue - sales tax,
property tax, and transient occupancy tax (TOT). In November 2012, voters approved a
1% increase in sales tax for 10 years which is the primary driver of the surplus (The
Carmel Pine Cone, Pages SA and 12A March 22, 2013). Increases in revenues from
property taxes are limited by Proposition 13. As such, the greatest opportunity for the
City to ensure long term sustainability is through increases in revenue from TOT.
Currently, TOT accounts for 35% of the City's total revenue.
Carmel relies on hundreds of thousands of tourists annually to generate revenue for the
City through its TOT and sales tax. The delicate balance of maintaining the City's
small-town feel for residents, while generating revenue through tourism is a critical
factor in our project. The City is not interested in making any material changes to the
village. This is irrespective of the fact that there is simply no more land for the City of
Carmel-by-the-Sea to use for expansion. Consequently, the quantity of hotel rooms will
remain static at 966.
Although Carmel-by-the-Sea has a unique charm, it competes with neighboring
Monterey. Monterey is approximately five miles north of Carmel-by-the-Sea and has
the capacity to support large groups upwards of 2,500 people. Monterey has large chain
hotels including the Marriott, Hilton, and InterContinental. Monterey is horne to the
famous Monterey Bay Aquarium and Fisherman's Wharf, which are major attractions
for visitors of all ages. Carmel-by-the-Sea could be losing overnight visitors to Monterey
who visit the village for a day trip.
Leisure travelers in the San Francisco Bay Area have a plethora of options when
deciding where to visit. As a result, this area becomes a feeder market for Carmel by-
the-Sea as well as many local destinations including Lake Tahoe, Reno, Napa, and
Monterey Peninsula. All of the locations are within a one to four hour driving distance
and can support business and leisure travel year round. Therefore, to assess if the City
can expand its visitor base with younger visitors, we traveled to the San Francisco Bay
Area to survey potential visitors and understand their interest and awareness of Carmel
by-the-Sea.
6
304
1.1.c Project Scope
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea engaged our team from UCLA Anderson School of
Management to help them create a visitor profile and provide strategic
recommendations to increase the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue, driven by
increasing the number of hotel room nights sold to leisure visitors, particularly younger
visitors. Specifically they were interested in a demographic and psychographic profile
of their visitors, as well as improving occupancy rates during their slow season Ganuary
-April), and weeknights. As a result of several discussions with our client and several
refinements to the project scope, our team developed the following hypothesis to test if
younger visitors are a viable segment to drive higher TOT revenue during the City's
slow season and weeknights:
Cannel-by-the-Sea can attract younger visitors during lean periods without
making material changes that may impact village chann.
The City has a healthy flow of tourism on the weekends due to festivals, tournaments
and the other recreational attractions in the surrounding area including Monterey.
Group meeting travelers could fill the weeknight and slow season which would drive
increases desired in the TOT revenue. Therefore, Carmel-by-the-Sea would like our
team to assess the City's appeal to group meeting planners in order to determine if
there is an opportunity to grow TOT revenue with this consumer segment and thus
build towards long-term sustainability. Through several discussions with our client
and refinement of the project scope, our team developed the following hypothesis to
test whether small groups are a viable target consumer segment.
Cannel-by-the-Sea is well-positioned to attract small groups during lean
periods and weeknights.
The City has recently created a Hospitality Improvement District (HID), as a
partnership between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, the Carmel-by-the-Sea Chamber of
Commerce, the Carmel Innkeepers Association, the Monterey County Convention and
Visitors' Bureau (MCCVB) and the Sunset Center, the city-owned performing arts and
conference site. Together, they are working to increase the occupancy rates in the
town's many inns and hotels, as well as to market the town as a world-class destination.
Moreover, renovations have recently been completed to make the Sunset Center a more
desirable meeting and conference space. The town contributed $lOOK to the
7
305
renovations, and the HID funds supported the hiring of a meeting planner to assist
groups by coordinating catering, accommodations, travel and specific meeting needs.
In this business plan, we explain the methodologies used to collect the data needed in
order to design a visitor segmentation profile, test the feasibility of supporting group
meeting and lodging needs, as well as assess opportunities to grow the leisure visitor
segment. We then outline our recommendations to management along with the
findings and evidence that support our recommendations.
8
306
2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1.a Group Travel Research
In order to assess Carmel's appeal to group travelers as a destination for holding
business meetings and retreats and the feasibility of supporting their meeting and
lodging needs, we used primary research almost exclusively as there is very little
secondary research available on this topic. We developed a meeting planner survey
(Exhibit 2) to conduct our primary research, which were collected through interviews.
The objective of the survey was to capture meeting planners' perceptions of the city as
well as quantitative and qualitative data to learn what factors meeting planners believe
are important when selecting an offsite meeting location. We collected 30 responses.
We identified the respondents to these surveys through our personal and professional
networks. We also solicited feedback from members of the Monterey County
Convention Visitors Bureau but we did not receive any responses personally, though
we did receive notes from the Meeting Planners meeting hosted by the Monterey
County Convention Visitors' Bureau (MCCVB). Initially we targeted corporate meeting
planners as our client considered them a viable segment to build the group travel
business and thus drive increased occupancy during the week and slow season. The
data collected via the surveys was supplemented with feedback from employees of the
Sunset Center as to their capability to support corporate group meeting needs. Based
on the feedback from the Sunset Center management and the consistent responses
among corporate meeting planners, we deemed it necessary to expand our research
beyond corporate meeting planners.
We then expanded our research to what people in the group travel industry refer to as
SMERFs (Social, Military, Educational, Religious, and Fraternal). We supplemented our
survey data of SMERFs with an interview of an employee of the HID who provided
insights as to exactly which type and size of SMERF they are targeting as some SMERFs
have meeting needs similar to corporate groups.
2.1.b Group Travel Data Analysis
The data was analyzed by each segment, corporate meeting planners and SMERFs, as
well as across the entire sample. In order to identify trends and themes in the
qualitative data, the results were assigned a quantitative value to determine the
frequency of the response. The responses were ranked to understand which factors
9
307
were more important than others. The quantitative data was averaged overall as well
as by each segment to determine whether significant differences in responses existed.
Based on the above analysis, we concluded the following:
Most SMERF groups have amenity and space needs similar to corporate group
needs which make hosting such groups at the Sunset Center a challenge.
Small (10-15) leisure groups (i.e. needle point groups) that enjoy a pedestrian
lifestyle and are open to dining and lodging at different places would be a better
fit for Carmel and specifically the Sunset Center.
2.2.a Leisure Visitor Profile Research
The profile of visitors comes from three surveys (Exhibits 3-5). Two were administered
in person whereas the third was completed via the Internet, which provided a higher
degree of anonymity. The surveys were modeled after best practice research and
marketing tools used for similar locations (see Appendix F for websites used for
research). The instruments underwent pilot testing to determine ease of use and
appropriateness of content. Finally, the instruments were reviewed by researchers who
were unrelated to the project to determine their validity and provide insights regarding
statistical analysis.
The first survey was administered to current Carmel visitors. It was a convenience
sample obtained from on-the-street interviews with pedestrians in Carmel on February
2-4, 2013. The team used paired interviewers to approach pedestrians to solicit
responses after a standardized identification. We did not track non-respondents though
this number appeared to be higher on weekend days than on a weekday. An additional
confounder was that the respondents appeared more likely to answer questions when
approached by paired interviewers who were of mixed gender.
While interviewing, we typically remained in a single location for sampling for
approximately 30-60 minutes and then relocated to another area of town. We
oversampled along Ocean A venue as this was the most densely populated area of town
during the hours we canvassed the streets. Additionally, the interviewers oversampled
pedestrians on the beach as they were very likely to be willing to complete the survey.
Finally, the interviewers under-sampled the population of non-English speaking foreign
visitors who were on bus tours of the area. This survey generated 75 responses.
10
308
The second survey was administered to potential Carmel visitors. It was a convenience
sample obtained from on-the-street interviews with pedestrians in a number of feeder
markets for the city. These markets include San Francisco and Silicon Valley, and West
Los Angeles (Brentwood and Westwood, specifically). The team used individual and
paired interviewers to approach pedestrians to solicit responses. The team did not track
non-respondents. With the exception of the West Los Angeles survey, there were three
interviewers performing these surveys, all of a single gender. The interviews took place
on March 22-23, 2013. There was an attempt to oversample potential visitors to Carmel
who had not visited the city. There was an attempt to oversample potential visitors
from local markets to Carmel that were within a two-hour drive of the city. This survey
generated 132 responses.
The third survey was administered to a convenience sample of over twenty-five
thousand people who had opted-in to join an electronic mailing list when they visited
the official Carmel-by-the-Sea webpage (http: Uwww.carmelcalifomia.comD. An
embedded link to the survey accompanied the quarterly electronic newsletter on
February 28, 2013. This survey generated 343 responses.
2.2.b Leisure Visitor Profile Analysis
Though the data for these analyses came directly from the survey responses, in one case
a transformation of the data was required. This instance was related to the seasonal
preferences of the travelers. In order to create categories that sensibly represented
reality and contained sufficient numbers of respondents for statistical analysis, the
travelers were placed into one of three seasonal categories: summer, winter, and no
preference. The summer cohort contained respondents who listed any of the following
combinations as their seasonal preferences: Spring; Spring and Summer; Spring,
Summer and Fall; Summer; Summer and No Preference; Winter, Spring and Summer.
The winter cohort contained respondents who listed any of the following combinations
as their seasonal preferences: Fall; Fall, No Preference; Winter; Winter, Fall; Winter,
Spring, Fall; Winter, Summer, Fall. The no preference cohort contained respondents
who listed any of the following combinations as their seasonal preferences: No
Preference; Spring, Fall; Summer, Fall; Winter, Spring; Winter, Summer; Winter, Spring,
Fall, Summer; Blanks. The assignment of these categories relied on judgment to arrive
at the best possible match for the intention and preference of the respondent into one of
11
309
these three categories. Because these assignment rules were applied consistently across
all surveys, the possibility of introducing bias was minimized. For all discussions, the
seasonal preference refers to this transformed season rather than the preference
expressed originally in the survey.
In order to analyze differences between two comparison groups, pivot tables were
made to stratify the data within a given survey across two variables. If differences
between groups appeared to be significant, a Chi Square Test was applied to calculate if
the observed differences were statistically significant from the expected differences.
The Chi Square Test was selected because the survey was comprised of non-parametric
data (12). The test was run with the, Microsoft Excel function Chi Square Test
(CHISQ. TEST).
Because of the large number of analyses that were run, it is reasonable to consider the
possibility that some of the relationships that were noted were due strictly to chance.
To minimize this risk, an alpha of 0.05 was selected for the tests of significance. This
corresponds to a confidence interval of 95%. At this level, only one-in-twenty analyses
would yield a positive result due to chance alone. Many of the Chi Squares were
significant at significantly higher levels meaning that it is much less likely that the
observations noted were due to chance alone. Additionally, a large number of the
statistically significant differences were noted in relation to the visitors' age. For these
all eleven to be related to chance is extraordinarily unlikely. (The odd of this occurring
are one in 200,000,000,000,000.)
2.3.a Competitive Set Research
In order to determine whether the city of Carmel-by-the-Sea is well-positioned to
increase its overnight occupancy rates during lean periods and weeknights without
making material changes that may impact village charm, an in-depth analysis of the
occupancy rates for locations considered its 'competitive set' was undertaken. These
occupancy rates would help us to determine how well Carmel was performing, using
its competitive set as benchmarks.
The data used in our study came from Smith Travel Research (STR) reports, which we
identified as critical secondary material, but are proprietary. For the purposes of this
project, the UCLA Anderson Library helped to create a partnership in which SMR
12
310
teams could have reports gratis. The STR reports we received covered data from the
period January 2000 to February 2013. For each report, the source of the data from the
STR reports is indicated (see Appendix F).
The data from the STR reports was intended to be compared to our client city, Carmel-
by-the-Sea, but the report for Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA contained only 7 months of data,
which we considered insufficient to create the three-year profile desired. To that end,
the STR report for Carmel, CA (which includes the 93921 and 93923 zip codes) was
utilized as the benchmark used against the comparison data from Santa Barbara, Santa
Barbara County, Sonoma, Napa, Mariposa County, San Luis Obispo and South Lake
Tahoe. These cities were specifically identified by the City as the competitive set.
Additionally, as we proceeded into our analysis, it became clear that the South Lake
Tahoe data was considerably less competitive than the other cities identified; it
occupancy rates were considerably below that of the other set of locations. Therefore,
the data used as the comparison group was changed to exclude South Lake Tahoe in the
figures included.
For several of the comparisons, there was not enough data to utilize Mariposa County
for the duration of the three-year comparison window. In those cases, the term "n/a" is
marked, and that destination is not included in the competitive set average.
Further, please note that when we list the Competitive Set Average for each data set,
those figures exclude the data from the STR reports for Carmel and Carmel-by-the-Sea,
as well as the aforementioned data for South Lake Tahoe.
2.3.b Competitive Set Data Analysis
Based on the above analysis, we concluded the following:
a) The City of Carmel' s occupancy rates are lagging slightly behind its competitive
set, especially in the first quarter (January, February and March) by an average of
approximately 5.2%. However, over the entire year, in the three-year period
between 2010 and 2012, its occupancy rate was only 1.8% behind the competitive
set locations analyzed;
13
311
b) In analyzing the comparison with its competitive set, the City's weekday
occupancy rates lagged those competitors by 2.1 %;
c) However, Carmel by-the-Sea is spending less than its competitors on marketing
itself. Given the occupancy rates and the relatively modest marketing
expenditures, the City is doing remarkably well in terms of generating overnight
room night sold.
2.4.a Marketing Spend Research
The City spends its marketing dollars across multiple media channels, such as
magazines, internet, and TV, radio to promote the awareness of the town amongst the
residents in the Bay Area and across the country. The objective of the analysis was to
determine which of these media channels have a statistically significant impact on the
hostelry revenue. Accordingly the city can focus more on such media channels for
future promotions to draw overnight visitors to the city. The focus was on the overnight
tourist revenue as the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), as it is directly dependent on the
hostelry revenue (10% of the revenue is TOT).
Two sources of data were collected for this analysis:
(a) Marketing spend of the City: The City's marketing consultant provided the
monthly breakdown of the marketing spend across the various media channels
for the last five fiscal years (FY09 - FY13);
(b) Monthly Overnight Tourist Revenue: Secondary sources such as STR reports and
the City's financial reports were leveraged to gather data relative to overnight
tourist revenue. With our client's assistance, we also secured monthly revenue
data from the owners of hotels and inns ('inn-keepers' data) in Carmel by-the-
Sea. It should be noted that the inn keepers' data collected represents 25% of the
revenue earned by all of the hotels and inns. We determined this sample to be
large enough to use for analyzing the trends and the effectiveness of marketing
on the overnight tourist revenue
Revenue and marketing data for 56 months were used for our analysis.
14
312
2.4.b Marketing Spend Analysis
We analyzed the marketing budget and the innkeepers' revenue data to determine the
statistically significant media channels that impact revenue to the hotels. The
hypothesis tested in the regression analysis was that all the media channels are
statistically significant in improving the revenue for the City.
Based on our regression analysis, we concluded the following:
1. Over the years, the City has developed a very strong base of loyal visitors who
are sold on Carmel by-the-Sea's brand. Thus the City's brand is the primary
reason these visitors repeatedly come to the city to spend a few nights and enjoy
the quaintness of the city versus being drawn by the marketing campaigns. This
is consistent with the results of our regression analysis which indicates that the
best predictor of the number of room nights sold in a particular month is the
sales volume of the prior month, given the macro-economic environment
remains healthy from month to month;
2. Of all the media channels the City currently leverages, the most effective in
drawing more overnight visitors is the Internet. As with any marketing
campaign, the impact of the Internet marketing campaigns was observed a
couple of months after the campaign ended.
15
313
This page was intentionally left blank
16
314
I
3.0 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS
Hypothesis: Carmel-by-the-Sea is well-positioned to attract small groups during lean
periods and weeknights
3.1.a Recommendation #1:
Do not invest additional funds in the Sunset Center to attract corporate groups.
Finding lA: The investments in the kitchen renovation (estimated at $250k) and
personnel necessary to staff group meetings ($106,370, for two FTE including
benefits) significantly outweigh the projected increases in TOT receipts for the
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea.
Evidence lA: If Carmel-by-the-Sea can achieve the average returns of its
competitive set (approximately 5.2% growth from current occupancy rates in
Q1 months of January, February and March), it will only realize an additional
$38k in TOT. Because the TOT revenue the City receives is a 10% surcharge on
each room night sold, an increase 5.2% increase in occupancy would not
significantly impact the City's revenues (see chart below). Additionally, because
it is off-peak season, room rates are generally lower than the rest of the year
thus limiting the amount of additional TOT revenue for the City.
Carmel by-the-Sea's Estimated TOT Revenue Growth for January - March
Average I
1m
Feb March Total
- ------ -------
- -
-
Difference between Average Occupancy Rates of
5.5% 3.6% 6.5% 5.2%
Set and CB1S Mar)
-
Jan- Mar 2012 TOT Receipts $ 220,846 $ 220,846 $ 279,520
Estimated TOT Receipts Based on Increased Occupancy 232,993 228,796 297,688
I- - - --- - - --
Estimated Increase in TOT Receipts $ 12,147 $ 7,950 $ 18,169 $ 38,266
The additional revenue from increased occupancy during the first quarter is far
below the cost of attracting and staffing for more group visitors. Below is an
Net Present Value analysis performed to assess whether the City should make
an additional investment in the Sunset Center.
17
315

Calculation Inputs Discount rate: 3%
Initial Cash Outflow: $250,000
Annual Cash Outflow: $106,370
- Two (2) FTE- Per HID contact, at least 2 additional FTE would be needed if
the entire meeting space within Sunset Center is in use. FTE Hourly Rate is
$18 which is the mid-point of the hourly wage range per a Banquet Server
job posting. Annual salary for 2 FTE = $74,880
- Healthcare Benefits- $15,745 (Washington Post, 9111112) per FTE; $31,490
Annual Cash Inflow: $38,000
- Carmel could expect an increase of approximately $38,000 in TOT receipts
in its slowest quarter Ganuary, February and March) if they are able to
capture some of the group travel market and their occupancy during those
months increased to the average occupancy rates of its competitors.
Finding lB: Both corporate and social groups with whom we spoke did not
express support for holding group meetings in Carmel-by-the-Sea.
Evidence lB: Of the group meeting planners with whom we spoke, on a scale of
1 to 10 (10 being of the utmost importance), rated holding an off-site in a location
that serves all purposes (hotel rooms, food, meeting rooms, etc. all on-site) a 8.9.
Finding lC: Carmel-by-the-Sea is a desirable leisure destination, but faces
considerable local competition to attract group meetings.
Evidence lC: At the luxury end of the spectrum, there are several nearby resort
facilities, including those run by the Pebble Beach Company, that are more
attractive to corporate groups. For those groups looking for more affordable
space there is stiff competition within Monterey County, including the Asilomar
Conference Grounds which is in the midst of a $20.5 million renovation and
rooms are approximately $130/night.
18
316
Hypothesis: Carmel-by-the-Sea can attract younger visitors during lean periods
without making material changes that may impact village charm.
3.1.b Recommendation #2:
Focus on attracting older (55+) visitors during lean/slow periods
Finding 2A: Older visitors have greater flexibility in their ability to travel during
winter months.
Evidence 2A: Analysis of the Potential Visitor Survey shows that young potential
visitors (adults younger than 55) are less likely to make a winter season visit;
whereas older potential visitors are more likely to make a winter season visit.
Thus, we recommend that the City target visitors over 55 years of age for winter
visits.
Finding 2B: Older visitors have greater flexibility in their ability to travel during
the week.
Evidence 2B: Analysis of the Potential Visitor Survey shows that young
potential visitors (adults younger than 55) are less likely to make a midweek visit
to Carmel whereas older potential visitors were more to make a midweek visit.
NOTE: For this analysis, we defined a "younger" visitor as being less than 55.
This was because qualitatively we learned that a large number of working aged
felt that their work schedules would not facilitate weekday visits to the city. The
cut point of 55 was chosen to capture people who were more likely to be retired
from full-time work, or who have greater autonomy over their work schedules.
Finding 2C: Younger visitors (adults younger than 55) are less likely to stay as
long as older visitors, and thus not contribute as significantly to TOT revenues.
Evidence 2C: Analysis of the Carmel by-the-Sea on the street survey shows that
younger visitors (adults younger than 55) are more likely to be day travelers
whereas older visitors are more likely to be long stay visitors.
19
317
3.1.c Recommendation# 3:
Experiment with reallocating existing marketing budget to attract new visitors during
the lean/slow periods without risking the loss of your existing loyal visitor base as
they will help sustain current TOT revenues.
Finding 3A: Marketing efforts for older potential visitors is likely to be
optimized by targeting different media charmels than those used for younger
potential visitors.
Evidence 3A-1: Analysis of the Potential Visitor Survey shows that older
potential visitors were more likely than expected to have seen an ad for Carmel
by-the-Sea in print media whereas younger potential visitors (adults younger
than 55) were less likely than expected to have seen an ad for Carmel by-the-Sea
in print media.
Evidence 3A-2: Analysis of the Potential Visitor Survey shows that older
potential visitors were less likely than expected to consume media via the web
whereas younger potential visitors (adults younger than 55) were more likely
than expected to consume media via the web.
Finding 3B:
Reallocating more of the City's marketing budget towards Internet media and
less towards the other charmels such as radio and TV would more likely reach
potential visitors who have never visited Carmel by-the-Sea. Because the City
already has a very strong loyal base and the current macro-economic conditions
are improving, it is in the best position to experiment with the reallocation of the
marketing budget to determine the most optimum media spend plan.
Evidence 3B: Regression Analysis Observations
The following is the setup for the regression (details of other regression analyses
performed can be found in Appendix D):
Hypothesis: All the media channels are statistically significant in improving the
monthly room nights sold
Input Variables: The monthly spend on the following media charmels - Print, TV,
Radio, Internet and Wedding
Output Variable: Monthly Room Nights sold
20
318
Several regression models were developed by using different combinations of
the input variables (including the wedding and internet input variables) along
with the prior month's room night to develop a model that was statistically
significant and made sense in the real world. The regression model below
provided the best fit for the underlying data -the input variables have positive
coefficients, there is no correlation between the input variables (Durbin-Watson
stat is more than 2), all the input variables in the model have t-statistic value
greater than 2 and the value for Adjusted R-squared is quite high (-0.85),
meaning these variables explain 85% of the drivers of room nights.
Dependent Variable: ROOMNIGHT
Method: Least Squares
Date: 05/07/13 Time: 19:47
Sample (adjusted): 2008M09 2012M12
Included observations: 52 after adjustments
Variable Coeffic1ent Std. Error t-StatiStiC
c -1883.514 949.5620 -1 .983561
ROOMNIGHT(-1) 0817651 0.062477 13 08725
INTERNET(-2) 0 145701 0.063339 2 300341
CCI(-2) 32 48464 14.93739 2 174720
R-squared 0.858557 Mean dependent var
AdJusted R-squared 0 849717 S.D.dependentvar
S.E. of regression 622.5650 Akaike info criterion
Sum squared resid 18604187 Schwarz criterion
Log likelihood -406.2638 Hannan-Quinn criter.
F-statistic 97.11977 Durb1n-Watson stat
Prob(F-statistic) 0.000000
Prob.
0.0530
0.0000
0.0258
0.0346
3404.758
1605.941
15.77938
15.92947
15.83692
2.423155
The above model explains that the number of room nights sold in a particular
month was dependent on the following:
(a) Number of room nights sold in the prior month;
(b) Marketing spend on the Internet media channel two months earlier;
(c) The macro-economic variable, Consumer Confidence Index, two months
earlier.
Because the current marketing program is not the primary driver of room nights
sold, as an alternative the City could reallocate its marketing dollars as follows:
Implement a "cookie" for users that go to www.carmelcalifornia.com to
track their web activity (30-60-90 days). Retarget based on Carmel website
visitor future web activity (e.g. Amazon, Facebook (FB), any network);
21
319
Target your own fans on FB with advertisements;
Create FB page that is commerce driven;
Host Blogger visits during the week for the regional newspapers (San
Francisco Chronicle, San Jose Mercury News, LA Times, Santa Barbara
News-Press);
Maximize Coogle AdWords to capture potential visitors;
Reorganize the City's website to maximize the high-converting, high
value ads to the prime real estate spots (leaderboard, above the fold).
We have not determined the amount of additional revenues the City can expect from
implementing these alternatives as that analysis is beyond the scope of this project.
Perhaps the City will pursue a UCLA Anderson SMR Project in 2013-14 to address these
more directly. Nonetheless, we wanted to provide some ideas for the City to begin to
think about what will work best for future revenue growth.
22
320
4.0 EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1- Fiscal Year 2013-2014 City Council Budget Workshop Five Year
Financial Forecast
19.0
18.0
17.0

16.0
faC::
15.0
- _g 14.0

13.0
Q'-"
12.0
11.0
10.0
F'IVe Year
General Fund
Revenue It Uses
1t:.7

-17:'5 18.0
,.. .... 16.9 17.0 .

14.2 14.2/ _J'
12.8 13.4 ': 15.4
..
7
13
.4
12.3 . . 12.9
lOCI8-G9 200.10 :101011 ZD111Z :101213 2013-14 2014-15 2015 11 2011-17 31711
- ElcpendlnRs
Source: Fiscal Year 2013-2014 City Council Budget Workshop Five Year Financial Forecast March 19,
2013
23
321
Exhibit 2- Meeting Planner Survey
1) Name
2) Company/Organization
3) What kind of meetings and conferences do you plan?
a. Corporate
b. Association
c. Incentive
d. S.M.E.R.F.
e. Other
4) For what size groups do you normally plan off-site meetings?
a. Under 25 participants
b. 25 - 49 participants
c. 50-74 participants
d. 75 - 99 participants
e. 100- 124 participants
f. 125- 149 participants
g. More than 150 participants
5) Where do you book most?
a. Hotels
b. Resorts
c. Conference/convention centers
d. Other (with text box)
6) When are most of your meetings
a. On weekdays
b. On weekends
c. Combination weekday & weekend
7) During what time of year are you most likely to book a group event? (Choose all
that apply)
a. Winter
b. Spring
c. Summer
d. Fall
24
322
e. Any season
8) For your group events, what is the approximate spend per person per night?
$ ___ _
9) How many nights does your group event last?
a. No overnight component
b. 1 night
c. 2 nights
d. 3 nights
e. 4 nights
f. 5 nights
g. 6 or more nights
10) What are the logistical requirements for the event(s) you plan?
a. Size of meeting space
b. Number of available meeting spaces
c. Technology (projectors, internet access, etc.)
d. Efficiency /proximity of hotel rooms to meeting space
e. Catering services
f. Hotel accessibility
g. Distance from our offices
h . Convenience for participants
i. Nighttime activities for fun
j. Recreation (golf, tennis, etc.)
k. Other (text box)
11) Would you consider holding a meeting in Carmel-by-the-Sea?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Maybe
12) Why did you answer the previous question as you did?
13) Have you seen any advertising for Carmel by-the-Sea?
25
323
14) If yes, what kind?
a. TV
b. Travel magazine ad
c. Newspaper ad
d. Radio spot
e. Direct mailer (snail mail)
f. Social media (Facebook, etc.)
g. Email ad (to your inbox)
h. Web ads (on travel sites)
15) What is the greatest distance from your office that you'd book an offsite meeting?
a. Under 10 miles
b. 10 - 49 miles
c. 50 -99 miles
d. 100- 149 miles
e. 150 - 199 miles
f. More than 200 miles
16) Where do you book your group events most? (Open ended: let the respondent
answer. Circle applicable answers.)
a. In own organization's facilities
b. Western United States
c. Mountain United States
d. Southern United States
e. North Eastern United States
f. Outside United States
g. Lake Tahoe
h. Los Angeles
i. Napa/Sonoma
J Palm Springs
k. Santa Barbara
1. San Diego
m. San Francisco
n. Las Vegas
o. Reno
p. Hawaii
q. Mexico
26
324
r. Canada
s. Other _____ _
17) What are the primary reasons you chose the last destination you used for an off-
site meeting? Choose all that apply.
a. Previous Visit
b. Outdoor Recreation
c. Quality of meeting facilities
d. Arts and Culture
e. Budget
f. Food and Dining
g. Shopping
h. Scenic Beauty
i. Entertainment/Night Life
J
Family/ Friends
k. Weather
1. Romantic Character
m. Family Friendly Activities
n. Distance to Area
o. Had Never Been Before (i.e. New Place to visit)
18) How important, on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being of the utmost importance), is
holding your off-site in a location that serves all purposes (hotel rooms, food,
meeting rooms, etc. all on-site)?
a. 1
b. 2
c. 3
d. 4
e. 5
f. 6
g. 7
h. 8
i. 9
j. 10
19) Any additional thoughts?
27
325
Exhibit 3- CBTS on the street Survey (Current Visitors)
1) "What city are you corning from?"
2) Visitor's gender:
a) Female
b) Male
3) Estimate of visitor's age:
a. 18-24
b. 25-34
c. 35-44
d. 45-54
e. 55-64
f. 64+
4) Estimate of visitor' s ethnicity:
a. Caucasian
b. African-American
c. Asian
d. Hispanic
e. Pacific Islander
f. American Indian
g. Bi-racial
h. Other
5) Characterization of the traveler's companions:
a. Alone
b. Couple
c. Family
6) "What are you planning on doing while you are here?" (Open ended: let the
visitor answer. Circle applicable answers.)
a. Cannery Row
b. Laguna Seca Raceway
c. Camping/Backpacking
d. Spa
e. Fine Dining
f. Shopping
28
326
g. Monterey Bay Aquarium
h. Biking
i. Beach
j. Kayaking
k. Sailing
1. Visit Museum
m. Golf
n. Activities with my dog
o. Special Event
p. Hiking/Walking
q. 17 Mile Drive
r. Fishing
s. Whale Watching
t. Art/Cultural Exhibits
u. Historical Sites
v. Wine Tasting
w. Live Theatre Performance
x. Sight seeing
7) "How many nights are you staying?"
a. 0 (day traveler)
b. 1
c. 2
d. 3
e. 4
. 5
g. 6+
8) Do you plan to visit Carmel-by-the-Sea again?
9) "Thinking about this trip to, what is your total trip budget, not including
transportation? " $ _ ___ _
10) "How many times have you visited?
a. 1 (this is first visit)
b. 2
c. 3
d. 4
e. 5
. 6+
29
327
11) "During what season do you visit most?"
a. Winter
b. Spring
c. Summer
d. Fall
12) "Would you ever consider visiting Carmel-by-the-Sea on a weeknight? If no,
why not?"
13) "What comes to mind when I say 'Carmel-by-the-Sea?' "
14) "What is the primary reason for your visit?"
a. Leisure
b. Business
c. Wedding
d. Other
15) "What other area have you visited in the last 3 years that you would visit again?"
(Open ended: let the visitor answer. Circle applicable answers.) check boxes
a. Outside United States
f. Cruise
g. Hawaii
h. Lake Tahoe
i. Las Vegas
J. Los Angeles
k. Napa/Sonoma
1. Mexico
m. Canada
n. Palm Springs
o. Reno
p. Santa Barbara
q. San Diego
r. San Francisco
s. Cambria
30
328
t. Big Sur
u. Monterey
v. Carmel Valley
w. Half Moon Bay
x. None
y. Other __ _
16) "What would make Carmel-by-the-Sea better for you?"
31
329
Exhibit 4- Survey for Potential Visitors (On the street interviews in Northern
California and Southern California)
1) "What city did you travel from?"
2) Have you ever visited Carmel-by-the-Sea?
a. Yes
b. No
3) If no, why not?
4) If yes, what time of year do you normally visit?
5) Would you visit during January to April?
6) Would you ever visit during the week?
7) Visitor's gender:
a. Female
b. Male
8) Estimate of visitor' s age:
a. 18-24
b. 25-34
c. 35-44
d. 45-54
e. 55-64
f. 65+
9) Estimate of visitor's ethnicity:
a. Caucasian
b. African-American
c. Asian
d. Hispanic
e. Pacific Islander
f. American Indian
g. Other
32
330
10) Characterization of the traveler's companions:
a. Alone
b. Couple
c. Family
11) "What types of things do you like to do on vacation?" (Open ended: let the
a. Cannery Row
b. Laguna Seca Raceway
c. Camping/Backpacking
d. Spa
e. Fine Dining
f. Shopping
g. Monterey Bay Aquarium
h. Biking
i. Beach
j. Kayaking
k. Sailing
1. Visit Museum
m. Golf
n. Activities with my dog
o. Special Event
p. Hiking/Walking
q. 17 Mile Drive
r. Fishing
s. Whale Watching
t. Art/Cultural Exhibits
u. Historical Sites
v. Wine Tasting
w. Live Theatre Performance
x. Sight seeing
12) "What other area have you visited in the last 3 years that you would visit again?"
(Open ended: let the visitor answer. Circle applicable answers.)
a. Outside United States
33
331
f. Cruise
g. Hawaii
h. Lake Tahoe
i. Las Vegas
J Los Angeles
k. Napa/Sonoma
1. Mexico
m. Canada
n. Palm Springs
o. Reno
p. Santa Barbara
q. San Diego
r. San Francisco
s. Cambria
t. Big Sur
u. Monterey
v. Carmel Valley
w. HalfMoon Bay
x. None
y. Other __ _
13) "Thinking about your last trip within California, what was your total trip
budget, not including transportation?" $ ____ _
14) "What influenced your decision to plan your last trip?" (Open ended: let the
a. Previous Visit
b. Outdoor Recreation
c. Arts and Culture
d. Budget
e. Food and Dining
f. Shopping
g. Scenic Beauty
h. Entertainment/Night Life
i. Family/Friends
j. Weather
34
332
k. Romantic Character
1. Family Friendly Activities
m. Distance to Area
n. Had Never Been Before
15) "Have you ever thought about taking a trip to Carmel?"
16) "Have you seen any advertising for Carmel?"
35
333
Exhibit 5- Web Blast Survey (Past Visitors)
1) How many times have you visited Carmel-by-the-Sea in the last three years?
a) 0
b) 1-5
c) 6-10
d) 11-20
e) 20+
2) During what time of year do you normally visit?
a) Winter
b) Spring
c) Summer
d) Fall
e) AnyTime
3) What was the primary reason for you last trip?
a) Pleasure/vacation/leisure
b) Visit Friend/Family
c) Sales meeting/Reward Trip
d) Conference/Business Meeting/Convention
e) Wedding
f) Other: ____ _
4) What is your ZIP code (or do you live overseas)?
Text box: (either zip or cormtry of origin)
5) During your last visit to Carmel-by-the-Sea, how many nights did you stay?
a) 1
b) 2
c) 3
d) 4
e) 5
f) 6+
g) Didn't stay overnight
36
334
6) Thinking about your last trip to Carmel-by-the-Sea, what was your total trip
budget, not including transportation?
$ ____ _
7) On that last trip, how many people were in your immediate party? (Please
indicate number of each category; example: 2 adults, 2 children)
a) _Adults (65+)
b) _Adults (55-64)
c) _Adults (45-54)
d) _Adults (35-44)
e) _Adults (25-34)
) _Children/Young Adults (13-24)
g) _Children (12 & Under)
8) Which of the following activities were included in your last visit to Carmel-by-
the-Sea? (Check all that apply)
a) Cannery Row
b) Laguna Seca Raceway
c) Camping/Backpacking
d) Spa
e) Fine Dining
f) Shopping
g) Monterey Bay Aquarium
h) Biking
i) Beach
j) Kayaking
k) Sailing
1) Visit Museum
m) Golf
n) Activities with my dog
o) Special Event
p) Hiking/Walking
q) 17 Mile Drive
r) Fishing
s) Whale Watching
t) Art/Cultural Exhibits
u) Historical Sites
v) Wine Tasting
w) Live Theatre Performance
x) Sight seeing
37
335
9) What other area have you visited in the last 3 years that you would visit again?
a) Outside United States
b) Western United States
c) Mountain United States
d) Southern United States
e) North Eastern United States
f) Cruise
g) Hawaii
h) Lake Tahoe
i) Las Vegas
j) Los Angeles
k) Napa/Sonoma
1) Mexico
m) Canada
n) Palm Springs
o) Reno
p) Santa Barbara
q) San Diego
r) San Francisco
s) Cambria
t) Big Sur
u) Monterey
v) Carmel Valley
w) Half Moon Bay
x) None
y) Other _ _ _
10) What is your favorite place to visit?
a) Outside United States
b) Western United States
c) Mountain United States
d) Southern United States
e) North Eastern United States
f) Cruise
g) Hawaii
h) Lake Tahoe
i) Las Vegas
j) Los Angeles
38
336
k) Napa/Sonoma
1) Mexico
m) Canada
n) Palm Springs
o) Reno
p) Santa Barbara
q) San Diego
r) San Francisco
s) Other ____ _
t) Other ____ _
u) None
11) Are you planning to come back to Carmel-by-the-Sea?
12) What might make your visit to Carmel-by-the-Sea even better?
13) Would you come back during the week (as opposed to the weekend)?
a)
b) If not, why not?
14)Gender
a) Male
b) Female
15) What is your marital status?
a) Single
b) Married/significant other
c) Widowed
16) Do you have children?
a) No
b) Yes, they live at home
c) Yes, they do not live at home
17) How old are you?
a) 18-24
b) 25-34
c) 35-44
d) 45-54
e) 55-64
39
337
f) 65+
g) Prefer not to answer
18) Which category describes your annual household income?
a) 0-$49,999
b) $50,000-$99,999
c) $100,000-$149,999
d) $150,000-$199,999
e) $200,000-$249,999
f) $250,000-$499,999
g) $500,000+
40
338
5.0 APPENDICES
Appendix A - Meeting Planner Survey Analysis
Following are the combined results for key survey questions asked of the
meeting planners (corporate and SMERFs). We collected a total of 30
responses.
How important, on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 0 being of the utmost importance),
is holding your off-site in a location that serves all purposes (hotel
rooms, food, meetin rooms, etc. all on-site)?
Logistical Requirements for Events Planned
Other
Recreation (golf, swimming_ spa, etc.}
Availability of Nighttime leisure Activities
Catering Services Onsite
Efficiency/proximity of hote I rooms to .. .
Technology (projectors, Internet access, .. .
Number of Available Meeting Spaces
Budget Cost Constraints
Size of meeting space
0
8
15
16
16
14
Have you seen any advertising for CBTS?
41
18
20
25
Avg of Total
Responses
8.9
339
Would you consider holding a meeting in
CBTS?
The meeting planners surveyed provided the following reasons as to why they would
not consider holding a meeting in Carmel by-the-Sea.
Not enough space to accommodate all of the meeting participants. Also, must
have all activities in one place
Carmel is does not have all of the amenities and meeting spaces needed to hold
our regional conference. Also need to have entertainment avail as many
attendees come from out of town and like to turn such a trip into a vacation.
Family prepares all food for events during the family reunion. They need a place
to be able to cook, bar-b-que, etc. It would not be cost effective to cater every
meal for that many people (25 - 49).
Too small
Too hard to get to
42
340
Appendix B - Current Visitors, Recent Visitors, and Potential Visitors Profile
Analysis
From the survey data, a profile of the current, recent, and potential visitors can be
created. These descriptive statistics create the first known profile of who the visitors
are. It is important to recognize that the on the street data characterize selected visitors
for a single three day period on a February Saturday, Sunday and Monday during the
lead-in time for the 2013 AT&T Pro Am golf tournament in Pebble Beach. One cannot
generalize from this single sample to other segments of current visitors. The data set for
recent visitors which is derived from the web blast survey is drawn from a markedly
larger pool of people. Because of this, it is more likely to reflect accurately the general
population of recent visitors. Similarly, though the survey of potential visitors was
completed in a variety of feeder markets for CBTS over a three day period, it is
reasonable to generalize from its findings. This is because the population sampled
reflects the general population of potential visitors to the city.
The characterizations the follow are comprised of demographic and psychographic
data. The former represent who the visitors are and the latter represent how they think.
Demographics
Age of Visitors
While both the CBTS and Web Blast surveys indicated that there were few respondents
who were less than 35, there was a methodological difference between them. The age
from the on the street survey was the interviewer's impression of the respondents age
whereas the web survey specifically asked this question. Because feedback from a pilot
survey indicated that respondents did not feel comfortable providing their age, this
question was modified so that a direct response was not required. The data presented
in the accompanying table confirm the impression that visitors to the city are, indeed,
older.
It is noteworthy that the respondents to the potential visitor survey are, in generat
younger than the respondents to the other surveys. This was by design as the locations
of our convenience sampling were chosen specifically to examine the perspectives of a
younger cohort of travelers than current visitors. The respondents to the Web Blast
43
341
survey are older than the respondents to the other surveys. This is best illustrated in
the accompanying chart.
Age of survey respondents
Age
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65+
Decline/Blank
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
On the Street Survey Web Survey
1% 0%
15% 4%
24% 9%
15% 18%
26% 40%
19% 25%
0% 3%
Age of Visitor
44
Potential Visitor Survey
7%
36%
21%
22%
9%
4%
2%
On the Street Survey
Web Survey
342
Location of Origin
Of the three surveys, place of origin was only an important factor for the first two we
performed. For the potential visitor survey, we specifically targeted respondents who
were native to the location we surveyed so we could avoid including people who were
on vacation. The goal was to enrich the survey population with people who lived in
important feeder markets for CBTS. Because we asked if the respondent lived in the
area before starting the survey, we screened for (and excluded) people who were on
vacation from another location.
For the other surveys (CBTS on the street and Web Blast), it was not surprising that the
most frequent origin that the respondents reported was California (65% and 43%
respectively). The other most frequent locations of origin are listed in the table below.
For simplicity, origins with less than 2% of visitors were excluded.
Most Common Location of Origin of Visitors to CBTS
Visitors' Origin Web Blast Survey CBTS on the street survey
CA 43% 65%
Blanks 7% 1%
TX 4% 5%
Canada 3% 1%
ll 3% 3%
PA 2% 0%
WA 2% 1%
AZ 2% 1%
NV 2% 0%
OK 2% 0%
co 2% 0%
Fl 2% 0%
International 2% 9%
OH 2% 1%
45
343
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
5
Most Common Visitors' Origin
Web Blast Survey
t .. ._ _ ___
-
J
CBTS on the street survey
v>
X
"'
=
<l: <l:
N
>
:.:::
0
....J
-ro :c
..><
f- -o a..
3
<l: z 0 u
u...
c 0 c
"'
"'
c
0
Ci5
"'
:;::;
u
"' c
....
QJ
......
E
Region of Origin
Looking at the regions where the visitors originated gives helpful insights. The data
below come for the Web Blast Survey as it is the only national survey data available.
While California is the origin of the greatest number of visitors, over half (54%) come
from the West. The other regions are listed below.
Region of Origin %
CA 43%
11%
7%
13%
11%
3%
International 4%
Blank 7%
46
344
Region of Origin
Web Blast Survey
45% ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Gender
The CBTS on the street survey did not note the gender of the respondent. There was a
marked difference in the gender of the respondents to the other surveys. For the Web
Blast, two-thirds of the respondents were female as opposed with about half of the
respondents to the Potential Visitors' Survey.
Gender of Respondent
70%
60%
SO%
40%
Web Blast Survey
30%
Potential Visitors' Survey
20%
10%
0%
Male Female Blank
47
345
Marital Status/Family Status
The surveys assessed the marital and family status of the respondent differently. The
CBTS on the street survey relied on observation alone to assess who was traveling with
the respondent. The marital and family status could be inferred from these
observations though it was recognized that this was not reliable. Because the Web Blast
survey was not face-to-face and was anonymous, there was less concern that
respondents would object to more personal questions. The Potential Visitor survey did
not assess marital and family status due to concerns about making the respondents
uncomfortable and the unreliable nature of the data.
The majority (60%) of respondents for the CBTS on the street survey were judged to be
traveling as part of a couple. Approximately a fifth (22%) were judged to be traveling
alone and a smaller number (17%) were traveling with their family.
Traveling Companions
Alone Family Couple Blank
1%
The vast majority (77%) of past visitors responding to the Web Blast Survey were part of
a couple. A much smaller group (15%) were single. Only 2% were widowed.
48
346
Marital Status
Web Blast Survey
Married/significant other Single Widowed Blank
2%
The majority of prior visitors (61 %) indicated that they had children. Half of the
respondents had children who do not live at home whereas 11% had children living at
home. Almost a third (32%) did not have children.
Does the respondent have children?
Web Blast Survey
Yes, they live at home Yes, they do not live at home No Blank
49
347
Income
The prior visitors to CBTS who responded to the Web Blast Survey are relatively well-
to-do. 14% have yearly incomes of $200,000 or more. An additional27% make between
$100,000 and $200,000 per year. Almost a third (29%) declined to state their income
level.
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
!>)<>.>
Oj
r;,.C>.l'

t:l
!>)<>.>
Oj
:<>.>'

Income
!>)<>.> !>)<>.> !>)<>.> !>)<>.>
Oj Oj Oj Oj

o,C>.l'

:C>.l'

<)<:s
<)<:s <)<:s <)<:s <)<:s

<)<)' <)<)
tj

Psychographies
Number of Visits
Initial analysis of the survey data yielded interesting findings. The CBTS on-the-street
interviews indicated that 51% of current visitors had been to Carmel at least 6 times.
This compares with the web survey which showed that 73% of respondents have visited
Carmel-by-the-Sea 1-5 times in the past three years. Additional findings are presented
in the accompanying table and confirm the high prevalence of repeat visitors to the city.
The potential visitor survey found that almost 2/3' s of respondents had previously
visited the city. This is particularly informative as the sampling included a cohort from
Los Angeles who were expected to have a lower percentage of past visitors to the city.
The significance is that there is a high level of awareness of CBTS among potential
visitors, particularly in Northern California.
so
348
Number of visits to Carmel-by-the-Sea reported by survey respondents
CBTS on the Street Survey Web Survey
Number of % Number of %
Visits Visits (in past 3
years)
1 14 0 5
2 14 1-5 73
3 11 6-10 13
4 4 11-20 6
5 6 20+ 9
6 or more 51
Number of Visits
from CBTS on the Street Suvey
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1 2 3 4 5 6+ Blank
51
349
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1-5
Number of Visits to CBTS
Web Blast Survey
6-10 11-20 20+ 0 Blank
The potential visitor survey found that almost 2/3' s of respondents had previously
visited the city. This is particularly informative as the sampling included a cohort from
Los Angeles which was expected to have a lower percentage of past visitors to the city.
Excluding them, however, did not markedly change the percentage of previous visitors
to CBTS. The significance is that there is a high level of familiarity with CBTS among
potential visitors in the target markets.
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Yes
Prior visit to CBTS
No Blank
52
All respondents
Bay Area respondents
only
350
Duration of Visit
Because the duration of the visit is the critical determinant of the TOT, this was an area
of particular interest. 39% of current visitors were day travelers who, therefore, did not
pay the TOT. This compares with 15% of web survey respondents. Additional findings
are presented in the accompanying table.
Number of nights respondents are staying in Carmel-by-the-Sea
On the Street Survey Web Survey
Number of nights % Number of nights %
0 15 0 39
1 9 1 26
2 23 2 18
3 21 3 5
4 13 4 7
5 7 5 3
6 or more 13 6 or more 5
Duration of Visit (Nights)
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15% Web Blast Survey
10%
5%
0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 or
more
53
351
Purpose of Visit
The vast majority of respondents in both the CBTS and Web Blast surveys reported that
they were leisure travelers. This number was 95% for the on the street survey and 84%
for the web survey. Because we were interested in looking at the purpose of visits to
CBTS specifically, we did not ask this question of potential visitors.
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Seasonal Preference
Purpose of Visit
The seasonal preference of the visitors was anticipated to be a critical point to clarify as
one of the goals of the project was to increase overnight visitor traffic during the off
season. In this regard, there was remarkable consistency between the three surveys. A
total of 86% of the respondents to the CBTS on the street survey indicated that they
would visit during the winter (19% had a winter preference and 67% had no seasonal
preference). A smaller number (68%) of the Web Blast Survey respondents would visit
during the winter (30% had a winter preference and 38% had no seasonal preference).
A large majority of the Potential Visitor Survey respondents (70%) were willing to
consider a winter season visit. Of note, the seasonal preferences expressed in the first
two surveys involved transformations of the data as described in the methodology
section.
54
352
I
I
CBTS on the street Survey
1
Web Blast Survey
Summer 15% 32%
Winter 19% 30%
No Preference 67% 38%
70%
60%
SO%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Seasonal Preference for Visits to
Carmel-by-the-Sea
CBTS on the street Survey
Web Blast Survey
Summer Winter No Preference
55
353
Yes
No
Blank
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
70%
27%
2%
Willingness to make Winter Visit
Yes No
Willingness to Make Midweek Visit
Blank
The willingness of visitors to make a midweek visit was also anticipated to be a critical
point to clarify; a goal of the project was to increase overnight visitor traffic during the
slow periods (of the week). Over two-thirds of the Web Blast respondents and roughly
half of the Potential Visitor and CBTS on the street respondents were willing to make a
midweek visit.
1
Potential
Visitor
Willingness to make midweek visit Web Blast Survey , Survey CBTS on the street survey
Yes 69%
53%
48%
No 5%
45%
40%
--
-I-
Blank 26% 2% 12%
56
-
354
Willingness to Make a Weekday Visit
80%
70%
60%
SO%
Web Blast Survey
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Yes No Blank
Preferred Activities
The activities that visitors preferred showed a high degree of variability as represented
on the following tables and charts. Some activities (Cannery Row for example) were
very popular with Web Blast respondents whereas they were not preferred by CBTS on
the street respondents. Some activities (beach, for example) were popular with both
groups of respondents. Some activities (fishing for instance) were not popular with
either group. The preferences expressed by the Potential Visitor respondents were
obtained by a slightly different format and thus are noted in a separate table and chart.
57
355
17 Mile Drive 11%
Activities with
13%
Art/Cultural Exhibits
13%
40%
3%
Canne Row 48% 0%
43%
0%
36%
4%
0%
0%
58
356
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
It
I I I
Beach activities
Historical Sites
Outdoor activities
Rest and relax
Wine Tastin
.. ...
Prefered Vacation Activies
-

Web Blast Survey
I I I I L I I I
CBTS on the Street Survey
30%
26%
4%
2%
21%
32%
11%
10%
2%
8%
59
357
Potential Visitors Preference
35% .-------------------------------------------
30% +----
25% +--- -
20% -f----
15% +----
10% -f----
5%
0%
Segmentation for CBTS
The most important findings regarding the segmentation of current, past, and potential
visitors to CBTS involve comparisons between younger and older people. For the vast
majority of comparisons, younger visitors refers to visitors who are younger than 45
and older visitors refers to visitors who are 45 and older.
CBTS on the Street Survey
Age of Visitor and duration of visit
o Younger visitors (adults younger than 55) were more likely than expected
to be day travelers whereas older visitors were more likely than expected
to be long stay visitors.
Age of Visitor and number of visits
o Younger Visitors (adults younger than 55) were more likely than expected
to be first time visitors whereas older visitors were more likely than
expected to be repeat visitors.
60
358
Awareness of Carmel
~ Remember ad from travel magazine
Younger potential visitors (adults younger than 55) were less likely
than expected to have seen an ad for CBTS in a travel magazine
whereas older potential visitors were more likely than expected to
have seen an ad for CBTS in a travel magazine.
~ Remember web ad
Younger potential visitors (adults younger than 55) were more
likely than expected to consume media via the web whereas older
potential visitors were less likely than expected to consume media
via the web.
);> Due the size of the sample size, we were unable to reach conclusions
regarding the effectiveness of other media in a segmentation based on age.
Seasonal Preference for visit
~ Fewer younger potential visitors (adults younger than 55) than expected
would make a winter season visit whereas a greater number of older
potential visitors than expected would make a winter season visit.
Preference for weekday visit
';> Younger potential visitors (adults younger than 55) were less likely than
expected to be willing to make a midweek visit to Carmel whereas older
potential visitors were more likely than expected to be willing to make a
midweek visit.
~ NOTE: For this analysis, we defined a "younger" visitor as being less than
55. This differs from the definitions we used for the other segmentations.
This was because qualitatively we leamed that a large number of working
aged felt that their work schedules would not facilitate weekday visits to
the city. The cut point of 55 was chosen to capture people who were more
likely to be retired from full time work.
Visit History
);> More younger potential visitors (adults younger than 55) than expected
have not visited Carmel whereas more older potential visitors than
expected have visited Carmel
61
359
Web Blast Survey
Age and duration of stay
'r There was a greater number of younger visitors (adults younger than 55)
than expected who were day travelers. A greater number of older visitors
than expected were short stay visitors (1-2 nights) and long stay visitors
(5+ nights).
A number of other findings reached statistical significance and may help frame future
marketing efforts.
Motivations to plan trip
)> Fewer younger potential visitors (adults younger than 55) than expected
would plan a trip based on influence of friends and family whereas more
older potential visitors than expected would plan trip based on influence
of friends and family.
).> Note: We were somewhat surprised by this finding as based on our in
person interviews with this population we came to understand that peer
groups were an important determinant of trip planning for younger
adults.
Activity Preferences
).- We were unable to find statistically meaningful segmentations by activity
and age.
Web Blast Survey
Activity Preferences
>o> Activities with a dog
A greater number of younger visitors (adults younger than 45) than
expected preferred activities with their dogs whereas fewer older
visitors than expected preferred activities with their dogs.
)> Sightseeing
A smaller number of younger visitors (adults younger than 45)
than expected preferred sightseeing whereas a greater number of
older visitors than expected preferred sightseeing.
62
360
The practical significance of this finding remains unclear.
~ There were no other statistically significant relationships between age and
preferred activity.
Duration of stay and activity preference
r Fine Dining
Long stay visitors (5+ nights) value fine dining more than expected
whereas short stay visitors (1-2 nights) and day travelers value fine
dining less than expected.
';> Shopping

-,. Beach
Long stay visitors (5+ nights) were more likely than expected to
value shopping and whereas day visitors were less likely than
expected to value shopping.
Day visitors and short stay visitors (1-2 nights) were less likely than
expected to value the beach whereas long stay visitors (5+ nights)
were more likely than expected to value the beach.
? Special Events
value Special events whereas day visitors were less likely than
expected to value Special Events.
);> Hiking
value hiking whereas day travelers and short stay visitors (1-2
nights) were less likely to value hiking.
~ 17 Mile Drive
Day travelers and short stay visitors (1-2 nights) were less likely
than expected to value the 17 Mile Drive whereas long stay visitors
(5+ nights) were more likely than expected to value the 17 Mile
Drive.
);> Art and Culture
Short stay visitors (1-2 nights) and day travelers were less likely
than expected to value Art and Culture whereas long stay visitors
(5+ nights) were more likely than expected to value Art and
Culture.
63
361
'r Historical Sites
Short stay travelers (1-2 nights) and day travelers were less likely
than expected to value Historic sites whereas long stay visitors (5+
nights) were more likely than expected to value historic sites.
;.. Live Theatre
value Live Theatre whereas day travelers and short stay visitors (1-
2 nights) were less likely than expected to value Live Theatre.
;.. The other activities we examined did not reach statistical significance.
Income and duration of stay
~ Lower income visitors (family income of less than $100,000 per year) were
more likely than expected to be day visitors and higher income visitors
(family income of greater than $100,000 per year) were more likely than
expected to be long stay visitors (4 or more nights for this analysis only).
Status of Children and Activities
J;> Activities with dogs
Visitors without kids were more likely than expected to value
activities with dogs whereas visitors with kids were less likely than
expected to value activities with dogs.
Seasonal preference and activity
;.. Visitors without a seasonal preference were less likely than expected to
value Cannery Row whereas visitors with a summer or winter seasonal
preference for visits were more likely than expected to value Cannery
Row.
Archetypes of Visitors
Initial observations in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea allowed for the formulation of
three archetypes of visitors. Survey data help describe these archetypes to some degree
though we were unable to characterize them to the extent that we initially hoped.
Danny and Doris Day Traveler
64
362
This group of visitors is more likely than expected to be younger. They were less
likely than expected to value fine dining, shopping, the beach, special events, hiking, 17
Mile Drive, art and culture, live theatre, and historical sites. They were more likely than
expected to have incomes of less than $100,000 per year.
Rhoda and Ronny Romance
We initially believed these visitors to be very loyal. Anecdotally, there were
couples who came to Carmel-by-the-Sea yearly to celebrate their anniversary. One had
made this trip yearly for fifty years! The survey data, however, did not support any
statistically significant relationships between marital status and other variables.
Erica and Eddy Event-goer
Initial observations suggested that this segment stayed overnight and was of
high net worth. Discussions with local business owners supported this view. While
we found that long stay visitors valued special events more than expected, we could
find no other statistically significant characterization of this group.
65
363
Appendix C - Competitive Set Analysis
The data gathered from the STR reports were analyzed to generate comparisons of
Carmel with these locations, as well as the aggregate of the competitive venues.
To that end, we compared Carmel against the Competitive Set for weekday, weekend
and overall occupancy rates for the three-year period between 2010 and 2012 (as well as
individual comparisons for each of those three years) from the tab entitled "WD WE"
within each location's STR report.
Over this three-year period, Carmel had lower occupancy rates than its competitive set
for all three areas: Weeknights (-2.1%), Weekends (-1%) and overall (-1.8%).
CBTS*
Napa
Santa Barbara
Santa Barbara County
Sonoma
So. Lake Tahoe
San Luis Obispo Count y
Mariposa County
Camp Set AVG (w/o SLT)
Carmel vs. Camp Set Avg (w/ o SLT)
3-year Avgs.
(2010-12)
Weekday Weekend Total
57.1 74.7
64.3 79.4
61.2 74.2
58.7 74.2
44.5 61.6
57.1 75.1
n/ a n/a
59.7 1 75.5
key:
Carmel below avg.
Carmel above avg.
Carmel with+- .1
A "Day of the Week" comparison was generated using the STR data from "Day of
Week," which returned the following results from the 3-year period of 2010-2012.
As in the weekday-weekend-total chart, Carmel is below its competitive set locations
for average occupancy rates except for on Saturday nights, where it achieves the
average rate. Overall, it is below the occupancy rates its competitive set locations by
1.7%.
66
364
3-Year Average: 2010-
2012
We Overall
Sun Mon Tue d Thu Fri Sat Avg.
Carmel 53.4 54.6 58.5 61.7 62.2 71.8 79.4 63.1
Napa 51.8 53.6 57.6 60.6 64.1 72.0 79.1 62.7
Santa Barbara 58.4 61.8 66.0 67.6 69.3 76.8 82.9 69.0 Key:
Santa Barbara Carmel blw
I
County 53.6 59.5 64.2 64.4 65.8 71.6 77.8 65.3 avg.
Carmel above
Sonoma 52.9 56.5 60.5 62.8 64.6 72.2 78.2 63.9 avg.
Carmel with +-
So. Lake Tahoe 40.5 42.9 46.1 47.4 47.6 57.7 66.6 49.8 .1
San Luis Obispo
County 51.1 54.3 58.7 60.1 63.8 72.9 78.9 62.8
Mariposa
County n/a n/a n/a n/a n/ a n/a n/a n/a
Comp Set AVG 53.5 57.1 61.4 63.1 65.5 73.1 79.4 64.7
Carmel vs. Comp
Set Avg -0.2
Quarterly occupancy rates were also generated from the STR data "Quarterly Results"
and used as a yardstick for Carmel's quarterly occupancy rates. The data revealed what
the City was asking us to solve for: lower than average occupancy is especially
pronounced in the first quarter Ganuary, February and March), and Carmel-by-the-Sea
is achieving higher occupancy rates than its competitors during the third quarter Guly,
August and September). However, its drop in the first quarter (-5.2%) is more than
double the percentage it exceeds its competitors in the summer months (+2.3%).
67
365
Q1 Avg.
Q2 Avg.
Q3 Avg.
Q4 Avg.
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Competitive set occupancy averages
2010 2011
48.7 52.0
64.5 68.5
73.8 78.0
55.5 57.6
Carmel vs. Quarterly
key:
Carmel below avg.
Carmel above avg.
Carmel with+- .1
2012 3-year Total
54.6 51.8
70.9 67.9
79.7 77.2
59.3 57.5
Given the data above and the focus of our project, we took a deeper look at the first
quarter months using the STR report data filed under the "Classic" tab. Three years of
data for Carmel versus its competitive set reveal that Carmel is particularly weak in
January (-5.5%) and March (-6.5%), and somewhat weaker in February (-3.6%). The
location of the AT&T Pro-Am Golf Tournament in Pebble Beach in mid-February,
combined with two holidays (Valentine's Day and President's Day), like account for the
slightly better performance that month.
68
366
Avg. across competitive set
2010
2011
2012
3 yr. Avg. 2010 - 2012
2010-2012
key:
Carmel below avg.
Carmel above avg.
Carmel with+- .1
January February March
42.2 48.8 55.1
46.5 53.7 56.0
47.5 55.6 60.6
45.4 52.7 57.2
Last, using the number of rooms as indicated in the STR reports in the "Response" tab,
we divided each location's marketing budget by the total number of rooms to get an
Average Marketing Spend per Room (the sources were cited in the opening section).
This graph shows that the average spend per room in the competitive set locations
again, without including South Lake Tahoe), is $429.29.
69
367
Marketing spend/room
1,200
1,000 -
..---
800 ~
600
A ~ . Mktg Spend/ Room = $429.29
400
~
;---
200
or--
0
~ r ~ n
70
368
Appendix D - Marketing Spend Analysis
The City markets itself through the following media channels:
Print Media- Includes marketing on travel magazines (such as VIA, Sunset, SF
Chronicle), travel I leisure directories, brochures and distribution of certified
folders;
Radio - Includes the marketing spend on radio commercials with different Bay
area radio stations (KCBS, KGO) during the slow seasons and holiday seasons;
TV - Includes the marketing spend on TV commercials with local county level
channels during the holiday and slow seasons;
Wedding- Besides general travel magazines, the city focuses on promoting the
city as a wedding destination through wedding specific magazines and journals;
Internet - Includes the fees paid for the Google Ad words, different campaigns
on the various websites such as SFGate.com, Go-California.com, maintenance of
the city's website ( carmelcalifornia.com);
Each of these media channels was considered as an input variable that affects the city's
revenue, the output variable for the purposes of the analysis.
The city's bi-monthly data on Average Daily Rate (ADR) for hotel rooms showed that
there was a seasonal variation in the ADR; this directly impacted the total revenue for
the city. For example, in the summer seasons the ADR was roughly 25% higher than
that in the winter seasons. In order to eliminate the impact of seasonality in the ADR on
revenue, the revenue data was normalized to number of room nights sold in a month
(Room Night= Revenue I ADR). In all subsequent analysis, number of room nights was
considered as the output variable instead of revenue.
The following is the setup for the regression:
Hypothesis: All the media channels are statistically significant in improving the monthly
room nights sold
Input Variables: The monthly spend on the following media channels - Print, TV, Radio,
Internet and Wedding
Output Variable: Monthly Room Nights sold
71
369
Below were the results of the regression analysis:
1. The first test was to determine the level of correlation between the different input
variables and the output variables. Given that there are 56 observations in the
data set, the statistical rule of thumb was that a correlation value greater than
0.26726 (2i'/56), implied that there was a significant level of correlation between
those variables
Based on the below correlation table matrix, it was found that there was a
significant level of correlation between the flowing pair of input variables:
Wedding and TV
Wedding and Radio
Wedding and Internet
TV and Internet
Radio and Internet
It was also observed that marketing spend on the Wedding magazines has been
constant over the last three years, and therefore cannot be considered as a direct
correlate to room nights. Accordingly the independent variable, Wedding was
dropped from the regression analysis. Similarly, the input variable, Internet, was
also dropped from the regression analysis.
Correlation
Probabilit ROOMNIGHT TV WEDDING RADIO PRINT INTERNET
ROOMNIGHT 1.000000
TV -0.078225 1.000000
0.5666
WEDDING 0 661431 0 352483 1.000000
0.0000 0.0077
RADIO 0.155108 -0.094277 0 299627 1.000000
0.2537 0.4895 0.0249
PRINT -0.159490 -0.172686 -0.035051 0.208605 1.000000
0.2403 0.2031 0.7976 0.1229
INTERNET 0.162565 0 292967 0 539059 0 271221 0.127335 1.000000
0.2313 0.0284 0.0000 0.0432 0.3497
72
370
2. The regression analysis of Room Night against the remaining input variables
(TV, Radio and Print) gave the following results:
Date: 05/07/1 3 Time: 21:20
Sample: 2008M07 2013M02
Included observations: 56
Variable Coefficient
c 3813.890
TV -0.057763
PRINT -0.143076
RADIO 0.063032
R-squared 0.071736
Adj usted R-squared 0 018183
S.E. of regression 1558.985
Sum squared resid 1.26E+08
Log likelihood -489 0858
F-statistic 1.339522
Std. Error t-StatiStiC Pro b.
411 .9800 9.257463 0.0000
0.080469 -0 717827 0.4761
0.091554 -1 562753 0.1242
0.045165 1 395600 0.1688
Mean dependent var 3333.036
S.D. dependentvar 1573.355
Akaike info criterion 17.61021
Schwarz criterion 17.75487
Hannan-Quinn criter. 17.66629
Durb1n-Watson stat 0 368310
None of the input variables are statistically significant, as the absolute value of
the t-statistic is less than 2 for each of them. Moreover the value for Adjusted R-
squared is very low, which indicated that the model did not fit well on the
underlying data set.
Though all the correlated variables were eliminated, the model indicated that
there was a significant level of correlation between the input variables (based on
very low values of Durbin-Watson stat).
The data were tested for auto correlation, i.e. the room nights booked in a
particular month was dependent on the room nights booked in prior months.
The results, as displayed below, indicated that there was a significant level of
auto correlation (close to 0.88). To eliminate the effects of correlation completely
from the regression model, the prior month's room night was considered as an
input variable for the model.
73
371
Date: 05/07/13 Time: 21 :36
Sample: 2008M07 2013M02
Included observations: 56
Autocorrelation Partial Correlation AC PAC Q-Stat Prob
. 1******1 . 1******1 1 0 879 0.879 45.622 0.000
. 1******1
-I I
2 0.776 0.017 81 .870 0.000
. I**** I ***I .
I
3 0.580 -0.465 102.48 0.000
. I***
I
. 1* . 4 0.441 0.1 06 114.63 0.000
. I**
I
.*1 . 5 0.263 -0.1 17 119.05 0.000
. I*.
I
. I** 6 0.186 0.222 121.30 0.000
1*. . 1*. 7 0.125 0.153 122.33 0.000
. I*. . 1* . 8 0.158 0.143 124.02 0.000
. 1*.
I
9 0.176 -0.047 126.16 0.000
. I** . 1* . 10 0.258 0.091 130.84 0.000
. I** .*1 . 11 0.284 -0.089 136.65 0.000
. I** . J . 12 0.321 -0.055 144.24 0.000
. I** .*J . 13 0.270 -0.130 149.75 0.000
. 1*. .*1 . 14 0.205 -0.160 153.01 0.000
. I*.
-I
15 0.078 -0 055 153.49 0.000
. I .
-I -
16 -0.017 0.072 153.51 0.000
.*1 .
-I
17 -0.128 0.026 154.87 0.000
. *1 . -I* .
18 -0.149 0.193 156.77 0.000
.*J . . J . 19 -0.159 0.036 158.98 0.000
. *I . . I . 20 -0.083 0.039 159.61 0.000
-I
**I .
21 -0.055 -0.281 159.89 0.000
. J. . J . 22 0.029 0.008 159.97 0.000
. I. . J . 23 0.049 -0.036 160.21 0.000
. J*. . I . 24 0.084 -0.002 160.92 0.000
74
372
3. Next, the regression model was refined by including the prior month's room
night as an input variable in the model. This input variable was represented as
ROOMNIGHT(-1) in the model
Date: 05/07/13 Time: 21:47
Sample (adjusted): 2008M08 2013M02
Included observations: 55 after adjustments
Variable Coeffic1ent Std. Error !-Statistic
c 730.3227 254.2882 2.872028
ROOMNIGHT( -1) 0.931831 0.056421 16.51563
TV -0 138248 0.032549 -4.247397
RADIO -0 019443 0.018703 -1.039596
PRINT -0 092719 0.037164 -2.494845
R-squared 0.857023 Mean dependent var
Adjusted R-squared 0 845584 S.D. dependentvar
S.E. of regression 622.4137 Akaike info criterion
Sum squared resid 19369943 Schwarz criterion
Log likelihood -429.2689 Hannan-Quinn criter.
F-statistic 74.92637 Durbin-Watson stat
Pro b.
0.0060
0.0000
0.0001
0.3035
0.0159
3347.828
1583.921
15.79160
15.97408
15.86216
2 494277
It became completely clear that prior month's room night was not only helpful in
eliminating the effect of auto correlation in the model (Durbin-Watson stat is
more than 2), it was also a statistically significant variable (very high value of t-
stat) for the model. However the model was still not acceptable as the other
input variables have a negative sign for their co-efficient. That means the higher
the marketing spend on TV, Radio and Print media, lower will be the volume of
room nights sold. Based on real world experience and the feedback received
from the client, it is clearly not the case.
75
373
Appendix E- 3 Year Financial Projection oflnvestment in Sunset Center for
Purposes of Attracting and Supporting Group Meetings
Carmel by-the-Sea
General Fund Projections
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016
Sources of Funds Budget Projection Projection Projection
Total Property Taxes $ 4,347,000 $ 4,347,000 $ 4,347,000 $ 4,347,000
Hostelry Tax Re\enues 4,463,000 4, 501,000 4,539,000 4,577,000
Sales & Use Tax 2,051,000 2,051,000 2,051,000 2,051,000
Business License Tax 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000
Total Tax Revenue $ 11,361,000 $ 11,399,000 $ 11,437,000 $11,475,000
Franchsie Fees 512,698 512,698 512,698 512,698
Fees & Permits 430,500 430,500 430,500 430,500
Fines and Forfeitures 25,200 25,200 25,200 25,200
Integovernrnental 71,700 71,700 71,700 71,700
Other 428,266 428,266 428, 266 428,266
Use of Prior Funds 575,002 575,002 575,002 575,002
Total Sources $ 13,404,366 $ 13,442,366 $ 13,480,366 $13,518,366
Expenditures
Polk)' & Executive $ 1,283,635 $ 1,390, 005 $ 1,496,375 $ 1,602,745
Public Safety 6,011,113 6,011,1 13 6,011,113 6,011,113
Public Services 2,648,955 2,648,955 2,648,955 2,648,955
Library 988,775 988,775 988,775 988,775
Administration 1,162,269 1,162,269 1,162,269 1,162,269
Planning & Bldg 662,279 662,279 662,279 662,279
Non-Dept 923,318 923,318 923,318 923,318
Debt Service 537,200 537,200 537,200 537,200
Capital Outlay 250,000
Other Uses (844,718) (844,718) (844,718) (844,718)
Total Expenditures $ 13,372,826 $ 13,729,196 $ 13,585,566 $13,691,936
Revenues over
(under)
Expenditures 31,540 (286,830) (105,200) (173,570)
76
374
Financial Projection Assumptions
Using the average (A VG) occupancy rates of competitive set destinations as
proxy for the MOST REALISTIC scenario the City can strive for, and TOT
receipts from January, February, and March, Carmel-by-the-Sea could expect an
increase of approximately $38,000 in TOT revenue during its slowest quarter.
All account balances were held constant in the financial projection except for
those that would be impacted by a Sunset Center renovation and additional FTE
needed to support group meetings.
).> $250K renovation to Sunset Center kitchen
J> Two (2) FTE - Per statements by our HID contact, at least 2 additional FTE
would be needed if the entire meeting space within Sunset Center is in
use. FTE Hourly Rate is $18 which is the mid-point of the hourly wage
range per a Banquet Server job posting. Annual salary for 2 FTE = $74,880
~ Healthcare Benefits- $15,745 (Washington Post, 9/11/12) per FTE; $31,490
for two FTE' s.
We are aware that FTEs for the Sunset Center are funded through the HID tax
levied on overnight hotel guests collected by the City. Because this type of
expenditures would flow through the General Fund account (operating budget),
our projection will include only the General Fund figures.
77
375
Appendix F- Websites Used for Research
Visitor Profile References
1) http://tourrnis2.modul.ac.at/material/eurocitymanual.pdf; accessed on January 8,
2013
2) http://tourmis2.modul.ac.at/material/fraboeurocityXXXtxe.pdf; accessed on January
8, 2013
3) http://ag.arizona.edu/pubs/marketing/az1056/az1056.html; accessed on January 8,
2013
4) http://ag.arizona.edu/pubs/marketing/az1056/az1056-survey2.pdf; accessed on
January 8, 2013
5) http: //ag.arizona.edu/pubs/marketing/az1056/az1056-appendixa.pdf; accessed on
January 8, 2013
6) http://www.azot.gov/documents/How%20to%20Create%20A %20Visitor%20Survey.
pdf; accessed on January 8, 2013
7) http://www.tzpunat.hr/Survey.aspx?id=196; accessed on January 8, 2013
8) http:Uwww.mgrt.gov .si/fileadmin/mgrt. gov .si/pageuploads/razpisi/JN /DT IAN G V
prasalnik Destinacija.pdf; accessed on January 8, 2013
9) http: //www.trc.upei.ca/exitsurvey; accessed on January 8, 2013
1 0) http://trc. upei.ca/sites/discoveryspace. upei.ca. trc/files/Exit Survey sec. pdf; accessed
on January 8, 2013
11) http://www. visitscotland.org!pdfNisitor%20Survey%20Toolkit.pdf; accessed on
January 8, 2013
78
376
12) http:ijchangingminds.org/explanations/research/analysis/parametric non-
parametric.htm; accessed May 10, 2013.
Competitive Data Set References
The marketing budgets were researched online from the following sources:
Santa Barbara:
http://www.noozhawk.com/article/032911 santa barbara marketing plan
Santa Barbara County:
http://www.santabarbaraca.gov/cap/MG87338/AS87342/AS87357/AS87363/AI91662/DO
91719/2.PDF
Napa:
https://mail.em.ucla.edu/owa/redir.aspx?C=7614d98643f2460eae79ebccc267b8cb&URL=
http%3a%2f%2fwww.northbaybusinessjoumal.com%2f36909%2fnapa-valley-
destination-council-ramps-marketing-campaign-with-new-budget%2f
Sonoma:
http://www .pressdemocrat.com/ article/20120715/B USINESS/120719809/1339 /business ?p
=2&tc=pg
South Lake Tahoe:
http:Uwww. trpa.org/RPUEISComments/5 Comment%20References/L TSL T FOWS TA
SC references/Airport/CSLT%20Annual%20Budget%202011-2012.pdf
San Luis Obispo County:
http://www.sanluisobispocounty.com/includes/media/docs/SLOCVCB-Marketing-Plan-
FINAL.pdf
Mariposa County: http://mariposacounty.org/DocumentCenterNiew /19262
79

Destination Marketing Plan 08-06-13

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Destination Marketing Plan 08-06-13

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

285

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen