Greater Manchester Visitors Survey 2010 Executive Summary Funded by: Commissioned to:

Northwest Regional Development Agency (NWDA) Bluegrass Research Ltd

Overview As the tourist board for Greater Manchester, Visit Manchester has the responsibility of leading the destination to attract visitors to the sub-region. To enable Visit Manchester to do this effectively a strong understanding of its visitors and their experiences is required to inform the decision-making to achieve this. The original study was undertaken in 2007 and the objectives for the 2010 study were: As comparable with the 2007 study:  Gain updated knowledge of the nature of visitors and visits to Greater Manchester.  Measure visitor satisfaction levels against a range of tourism product criteria.  Measure visitor spend in terms of; visit contribution to the economy and spend dispersal patterns across the business sectors in the tourism industry. Additional objectives for the 2010 study:  Measure visitor dispersal and cross-boundary visitor movement between Greater Manchester districts.  Gain feedback to ascertain how the actual visit compared to pre-visit expectations. Methodology Face to face interviews: 1652 in 2010 (compared to 1777 in 2007) Dates: May to December 2010 (months comparable with 2007 study) Key Findings Please find below the key findings of the survey including comparisons for the Manchester city centre sample. Please note that ‘GM’ refers to Greater Manchester. Visitor Profile – all visitors 

The Greater Manchester sample included 52% day visitors and 48% staying visitors (compared to 46% of day visitors and 54% staying for the city centre).



18% of visitors were from overseas markets which is steady with the 2007 proportion of 17% (compared to 26% overseas market for the city centre).



The most commonly reported overseas visitor origin was Australia (13%), Germany (11%), USA (9%), Ireland (7%), Spain, Greece & Canada (all 6%) and France (5%).



The domestic market originated from the Northwest (40%), Yorkshire & Humberside (10%), Southeast (6%), Northeast (4%), West Midlands (4%), East Midlands (4%), Greater London (3%), Southwest (3%), Scotland (3%), Eastern England (1%), Wales (3%) and Northern Ireland (1%).



If looking at the visitor age profile 10% were from the 16-24 age grouping, 17% 25-34, 23% 35-44, 23% 45-54, 18% 55-64 and 9% 65+. The profile was mostly comparable with the 2007 study with the most noticeable difference being the higher proportion of 45-54 year olds in 2010 (17% in 2007 to 23% in 2010).



50% of visitors to GM were under 45 (compared to 56% for the city centre).



32% of visitors to GM were travelling with a partner (compared to 34% city centre).



29% of visitors to GM were first-time visitors, 58% had previously visited in the past 2 years and 12% had previously visited more than 2 years before (compared to 30% first-time, 58% previously visited in last 2 years and 11% more than 2 years before for city centre).



The average number of visits during the two years leading up to the interview dates by the visitors sampled had increased from 5.9 trips in 2007 to 6.9 in 2010 for staying visits and from 9.5 in 2007 to 10.7 for day visits.



28% visiting GM were in a travelling party with children (compared to 22% city centre) and 35% of day visitors were travelling in a party with children compared to 20% of staying visitors.

Visitor Profile – first-time visitors 

First-time visitors were more likely to be staying (44% compared to 14% of day visitors)



First-time visitors were more likely to be aged 16-24 (51% compared to 32% of 25-34 year olds and 28% of 45-54 year olds) and from overseas markets, the staying visitor market (non-VFR) and be lone visitors.

Visitor Profile – staying visitors 

84% of staying visitors sampled were staying within GM, 5% staying in locations both inside and outside of GM and 11% staying outside GM. The 11% (95 sample) reporting that they were staying outside Greater Manchester were most likely to be staying in Yorkshire (20%), East Midlands (12%), and London (11%).



35% of staying visitors to GM stayed with their friends and relatives (compared to 30% for the city centre).



The most frequently reported accommodation type for staying visitors were; a hotel (38%), a friends or relatives home (35%), travel accommodation (12%), B&B/guest house/inn (4%), group accommodation/hostel (4%), caravanning & camping (3%) and a combined 5% for remaining categories.



The visitor segments most likely to stay in a hotel were from the 45-54 age group (also identified as the growing market for both staying and day visitors since 2007)



Those most likely to be staying within GM were from the 16-24 and 25-34 age groups (both 89% within these age groups) and those most likely not to be staying in GM but staying elsewhere were from 55-64 age group followed by 45-64 and 65+ age groups.



Staying visitors in the city centre were most likely to be from the 16-24 age group, overseas visitors, from socio-economic groupings A&B, first-time visitors and non-VFR.



The average length of stay in Greater Manchester was 4.52 and in the city centre was 4.58. Looking at specific markets a domestic visitor stayed an average of 2 nights, 8 nights for an overseas visitor, 6 nights for SFR (staying with friends and relatives) and 4 nights for those staying in paid-for accommodation.

Motivations & Visitor Activity

Please note that this section was multiple-response: 

The motivational factors with the strongest influence to have led to the visit (8-10 influence out of 10) by staying visitors were; ‘reputation and image’ (43% in 2010 compared to 22% in 2007), ‘to visit specific places - either attractions or places’ (40% in 2010 compared to 35% in 2007), ‘because I have friends/relatives nearby/a second home/ free accommodation’ (40% in 2010 compared to 54% in 2007) and ‘because of a special event or show’ (37% in 2010 compared to 31% in 2007).



The motivational factors with the strongest influence to have led to the visit (8-10 influence out of 10) by day visitors were; ‘because its somewhere I know and trust’ (49% in 2010 compared to 34% in 2007), ‘because of a special event or show’ (46% in 2010 compared to 42% in 2007), because of its ‘reputation and image’ (45% in 2010 compared to 19% in 2007) and ‘to visit specific places - either attractions or places’ (44% in 2010 compared to 57% in 2007)’.



The most frequently reported activities undertaken for GM visitors were ‘eating out’ (59%), ‘shopping’ (58%), ‘visiting cultural visitor attractions’ (47%), ‘stroll around and enjoy the ambience of the city/town’ (34%) and ‘attend a festival or outdoor event’ (20%).



The most frequently reported activities undertaken for city centre visitors were ‘shopping’, (72%), ‘eating out’ (70%), ‘visiting cultural attractions’ (54%), ‘stroll around and enjoy the ambience of the city/town’ (47%).



Those most likely to visit cultural visitor attractions eg museums and galleries were staying visitors (non-VFR), overseas, AB socio-economic groupings, those travelling with children and first-time visitors.

Visitor Movement 

Over a quarter of visitors sampled in Manchester city sample were also visiting Salford (28%) or Trafford (25%).



17% of GM visitors also visited areas outside the sub-region during their visit (a similar 18% for those sampled in the city centre). The other areas identified for the GM sample (and multiple-response) included Merseyside (6%), Lancashire & Blackpool (5%), Chester & Cheshire (4%), Cumbria (3%), The Peak District (3%) and Yorkshire (2%).

Visitor Information Sourced 

14% of all visitors reviewed www.visitmanchester.com prior to visit, rising to 11% for staying visitors. The visitor segments most likely to consult www.visitmanchester.com were overseas, AB socioeconomic groupings, those staying in paid-for accommodation, first time visitors and those not visited in the past two years.



Visitors were also asked how they booked their accommodation with 38% reporting the website, followed by e-mail (27%) and telephone (21%). The most popular channel for booking accommodation reported by visitors to the city centre was by website (36%), followed by e-mail (33%) and 17% telephone for the city centre.



Visitors were asked who they booked their accommodation with and 55% of GM visitors booked directly with the accommodation provider, 21% through a holiday website provider, 5% through a travel agent, 4% through a Visitor Information Centre, 5% through other sources and 16% did not book their accommodation prior to arrival.



17% of visitors had contacted a Visitor Information Centre during their visit which rises to 28% for staying visitors. The 2007 figures cannot be compared to here as the new VIC location in 2010 generated higher hit rates of visitors than in 2007.



Those most likely to use the Visitor Information Centre during their trip are likely to be 16-24 (also the higher spend age group), overseas, staying (non-VFR), lone visitors and first time visitors.

Visitor Spend within the Greater Manchester Economy 

Staying visitors spent an average of £113.10 per day including accommodation and £68.61 per day excluding accommodation. However if excluding the SFR market (staying with friends and relatives) those staying in paid-for accommodation spent £146.80 including accommodation and £78.73 excluding accommodation.



Day visitors spent an average of £53.60 per day.



Excluding accommodation spend, the highest spend category was for ‘shopping for gifts and souvenirs’, followed by ‘food and drink’ and then ‘shopping for daily needs’.



The 16-24 age group spent the most out of all visitors per person per day, followed by the 25-34 age group. The 65+ age group spent the least per person per day.

Visitor Expectations & Destination Performance 

11% of visitors to GM felt that their expectations had been exceeded (and 87% met), compared to 15% of the city centre sample (and 83% met).



The most-cited reasons why visitors to GM had their expectations exceeded were; ‘the amount and range of things to do’ (41 sample), ‘the friendliness of the people’ (31 sample), ‘the atmosphere’ (27 sample) and ‘quality of shopping’ (26 sample).



Just 2% of visitors sampled in GM reported that Greater Manchester fell short of their expectations (1% for the city centre sample).



Greater Manchester was rated an average of 4.5 out of 5 as a visitor destination when including13 visitor categories measured for both the 2007 and 2010 studies. All categories were rated higher than in 2007.



The category scores are provided below with the 2007 comparisons:

Visitor offer/requirement category Easy to get to/accessible Cultural/musical performances (eg. theatre, plays, concerts) Good atmosphere and options in the evening, that appeal to my group and me Sporting events/matches High quality visitor attractions Vibrant nightlife Unique events and festivals Historic houses and cultural heritage Excellent eating out experiences Good value for money accommodation City walking/sightseeing World-class shopping experience Exploring the countryside Low crime/good personal safety

Average score 2010 4.7 (4.66) 4.7 (4.66) 4.7 (4.66) 4.6 (4.62) 4.6 (4.58) 4.6 (4.58) 4.6 (4.57) 4.6 (4.55) 4.6 (4.55) 4.5 (4.52) 4.5 (4.46) 4.5 (4.45) 4.4 (4.41) 4.2 (4.18)

Potential Visit for 2011 or 2012 

90% of all visitors were “likely” or “very likely” to re-visit GM in the next 2 years.

Average score 2007 4.3 4.5 N/A (new for 2010 study) 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.1 3.6



85% of staying visitors were “likely” or “very likely” to re-visit GM in the next 2 years compared to 95% for day visitors.