[Mike Sweeney]

Ever wonder where the many projected visitors to a future Trump complex would come from? I mean, Trump is not creating new golfers, he is just hoping to lure existing golfers away from their current resort and into his place. So for every job created in Aberdeen there will be another one lost elsewhere. Certainly I'd expect other regions in Scotland to bear a part of the brunt - something to consider for the Scottish government.

Ulrich

See - http://www.visitscotland.org/ambitions_ch2_context.pdf
__________________________

If this trend were applied to Scotland, we would see a subtle shift in the composition of incoming tourists. Presently, 91 per cent of non-Scottish visitors to Scotland are from within Europe (including England), while 9 per cent are from beyond. In 2025, only 88 per cent of non-Scottish visitors to Scotland would be from within Europe whereas 12 per cent would come from other countries.14 The importance of the United States, Canada and Australia within the Scottish tourism, as the main long-distance suppliers of tourists to Scotland, would therefore moderately increase as we move forward to 2025, even though visitors from England will remain in the predominance.

______________________________

Right now, Trump is making money off of the overseas market buying real estate in New York. I assume he thinks that the dollar will rebound and then the above numbers could be supported when Americans and others travel to Scotland.

[Alfie]

Bloody hell Steve and Mike,

Just popped in before bedtime to check that you're all behaving yourselves.

One thing I can add, which is significant, to your combined tourism stats is ; that Scottish Tourism is presently pushing an initiative for a 50% increase in tourism spend by .....?...2015, or thereabouts ?

Contrary to what some may think, the English are our best customers in regard to visit numbers whilst not being big spenders. US visitors while still short in numbers, are one of the biggest spenders on average.

Steve mentioned Perry Golf.....now there's a blast from the past !

Alfie.

[Mike Sweeney]

US visitors while still short in numbers, are one of the biggest spenders on average.

From the VisitScotland.com survey on US Golfers:

http://www.visitscotland.org/us_golf_trips__to_scotland_2006_-_summary-2.pdf

• The most popular form of accommodation was 4 star Hotels and 3 star B&B’s.
• Significantly 19% of hotel users were in 5 Star accommodation reflecting the demand for premium golf experiences.
• Individual spend per day is high due to the types of courses that US golfers are playing.
• Respondents wanted to play Links and Championship courses.
• Respondents were critical of our golf course practice areas, locker rooms and restaurants.

[jeffwarne]

US visitors while still short in numbers, are one of the biggest spenders on average.

From the VisitScotland.com survey on US Golfers:

http://www.visitscotland.org/us_golf_trips__to_scotland_2006_-_summary-2.pdf

• The most popular form of accommodation was 4 star Hotels and 3 star B&B’s.
• Significantly 19% of hotel users were in 5 Star accommodation reflecting the demand for premium golf experiences.
• Individual spend per day is high due to the types of courses that US golfers are playing.
• Respondents wanted to play Links and Championship courses.
• Respondents were critical of our golf course practice areas, locker rooms and restaurants.

I know I'd cross an ocean for a better locker room ???Pretty much sums up why my next visit is to Wales,
before they discover/ruin that as well. (here's hoping they cancel the 2010 Ryder Cup-or at least stay at the asshole traps)

[Rich Goodale]

Ulrich (and Sean)

Economics is not a zero-sum game, nor a particularly predictable one.  If it were, we'd still be roaming the African savannahs--that is, if were were not already extinct.....

[Sean_A]

Ulrich (and Sean)

Economics is not a zero-sum game, nor a particularly predictable one.  If it were, we'd still be roaming the African savannahs--that is, if were were not already extinct.....

Rihc

You are right.  Economics is just about on par with voodoo.  Economists talk as big a load of bs as politicians do.  

Ciao

[Alfie]

Mike,

If I had my way - I'd scrap the whole visitscotland set up and start afresh. All they do is mark up the visitors holiday for them ! They operate as a marketing group in Scotland's interest - and that's about it !

The news today suggests that Donald may be heading for Northern Ireland. I wonder if they'll have a problem with a £billion or so ?

BTW. I did mean that our US visitors are still short in numbers, comparative to our overall tourism numbers.

Alfie.

[David_Tepper]

The news of The Donald's appeal over the Aberdeen site permitting is the lead story in the Press & Journal (December 3).  The fat lady is a LONG way from singing in this soap opera.

www.thisisnorthscotland.co.uk

[Ally Mcintosh]

the main 10 page feature in the sunday times supplement was about this proposed development....

[Rich Goodale]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/7127760.stm

Looks like this melodrama is playing out as I expected.......

[Mike Mosely]

In Scotland, I think these decisions are a valid function of government, I say NO TRUMP. He don't get it. For him, golf is a way to sell real estate.  He's not about the golf, he's into sales.

Right on, Pat!  Power to the people!

[George Pazin]

Nothing like The Donald to make you question your faith in free markets!

 

[Lou_Duran]

While visiting the lovely Aberdour (not far from Edingburgh) some four years ago, I managed to lock myself out of the B & B where we were staying.   After enjoying a few beers with a local legend at a neighborhood pub, my walk back to the B & B passed a small park where several teenagers under some form of influence were howling to the moon.

One particular young man repeatedly screamed "I have no future; somebody kill me" while his friends tried not very successfully to console him.  His inebriated pleas went on for the better part of a half an hour, making my wait on the B & B's front steps (for the proprietors to return from a local concert to let me in) particularly sad and poignant.

Now, I don't claim to understand the sociology and economics of the region, though I did learn from a highly reliable source that the educational system and the job situation for those lacking basic skills were rather poor.  In the absence of alternative industries and more attractive opportunities competing with Trump's project, I have to think (and hope) this poor chap would prefer a relatively low-paying service job with the potential for acquiring valuable work skillls and advancement to going on the dole.

Sean,

I hope your comments regarding economics and economists are tongue-in-cheek.  They are certainly popular.  The following is a recommendation for a book which provides an alternative perspective, though written by an economist like an economist, it is, I think, good scholarship and thought provoking.
     
"The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies" by Bryan Caplan  
 

[Ulrich Mayring]

What facts can you possibly cite to back up such a ludicrous statement? Your theory is pure falsehood and smacks of reactionary and baseless assumption.

Quite simple: I cite Trump's own business plan for the Aberdeen site. It is designed to lure existing, wealthy golfers away from other venues. There is not a single provision in it that is targeted at growing the market.

Mind you, there's nothing wrong with competition. But if the matter is now declared to be of "national importance", then surely the government must take Trump's business model into consideration. Why should there be a special "government exemption" for Trump, when he is taking at least some business from other, Scottish-owned establishments?

Ulrich

[Steve Lapper]

Ulrich:

  Maybe whatever document you cite makes that claim (and I doubt anything meaningful from Trump relies on that strategy), but as Rich mentioned, resort economics is not a zero-sum game. Overall travel growth will occur over time as Scotland further provides resort amenities for all golf-oriented visitors.

 Nobody builds a resort in a developed country to "grow" the existing market. but instead recognizes that the resort's mere presence should create some, if only incremental, market growth. If Trump's Aberdeen project takes customers from a Turnberry, then it is up to Turnberry to upgrade their facility (or make improvements to their experience)in order to re-acquire the customer. In these times, most travel customers want to try, taste or at least attempt new experiences along their lives and an upscale development in Aberdeen will go a long way to providing such. The golfer who now stops to play Royal Aberdeen and Cruden Bay and stays at Marcliffe-Pitfodels will now probably want to stay an extra day and play Trump. All of this is a net additive to the Scottish tourist economy (i.e auto, room, fee revenues) No other Scottish resort expects, or deserves, a protectionist mentality to preserve it's market position. Why should they get one?

[Mike Sweeney]

U,

Clearly Disney did not sign a deal with The Four Seasons to have them take customers away from Disneyworld hotels.

http://corporate.disney.go.com/corporate/moreinfo/four_seasons030207.html

Four Seasons provides Walt Disney World a no mouse ears luxury resort that complements their existing offerings and brings in new customers to their parks and attractions, same as Trump brings a different experience to Scotland, although Herb Kohler got there first. While fancy clubhouses and restaurants are not important to most GCA posters, there is a segment that cares about the experience first and the golf second.

Neither Disney nor Trump make these types of moves without significant due diligence.

[Mark Pearce]

Lou,

I suspect making judgments on the economic needs of an area is best not done by relying on the empirical evidence of a lad high on something in a park in a different region.

[Kirk Gill]

In regards to the environmental concerns - particularly the endangered bird species that currently exist on the site in question - is it the construction of the golf course/hotel that would endanger them, or is it that these species cannot live on land that also contains a golf course, long-term? I'd be interested to know if any of these endangered species can be found living in and around already-existing linksland courses. Or is it that the environment that supports these birds is in fact not found anywhere else, and thus this specific site must be maintained?

I find the opinions of some environmentalists to be more "mental" than "environmental," but to dismiss their concerns in a knee-jerk fashion is silly and dangerous. What about this case?

[Lou_Duran]

Mark,

I am not passing judgement.  My only point is that a job, even one in the service industry, is of great value and consequence to someone.  Within Scotland, Aberdeenshire appears to enjoy low unemployment, so perhaps the government is in the enviable position of being able to stringently select and "allow" specific types of enterprise to establish within its boundaries.

As to the assertion that most of the money will go into Trump's pockets, an analysis of projected capital and operational expenditures would show quite the opposite.  Until someone learns how to lop-off the real estate and move it elsewhere, the property remains in Scotland, under the jurisdiction of Scottish authority (including tax, labor, land use laws, etc.) and the lion's share of revenues will stay locally (even if you have to import labor).

Ultimately those closest to the situation will pass judgement.  Hopefully it will be a good one.

[Jason McNamara]

I find the opinions of some environmentalists to be more "mental" than "environmental," but to dismiss their concerns in a knee-jerk fashion is silly and dangerous. What about this case?

Kirk -

In the latest update (Scottish gov't may overrule locals - http://tinyurl.com/24ge2f), I found the following:

"This is not about a golf course, it's about a massive housing development. You could pave a golf course with gold and it still would not cost a billion,'' environmental campaigner Mickey Foote [Aberdeen Sustainability Group] said.

Elsewhere, Mr. Foote also said "I've got no beef with golf. What I've got a beef with is the destruction of our countryside for profit."   http://tinyurl.com/yruftf

Obviously just one data point, but that's one enviro who, while anti-OTT extras, is also pro-golf.

[John_Cullum]

From one of the early Scottish Press Association articles following the rejection by the council:

"Mr Ford warned members it would be a “grotesque mistake” to grant the application without any negotiation and voted to reject the application."

It seems pretty clear to me that Mr. Ford was just trying to shake The Donald down a bit more before giving him the go ahead. It seems that may have backfired on Mr. Ford now as the national bodies have gotten involved.

[Ulrich Mayring]

No other Scottish resort expects, or deserves, a protectionist mentality to preserve it's market position. Why should they get one?

They shouldn't. But the case we have here is the inverse: there is some special treatment given to the Trump project through the national government intervention. Environmental concerns and local council opinions is something that other developers had to deal with and, apparently, they found a way to do that and still got their resort built.

Maybe Trump needs to scale down housing, lose a couple of hotel floors, avoid certain sensitive areas and invest a bit in local projects such as youth development. And why not come out and have a beer with locals and talk to them? I am sure that would go a long way towards getting approval.

Ulrich

[Steve Lapper]

It is all about the price of the land and the costs of constructing and operating your facilities. It's easy to view this through the golf-centric kaleidoscope and make suggestions to pare things back (something the National Gov't can likely convince The Donald to accept), but ultimately if the present land owners want to extract their quart of blood by pricing the property so high that only a mega-development makes economic sense. The inherent tension of that purchase/development equation is more frequently the underlying problem. Try factoring that in?

This isn't about special treatment by national government intervention, it's about a large enough project to warrant some attention from a wider governing body to make a determination of the project's macro impact. Here in the US, most individual states have legal mechanisms in place to step in after local governing bodies have made their initial determinations when a projects complexities extend beyond local impact and into regional issues. This happens every day.

I don't argue that Trump shouldn't pare some parts of the project back and he has spent some time with the locals, but his name is polarizing and plenty of people just want to take a shot at him regardless of whatever positive steps he, or his people, make.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()