|
|
Post by darcy on Jul 31, 2007 0:12:21 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by californiacro on Jul 31, 2007 7:31:06 GMT 1
The link did not work.
So what was the jist of it?
|
|
|
|
Post by californiacro on Jul 31, 2007 7:53:50 GMT 1
Well EU or not.
I think Croatia needs to work at getting tourist year round.
Last year I believe we had just over 10 million tourists..... I bet the majority of them came in Summer.
The Govt really needs to promote year round tourism and not place additional focus on our coast... everyone knows we have a great coast....
I think Slavonia needs to promote and do Agri-tourism.... it seems to be doing well in other countries and in parts of Dalmatia. Slavonia is perfect for it.
Croatia should promote Zagreb as the place to spend your winter... a special Christmas in Zagreb and really push it as the place to be during Christmas and New Year.... kinda like New York. I know I know... we are no New York but at least try to achieve something like that....
Plus year round tourism I think is better enviromentally than a surge in Summer. It is also better for people that survive on tourism to have a steady income year round than a surge.
|
|
|
|
Post by justapixel on Jul 31, 2007 8:34:40 GMT 1
Thank you, Darcy. That was a very valuable and informative document. Last year I believe we had just over 10 million tourists..... I bet the majority of them came in Summer. That might have something to do with our coast being lifeless and boring when it's not hot and you cannot swim. The Govt really needs to promote year round tourism and not place additional focus on our coast... everyone knows we have a great coast.... How do you expect it to be promoted? A few resorts having year round tourisms have it because eithere they have decades long tradition and supporting infrastructure (Opatija) or large foreign companies have invested a lot of money into marketing and building additional leisure facilities (Falkensteiner Zadar). I think Slavonia needs to promote and do Agri-tourism.... it seems to be doing well in other countries and in parts of Dalmatia. Slavonia is perfect for it. Slavonia tourist potential is around nil, because terrain there is terribly boring. The only things having more substantial tourist potential are Kopaèki rit and a few thermal spas following Hungarian model. Croatia should promote Zagreb as the place to spend your winter... a special Christmas in Zagreb and really push it as the place to be during Christmas and New Year.... kinda like New York. I know I know... we are no New York but at least try to achieve something like that.... Yeah, that's why most Zagrebians flee for Christmas elsewhere. Sarajevo and Ljubljana are presently very popular, while Prague was always a destination of choice. Lemme tell you something - I've spent last ten winters in Zagreb and there wasn't a single second I didn't want to be somewhere else. On spring and fall it's very nice, though. Plus year round tourism I think is better enviromentally than a surge in Summer. It is also better for people that survive on tourism to have a steady income year round than a surge. Sure it is. It would also be better for enviroment and economy if tourists stayed at home and sent their money only, but unfortunately it doesn't work that way. . |
|
|
|
Post by capio on Jul 31, 2007 9:27:27 GMT 1
If I worked hard to pay for a holiday and ended up in Slavonia in the middle of winter I think I would consider suicide.
|
|
|
|
Post by justapixel on Jul 31, 2007 9:42:17 GMT 1
If I worked hard to pay for a holiday and ended up in Slavonia in the middle of winter I think I would consider suicide. That exactly is the reason Slavonia and Hungary have highest suicide rate in Europe. . |
|
|
|
Post by irac on Jul 31, 2007 9:59:02 GMT 1
I thought Finland had the highest rate?
The report is very good and I remember being told of it when it was still in the raw stage, the conclusions on accepting external investment is one that will be nay nayed by the knuckledraggers, who figure that external investment consists of handouts from fellow commie states or from family abroad, which needs to be spent as quickly and stupidly as possible.
Has anyone read the HNB report on internal savings? Really interesting and scary.
|
|
|
|
Post by justapixel on Jul 31, 2007 10:45:51 GMT 1
I thought Finland had the highest rate? Maybe that was in EU before Hungary joined. Nowadays, it seems true champions are Lithuanians. www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/country_reports/en/index.htmlIt must have something to do both with climate (cold) and genetics (Finno-Ugric group). In Croatia, Slovenia and Serbia, regions bordering Hungary have much higher suicide rates than other regions, sometimes more than two times average (i.e. Varazdin area 47 vs Croatian average 20). Has anyone read the HNB report on internal savings? Really interesting and scary. What is it about (please don't say "internal savings")? . |
|
|
|
Post by irac on Jul 31, 2007 10:50:13 GMT 1
Internal savings as in what people are saving. Here the situation is non-reflective of any other country bar Russia and (oh god, I'm scanning the papers here to find the other country) Albania, there, knew I could find it! Basically when it's poor or medium to wealthy there is a strong record of saving. It has nothing to do with levels of income (as in the correlation) rather it's down to cultural bias (or so the report says).
|
|
ct
Junior Member
Posts: 12
|
Post by ct on Jul 31, 2007 10:53:07 GMT 1
Darcy
Thanks for the post. Interesting and long detailed document. I read between the lines there was some passion on the subject by the author.
I would like to comment if it is OK. I don't live in Croatia but looking strongly at moving there. My comments are regarding tourism and property where I do have some experience.
I have lived in New Zealand for the last 10 years. We are about the same population as Croatia. Tourism is the number 2 industry here. I moved here from Las Vegas where tourism is the number 1, 2, and 3 industries.
Based on the article and my experience I have one question. What sort of country do the Croatian people want?
Tourism can be great but is not a panacea. It brings in remote revenue to the country. It usually generates service jobs. Not high paying but jobs non the less. However there are few pitfalls.
Tourism can be fickle or quickly swayed. One bad event such as an act of terrorism or even the bad weather you have now. all of sudden the revenue stops. The impact can be devastating. The other issue which does routinely happen is if you get tourism going is people from your source market countries move in to service the people from their country cutting out the locals. The examples are endless - Hawaii did a real good job years go to the Japanese so well they bought out every hotel on Waikiki beach. The hotels are now owned by the Japanese, the gift shops, you name it. What they did is perfectly legal but it didn't do much for the local population. The company revenue flows back to Japan not the local economy. They are like colony in some ways. It also happened in Christchurch, New Zealand and Sydney, Australia.
This doesn't mean don't do it but look before you leap.
On the property front the wolves are lining up, Developers, speculators, multi national corporations to get in on cheap land without concern for the local population.
Croatia has the potential to be big winner from joining the EU but if not manged correctly could lose it's national identity which would be great loss.
I hope my comments don't sound like the ravings of lunatic. I was just trying to shed little light on the subject. I will now wait for the first volley of return cannon fire.
Regards
ct
|
|
|
|
Post by irac on Jul 31, 2007 11:20:23 GMT 1
CT, Croatia is already a winner from getting closer to the EU, the pre-accession funds have hugely helped the infrastructure and if the next tranch of funding is better spread around the country will benefit even further.
|
|
Charles
Full Member
www.aplaceindalmatia.com
Posts: 75
|
Post by Charles on Jul 31, 2007 12:42:09 GMT 1
For me this is the central, critical debate as to the future of Croatia's economy. The UK long ago gave up trying to compete in labour-intensive industries except where there was a technological advantage eg engineering etc. It instead focussed where its competitive advantage is ie provision of value-added services. Whilst the pain is considerable in the transition phase, in the long run it allows the UK to compete globally. As one of the most open economies in the world, the UK has transformed from being the 'sick man of Europe' in the 70's to having a higher GDP per head than Germany, France or Italy. This is a major success. There are very real problems associated with this but, in my opinion, this Benthamite approach (the greatest happiness of the greatest number) has been shown to work.
Croatia has some long-term strategic decisions to make as well. The economy is broadly mixed with tourism and its potential being a proxy for the UK service industry. Initial de-regulation, investment and strong but flexible ongoing regulation has seen London overtake New York as the pre-eminent global financial services centre in many fields. Croatia could do worse than to adapt this experience to the tourist industry. Cutting bureaucracy inhibiting development, actively encouraging and working with investors and enforcing strict adherence to clearly laid out guidelines would allow Croatia to leverage its world-class resource ie it's coast and islands to the maximum (and all its other industries as well).
CT - what happened to the money the Japanese paid for the Hawaii hotels? I'm sure it wasn't put under the bed to collect dust. I suspect it was used to re-invest in other tourist facilities in the US or abroad (in which case the foreign earnings flowed to the US creating wealth and jobs there). In London, I'm sure the traders and bankers employed by Goldman and Deutsche bank don't mind that they work for foreign banks! - the wealth generated in London is infinitely higher than would have been possible with UK only banks. The tax revenues (corporate and personal) flow to the Treasury for all UK tax payers benefit. Economics isn't a zero sum game! When one side wins the other doesn't automatically lose. Global capital flows are generally a good thing and Croatia is well-positioned to benefit directly from these if it is willing to take its occasionally xenophobic blinkers off regarding foreigners investing here.
|
|
ct
Junior Member
Posts: 12
|
Post by ct on Jul 31, 2007 17:15:07 GMT 1
"CT - what happened to the money the Japanese paid for the Hawaii hotels? "
Does money still make it to the providing country? of course it does but not as much in the long run. It is like being an employee instead of owning the company. There is less tax revenue because much of the sales are offshore or sent offshore with no tax. It is better when the profits go back into the local economy instead of offshore.
You can help the country, help the people or both. It would be good if there was win-win.
Thanks for the comment irac. I knew there were funds made available but didn't know the impact on the ground. Sometime this can be eaten up by bureaucracy.
Development and influx of funds are all good. It is just best imho when the local people benefit from the process. I just wouldn't like to see Croatia or any country bought out from under the people who live there.
Croatia is a small country with a small population. It can be overwhelmed quickly. Tourism and property development are both relatively new. The local market is transitioning and growing. There will be growth pains.
Thanks for the comments.
ct
|
|
|
|
Post by californiacro on Jul 31, 2007 20:38:57 GMT 1
Darcy Thanks for the post. Interesting and long detailed document. I read between the lines there was some passion on the subject by the author. I would like to comment if it is OK. I don't live in Croatia but looking strongly at moving there. My comments are regarding tourism and property where I do have some experience. I have lived in New Zealand for the last 10 years. We are about the same population as Croatia. Tourism is the number 2 industry here. I moved here from Las Vegas where tourism is the number 1, 2, and 3 industries. Based on the article and my experience I have one question. What sort of country do the Croatian people want? Tourism can be great but is not a panacea. It brings in remote revenue to the country. It usually generates service jobs. Not high paying but jobs non the less. However there are few pitfalls. Tourism can be fickle or quickly swayed. One bad event such as an act of terrorism or even the bad weather you have now. all of sudden the revenue stops. The impact can be devastating. The other issue which does routinely happen is if you get tourism going is people from your source market countries move in to service the people from their country cutting out the locals. The examples are endless - Hawaii did a real good job years go to the Japanese so well they bought out every hotel on Waikiki beach. The hotels are now owned by the Japanese, the gift shops, you name it. What they did is perfectly legal but it didn't do much for the local population. The company revenue flows back to Japan not the local economy. They are like colony in some ways. It also happened in Christchurch, New Zealand and Sydney, Australia. This doesn't mean don't do it but look before you leap. On the property front the wolves are lining up, Developers, speculators, multi national corporations to get in on cheap land without concern for the local population. Croatia has the potential to be big winner from joining the EU but if not manged correctly could lose it's national identity which would be great loss. I hope my comments don't sound like the ravings of lunatic. I was just trying to shed little light on the subject. I will now wait for the first volley of return cannon fire. Regards ct Great Post! |
|
|
|
Post by californiacro on Jul 31, 2007 21:04:54 GMT 1
Thank you, Darcy. That was a very valuable and informative document. Last year I believe we had just over 10 million tourists..... I bet the majority of them came in Summer. That might have something to do with our coast being lifeless and boring when it's not hot and you cannot swim. How do you expect it to be promoted? A few resorts having year round tourisms have it because eithere they have decades long tradition and supporting infrastructure (Opatija) or large foreign companies have invested a lot of money into marketing and building additional leisure facilities (Falkensteiner Zadar). Slavonia tourist potential is around nil, because terrain there is terribly boring. The only things having more substantial tourist potential are Kopaèki rit and a few thermal spas following Hungarian model. Yeah, that's why most Zagrebians flee for Christmas elsewhere. Sarajevo and Ljubljana are presently very popular, while Prague was always a destination of choice. Lemme tell you something - I've spent last ten winters in Zagreb and there wasn't a single second I didn't want to be somewhere else. On spring and fall it's very nice, though. Plus year round tourism I think is better enviromentally than a surge in Summer. It is also better for people that survive on tourism to have a steady income year round than a surge. Sure it is. It would also be better for enviroment and economy if tourists stayed at home and sent their money only, but unfortunately it doesn't work that way. . Nothing is impossible unless you have that attitude that it is. You can promote a desert and flaunt its limited assets and still get tourists interested in it. Croatia is no desert we have all the right assets..... it is just getting them promoted and helping the locals get it started. Example Slavonia region. There are 2 things in Slavonia I would like to see. One is the Biomedical tech companies moving into the region. The govt should offer medical companies tax encentives to bring their business to this area. Two, give local farmers & land owners tax encentives to start FuFu boutique type hotels and promote Slavonia as a place to get organic, delicious homegrown foods.... make it a place people want to come to.... to enjoy the beautiful region, learn to cook while on vacation. Parts of Dalmatia have been successful at this and Italy also.... there is nothing wrong with the region. It is a beautiful place with lots of rich culture and great foods and crops. There is also nothing wrong with Zagreb in the winter....no differet to any other country in winter...... with the exception that we do not promote or do anything to attract winter guests. I would have Zagreb start some type of winter fest, also promote skiing. Build better ski/snowboard area's. give company tax breaks and free advertizing and promote them by bringing in the top ski/snowboarder people in the business. If you get a few top snowboarders making claims of how great the boarding is in Croatia.... you will have non-stop winter business. These are just small things that you can do that will dramitically change an area. Look at little ol Napa in California... it is a very popular destination now.... and basically it is a bunch of wineries that got together and now offer boutique hotels and cooking classes. That is it! |
|
