docmarket research about the interest and wishes of central
download 
Report Transcription
market research about the interest and wishes of central
MARKET RESEARCH ABOUT THE INTEREST AND WISHES OF CENTRAL-EUROPEAN TOUR OPERATORS REGARDING TOURISM TO FINNISH AND RUSSIAN KARELIA ENPI CBC ”Karelia - developing competitive tourism resort with collaborative platform” -project. JK Kehitystoimisto Oy Jani Karjalainen Niina Seppänen 30.4.2014 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 3 2. BACKGROUND OF THE RESEARCH 4 2.1 TOURISM BETWEEN RUSSIA AND SCHENGEN COUNTRIES NOWADAYS 2.2 VISA FREEDOM 2.3 REVIEW OF THE NEED AND DEMAND BASE OF THE RESEARCH 4 5 6 3. THE GOALS AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESEARCH 7 3.1 THE GOALS 3.2 THE IMPLEMENTATION 7 8 4. THE RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH 9 4.1 QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF THE RESPONSES 4.2 THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF THE RESPONDENTS 4.3 THE INTEREST REGARDING TOURISM TO FINNISH AND RUSSIAN KARELIA 4.4 THE TARGET GROUP, STRUCTURE AND CONTENTS OF THE NEW TOURIST PRODUCT AIMED TO FINNISH AND RUSSIAN KARELIA 4.5 PREVIOUS RUSSIA COOPERATION OF THE TOUR OPERATOR; EXPERIENCES AND FEEDBACK 4.6 SALES AND MARKETING OF THE TOURIST PRODUCT AIMED TO FINNISH AND RUSSIAN KARELIA 4.7 COOPERATION REGARDING ELECTRONIC BOOKING SYSTEM 9 9 5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 22 6. LIST OF SOURCES 24 7. APPENDICES 25 2 12 13 15 18 19 1. INTRODUCTION Cross-border cooperation with Russia is one of the strengths and opportunities of the tourism of North Karelia region. The cooperation-based development work has been supported by EU since 1996. During the programme period 2007-2013 the theme-connected projects are financed, for example, through Karelia ENPI CBC programme.1 ENPI means the programme entity of European neighbourhood and partnership, by which the external relationship programmes between an EU-country and a third country are being financed. Karelia ENPI CBC is a cross-border cooperation programme of Kainuu, North Karelia and North Ostrobothnia regions and the Republic of Karelia, which is aimed at increasing the wellbeing in the region by means of cooperation. Karelia ENPI CBC is divided in seven different themes, and several projects of each theme have received financing. 2 ”Karelia - developing competitive tourism resort with collaborative platform” is a project, financed by Karelia ENPI CBC programme, and it is administered by the Central Karelia Development Company KETI Ltd. (www.keti.fi). The central aim of the project is to increase the number of tourists in North Karelia and the Republic of Karelia. In addition to this, one aim is also to enhance the cooperation between the operators and companies in tourism industry on both sides of the border, and also to create and take into use a new electronic operational model for marketing of tourist services. The Finnish partners of the project are Pielinen Karelia Development Center Ltd PIKES (www.pikes.fi), Joensuu Regional Development Company Ltd. JOSEK (www.josek.fi) and Karelia Expert Tourist Service Ltd. (www.visitkarelia.fi). In Russia the partners are Sortavala branch of the tourist information centre of the Republic of Karelia and Sortavala branch of Tourist Association of the Republic of Karelia. The project budget is 605 298 euros and it is financed by the European Union, Finland and Russian Federation.3 One of the central goals of the project ”Karelia - developing competitive tourism resort with collaborative platform” is to survey the interest of Central European tour operators towards the tourist services on both sides of the Finnish-Russian border. In order to clarify the mentioned issue there was carried out a market research aimed at the Central European tour operators. The most important goal of the research was to find for the company network of the project such tour operator partners that would take the products developed in the project into their product offering. In addition to this the project also clarified the quality and contents requirements as well as marketing methods of these products. The research also surveyed the readiness of tour operators to expand their activities to the Russian Karelia after the possible visa freedom has entered into force, and which kind of destinations, programme services, cooperation structures and other travel related issues they would be interested in then. The research was ordered from JK Kehitystoimisto Oy and it was carried out during October 2013 - February 2014. This report is a summary of the implementation and results of the research. 3 2. BACKGROUND OF THE RESEARCH 2.1 TOURISM BETWEEN RUSSIA AND SCHENGEN COUNTRIES NOWADAYS Nowadays it is easier for Russian tourists to travel to Schengen countries than it is for citizens of Schengen countries to Russia. When travelling, for example to Finland, the Russian citizen applies for a Schengen visa, which in Russia is issued by the Embassy of Finland in Moscow and the Consulate General of Finland in St. Petersburg (branches also in Murmansk and Petrozavodsk). The Schengen visa gives the person a right for travelling and short-term stay in all 26 Schengen countries, anyhow altogether 90 days during six months. For travel longer than three months one should apply for a residence permit, and if working it is necessary to have a work permit.4 The Central European tourist, on the other hand, when travelling to Russia applies for a Russian visa the same way as a Finnish tourist. If the tourist (group) would like to travel also to Russia when travelling to Finland he/she should apply for tourist or endorsed visa. The visa application should be admitted in due time before the planned journey (at least for three weeks). The visa is to be applied through the Russian visa centres, which are located in Helsinki, Turku, Lappeenranta and Mariehamn. When applying for Russian tourist or endorsed visa the passport has to be valid for at least six months after the expiry date of the visa. The price and handling time for the citizens of Schengen countries are the same as for Finns.5 The preconditions for receiving a visa are the following: a) the ground for visa reception: invitation/endorsement (for example tour operator’s endorsement), b) valid and original passport, c) filled visa application form, d) photo and e) insurance valid in Russian territory. The visa fee for EU citizens is 35 euros. Handling time 7-10 calendar days. Fee for express handling (3 days) is 70 euros. The handling times and fees for the third country citizens vary depending on nationality of the applicant. 6 According to legislation when arriving to Russia the EU citizen has to register ones visa within seven weekdays from the arrival date. In case the journey is shorter than seven days there is no need for registration. In case the traveller stays in a hotel, most hotels register their clients automatically. Otherwise the registration has to be done with the help of the inviting organisation or in the local passport and visa office (OVIR). The foreign citizen arriving to Russia has to fill in the migration card (A and B) and receive in it a stamp from the border officials. The card has to be kept during the whole journey. When leaving Russia the B-part of the card is to be given back to the border officials. Hotels do not accommodate client in case he/she does not have a filled in migration card, or the border officials’ stamp is missing.7 4 2.2 VISA FREEDOM In case visa freedom enters into force it would have special effect on tourism between Finland and Russia from the Russians’ point of view. It would also have an impact on traveling of the Central European tourists, for example, by relieved border formalities. In accordance with surveys the number of Russian tourists in North Karelia could reach by year 2025 up to 1,36 million (daily tourists and the ones staying overnight altogether / year). The increase would be really remarkable, because, for example, in 2012 in our region there were 263 000 tourists (daily tourists and the ones staying overnight altogether / year). In accordance with estimates the Russian tourists will use over three times more money in North Karelia by year 2025 even without visa freedom. In case visa freedom enters into force the use of money might even be 4,5 times more, and this would mean that the Russian tourists would leave app. 370 million euros in the region.8 The actual realisation of visa freedom is anyhow still an open issue. EU and Russia have already in 2003 agreed that visa freedom is their common goal. In practise visa freedom would mean abolishment of the current visa policy, and simple border formalities would be enough. In 2007 the process progressed so, that a visa facilitation agreement between EU and Russia entered into force relieving the visa application process for certain groups. The agreement concerns close relatives, students and the representatives of official delegations, and it, for example, limits the visa handling time and the number of documents required from the applicants. 8 In 2011 EU and Russia agreed about common footmarks which, if realised, would lead to visa freedom. Preconditions have been imposed on both parties and after fulfilment of the conditions the negotiations for visa freedom can be started. Some of the conditions are political and hard to measure (for example, counteraction in corruption), and some conditions are technical, like, for example, the development of passport granting process and population register in Russia, and also intensification of border control both in Russia and EU. There has also been a proposal as one condition for visa freedom to abolish the obligatory registration of foreign citizens in Russia. The technical obstacles for visa freedom seem to diminish by time in Russia and the biometric passports are becoming more common, also in Russia.8 EU has not put any schedule for realisation of visa freedom. The latest estimate of Finnish specialists is based on the survey “Controlling of growing border traffic” carried out on assignment of the Ministry of the Interior. In accordance with the study the earliest possible time for realisation for visa freedom is year 2018. The visa freedom is, anyhow, a very important issue for the political leaders of Russia. President Putin has hoped that visa freedom would be realised as soon as possible, and at the moment the parties are studying the conditions for the beginning of the visa freedom negotiations. 8 5 The number of Russian tourists in the beginning of 2014 has decreased after the implementation of this research because of the weakening of rouble and the crisis in Ukraine. In case the crisis should prolong the economic sanctions entering into force might hinder the growing conditions of Russia also in the future. The visa negotiations between EU and Russia have also been interrupted temporarily because of the Ukrainian crisis. 2.3 REVIEW ON THE NEED AND DEMAND BASE OF THE RESEARCH Tourism is a global growing industry. Regardless of business cycle the industry has grown in Finland during five years over 20 %. The international and national forecasts are promising also in the future. The growth during the next few years is forecasted to be around 5 %. Nowadays the value of tourism as an industry in Finland is over 13 billion euros. Directly tourism industry employs 130.000 persons and by the end of programme period 2007-2013 the number of new workplaces is estimated to achieve additionally 50.000. The incomes brought by foreign tourists, which can be equated with export incomes, is approximately 4 billion euros per year.9 The Finnish Tourist Board has defined the “Modern humanists” as the main target group of marketing of Finland abroad. 12 Strong interest towards nature experiences and culture are characteristic for the target group, main emphasis being in history, folklore, authenticity and local way of life. Other growing international trends are, in accordance with forecasts, wellness tourism based on mental wellbeing and traditional treatment methods, and growth of ethical and sustainable tourism. The attraction of Northern areas and demand of winter products has also been forecasted to grow. The future tourist clients are more frequently looking for authentic and real experiences and “virgin” objects (”Once in a Lifetime Experiences”).10 The change of purchase and booking behaviour of international tourism consumers will go on. The reservation and marketing operations of tourist services are becoming more electronic and mobile. Even over 50 % of the operations on searching and booking of a journey will be carried out by using mobile devices, tablet PC or smart phone. The social media is more and more in the main role when making the decision about the journey. The journey duration and booking cycle are shortening. The tourist attractions that use a lot of new technology will be the winners in the future market regardless of their location. At the same time the price-quality ratio as a competitive factor will be emphasized, because the service offering and the comparison possibilities are increasing because of the enormous quantity of available electronic information. 9,11 Especially the border area between Finland and Russia could in the future offer interesting tourist services, which are based, in addition to the above mentioned contents, on unique exoticism of the East. In accordance with the Trends of tourism demand by 2030 one of the most important growth factors of the industry is the development of cross-border tourism and cooperation with Russians.13 Good experience has already been received from the use of the nature and cultural contents on both sides of the border in the international tourism, for 6 example from Kuusamo (Far North concept / Rukapalvelu Oy) and Kuhmo (Wild Taiga nature and culture services).12, 13 The tourism in North Karelia forms, in its versatility, a unique entity, which has great opportunities to answer to the above mentioned change and demand trends. Our unique tourist centres (the tourist areas of Koli, Joensuu, Bomba, Ruunaa, Pajarinhovi, Ilomantsi and Outokumpu), the network of living villages of the region, the nature and national parks, versatile culture and event offering and the closeness of Russia form a solid base for growing of national and international nature and culture tourism.14 The “Karelia cooperation”, which has been going on for many years, the company and cooperation networks based on it combined with functioning border crossing services (and possible visa freedom) enhance the remarkable future growth of international tourism based on tourist products offered on both sides of the Finnish-Russian border. The opportunities for remarkable growth of the above mentioned cooperation would be enhanced especially in case of realisation of the visa freedom between EU and Russia. The current competition situation and the existing offering from Finnish Lapland to Russia were studied on basis of tour operators’ brochures in a market survey of “Zakuska” project, which was implemented in Rovaniemi. The main emphasis was on German speaking market area combined with the Benelux countries. In accordance with the results there is no actual offering and knowledge about the tourism through Finland to Russia. In the offering of tour operators Finland and Russia are usually sold separately. Of Russian city destinations especially Moscow and St. Petersburg are interesting for the Central European tourists, but the offering of Russian destinations is widening constantly. 15 The experiences of Finnish programme service entrepreneurs about working in Russia were studied in a survey within project “White road”, implemented in the region of Kainuu. The same survey also studied the attraction factors, challenges and development ideas of tourism to Russia from entrepreneurs’ point of view. The survey stated that Russia is an interesting destination, the main attraction factors of which are exoticism, culture, nature and fish. It was stated that in practise the precondition for successful cooperation is a partnership with a Russian tourist operator. The forms of cooperation, which were interesting for the entrepreneurs, according to the survey, are direct cooperation with Russian tourism entrepreneurs and cooperation and common marketing with Russian and Central European tour operators. The survey stated that obstacles for cooperation are the hard accessibility of Russia, and in some cases bad price-quality ratio.16 3. THE GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESEARCH 3.1 THE GOALS The goal of this research was to 1) survey the interest of Central European tour operators towards the tourist services on both sides of the Finnish-Russian border, and also towards the products built on their basis, 2) clarify the quality and contents requirements of this kind 7 of tourist services and also the marketing methods for the services, 3) study the readiness of Central European tour operators to branch their activities to Russian Karelia in case the visa freedom enters into force and 4) study what kind destinations, programme services, cooperation structures and other travel related issues tour operators would be interested in if the visa freedom enters into force. 3.2 IMPLEMENTATION The market research was divided into following stages: 1) implementation of background study, 2) drafting of the questionnaire and the covering letter, and sending them to the tour operators, 3) gathering of the e-mail lists and addresses, 4) sending of the questionnaire to the tour operators, 5) sending of a reminder letter, 6) analyse of the answers, 7) clarifying phone interviews and 8) gathering of the results in the form of report. The research was carried out as a questionnaire interview. The questionnaire was formed so that the answers to its questions would give as representing answers as possible for the research questions. The questions of the form consisted of seven sections (Appendix 1), which were aimed to clarify the requirements of Central European travel agencies regarding the quality and overall functionality of the tourist services in Karelia region (accommodation, programme services, accessibility, transfers). The asked sections were the following: 1) the information regarding the respondent/tour operator, 2) the interest towards tourism to Finnish and Russian Karelia, 3) the structure and contents of a new tourist product aimed to Finnish and Russian Karelia, 4) tour operator’s previous Russia cooperation; experiences and feedback, 5) sales and marketing of the tourist product aimed to Finnish and Russian Karelia, 6) cooperation regarding electronic booking system and 7) wishes & feedback. In questionnaire were taken into account the tour operators already organising journeys to Russian Karelia, and also those operators who do not yet work with Russia, but would be interested in cooperation in the future. The questionnaire and covering letter (Appendix 2) were first written in Finnish and then translated into English and German. The covering letter included a detailed presentation with a map about the research and project ”Karelia - developing competitive tourism resort with collaborative platform”; about the goal to find a market niche for the new tourist product aimed to Finnish and Russian Karelia. The aim of the covering letter was to arouse interest in respondents and to improve the response rate from the predicted. The first e-mails to the tour operators were sent 25.11.2013. Total number of sent e-mails was about 270 (Appendix 3) and about 250 (pcs.) got through to the receivers. The number of messages sent was considered to be big, but when planning the research it was taken into account that the response rate might be low. The questionnaire was sent to the travel agencies which were already known to deal with tourism to Finland, and to other European travel agencies offering journeys to Scandinavian countries. The research covered mainly small and medium-sized tour operators who operate with large-scale tourism. 8 After the first e-mail round it was decided to complement the questionnaire with a possibility to answer to the questions in internet. This was implemented by Karelia Expert Tourist Service Ltd. through Survey Monkey application. The link to the internet questionnaire was sent to the respondents with a reminder letter 2.12.2013. The response time for the internet version was the same as for the questionnaire sent earlier by e-mail (approximately one week). English was chosen as the language for the internet questionnaire because it was easier and quicker to carry out taking the situation into account. On basis of the received electronic answers the research was completed by a phone interview with 22 respondents (Appendix 4). The interviews were carried out by Nurmijärven luonto- ja eräkeskus Oy (www.eräkeskus.fi) as subcontractor for JK Kehitystoimisto Oy. Mrs. Simone Kuhnt, who carried out the interviews, has earlier worked in Swiss travel agency’s sales department and as an entrepreneur in tourist industry, so she was able to use her experience during the implementation of the interviews. The respondents’ actual interest towards tourism to Russian Karelia was studied more detailed during the interviews. 4. RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH 4.1 QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF THE RESPONSES 28 tour operators answered to the questionnaire (Appendix 5). Four responses were received by e-mail and 25 by Survey Monkey application. The response rate of the questionnaire was 11 % (of the number of 250 e-mails which got through to the receivers) (Appendix 3). For the countries the most active respondents were the German (ten responses) and the French (five responses) tour operators. When the questionnaire was planned all possible problems, which the tour operators could face, could not have been taken into account. A common observation was, that even after editing, our questionnaire was too extensive, and because of that, it seems that many respondents did not carry out the answering after having opened the attachment to the email. The form was, in some parts, also difficult to fill in and some of the questions were hard to understand. In addition to this some of the questions were by nature aimed to the management of the travel agencies and not all respondents had the possibility or knowledge to answers them. In addition to actual answers the respondents told also a lot of other information in their responses connected with the questionnaire itself, but also with their hurries and their operation regions. Many respondents had studied the questionnaire only superficially, but, on the other hand, some respondents gave very thorough answers to the questions. 4.2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF THE RESPONDENTS 23 of the tour operators responding to the questionnaire (82 %) told that they mainly work with group clients. Most popular content themes are activity and special interest tours, as well as nature and adventure tours. Picture 1. 9 In open answers to the question were emphasized the cottage accommodation and experiencing of nature. According to the responses traditions, landscapes and silence, and also the arctic surroundings especially in winter attract the clients most. The most common contents of the summer activity and special interest journeys offered by the tour operators are cottage accommodation, landscapes, silence, hiking, canoeing, nature and wildlife watching and photographing. In winter package the most common contents were snowmobiling, dogsledding, northern lights and cross-country skiing. Other trip 11 Theme tours 17 Bus trips or touring 20 Nature and adventure tourism 22 Group travel 23 Activity and special interest tours 23 0 5 10 15 20 25 Picture 1. Segmentation of the existing offering of the tour operators responding to questionnaire. In accordance with the answers regarding the size of client group, most of the respondents organise services nowadays for groups of 10-35 persons (16 respondents). Only four respondents informed that they organise tours for individual persons (number of persons in group 2-4). 23 respondents informed that they have organised tours to Finland already earlier. Eight respondents informed that they have organised tours to Eastern Finland, they mentioned such places as Koli, Joensuu and Bomba. 11 respondents informed that they offer journeys also to Russia, especially to St. Petersburg and Moscow, but also to the Republic of Karelia (for example, to Paanajärvi). Only few of the responded tour operators informed, that they use DMC services (in this case Karelia Expert), instead many of them told that they operate directly with the tourist operators in their destination area. Couple of the companies informed that they themselves offer also DMC services at the same time. The tour operators that use DMC services are mainly satisfied with the received services. The respondents hoped, as a development idea, for 10 more targeted marketing and communication/product sales from the DMC company’s side, in North Karelia from Karelia Expert. In addition to this the respondents wished for even quicker activity/reaction time for answering to questions and inquiries. During telephone interviews the meaning of DMC services for the respondents was studied in more detail (Picture 2). They were asked from whom they would buy the tourist services which include services of many local companies in the destination (overall package). Most of the respondents giving answer a) use services of Karelia Expert, by which the “whole package” is taken care of at once. The electronic answers gave hints about that many travel agencies, answers b) acquire all services in the destination by themselves directly in cooperation with the local operators. Most popular are the operators which have good connections and experience of “taking the clients in their hands” straight after arriving to the airport, when the journey is beginning or ending. Appendix 6. Table 1. Info: Destination Management Company. Info: Destination Management Company = DMC. Destination Management Company = DMC is a name commonly used within tourist industry, it means a travel agency that takes care of organisational tasks in the destination. DMC agencies tailor, for example allover programmes for incentive travels, conferences and also other auxiliary programmes. One can assign to DMC agency everything or only part of the organisational tasks. The DMC agencies offering services in destination take care of, for example, hotel and meeting room bookings, transfer services, lunches and dinners, theme parties, company visits, guides, meeting assistants and trips. One fifth of the respondents are using big travel agencies which operate also as DMC agencies at the same time. Rest of the respondents chose either a- or b-answers. It is worth mentioning as interviewer’s comment that the travel agencies offering bus tours often use services of DMC companies that are located in a different country than the actual travel destination. 3 7 6 6 Vaihtelevasti sekä DMC - toimijoilta että matkakohteen yrityksiltä All-in-one -paketit ei paikalliselta DMC -yritykseltä Kaikki palvelut suoraan matkakohteen toimijoilta 11 All-in-one -paketit paikalliselta DMC -yritykseltä Picture 2. Use of DMC services amongst tour operators (number of answers / 22 respondents taking part in telephone interview). 4.3 INTEREST REGARDING TOURISM TO FINNISH AND RUSSIAN KARELIA This question section was aimed to respondents that did not have offering to Russia, in accordance to their previous answers. The attention in questions was especially paid to the fact if the respondents would be interested in organising nature and culture tours to Finnish and Russian Karelia, and if they would be interested in cooperation with Russian tourist operators. We received altogether 12 responses from operators which were interested in offering journeys – four companies notified about their immediate interest and six were interested in cooperation in case the visa freedom enters into force. Seven tour operators were interested in cooperation with Russian tour operators and offering of extended tour packages (journey includes Finland and Russia at the same time). Picture 3. During telephone interviews the respondents were asked how they would estimate their own interest regarding the tourism to Finnish and Russian Karelia and which practical issues the interest depends on in addition to possible visa freedom. 15 respondents (68 %) informed that their interest depends mostly on the tour package and its contents. Tour packages attract clients if the attractiveness of the destination, service quality and marketing are right. The rest seven respondents (32 %) on the other hand were sceptical about the tourism to Finnish and Russian Karelia. Three respondents did not believe in quick realisation of visa freedom and four thought that the growth of tourism to the region was unrealistic because of the unfamiliarity of the region and the narrow niche market of the products and services. Appendix 6. 2 4 6 Kyllä Kyllä, mutta ainoastaan jos viisumivapaus toteutuu. 12 Ei Picture 3. Tour operators’ interest towards tourism cooperation to Finnish and Russian Karelia (tour operators that have not organised journeys to Russian Karelia). During telephone interview the respondents were asked in more detail about the possible wish to cooperate with Finnish or Russian tour operators. The question described a situation when the tour operator would be offered a ready all-in-one product. 16 respondents would like to cooperate with Finnish partner and four a Russian one. Two respondents thought that it would be good to have a partner on both sides of the border. In interviewer’s opinion the fact that mainly influenced to the matter was the appreciation of the functioning payment system of Finland (SEPA) and risk-free currency exchange. The respondents giving the answer b on the other hand think that it is easier to negotiate with Russian partner. Appendix 6. 4.4 TARGET GROUP, STRUCTURE AND CONTENTS OF THE NEW TOURIST PRODUCT AIMED TO FINNISH AND RUSSIAN KARELIA Ten respondents estimated the age of the most suitable client group for the product, of which five thought that the product suits for all ages and five that it suits for age group of 40-50 years. The most suitable group size was considered to be quite small (2-15 persons), but anyhow up to 35 persons. In this connection it necessary to notice that most of the responded tour operators informed that they nowadays organise services for groups of 10 – 35 persons (16 respondents). Only four respondents told that they organise journeys for individual persons (number of persons 2 – 4). What it comes to the contents and the structure of the product the tour operators would offer the new tourist product aimed to Finnish and Russian Karelia especially to tourists who are interested in adventures, nature and culture. The greatest support received nature activities (both winter and summer), unique nature attractions and local way of life and tradition tours/countryside. Experiencing of culture and landscapes was considered to be essential part of the tour in order to receive a full experience. Local food and cultural attractions were also considered important as well as the exoticism of Russia and the East. In responses was emphasized the production of different kind of experiences and feelings for the client. A total feeling of locality with all aspects was considered as one of the preconditions of successful journey. Picture 4. The respondents were of the same opinion regarding the duration and time of the tour – duration of the journey organised both summer and winter was proposed to be app. one week (+2 days). Both summer and winter tours received support. Opinions on “the starting point” of the tour were divided to two groups. Some supported clearly the Kuopio airport and some Joensuu airport. Important was the fact that both the beginning and the end of the journey would preferably be located max. 1,5 hours distance from the viewpoint of the actual destination. Some respondents considered the expensiveness of internal flights of Finland to be a problem because of which they suggested that the starting point for the clients should 13 be Helsinki. The bus transfers from airport to the destination were also considered to be important for the success of the tour. One respondent also considered important to have a possibility to rent a car near the airport. During telephone interviews the question whether the start or end of the extended tour packages should be in Finland or in Russia was discussed in more detail. In the answers one opinion prevailed: the start and the end should be in Finland. The main reasons for the answer seemed to be the good airline connections and fluent border crossing services of Finland. What it comes to bus tours it was considered best to organise the visit in Russian Karelia only as one stage or programme number/activity. For the individual tourists travelling in their own or rented car the start in Finland was considered to be a more sensible alternative and the visit to Russian Karelia should be carried out from Finland during the journey. Table 2. Appendix 6. Local food 4 Welfare services 1 Military history 1 The local way of life, traditional tours/countryside Russian & Eastern exoticism 8 3 Nature activities, winter (e.g. snowmobiling, dog sled rides, fishing, skiing) Nature activities, summer (e.g. hiking, bird / animal watching, fishing, hunting, canoeing, white water rafting, buggy safaris) City destinations, shopping opportunities Cultural attractions (museums, churches, buildings, tourist attractions, etc.) Unique natural sites (national parks, protected areas, landscapes) 5 7 3 6 9 Picture 4. The most interesting contents themes of the new product to be developed (the number of those tour operators who have not organised tours to Russia earlier). Table 2. Recommendations for the contents and structure of the new product to be developed (on basis of the responses of tour operators who have not organised tours to Russia earlier). Motivation of the tour: interest towards the unique nature attarctionsd and local culture/way of life Age: 40-50 years Size of the group: 15 - 35 Duration: approximately one week (both winter and summer) The most important contents themes: Unique nature attarctions, local way of life and culture Form of product: Circular tour 7 days (+ 2 days) Arrival: By plane to Kuopio or Joensuu airport, from where transfer in minibus Start and end of tour in Finland Multilingual guide available for the group all the time 14 4.5 PREVIOUS RUSSIA COOPERATION OF TOUR OPERATOR; EXPERIENCES AND FEEDBACK This section of questions was aimed for those tour operators who are at the moment offering journeys to Russia (11 respondents). Nine respondents have organised journeys to Russia for 5-40 years, and two have expanded their activities to Russia during the last 1-2 years. The contents of the existing tours were activities and speial interests, or city destinations, in which the cultural attractions and shopping formed the main contents. Table 3. Picture 5. Table 3. Contents and destinations of the tours which are being organised to Russia at the moment (11 respondents). Answers for contents City trip St. Petersburg, motor safari to Paanajärvi City trips, round trips, cruises, cultural tours Snowmobile tours Winter Snowmobile Trips Hiking, adventure roundtrips, Transsib, skiing Biological excursions in the North, South, and East, also far east of Russia. Nature and culture. Visa free tours to St. Petersburg. City sightseeing and museum visits. Nature and culture Answers for destination St. Petersburg, Moscow, Golden Circle, Wolga River cruises, Kazan, Nischnyi Novgorod St. Petersburg, Paanajärvi Karelia Karelia Baikal, Caucasus, Siberia, Kamchatka, Karelia, Altai Karelia (several times), Altai, Baikal (twice), Kamtschatka. Moscow, St. Petersburg. interest travel St. Petersburg and Moscow All over the country from Petersburg to Kamtchatka It should be noted that also all the tour operators who have earlier organised journeys to Russia were interested in expanding their offering regarding the tourist products of Finnish and Russian Karelia. In addition to this also five tour operators who have not organised journeys to Russia earlier had given a positive answer to the question. Altogether the total number of tour operators who are interested in further cooperation was 16. Picture 6. Regarding the requirements for the tourist services aimed to Finnish and Russian Karelia, the tour operators were asked about their opinion for four sections: a) accessibility of the region/destination b) accommodation c) programme services and d) entity of quality/services. In accordance with the received answers the relatively easy access to the destination was considered very important, as well as the location of airport from start and end points of the tour. Accommodation and its quality were also considered a very important requirement. In addition to this, the offering of small private accommodation services (for example families) was highly appreciated, as well as local food. The quality of food was also considered a very meaningful factor. The programme services as such and also their quality was considered important, especially for longer tour packages (7-12 days). In short, a functioning entity of 15 good quality is a good selling factor, for which special attention is to be paid when developing a new tourist product. Table 4. Theme tours 6 Bus trips or touring 7 Nature and adventure tourism 7 Group travel 9 Activity and special interest travel 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Picture 5. Main themes of the tours already being organised to Russia (number of answers / tour operators that already organise journeys to Russia). 2 Kyllä Ei 16 Picture 6. Tour operators’ interest towards new products to be organised to Finnish and Russian Karelia (operators already organising tours – 11 respondents and seven answers from operators not organising tours to Russia earlier). FUNCTIONING ENTITY OF HIGH QUALITY MAKES A DIFFERENCE! 16 Picture 7. The most important success factor of tourist product. Table 4. Answers regarding question about the contents requirements of tourist services (nine respondents). Accessibility It is important that the next airport isn't not further than 1,5 h away from start or end point of the tours/ For Russia it would be really important to simplify the visa procedures. Off the beaten track. Excursions by car and by foot, not too difficult. Roads needs to be suitable for busses. Accommodation Small, private accommodations, which are runned by families and which provide good food from the region. Good quality hotel and good food. Good middle class hotels, may be families. Good quality of food and hotel standards. 3-star hotels at least. Programme services We need tour packages, which are at least 7 days long (winter) and at least 12 days (summer). Quality! Excursions in towns and in the wilderness. Professional guides in German, English, French and Dutch. What ever the client asks. For seniors also. Satisfaction regarding the entity of quality and services Until now, yes! It is impossible to have Finland and Russia in the same line regarding the questions, it is absolutely different We are waiting to see at the moment. The quality of the accommodation should be improved in both Finland and Russia. For Russia the infrastructure should be improved. For Winter there should be cross country skiing trails in Russia. Cost effectiveness in Russia isn't adequate. Not really by the food and by the prices Satisfied I am very satisfied with Finland, can´t say about Russia On basis of the above mentioned responses the tour operators are mainly satisfied with the quality and level of the services in their tour destinations. The main development proposal was the price and quality relationship. In Finland the operators were mostly satisfied with the relationship but there was slight dissatisfaction noticeable regarding the tours to Russia. The right quality of accommodation and food compared to the price guarantee satisfaction. If also the programme services and transfers work properly the level of satisfaction is really high. 17 In telephone interviews the tour operators were asked an open question regarding the three most important factors that should be included in tour package to Russian Karelia. The received answers are shown in table 5 (Table 5). Appendix 6. Table 5. The most important requirements regarding the product contents mentioned by the tour operators during telephone interviews BUS TOUR OPERATORS ”INDIVIDUAL TRAVEL” OPERATORS Accommodation in Russian family/farm/farm 3 star hotel accommodation house/hostel-type accommodation – simplicity Evening parties in Russian way, where groups can hang about ”A day with a local/Russian” – contents of the day, for example, fishing, farm work, handicraft and have dinner sitting together etc. and observing the events at the same time (dance, singing, “gambling”) COMMON FACTORS English-speaking guides in Russia Tour package the contents of which cannot be booked directly in internet – the element of surprise Local food Showing of the Russian specialities in the tour contents (something that you cannot find in Finland) Shopping, for example, local handmade souvenirs and food Importance of the service package – one person or a tour leader from the Russian side who takes care of the whole package and can at the same instruct the tour leaders of the group 4.6 SALES AND MARKETING OF THE TOURIST PRODUCT AIMED TO FINNISH AND RUSSIAN KARELIA The goal of the question section was to find out what marketing and sales channels the respondents considered to be best for the products aimed to Finnish and Russian Karelia. In accordance with the received answers the traditional brochures and newsletters in travel magazines were still holding their position alongside with the online-marketing. Websites and services of social media (for example Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and the own websites of tourist communities) were seen as recommendable channels for reaching the clients. Many respondents appreciated the visibility in different exhibitions. Many respondents, for example, asked whether the project will take part in Finnish Tourist Exhibition “Matka”, these contacts were directed to Karelia Expert Tourist Service Ltd. Picture 8. 18 An electronic booking system and supporting network 4 Websites 16 Social media 6 Trade fairs (eg tourism trade fairs) 10 Brochures 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Picture 8. Tour operators’ recommendations as marketing channels for new products (answers pcs.). 4.7 COOPERATION REGARDING ELECTRONIC BOOKING SYSTEM In this question section the tour operators were asked about their general interest regarding the possible visitkarelia.ru –platform and opinions regarding the technical implementation of the system. In accordance with the received answers eight tour operators would be interested in the cooperation possibilities brought by the new electronic system (Picture 9). Ten respondents were not interested in cooperation and justified their opinion by telling that this kind of electronic system is not needed for sales and marketing of such limited special products (”niche products”). Generally speaking, the ones giving a negative answer were also thinking about the expenses of the system and whether it is really possible to organise the compatibility with their own systems. Many respondents also thought that the time is not right for them to acquire a new electronic platform/service. What it comes to the development needs and strengths of the electronic system itself, the respondents emphasized its novelty value (differentiating factor compared with the competitors), high quality, flexibility, ease of use and the special service made possible by it (for example “the possibility to tailor” the products). Most of the respondents giving a positive answer for cooperation were interested in technical solutions in which the electronically transmitted information would be used: - for representation of the travel offering of Karelia (products/destinations, product/destination information, prices, availability) in the distribution channels used by the tour operators (for example websites) in such way, that the information search would require a targeted search in the tour operators’ websites (six positive responses) - as a link in tour operators’ websites in such way, that the link directs the clients first to a narrowly targeted view in VisitKarelia, for example, in accordance with the chosen language and target group (seven positive responses) 19 - as a XML-feed in tour operator’s website (requiring a reader solution in tour operator’s website) (seven positive responses) (Picture 9). 8 Kyllä Ei 10 Picture 9. Tour operators interested in VisitKarelia.ru cooperation. Would you display information on your site if it was available as an embedded applet (code placed on the site), which would automatically retrieve information about availability and related matters from the database at VisitKarelia? 3 Would you display information on your site, if it was available as an XML feed but this would require installing a a feed reader solution on your site? (Live digital content publishing) 4 2 5 Could you link your site to a view on VisitKarelia targeted to your customers (language version, target group definition)? 7 Would you display Karelian tourism presentations (products / attractions, related information, rates, availability) on the distribution channels that you use (e.g., web pages) if this involved conducting a search on the site? Would you display Karelian tourism presentations (products / attractions, related information, rates, availability) on the distribution channels that you use (e.g., web pages) if they were available from the "Professional" sections of VisitKarelia? Kyllä Ei 1 6 2 7 0 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 Picture 10. Answers regarding technical implementation of VisitKarelia.ru cooperation (tour operators giving a positive response for cooperation). On behalf of the telephone interviews the question section was complemented with three open questions. The interviewees were asked about their general opinion about the electronic booking system, whether they would use it and thirdly, which are the main 20 requirements regarding this kind of electronic booking system. The received answers are shown in table 6 (Table 6). Appendix 6. Table 6. The answers received to the questions regarding Visitkarelia.ru cooperation in the telephone interviews. ”The booking system has to be aimed either for travel agency or directly for the clients. If it is aimed for both, then it does not have any meaning for us” ”We do not quite understand how this system should look like and how it should function”, but it sounds like some kind of standard booking system which offers tour packages and information which can already be found elsewhere”. The respondent is interested in such special products which make the journey especially interesting and at the same time “tie” the client to them. If the same tour package will be offered in many other companies they will not take it into use. In general they are interested in tour packages that are tailored in accordance with their own wishes and needs. ”Electronic system is too inflexible and non-adaptive. We need flexibility in order to tailor the tour packages for our clients. That’s why we prefer direct contacts with the destination operators or a DMC company.” ”The booking system might be a good idea for distribution of general information and online-booking of “easy” tourist packages, but I see it rather as a platform between tour operators and consumers, than between travel organisations and tour operators.” ”If there are any figures published about the tour prices in this system we need for our own packages at least a 20 % price discount”. ”The system might work for big bus groups which have simple programmes, but for offering of our own theme journeys (special activities) or for individual tourists this system does not suit.” ”All systems in which the booking is easy and prices reasonable are ok for us. It does not matter if the system is electronic as long as the booking is simple and the confirmations about availability and services are received immediately.” ”If the booking system will be as complex and inadequate as the Finnish site of Karelia Expert, we most certainly will not use it” ”If the basic tourist packages look good and we can use them we are willing to give support by using it, by adding its link to our website and by marketing it to our clients”. ”Supposedly we will start with good basic packages which suit our clients’ needs. When we will receive the order figures of them and see if there is demand for this kind of tours, then we can estimate our plan for future. In case Karelia Expert should surprise us and create a great demand in Europe within short time, you can really start to think about investing bigger sums into this kind of booking system.” 21 5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The goal of this research was to 1) survey the interest of Central European tour operators towards the tourist services on both sides of the Finnish-Russian border, and also towards the products built on their basis, 2) clarify the quality and contents requirements of this kind of tourist services and also the marketing methods for the services, 3) study the readiness of Central European tour operators to branch their activities to Russian Karelia in case the visa freedom enters into force and 4) study what kind destinations, programme services, cooperation structures and other travel related issues tour operators would be interested in if the visa freedom enters into force. In accordance with the results there is a clear interest amongst the European tour operators towards the tourist services and built on their basis products located on both sides of the Finnish-Russian border. The conclusion can be justified especially on basis of the answers to the question which was aimed to the operators who have already organised journeys to Russia (Picture 6). On basis of the same result it can be assumed that the interest will also grow in the future – according to the answers most tour operators who already now organise tours to Russia will continue their activities and develop them further, and they are not giving up these services. The conclusion is also supported by relatively high level of interest also among those tour operators who have not organised tours to Russia earlier. (Picture 3). According to results the possible visa freedom would also have great impact on tour operators’ interest in cooperation (Picture 3), although some respondents relate to its realisation sceptically. The current situation of Russia – the crisis in Ukraine and the visa negotiations which have been interrupted because of it – have proved that the suspicions are at least partly justified. On the other hand the current visa policy did not appear in the answers as an obstacle for planned tourism cooperation development (with the exception of individual answers – table 4). The conclusion is also supported by the answers of those tour operators who already organise journeys to Russia, because they did not mention the issue as an obstacle for future development of tourist services. It has to be noted that the current situation has not created any noticeable obstacle for tourism from Finland to Russia. The situation might be completely opposite – the current visa and border crossing operations function normally and travelling to Russia is nowadays remarkably cheaper because of the lower exchange rate of rouble. The most important factor effecting the planned “border tourism cooperation” is, on basis of the received answers, the contents and quality of the new products. In developing and communication related to the products it has to be noted that we are talking about tourism business which offers niche product for niche market. In this connection it is good to brand the new product as a “Once in a lifetime” -experience including unique nature and culture experiences, which no one else in the world can offer. By this it is possible to answer to the most important attractiveness factor mentioned by tour operators in their responses – the attraction and familiarity of the products, and their marketing in a way that “wakens” the clients up. 22 On basis of the answers received for the research it is easy to define the most popular standard structure of the products. What it comes to target groups, the new products are to be built for small groups of 10-35 persons aged 50+ years, who are especially interested in above mentioned unique nature attractions and local, authentic culture experiences. It is advisable to plan for both summer and winter seasons one own main product with duration of approximately one week (+2 days). The product accessibility is to be developed so that the clients will arrive on normal scheduled flights first in Finland (in Joensuu airport, which is closer to border crossing points), from where they will be picked up to the first destination with minibus that will be in their disposal for the whole journey. At the airport the clients are to be met by group’s own multilingual guide who will take care of the fluency and practical organisation of the journey during the whole tour. The basic structure of the product is a tour in which the accommodation place of the group is always located as near as possible to the nature and culture attraction to be visited, and the place can be changed almost every night. The form of accommodation can be either a hotel or individual accommodation, for example, with local families. In accordance with the received responses the product contents are to be based on the earlier mentioned observation of nature attractions and on small-scale physical nature exercises in the destinations. Through the offered nature experiences the client should also be offered a possibility for peaceful, personal experience and feeling of nature, and by that also a possibility to experience silence and to quiet down. What it comes to cultural experiences the contents should include personal participation and familiarisation with local life and also visiting remarkable places (for example orthodox churches and living Karelian villages and towns). Local food and connected with it evening parties with local people are also to be included in programme. On basis of the tour operators’ answers “a good medium level” can be taken as quality requirement and expectation for the products, which is recommended to be exceeded every now and then by surprisingly high quality accommodation, experiences and food services. In the answers the best phrase describing the tour operators’ quality requirement is their expectation for “overall functionality” of the product. This can be understood to mean the fluent and as easy as possible cooperation connected with the marketing, sales and implementation of the product. What has been promised to the client will be arranged and successful, fluent, safe and of high quality. The cooperation structure of using a DMC operator in implementation of the new product is partly connected to the above described “overall functionality”. On basis of the answers it is easy to reason that the organisational tasks of the new product in the destination are best to be carried out with one local DMC operator, for example with Karelia Expert Tourist Service Ltd. (from viewpoint of the fluency of the arrangements they have to be in “one pair of hands”). 23 This requires, anyhow, development of the existing operation model to the direction in which the products offered to the European tour operators through a DMC are updated and clarified as explained above, and that high quality implementation networks and contracts have been put together for them (with Finnish and Russian tourist operators). In addition to this in sales of the products more resources have to be put directly in personal sales work with the tour operators who took part in the research, by which it will be possible to enhance the cooperation activity and communication, which were mentioned in responses as issues to be developed. On basis of received answers the sales and marketing of the new developed products, in addition to the above mentioned DMC structure, should be primarily based on electronic channels and on traditional marketing methods supporting them. What it comes to electronic marketing, the attractiveness and familiarity of the product are to be increased by websites and social media supporting them. It was maybe somehow surprising that the tour operators still recommend the use of traditional marketing methods (Picture 8). According to the recommendation it is worthwhile to produce high quality brochure and presentation materials for the new products, and in addition, it is still recommended that the product should be presented in tourist exhibitions. Some of the tour operators are also interested in common use of the electronic service platform (visitkarelia.ru) which was also a part of the research. In accordance with the responses the cooperation should not be built as “too laborious”, not at least at the first stage. This was partly justified by the fact that the cooperation is based on quite limited product offering, which, in tour operators’ opinion, can be taken care of also without “new electronic systems”. Later, when the product offering might be wider, the electronic solutions would also bring advantage compared with the competitors, for example, by the diversified information offering and the tailoring possibilities. 6. LIST OF SOURCES 1. Border cooperation. Regional Council of North Karelia (2011). http://www.pohjoiskarjala.fi/Resource.phx/maakuntaliitto/raja/rajayhteistyo.htx 2. Website of the programme Karelia ENPI CBC. http://www.kareliaenpi.eu/ 3. Project release of “Karelia – developing competitive tourism resort with collaborative platform”, Pikes Oy (2012). http://www.pikes.fi/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=7b7d2173-f008-4acb-a2ce92316d08d170&groupId=69174 4. Regional Council of North Karelia: Impact of the visa freedom between EU and Russia in North Karelia region. FCG Konsultointi Oy (2013). http://www.pohjoiskarjala.fi/dman/Document.phx/~maakuntaliitto/Julkiset/POKETTI/viisu mivapausselvitys?folderId=~maakuntaliitto%2FJulkiset%2FPOKETTI&cmd=download 5. Russian visas for foreigners. Matka-Prima Oy (2013). http://www.primatours.fi/travel/fi/VIISUMIT-1-48/Venaja-7-63/Venajan-viisumitulkomaalaisille-7-89.html 24 6. Visa issues. Consular Section of The Embassy of Russian Federation (2013). http://www.rusembassy.fi/SuomVisaInf.htm 7. Visa registration. Saimaa Travel (2013). http://www.saimaatravel.fi/viisumin-rekisterointivenajalla 8. Impact of the visa freedom between EU and Russia in North Karelia region. FCG Konsultointi Oy (2013). http://www.pohjoiskarjala.fi/dman/Document.phx/~maakuntaliitto/Julkiset/POKETTI/viisu mivapausselvitys?folderId=~maakuntaliitto%2FJulkiset%2FPOKETTI&cmd=download 9. Ministry of Employment and the Economy. (2014). Future perspectives of tourism in Finland. View to year 2030. TEM raportteja 2/2014. http://www.tem.fi/files/38499/Suomen_matkailun_tulevaisuuden_nakymat.pdf 10. Finnish Tourist Board. (2012). Modern humanists and traveling to Finland. TNS Gallup Oy & Matkailun edistämiskeskus 2012. http://www.mek.fi/studies/modernit-humanistit/ 11. Puhakka, R. (2011). Demand trends in tourist industry by year 2030. Lahti University of Applied sciences. Faculty of Tourism. TULEVA – Future tourists -project. 12. Far North concept / Rukapalvelu Oy. http://www.e-julkaisu.fi/rukapalvelu/farnorth 13. Wild Taiga nature and culture services http://www.wildtaiga.fi. 14. Tourism offering of North Karelia. www.visitkarelia.fi. 15. Rovaniemi Vocational Adult Education Centre, project Zakuska (2004). Zakuska –project Rovaniemi-Murmansk. Market survey in Central Europe. http://omat.lao.fi/files/20050301123253.pdf. 16. Inka Makkonen (2013). Production of programme services in Russia from viewpoint of Finnish entrepreneurs. http://www.kamk.fi/loader.aspx?id=d6db53bc-fc69-4821-8088-1b606d4a1470 7. APPENDICES Appendix 1. Questionnaire. Appendix 2. Covering letter sent to the tour operators. Appendix 3. List of tour operators whom the questionnaire was sent Appendix 4. Tour operators who took part in telephone interviews. Appendix 5. Contact information of the tour operators responding to the questionnaire. Appendix 6. Summary of telephone interviews. 25 APPENDIX 1. QUESTIONNAIRE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TOUR OPERATORS Dear Respondent. If your company organizes trips to Russia as well as Finland, please answer questions 1-5 and 12-21. If your company does not (yet) organize trips to Russia, please answer questions 1-11 and 17-21. If your company does not offer trips to Finland, please answer questions 1-3 and 20-21. I. RESPONDENT / INFORMATION ABOUT THE TOUR OPERATOR 1) Please provide your contact information Name: ___________________________________________________________ Position: _________________________________________________________ E-mail: ______________________________________________________ Phone: _________________________________________________________ 2) The tours that my company organizes for its clients are best described by the following product descriptions. (circle the appropriate items and fill in the required information) a) Activity and special interest tours; the most common activity or special content for the tour is _______________________________________________________________ b) Group travel; the average group size is: ________________________ c) Nature and adventure tourism; the key content of the trip is: ________________ d) Bus trips or touring; the key content of the trip is:_______________________ e) Theme tours; the key theme of the trip is: _____________________________ f) Other trip; the key content of the trip is: _________________________________ 3) Does your company organize / offer tourism services/products? (circle the appropriate items and fill in the required information) a) To Finland? Yes, where: _____________________________________________________ No. Go to question 20. b) To North Karelia in Finland? (see the cover letter and its links) Yes, where: _____________________________________________________ No. 4) The service chain and co-operation that your company requires in Finland for the trips that it organises: a) What kind of network does your company have with Finnish tour operators / programme service producers? Do you cooperate with a "Destination Management Company" on your tours? b) What kind of cooperation are you involved in? c) How does this cooperation operate? Proposals for improvement? 5) Does your company already organize trips to Russia / Russian Karelia? (circle the appropriate item) a) Yes Go to question 12 b) No II. INTEREST IN TOURISM TO FINNISH AND RUSSIAN KARELIA 6) In future, would your company be interested in organising nature and cultural tours, particularly in Finnish and and Russian Karelia? (circle the appropriate items and fill in the required information) a) Yes b) Yes, but only if progress is made on visa-free travel c) No, why? ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ (If you answered No, you can proceed to question 20). 7) Cooperation with Russian tour operators ? (circle the appropriate items and fill in the required information) a) Do you already have a Russian partner? Yes No b) Would your company be interested in cooperation? Yes No c) Would your company be interested in providing enhanced travel packages, Finland + Russia or Russia + Finland on the same tour? Yes No, why? ________________________________________________ III. STRUCTURE AND CONTENT OF A NEW TOURISM PRODUCT FOR FINNISH AND RUSSIAN KARELIA 8) Please describe the customer group to which you would like to market a possible tourism product and service developed for Finnish and Russian Karelia. (please write your answers) a) Customer Type? b) The age class of the target group? c) The potential size of the target group? (number of persons) d) Other? (anything else to which your company would like to draw attention in providing the service) 9) What is the key customer expectation that a new product / service oriented towards Finnish and Russian Karelia should fulfil? (circle the appropriate items and fill in the required information) a) Unique natural sites (national parks, protected areas, landscapes) b) Cultural attractions (museums, churches, buildings, tourist attractions, etc.) c) City destinations, shopping opportunities d) Nature activities, summer (e.g. hiking, bird / animal watching, fishing, hunting, canoeing, white water rafting, buggy safaris) e) Nature activities, winter (e.g. snowmobiling, dog sled rides, fishing, skiing) f) Russian & Eastern exoticism g) The local way of life, traditional tours/countryside h) Military history i) Welfare services j) Local food k) Other customer expectation, what___________________________________________ 10) What is the most appropriate time and duration for a trip to Finnish and Russian Karelia (summer / winter)? (please write your answers) 11) Accessibility of trips to Finnish and Russian Karelia - should trips begin from Helsinki, Joensuu, or Kuopio (from the airport), or how else would you want transport for such a trip to be organised for your clients? (please write your answers) IV. THE TOUR OPERATOR'S PREVIOUS COOPERATION IN RUSSIA: EXPERIENCES AND FEEDBACK (COMPLETE THIS SECTION ONLY IF YOU HAVE PREVIOUSLY ORGANIZED TOURS IN RUSSIA) 12) How long has your company been organizing trips to Russia? (please write your answer) 13) Please describe the tourism products that your company has organised in Russia. (circle the appropriate items and fill in the required information) a) To what regions in Russia do you organise trips? b) Would you be interested in offering your customers tourism products directed towards both Finnish and Russian Karelia? Yes No, why? ________________________________________________ 14) What kind of tourism products does your company organise in Russia? (circle the appropriate items and fill in the required information) a) Activity and special interest travel; the most common activity or special content for the trip is _______________________________________________________________ b) Group travel; the average group size is: ________________________ c) Nature and adventure tourism; the key content of the trip is: ________________ d) Bus trips or touring; the key content of the trip is:_______________________ e) Theme tours; the key theme for the tour is: _____________________________ f) Other tours, the key content of which is: _____________________________ 15) For how many clients does your company organize tours to Finland/ Russia each year? (write the required answer) 16) What demands does your company make in respect to the provision of tourism services for the destinations you offer in Finland / Russia each year? (write the required answer) a) Accessibility of the area / destination b) Accommodation c) Programme services d) Are you satisfied with quality / overall services? Proposals for improvement? IV. SALES AND MARKETING OF TOURISM PRODUCTS AIMED AT FINNISH AND RUSSIAN KARELIA: A SHARED QUESTION FOR EVERYONE 17) What kind of marketing and sales channels would you consider best for products related to Finnish and Russian Karelia (circle the appropriate items and fill in the required information) a) Brochures b) Trade fairs (eg tourism trade fairs) c) Social media, how? d) Websites e) An electronic booking system and supporting network f) Other, what? V. COOPERATION RELATED TO AN ELECTRONIC BOOKING SYSTEM 18) Do users of your online service need information about tourism services in Karelia (Finland & Russia), and do they seek that information from your online service? (write the required answer) 19) The ENPI CBC "Karelia - developing competitive tourism resort with collaborative platform" project is developing an electronic service platform for marketing tourism services (www.visitkarelia.fi and www.visitkarelia.ru). The site is intended to gather centralized information on tourism and tourism services in both Finnish and Russian Karelia. The creation and deployment of the service is still in preparation. a) Would you be interested in cooperating on this electronic service platform? (circle the appropriate items and fill in the required information) Yes No, why:___________________________________________________________ If you answered No, please go to question 20 b) Would you display Karelian tourism presentations (products / attractions, related information, rates, availability) on the distribution channels that you use (e.g., web pages) if they were available from the "Professional" sections of VisitKarelia? (circle the appropriate item) Yes No c) Would you display Karelian tourism presentations (products / attractions, related information, rates, availability) on the distribution channels that you use (e.g., web pages) if this involved conducting a search on the site? (circle the appropriate item) Yes No d) Could you link your site to a view on VisitKarelia targeted to your customers (language version, target group definition)? (circle the appropriate item) Yes No e) Would you display information on your site, if it was available as an XML feed but this would require installing a a feed reader solution on your site? (Live digital content publishing) (circle the appropriate item) Yes No f) Would you display information on your site if it was available as an embedded applet (code placed on the site), which would automatically retrieve information about availability and related matters from the database at VisitKarelia? (circle the appropriate item) Yes No VI. WISHES & FEEDBACK 20) Do the clients of your travel agency have any new service expectations and needs (new trends in demand) to which the network of tourism operators in North Karelia could respond or in which they could offer to cooperate? (write the required answer) 21) Free-form feedback - is there some other development need or feedback that you want to bring to our attention regarding tourism in Finland / North Karelia, or about this study? (write the required answer) THANK YOU FOR YOUR REPLY! DEAR TOUR OPERATOR -"Are You Interested in an Expedition into the Last Frontier Wilderness of Europe" We wish to put forward a new proposal for cooperation, which we hope will lead to future growth in the tourism business organized by your company. We are engaged in a development that aims to expand the supply of our tourism services in the region of Finnish and Russian Karelia (Figure 1). The area is unique, and in particular the natural and cultural services that it offers are unique and diverse(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article2488288/Finland-winter-holidays-A-perfect-Finnish-Karelia.html) (http://issuu.com/visitkarelia/docs/pohjois-karjalan_imagoesite_2010). The area also has active bordercrossing facilities, and a well-developed network of cooperating tourism companies. In addition, there is a Destination Management Company - Karelia Expert Matkailupalvelu Oy, which provides professional and safe organization of the area's tourism services for your customers (www.visitkarelia.fi). The most essential part of our development work is a questionnaire and interview study aimed at You, the travel agent who is also our cooperative partner (Appendix 1). Its background is Karelia - Developing competitive tourism resort with collaborative platform - a project that aims to increase cooperation between Russian, Finnish, and Central European tourism operators. The project also aims to create and share a new electronic model for the marketing of tourism services in the area (visitkarelia.fi and www.visitkarelia.ru). The main factor behind the development work that we have launched, however, is the ongoing negotiations between the EU and Russia on the liberalization of visa regulations. The EU and Russia already agreed on a common goal of visa-free travel in 2003, and the most recent schedule estimates that visa-free travel could be realized from 2018 onwards. If implemented, visa-free travel will bring very significant possibilities for growth in international tourism between Russia and Finland. The attached questionnaire is intended to survey existing tourism services and offerings, and their development from the viewpoint of a possibly visa-free future. Our research goal is also to find appealing customer-oriented content for new products that allow our customers to visit both Finnish and Russian Karelia on the same trip. This research will help to drive forward development of functional travel/tourism products, and allow for further development of cooperation networks with potential tour operating partners. Dear Partner - we hope that you will find time to answer our cooperation request and to participate in our attached survey (Appendix 1). Please respond by circling or completing the appropriate items on the attached questionnaire and returning it, when completed, to jkkehitystoimisto@gmail.com no later than the 8th of December 2013. In addition to receiving your answers, we might contact you by phone. If you have any questions about this study, please send them to the above email address. A prize draw for a surprise "Karelia"-themed prize will be held for all respondents. Many thanks Karelia team, FINLAND (www.keti.fi, www.pikes.fi, www.visitkarelia.fi) APPENDIX 3. List of tour operators whom the questionnaire was sent Kati.Searle@guildtravel.com info@balticholidays.com info@baltictravelcompany.com info@campfireadventures.co.uk info@reisebazaar.no res@explore.co.uk grj@greatrail.com mail@guildtravel.com sales@headwater.com ticketing@inghams.co.uk inntravel@inntravel.co.uk info@offthemaptravel.co.uk ask@originaltravel.co.uk travel@solos.co.uk office@taberhols.co.uk ask@mightyfinecompany.com info@nordicholiday.co.uk info@naturalist.co.uk info@thewhitecircle.com holidays@transun.co.uk info@wildlifewilderness.com sales@wildlifeworldwide.com reservations@zenithholidays.co.uk attent.reizen@planet.nl info@belugareizen.nl info@beuktravel.nl wimvanderwerff@colorsoftheworld.nl welkom@moniquesajet.nl info@cycletours.nl visreizen@devluchtendevisser.nl info@diogenesreizen.nl ellen364@wxs.nl info@eurocult.nl info@glebbeek.nl antoon@galyatours.nl h.gillieron@hannick.nl info@incentive.nl info@incento.nl info@kuijerpartner.eu info@leverreizen.nl info@mambo.nl dirk@mauri.nl rus@montys.nl info@newspirittravel.nl info@nivon.nl specials@oad.nl h.sonnenberg@obbreisorganisator.nl ps.visreizen@planet.nl info@pelikaanreizen.nl info@performancetravel.nl deklantiskoning@langhout.nl info@players.nl info@eurobudget.nl info@rientjes.nl info@robinreizen.nl info@scanbritain.nl rene@scandinavianwintersports.nl info@snellevliet.nl mathiska@hetnet.nl info@speedwell.nl vibeke@srctravel.nl info@sundowner.nl info@thika.nl matties@tiaratours.nl info@traveltrend.nl info@vliegenfiets.nl antwerpen@zuiderhuis.be info@sales-lentz.lu info@vew.lu desiree.hoving@buroscanbrit.nl rob.becker@buroscanbrit.nl info@anywhere.nl jan.mensink@tui.nl s.vanschijndel@kras.nl karin.westerhof@anwbreizen.nl info@agroreizen.nl info@apriori.nl info@ticket2go.nl secretariaat@toerkoop.nl winkel@fietsvakantiewinkel.nl contact@vcktravel.nl t.venix@oad.nl h.gerretsen@hannick.nl redactie@zakenreis.nl Han@beuktravel.nl reizen@flachtravel.nl desiree@voigt-travel.nl vanderkooi@bbi-travel.nl marleen@puurenkuur.nl info@galyatours.nl jimmy@northandaway.be h.pluimers@oadbus.nl lotte@tmc-world.com info@beter-uit.nl info@carlsonwagonlit.nl info@bink-online.nl info.overland@tui.nl info@acrosstheworld.it agamatour@viaggiaconnoi.it info@blueberrytravel.it cristianoviaggi@cristianoviaggi.it infoviaggi@fsnc.it info@giverviaggi.com info@kailas.it info@norama.it info@seiviaggi.it info@fincentive.com irene.harrasser@haman.se rk@nordictours.dk sfernandez@touristforum.net olivier.legal@dk.kuoni.com quentin@66nord.com info@akaina.fr direction@akaoka.com paris@atalante.fr paris@insolites.com jean-claude@grandangle.fr iira@nord-espaces.com indiv@nordicfascination.com info@nortours.fr info@scandinavia.fr scandinavie.maison@kuoni.fr charlotte-souillard@terresoubliees.com info@voyage-sur-mesure.com carl@flandriareizen.be nico@asteriaexpeditions.be benjamin@northandaway.be frankneels@zuiderhuis.be Maarten@nordic.be adler-reisen@t-online.de info@aeroski.com info@allmendinger-reisen.de ABeR@aber.de info@amphitrek.de info@arktis-tours.de hannes.huber@asi.at kim.hueneke@atraveo.de info@auto-fischer.de juergen.kutzer@atiworld.de info@atiworld.de azurreisen@derpart.de skandi@behringer-touristik.de info@birdingtours.de e.bischof@bischof-reisen.de werner@cts-reisen.de info@cts-reisen.de dansommer@dansommer.de manila.luecking@novasol.com dino.steinkamp@dertour.de webmaster@dertour.de dethiertours@aol.com S.Wesser@diamir.de touroperating@djoser.de info@djoser.de a.stiebing@eberhardt-travel.de info@eberhardt-travel.de elch@elchtours.de info@feelgoodreisen.de info@ferryknowhow.info fact.nt@freenet.de mail@finnbungalows.com berthold.paul@finnlandtours.de hajo.herbst@fintouring.de daniel.lang@fintouring.de tina.lang@fintouring.de reisen@frauenunterwegs.de Ago@gebeco.de Contact@Gebeco.de c.schaefer@globetrotter-reisen.de andrea.mueller@heideker.de info@Heideker.de info@huelser-reisen.com info@hummel-reiseideen.de g.michael@interchalet.com info@interchalet.com info@kranichreisen.de reiseagentur@loma.de mm@mare-baltikum-reisen.de info@mare-baltikum-reisen.de cs@mare-baltikum-reisen.de av@mare-baltikum-reisen.de karin.steigerwald@neckermann-reisen.de bs@nordic-holidays.de soenke.jacobs@nordic-team-travel.de info@nordic-team-travel.de info@nordlicht-kanu.de info@nordwindreisen.com c.gruther@primareisen.com kai-uwe.finger@novasol.de manila.luecking@novasol.com c.gruther@primareisen.com m.greinus@pferdreiter.de hallo@pferdreiter.de polarkreis@t-online.de info@reisedienst-witter.de info@reise-karhu.de stefanie.malchow@finnlines.com roland.streicher@renatour.de info@renatour.de reisen@rucksack-reisen.de terttu.busse@sagatravel.de jens.freudenberg@scandtrack.de steffen.schiemann@ferryexperts.com miia.kajander@schulz-aktiv-reisen.de tanja.simrod@schulz-aktiv-reisen.de kristiane.heyne@servicereisen.de skandinavien@servicereisen.de info@sisu-aktivreisen.de info@skandinavische-reiseagentur.com info@srs-studienreisen.de ulrich.brandner@studiosus.com js@top-nord.de info@top-nord.de info@trails-reisen.de nobis@trolltours.de info@trolltours.de andrea.kling@tujareisen.de info@tujareisen.de info@urlaubundnatur.de vertours@t-online.de felix.hasskerl@gmx.de info@vollmer-special-tours.de weiss@angelreisen.de info@angelreisen.de dagmar.kimmel@wikinger.de peterboegelein@aol.com verena.duhr@wolters.tui.de info@wts-touristik.de els.hochheimer@zeitraeume-reisen.de Alfred.Becker@zonista.de schubert-haake@oekumene-reisen.de info@oekumene-reisen.de info@suomitravel.de info@talvitours.de booking@traveltraders.eu lutz@polarkreis-reisen.de info@agtraveltrend.ch sieber@bichsel-musikreisen.ch pburkhard@finlandia-reisen.ch lburkhard@finlandia-reisen.ch ulla.gertsch@fins-tours.ch jaana.paraiso@fins-tours.ch zumbuehl@glur.ch jordi@glur.ch info@imbach.ch patrick.lohri@kontiki.ch bruno.bisig@kontiki.ch anita.stauffer@kontiki.ch info@nordisch.ch sales@novasol.ch rosanna.cataldo@sas.dk mirjam.hug@travelhouse.ch mherrmann@knecht-reisen.ch info@globusreisen.ch osterwalder@jojo-reisen.ch a.wildberger@twerenbold.ch info@schmidcar.ch Appendix 4. Tour operators who took part in telephone interviews. Wildlife & Wilderness United Kingdom Nordic Team Travel Germany Service Reisen Germany Travel House Switzerland Nordic Fascination France Gebeco Germany Blueberry Travel Italy Mighty Fine Travel United Kingdom Schultz Aktiv Reisen Germany Zuiderhuis Belgium Terres Oubliées France BBI Travel Netherlands SRS Studienreisen Germany Kailas Viaggi Italy Nordic Tours Denmark Nord Espaces France Polarkreis Reisen Germany Saga Travel Germany Kuoni Reisen Kontiki Switzerland Suomi Travel Germany Fintouring Germany Campfire Adventures United Kingdom APPENDIX 5. Contact information of the tour operators responding to the questionnaire Nro Vastaus pvm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Nimi 10.12.2013 Philipp Jordi 5.12.2013 Mirjam Hug 5.12.2013 Jerome ROQUES 5.12.2013 Goller, Annegret 5.12.2013 Stefano Serra 5.12.2013 Burckhard Specht 5.12.2013 Patrick Coyle 5.12.2013 Miia Kajander/Tanja Simrod 5.12.2013 Christoph Gruther 5.12.2013 Scan Britain 5.12.2013 Praire 3.12.2013 Frank Neels 3.12.2013 Charlotte SOUILLARD 3.12.2013 Christina Mack 3.12.2013 Beauvy Quentin 3.12.2013 H. van der Kooi 2.12.2013 Dieter Schetat 2.12.2013 Vivica Boden 2.12.2013 Ronni Knudsen 2.12.2013 Stuart McLeod 2.12.2013 Iira Heinonen-Zeitoun 2.12.2013 Lutz Stickeln 2.12.2013 Verena Duhr 2.12.2013 Terttu Busse-Lunkka 10.12.2013 Ulla Gertsch 25.11.2013 Steve Banner 26.11.2013 Eva Frank 26.11.2013 Hans F. Hassker Ammatti Matkatoimisto Maa Managing Director Manager Sales @ Operations FIT operator & selling Product Manager Europe Managing Director Managing Director Sales Director Product Manager Glur Reisen Travel House Nordic Fascination Gebeco Blueberry Travel Nordic Holidays Mighty Fine Travel Sveitsi Sveitsi Ranska Saksa Italia Saksa Iso-Britannia Product Manager Directeur Product manager Trip organisator Teamleader Skandinavien Scandinavian product manager Managing Director CEO Responsible Groups Contracts Manager Director Salesadvisor Managing director Contracting Northern Europe President Managing director Director Head of department Inhaber (omistaja) Schultz Aktiv Reisen Pirma Reisen Scan Britain Grand Angle Zuiderhuis Terres Oubliées Service Reissen Giessen 66Nord BBI Travel SRS Studienreisen Kailas Viaggi Nordic Tours Zenith Holidays Nord Espaces Polarkreis Reisen TUI Wolters Saga Travel Fintouring Wildlife & Wilderness Service Reisen VIAfelix Sähköpostiosoite jordi@glur.ch mirjam.hug@travelhouse.ch jroques@nordicfascination.com annegret.goller@gebeco.de stefano.serra@blueberrytravel.it bs@nordic-holidays.de patrick.coyle@mightyfinecompany.com miia.kajander@schulz-aktiv-reisen.de/ Saksa tanja.simrod@schulz-aktiv-reisen.de Itävalta c.gruther@primareisen.com Alankomaat info@scanbritain.nl Ranska jean-claude@grandangle.fr Belgia frankneels@zuiderhuis.be Ranska charlotte-souillard@terresoubliees.com Saksa skandinavien@servicereisen.de Ranska quentin@66nord.com Alankomaat vanderkooi@bbi-travel.nl Saksa info@srs-studienreisen.de Italia info@kailas.it Tanska rk@nordictours.dk Iso-Britannia Stuart@zenithholidays.co.uk Ranska iira@nord-espaces.com Saksa lutz@polarkreis-reisen.de Saksa verena.duhr@wolters.tui.de Saksa terttu.busse@sagatravel.de Sveitsi ulla.gertsch@fins-tours.ch Iso-Britannia info@wildlifewilderness.com Saksa skandinavien@servicereisen.de Saksa felix.hasskerl@gmx.de Puhelin Vastaustapa +41612059494 Verkkolomake +0041432117123 Verkkolomake +33450649717 Verkkolomake +494315446515 Verkkolomake +390794812011 Verkkolomake +494121791120 Verkkolomake +44(0)8450720090 Verkkolomake +4935126625 -34/44 Verkkolomake +004315808022 Verkkolomake Verkkolomake +33476952300 Verkkolomake +3292670244 Verkkolomake +33437484990 Verkkolomake +00496414006711 Verkkolomake +33478923083 Verkkolomake +31503136000 Verkkolomake +004930895100 03 Verkkolomake +390254108005 Verkkolomake +4589321119 Verkkolomake +0203 137 7678 Verkkolomake +33145650000 Verkkolomake +4923055499366 Verkkolomake Verkkolomake +491738605724 Verkkolomake Sähköposti Sähköposti +496414006710 Sähköposti +496173327639 Sähköposti APPENDIX 6. Summary of telephone interviews. Final Report about questionnaire evaluation and interviews Simone Kuhnt / 17.01.2014 Main questions from phone interviews, based on questionnaire sent to tour operators: 4) Where do you buy service products and packages that include several local providers: a) all-in-one-packages from local income office b) All services directly from local service provider c) all-in-one-packages from non-local income offices d) Variable, depends on the quality/experience of the local provider 6) how big would you estimated you own interest and the one from possible target groups in travelling to Russian Karelia and what does it depend on? a) It depends mostly on the package and what it will include b) Would not like to make any commitments before the visa free travelling is for sure accepted c) Rather small, as the area is not yet known very well 7) Supposing an all-in-one-package will include both Finnish and Russian Karelia, would you prefer a Finnish or a Russian income agent for this? a) Finnish b) Russian c) One for each part of the package 11) Supposing you get a 5-day-package for Finnish & Russian Karelia, would you like it to start/end in Finland or Russia, to get it easily included in your existing travel combinations? a) Finland b) Russia c) Does not matter 16) Give me 3 important “must”-details, a package/service provider should offer, to make you seriously think about taking it into your marketing channels. (Open answers) 19) Karelia Expert electronic booking system: what is your opinion about such a system, would you use it and what would be the most important requirements you have to such a booking system? (Open answers) Nurmijärven Luonto- ja Eräkeskus OY Alakylä 15 FIN-81970 Jongunjoki www.eräkeskus.com / kontakt@eraekeskus.com Special evaluation with selected tour operators, basing myself on their answers from questionnaire (if they had filled in and returned it in) or giving them just the short version of questionnaire with my above listed questions (if they had not filled in and returned the long version) Wildlife & Wilderness Nordic Team Travel Service Reisen Travel House Nordic Fascination Gebeco Blueberry Travel Mighty Fine Travel Schultz Aktiv Reisen Zuiderhuis Terres Oubliées BBI Travel SRS Studienreisen Kailas Viaggi Nordic Tours Nord Espaces Polarkreis Reisen Saga Travel Kuoni Reisen Kontiki Suomi Travel Fintouring Campfire Adventures United Kingdom Germany Germany Switzerland France Germany Italy United Kingdom Germany Belgium France Netherlands Germany Italy Denmark France Germany Germany Switzerland Germany Germany United Kingdom Total 22 our operators Nurmijärven Luonto- ja Eräkeskus OY Alakylä 15 FIN-81970 Jongunjoki www.eräkeskus.com / kontakt@eraekeskus.com Results from special evaluation with above tour operators 4) Where do you buy service products and packages that include several local providers: a) all-in-one-packages from local income office 34% prefer to use packages provided by local income office (mostly Karelia Expert), which makes calculating/booking/voucher system easier b) All services directly from local service provider 27 % book straight with local providers, mostly those agencies who have long years of experience and good cooperation with local companies that provides service from/to domestic airport (transfer, accommodation, guides, food) c) all-in-one-packages from non-local income offices 25 % are using big non-local income office, like for example they book all-in-onepackages from Nordic Tours in Denmark or use ready-made packages from ServiceReisen. d) Variable, depends on the quality/experience of the local provider 14 % do not make clear answers and let it open; means they probably use a) and b) Comments: the bus-tour-companies mostly use non-local incoming offices, which are mostly not even in the country where their clients/tours are travelling to. Here is – I think – a chance for Karelia Expert to get more involved with local packages sold to those agencies. The more specific a travel target is (specified active holidays, animal watching or similar), the more those tour operators are booking straight via local companies who provide all in one. 6) how big would you estimated you own interest and the one from possible target groups in travelling to Russian Karelia and what does it depend on? a) It depends mostly on the package and what it will include 68% think, that the attractiveness of a package may influence the interest from customer groups, good packages might bring new customers and the marketing from the agencies can put efforts in those trips if the packages and services are satisfying. b) Would not like to make any commitments before the visa free travelling is for sure accepted Nurmijärven Luonto- ja Eräkeskus OY Alakylä 15 FIN-81970 Jongunjoki www.eräkeskus.com / kontakt@eraekeskus.com 12 % don’t really believe that a visa-free-travel between Russia and Finland will come soon, or don’t want to spend time thinking about how it could be if… c) Rather small, as the area is not yet known very well 20 % don’t see a realistic chance in growing tourism to Karelia (both sides), as it is too much niche product, mostly unknown area and the big stream of tourism is leading elsewhere. The chance of visa-rules – they think – will not affect the all-over interest in the area. 7) Supposing an all-in-one-package will include both Finnish and Russian Karelia, would you prefer a Finnish or a Russian income agent for this? a) Finnish 73% b) Russian 16 % c) one for each part of the package 11 % Comments: I got the feeling that those answering with a) were mostly appreciating the easy payment system within SEPA and the non-risk of currency exchange. One rate in same currency like standard Europe has, makes calculating much easier and without risks. Meanwhile, from those who prefer a Russian partner, I got somehow the feeling, that they think the Russians are easier to negotiate with, lower the rates by sales-discussions. But this was a purely private feeling, nobody said that in words. 11) Supposing you get a 5-day-package for Finnish & Russian Karelia, would you like it to start/end in Finland or Russia, to get it easily included in your existing travel combinations? a) Finland 84% b) Russia 10 % c) does not matter 6 % Nurmijärven Luonto- ja Eräkeskus OY Alakylä 15 FIN-81970 Jongunjoki www.eräkeskus.com / kontakt@eraekeskus.com Comments: Here everybody was surprisingly having the same opinion: Because of much easier flight connections to Finland (either Helsinki, or domestic airports like Joensuu, Kuopio or Kajaani) almost everybody would like to have those packages starting and ending in Finland. Those traveling by bus with large groups normally have other parts of Finland included in their tour programs, means the trip to Russia would be made by same bus and before and after that step-visit, they have other points of interest in the program. Karelia would be only a little detail in the whole trip. Meanwhile those who have more individual travellers with often own car or rental car, believe it is easier to enter Russia with a car from Finland, than finding a rental station suitable for those places nearby Russian Karelia. 16) Give me 3 important “must”-details, a package/service provider should offer, to make you seriously think about taking it into your marketing channels. (Open answers) I collected the main-answers here and those which were given several times in almost same words. Get-together with local Russian Family/Farmer or simple-live Perfectly English speaking contact persons/guides for the Russian part 3*-accommodation (bus-tour-operators) Farmhouse-accommodation or local guesthouses (activity-operators and FIToperators) “a package that cannot be found and booked in internet by clients directly” Local food, no international kitchen “find something in Russia, that cannot be found in Finland” Sharing a day in the life of a local person, joining for fishing, farming, handicraft or similar (FIT-agencies) Evening entertainment with local traditions such as dancing, singing, gambling, where groups can sit and watch and enjoy a nice dinner (bus-tours) All service in Russia from one hand, no dealing with different partners. We need a reachable & responsible person during the whole duration of the trip, which can assist our own guides in all matters. Good shopping possibilities of handmade local souvenirs and/or transportable food In general, the needs from bus tour operators are different than those from individual operators. Bus groups have more tendency to hotel accommodation and entertainment, FIT operators look more for the genuine live and simple accommodation, being part of the urban live in Russia for a short time and experience something different. Nurmijärven Luonto- ja Eräkeskus OY Alakylä 15 FIN-81970 Jongunjoki www.eräkeskus.com / kontakt@eraekeskus.com 19) Karelia Expert electronic booking system: what is your opinion about such a system, would you use it and what would be the most important requirements you have to such a booking system? (Open answers) I collected the main-answers here and those which were given several times in almost same words. I tried to give translations of the main-meaning of their answers, not a word-by-word-translation. Any booking system should be either for travel agencies or for direct internet clients. If it is reachable for both, then it does not make sense for us. We don’t really understand how this system should look like and work, but for me it sounds more like a standard-version for general packages and information. What we would need are more specific products, which make a journey attractive and connects the client with us. If the same package can be found in many other agencies, then we will not use it. Generally we prefer to work individual tailor-made packages according to our needs and wishes. Electronic system is stoic and not adjustable; we need flexibility in our packages to make them suitable to our client. Therefore we prefer the direct communication with providers or incoming office. It can be a nice idea for general information and easy packages to book online, but I see it rather as a platform between tour operators and end consumer, than between providers and tour operators. If there are any rates published in this system, then we need at least 20 % lower rates for our packages. This might work for big busgroups with rather easy programs, but for our special interest tours and individual travellers it will not be suitable. Everything which is easy to book and has good rates, is ok for us. It does not matter if it is an electronic system or other, as long as we can book it easily and get immediate confirmation of services and availabilities. If it will be as complicated and incomplete as the Finnish Webpages from Karelia Expert, we will definitely not use it… If the basic packages are looking nice and we can use it for our production, then we are willing also to support it by using it, linking it with our pages and give it to our customers. Let’s start first with some good packages that will suit the need of our customers, then we can see the booking figures for this kind of trips and evaluate the future planning, and if Karelia surprises us by getting suddenly big demand all over Europe, then you can think about investing a lot of time in such a booking system. I think you do it the wrong way, if you first do all the work for such a system, and then start thinking about what will be in those packages included in the system. 17.01.2014/Simone Kuhnt Nurmijärven Luonto- ja Eräkeskus OY Alakylä 15 FIN-81970 Jongunjoki www.eräkeskus.com / kontakt@eraekeskus.com
