Alaska tourism: Maybe the perfect is the enemy of the good

[RustyC]

Just got back from my 10th trip to the state since 1997. All have been in the short spring or fall "shoulder" season (most commonly September after Labor Day), all have been fly-drives that were very budget-conscious, and all but one have been on 25K FF award tickets. This year the award ticket was for Fairbanks (first-ever that wasn't ANC), and the hotels were helped greatly by Expedia voucher redemptions.

Unlike in the lower 48, I don't get the sense that too many people are trying to self-book budget trips to Alaska yet. It's still promoted more as a hang-the-moon thing, and in this economy I'll bet that means losing a lot of business because people are under the (mis-)impression they need a grand plan to go. Maybe a cruise, or trying to take an RV in via the Alaska Highway. Both can be expensive propositions. Car rents and hotels can spike in summer (maybe less so lately), and glacier tours by boat or anything by helicopter or plane can add to the tab.

With fly-drives you're restricted to the contiguous road part of the state (ANC, FAI, Kenai, other places in that quadrant), and if you go in September Denali might not be do-able. Juneau, Sitka, Ketchikan and those places aren't really in play on a land-based trip, either. That still leaves a fair amount, though. The marine highway could be an alternative on the glaciers. ANC in recent years has more of a critical competitive mass on car rents and hotels and FAI is slowly following there.

Mightn't Alaska do better on tourism by acknowledging that budget travel there is possible? Having 25K FF awards in most programs is a great boon, and ANC and FAI can have lower-48 hotel prices outside the summer peak season (am thinking chiefly about the 3-4 weeks on either side of the peak season). They'll make less money from budget-conscious fly-drives, but I think they'd easily recover it on subsequent trips from people who really liked the experience and would plan to come back. Better to get them in the door once than to have people who've never been keep postponing the grand hang-the-moon trip, which seems to be what's happening now.

Thoughts?

[jackal]

What would you suggest that the state or the tourism industry do to promote this? Advertising?

I've already asked my state senator to support increased funding for marketing through the Alaska Travel Industry Association, but what else can you think of?

The tourism industry did take a hit this summer. One primary industry was down (for June, July, and August) 24.9% from last year. I don't know if anyone's close to going out of business, but I'd bet some companies (especially the smaller ones) are hurting. Anything that can be done to promote travel--especially in the off-season--is good for everyone.

But individually, companies can't do much. I think everyone's reliant on the ATIA for marketing (AS possibly has a big say in things, but their insistence on keeping fares high isn't furthering Alaska's reputation as a budget travel destination).

[RustyC]

Well, how about a "something for all budgets" type of campaign that caters to the usual high-spending groups but also mentions that award travel costs the same for AK in most FF programs as the lower 48 now (many people might not know that) and that ANC and FAI land costs have been trending downward toward lower-48 levels for years ("Cheaper than Hawaii!") Many people might still be carrying the impression that costs are off the rails based on stories from the 70s and the pipeline days. I think there are also misconceptions about climate, mosquitoes, etc., that make the place seem intimidating for independent travel. (e.g. the whole state doesn't become a frozen wasteland navigable only by dogsled from September through May).

[fti]

Interesting discussion. I love Alaska and have been there over a dozen times. I might go back in 2-3 weeks if polar bears appear in Barrow .

I too am a budget traveler. But I do take tours. Boat and flight tours are an excellent way to experience Alaska and believe it or not can be extremely inexpensive. Two-for-one coupons abound, as do other discounts.

I have traveled in all four seasons and one of my most memorable trips (except no Northern Lights viewing) was in March.

My average cost per day for travel in Alaska is right about $100. That includes everything (though flights cost only $10 using miles), and is pretty much the same no matter when I go, surprisingly enough. Sometimes I stay in hotels, sometimes in cabins, sometimes camp, occasionally a hostel. I almost always rent a car, but I book the car 8-11 months in advance so always pay about $100/week plus taxes if renting in Anchorage (that offer has been in effect the past 3 summers and is bookable now for next summer).

The problem I see is this - what people pay varies greatly. I am active on the Alaska forum on Trip Advisor. I am blown away with what some people will pay for various things - car rentals, hotels, etc. Even food prices are up for contention. One couple spent $10,000 in 2008 for a two-week trip to Alaska (1 week cruise and 1 week land tour). Yes, $10,000. I was shocked. This person couldn't understand how I eat in Alaska for $10/day. I rarely go out to eat but I buy nice food at the supermarket to prepare myself. Not PB&J for sandwiches, for example. Usually meat most dinners, sometimes pancakes and sausage for breakfast, etc.

Most people want to splurge when they travel so marketing a destination as "budget" then getting complaints because people don't think it is, might not be the best way. Because they have to fly to Alaska, often their mindset is different from a typical driving vacation in the US. Often just because Alaska is promoted as "frontier" and remote, it scares people. People have seriously asked on Trip Advisor about the language and currency used!

Plus, many people like convenience over flexibility or cost savings. If they didn't, most cruisetours would cease to exist. There are extremely few cruisetours that really experience much. The people get shuffled around on trains and buses, often put in remote hotels, and can get the short end of the stick at Denali (often booked on a tour for $50 that can be duplicated on their own for free, and rarely seeing wildlife on that tour).

I agree that one of the best uses of FF miles is a trip to Alaska. And it is not as hard as it might seem to get the 25K mile award even for summer travel. I consistently get such tickets. Just booked two 25K mile tickets last month for travel to SE Alaska next July. And if you have Delta miles, you can really maximize your savings since Delta allows a free stop on domestic award tickets.

Rusty, try going to Alaska in the summer or in the winter. Denali is a gem. Going in mid to late May is totally different than going there in July, August or early September. After having been there this past May, I have now been to Denali every month the shuttle buses operate. Vastly different perspectives, colors, wildlife sightings based on the seasons.

John

[sipes23]

Originally Posted by RustyC

Unlike in the lower 48, I don't get the sense that too many people are trying to self-book budget trips to Alaska yet.

The 25k reward ticket is the biggest bargain out there, in my opinion.

I just did a long weekend in Yellowknife, NWT (I know, not Alaska) on a reward ticket. Yeah, you've got to do some research for locations like this, but it is no more difficult to do the self-booking thing in locations like this than anywhere in the lower 48/southern Canada--so long as you are talking about locations on the road system. Car rentals, hotels, B&Bs are as easily bookable as elsewhere.

I'll bet Dawson City isn't too hard from Whitehorse. That gives me an idea...

[Gardyloo]

The reality is that the cruise industry is extremely oriented to low-budget travelers. Where else can you get a waterfront hotel room, all meals, entertainment and transportation for $200 a day or less? Around the world, cruising (using mass market lines, not Crystal, Seabourne et al) is an extremely affordable tourism mode.

[jackal]

Originally Posted by Gardyloo

The reality is that the cruise industry is extremely oriented to low-budget travelers. Where else can you get a waterfront hotel room, all meals, entertainment and transportation for $200 a day or less? Around the world, cruising (using mass market lines, not Crystal, Seabourne et al) is an extremely affordable tourism mode.

I wouldn't call $200 per day "low budget." It may be a bargain compared to full-on 4+ star hotels, 4+ star meals, high-end entertainment, and transportation, but it's hardly budget travel.

My trips average probably $130 per day for 2, or $65 per day each. That's factoring in $40 per night for a motel (or, as I've recently discovered, a 3-4* Pricelined hotel! ), $40 per day for food ($20 for lunch and $20 for dinner), $40 per day in gas, $10 for miscellaneous expenses, and as close to $0 as possible for the car (so far, all of my major US/Canada/Alaska road trips have been in cars owned by me or a family member/friend).

On a tighter budget, that can be reduced to $70 per day: $20 for a camping spot or pair of hostel beds, $10 for food ($5 for lunch and $5 for dinner--buy and cook yourself...I've gotten sick of PB&J sandwiches this way!), and $40 for gas. That's $35 per person.

I went with a family member to Southeast Asia and Australia for over 70 days. Our total spend was approximately $6,000 (not including the air miles used for the long-haul tickets but including the airfares on Air Asia and rail fares in Australia). That works out to $85 per day, or $42.50 each. Not bad at all--yes, SE Asia really lowered that average, and it helped that we got free use of a friend's car in Australia, but all in all, that was a pretty fair trip--and it felt like we had a moderate budget (we actually didn't really try to go on a shoestring).

Compared to my boss's family, who dropped the same $6,000 on a 7-day trip to Disney World (granted, there were five people, but still), I feel like a veritable budget traveler, and I know there are many people who go much tighter than I.

I personally would never consider a cruise unless I could take advantage of some of the shoulder-season $300ish ones they sometimes offer. The thousands some people spend blow my mind.

[Gardyloo]

Originally Posted by jackal

I wouldn't call $200 per day "low budget." It may be a bargain compared to full-on 4+ star hotels, 4+ star meals, high-end entertainment, and transportation, but it's hardly budget travel.

Offered herewith my guesstimate on two days in Anchorage (2 persons) as an independent tourist. Airfare, entertainment, etc. not included. I don't regard these choices as especially 4-star, although they're not youth hostel and McD level either. One can quibble, but I don't think these are unrealistic.

	                 Day 1	Day 2
Car, mid-size	         105 	 105 
Gas, 5 gal	          15 	 15 
Hotel, say Comfort Inn	 230     230 
Meals, say		 -   
B - Downtown Deli	 30 	 30 
L - Arctic Roadrunner	 25 	 25 
D - Simon's	         80 	 80 
Tour, say 26 Glaciers	 300 	
Total	                 785 	 485 
Per person/day	         393 	 243

Many cruises, especially those not using balcony cabins (ocean view instead) sail for ca. $1000 pp for seven days, so $130 - $140 pppd is closer. IMO that would be extremely hard to match in ANC, never mind ports of call like Juneau. It's even cheaper than the ferry, unless you sleep on the kumbaya deck.

[jackal]

Originally Posted by Gardyloo

Offered herewith my guesstimate on two days in Anchorage (2 persons) as an independent tourist. Airfare, entertainment, etc. not included. I don't regard these choices as especially 4-star, although they're not youth hostel and McD level either. One can quibble, but I don't think these are unrealistic.

	                 Day 1	Day 2
Car, mid-size	         105 	 105 
Gas, 5 gal	          15 	 15 
Hotel, say Comfort Inn	 230     230 
Meals, say		 -   
B - Downtown Deli	 30 	 30 
L - Arctic Roadrunner	 25 	 25 
D - Simon's	         80 	 80 
Tour, say 26 Glaciers	 300 	
Total	                 785 	 485 
Per person/day	         393 	 243

Many cruises, especially those not using balcony cabins (ocean view instead) sail for ca. $1000 pp for seven days, so $130 - $140 pppd is closer. IMO that would be extremely hard to match in ANC, never mind ports of call like Juneau. It's even cheaper than the ferry, unless you sleep on the kumbaya deck.

That's a reasonable budget for summer in Anchorage, though you could shave a bit off by doing the (relatively nice) Motel 6 for $150 per night or (my preference) even one of the nicer B&Bs on Hillside (Highland Glen or Alaskan Frontier Gardens) for $150-180 per night. So yes, compared to that, a cruise is a "budget" vacation.

But that misses the OP's point. It's not "budget" travel--it's [expensive] midrange travel that is only budget in the comparative sense. The OP was saying that travel in the shoulder season--September--allows one to travel much closer to the level of a real budget traveler ($35-85 per person per day, double occupancy), and that is what should be promoted. I wholeheartedly agree.

[jackal]

Originally Posted by Gardyloo

The reality is that the cruise industry is extremely oriented to low-budget travelers. Where else can you get a waterfront hotel room, all meals, entertainment and transportation for $200 a day or less? Around the world, cruising (using mass market lines, not Crystal, Seabourne et al) is an extremely affordable tourism mode.

Actually, I just re-read this, and it touches on a debate that takes place often (or maybe it's in a sticky; I can't remember) in the Budget Travel forum.

The cruise indistry is not oriented to low-budget travelers. It IS, however, oriented to travelers seeking an excellent value. A true budget traveler is not going to pay $200 per day or even $130 per day. Staying at the Mandarin Oriental in Bangkok for $320 per night may be a great deal, as far as five-star hotels go (one of the world's nicest and at one of the world's lowest five-star prices, if I'm to understand correctly), but it's not what would fit into the category of budget travel.

Even a $95 bid on a Maui four- (or even five-)star resort might be a screamin' deal, but it's not budget travel. The true budget traveler will choose to pay $20 at the Banana Bungalo hostel or find a place to camp.

Budget travel in the Alaskan summertime consists of staying at hostels, camping, using public transportation (difficult, but possible, to do--some of the van services only run some routes once or twice a week, but you can get most places on the road system by bus or van), buying and cooking your own food (and making sandwiches), and taking advantage of free or low-cost activities (hiking, etc.) instead of expensive touristy activities (harbor cruises). Using those strategies, it is probably entirely possible to end up with a per-person (even single occupancy) per-day rate--even in the summer--of under $50 (and possibly a good deal less).

The midrange traveler, as you've accurately portrayed him, is going to spend a LOT more. For a moderate increase in comfort (real hotels/motels, self transportation, and the odd tour), there's a vast increase in price. Alaska's peak season may be one of the few places in the world where there is such a huge disparity in price for a relatively small increase in comfort (compared to Southeast Asia, where for literally pennies more per day than hostel dorms and self-cooked food, you can end up in a decent three-star guest house with ensuite bath and toilet and eat very good street-vendor food). It is, as you indicate, a fairly poor value. So, a cruise is a comparative bargain--that is, a good value for what you receive, but it's not budget travel.

I think that's where the difference in our viewpoint lies.

[fti]

Originally Posted by Gardyloo

Offered herewith my guesstimate on two days in Anchorage (2 persons) as an independent tourist. Airfare, entertainment, etc. not included. I don't regard these choices as especially 4-star, although they're not youth hostel and McD level either. One can quibble, but I don't think these are unrealistic.

	                 Day 1	Day 2
Car, mid-size	         105 	 105 
Gas, 5 gal	          15 	 15 
Hotel, say Comfort Inn	 230     230 
Meals, say		 -   
B - Downtown Deli	 30 	 30 
L - Arctic Roadrunner	 25 	 25 
D - Simon's	         80 	 80 
Tour, say 26 Glaciers	 300 	
Total	                 785 	 485 
Per person/day	         393 	 243

Many people might spend that in Alaska, but certainly not me.

My WEEKLY car rental rate for pick up and drop off in Anchorage the past two summers at an off-airport location is $120 including taxes ($175 for mid-size), taxi to/from the airport $30 ($15 each way), hotel even in summer can be under $100/night with Priceline or Hotwire. I have gotten a hotel for under $75/night including taxes the past three summers in Anchorage.

Tours can easily be had for 2-for-1 so 26 Glaciers or similar tour costs $150 for two (not per person), plus $50 for the coupon book (which you can resell for half price on EBay).

I have been to Alaska four times in 2009. Every trip has basically cost me $100/day. It includes tours (boat tours, flightseeing, dogsled, glacier hikes, etc.) but almost always using coupons. Granted, sometimes I camp or stay in a cabin or hostel. Two nights for the price of one lodging coupons can also be found in the discount coupon books. I often travel alone so traveling in pairs can reduce the per-person price. And though I often prepare my own meals, they are not PB&J.

I agree with jackal - I don't see cruising as budget travel but more a decent value.

John

[Gardyloo]

I certainly didn't want to get into a nomenclature debate; if you want to use the term "value" instead of "budget," fine with me.

Obviously demographics plays a big role in all this; not a high percentage of HAL cruisers are going to be the same demographic as people who stay in hostels or who hit Fred Meyer for their groceries first thing on landing.

The OP asked, "Mightn't Alaska do better on tourism by acknowledging that budget travel there is possible?" and then went on to talk about FF awards and fly-drive.

IMO the whole point of states and localities promoting tourism is to leverage some kind of economic multiplier out of visitor expenditures. If you promote tourism to people who will only camp and hike, make sandwiches instead of patronizing local restaurants, use rent-a-wreck car hire companies, and limit their entertainment spend to watching float planes taxi around at Lake Hood, why bother? Those people are costing the state income, not adding to it.

In my quick read of Alaska tourism promotional literature I don't see any evidence of attempts to discourage "budget" travel; but I don't think it's realistic for the tourism promotion people, nor for travel agents, to advocate it especially. I think most people in the tourism and travel industry are well aware that there are ample channels doing so already. Go over and look at the threads on the Lonely Planet Thorn Tree for evidence.

[AllTheNamesWhereTaken]

Are we talking prices in 2009? 7 day cruises out of Vancouver/Seattle were going for $500 per person! That's pretty darn cheap! I actually talked to a couple who decided it was cheaper to take another cruise back down to Vancouver than to fly from ANC to Vancouver. At one point I was looking at prices on NCL for middle of the season, $500 for the first person, $99 per extra person. This was for a cruise 14 days out.

[fti]

Originally Posted by AllTheNamesWhereTaken

Are we talking prices in 2009? 7 day cruises out of Vancouver/Seattle were going for $500 per person! That's pretty darn cheap! I actually talked to a couple who decided it was cheaper to take another cruise back down to Vancouver than to fly from ANC to Vancouver. At one point I was looking at prices on NCL for middle of the season, $500 for the first person, $99 per extra person. This was for a cruise 14 days out.

This year was indeed a bonanza for cruise bargains. But for those booking at such short notice, often the airfare is prohibitively expensive. So it can be a tradeoff unless you live driving distance from the port or use FF miles, which can be hard in the summer to Alaska (though perhaps easier at short notice?).

Originally Posted by Gardyloo

I certainly didn't want to get into a nomenclature debate; if you want to use the term "value" instead of "budget," fine with me.

I see the two terms as being total different. Budget is another word for "inexpensive" or maybe even "cheap." Value means you get a good deal for what you are paying. A Cruise West cruise may be a good "value" even though it costs $3,000/person for a week. But definitely not "budget" travel.

[jackal]

Originally Posted by fti

I see the two terms as being total different. Budget is another word for "inexpensive" or maybe even "cheap." Value means you get a good deal for what you are paying. A Cruise West cruise may be a good "value" even though it costs $3,000/person for a week. But definitely not "budget" travel.

Yup! And getting a $500-700/week rental car for $100 is a great value.

As in that example, sometimes the "budget" and "value" travel worlds coincide. In that instance, the good "value" of the cheap rental car actually makes it a cheaper option that using public transportation and shared van/bus services, so the "budget" traveler may actually use a mode of transportation he or she otherwise wouldn't because it's actually cheaper than the "normal" budget traveler's mode.

Similarly, a $599 cruise for two is (in the right circumstances--travel from the west coast, for example) much cheaper than even the cheapest airfare to Alaska (courtesy of the Alaska Airlines monopoly ) and even cheaper than the ferry (which, were the budget traveler traveling and avoiding cabin fees, would entail sleeping on the deck--and it would only get him/her to Haines). A normal budget traveler would never think of doing a cruise, but if it's the cheapest option, it's a go.

Gardyloo has a valid point, though, that budget travel doesn't add significant income to the state. Still promoting the idea of Alaska as an affordable travel destination in the shoulder season (perhaps not "budget," but definitely for normal middle-class people seeking an affordable trip) would help everyone--it'll help people working seasonally in the tourism industry stay employed longer (contributing to the state's economy by helping them stay in the state and spend money here longer) and by helping tourism business owners increase their revenues, which increases what they spend in the local economy.

In my experience, shoulder season tourist activity had been increasing steadily (tourism businesses seemed to be staying busy longer and longer into the fall) up through 2007. (In 2007, most were busy at nearly summertime numbers, although at shoulder-season rates, all the way through and beyond the AFN convention in October.) In 2008, it dropped a good bit (probably as people started to fear what was happening with the economy), and in 2009, it's looking like things are still down (numbers are down over last year but prices are slightly higher, so it's actually a slight net revenue gain), but the huge off-season we had in 2007 is not repeating itself. If Alaska can promote that activity, it'll help to significantly increase the economic gain to the state simply by keeping people employed longer, even if actual profits don't go up much (because the prices are closer to the break-even point).