Free flights to Australia plan for tourists

[yangry]

Link

INTERNATIONAL tourists could be offered free flights to Australia in a bid to counteract the downturn in tourism due to the global financial crisis.

...visitors who take up the offer will be required to spend a specified amount of money, say $5000, within Australia, which would bolster local shops, hotels and restaurants.

How does everyone think of this? I think it's a good idea in theory but could well be exploited.

If the overseas tourist is in fact a relative or a friend of someone that lives here, for example, Kevin. Kevin can then ask them to spend the $5000 on behalf of him (Kevin was gonna spend that anyway), and the tourist can get a free holiday out of it.

I don't know whether it will become a reality but it is indeed an interesting way of attracting visitors.

Alan

 

[thewinchester]

Link

How does everyone think of this? I think it's a good idea in theory but could well be exploited.

If the overseas tourist is in fact a relative or a friend of someone that lives here, for example, Kevin. Kevin can then ask them to spend the $5000 on behalf of him (Kevin was gonna spend that anyway), and the tourist can get a free holiday out of it.

I don't know whether it will become a reality but it is indeed an interesting way of attracting visitors.

Alan

Interesting, but who's paying and is 5k really enough spending to cover the cost/justify what could be a 2-3k ticket for some people? And do people really have 5k to spend during these times in the first place?

 

[stuartfaz]

Link

How does everyone think of this? I think it's a good idea in theory but could well be exploited.

If the overseas tourist is in fact a relative or a friend of someone that lives here, for example, Kevin. Kevin can then ask them to spend the $5000 on behalf of him (Kevin was gonna spend that anyway), and the tourist can get a free holiday out of it.

I don't know whether it will become a reality but it is indeed an interesting way of attracting visitors.

Alan

I don't think Kevin (the Canberra one) would care whose $5000 got spent. It's $5000 more in the economy than there was before.

But yeah, how many people would have a spare $5k around to be able to 'exploit' this offer?

Novel idea, though.

 

[yangry]

And do people really have 5k to spend during these times in the first place?

I think I would be tempted if I was living overseas. I could take advantage of the good exchange rate and buy a laptop or something and at the same time enjoy a holiday.

is 5k really enough spending to cover the cost/justify what could be a 2-3k ticket for some people?

I think you are spot on here. But it could work as a rebate of up to $1000 of the airfare or something.

 

[JohnK]

Why not pay international tourists to come to Australia? That will be a real boost for tourism. Don't we have much bigger issues to worry about than subsidising holidays for overseas visitors?

 

[turtlemichael]

I think the current "Australia" advertising campaign, coat tailing off the movie, cost $40 million and resulted in 8 extra tourists. I may be overestimating there - maybe it was only 5? Some family from Des Moines? While it must have certainly benefited Baz Lurhmann it was a bit hard to see what it did for Australia (the country, not the movie).

So a scheme to spend that $40 million directly with the consumer would result in a lot more visitors and jobs here in Australia where it matters (beyond Baz, advertising executives, Nicole and that skinny man who did the Oscars). Good lateral thinking I say. We need this sort of approach. We just need to avoid a $40 million campaign to promote it. :mrgreen:

 

[munitalP]

Why not pay international tourists to come to Australia? That will be a real boost for tourism. Don't we have much bigger issues to worry about than subsidising holidays for overseas visitors?

Yes we do JK, we have to all work harder and longer, pay more taxes to keep KR's love of first class travel afloat

Don't forget your place in the big picture!!




Mr!

 

[JohnK]

Don't forget your place in the big picture!!

Yes sir! My place in the grand scheme of things is to make money for everyone else....

 

[odysseus]

So a scheme to spend that $40 million directly with the consumer would result in a lot more visitors and jobs here in Australia where it matters (beyond Baz, advertising executives, Nicole and that skinny man who did the Oscars). Good lateral thinking I say. We need this sort of approach. We just need to avoid a $40 million campaign to promote it. :mrgreen:

Fair comment about the spending there.

The only thing is I think there are more beneficial things to spend money on/subsidise than giving those overseas a free holiday/work trip. As mentioned, it is potentially easy to scam where it doesn't result in any extra/only a small amount of extra spending, but just provides a free trip at the expense of the local taxpayer.

 

[JohnK]

How do you differentiate between international visitors who would have already come to Australia on holidays or enticing new travellers?

I would not spend any extra money giving someone a junket regardless of how much money they were going to spend here while on holidays. I still remember the days when oversears tour groups would arrive in Bondi and other famous landmarks and only visit specific shops run by expats from their own country.

 

[Commuter]

If they required spending of say $50,000, then I can understand this initiative to an extent, but $5,000? That's a joke, right? How can it be much benefit if it costs the taxpayers at least c. $2,000 to bring that person over in the first place?

It's so open to abuse too - e.g. not spend the promised $5,000, or buy things for friends/family there and get free flights, etc.

To me, this is a totally idiotic scheme.

AND, guess what, I'm one of those people that pop over to Australia and genuinely spend 5k (mainly on hotels and internal flights) so I could be one of those benefiting from the scheme, yet thinks it's utterly stupid!

 

[Dougo]

I tend to agree with previous posters. $5K is a lot for some tourists to spend - especially as many purchases (eg tours, accommodation etc) may be made on the internet prior to arriving here with companies that aren't necessarily Aussie. Further, how are they going to monitor the spending and ensure that any goods purchased from say retail outlets are not returned and their money credited after they have left the country? Sounds like a "good" idea but it is fraught with potentially many many holes and at great cost to the taxpayer.

 

[pleasureg]

I think that this scheme has too many unknown factors within it. Some of which have already been identified by others. There has been no "Risk Assessment" carried out on the project to the best of my knowledge to identify potential benifits and possible negatives. My view is that it would be better if "ALL" the money destined to shore up the economy and to protect/provide for employment should be better allocated to infrastructure within Australia. For example we are an island nation but we transport most of our non essential/urgent freight via road transport and rail. Why do we not have a shipping policy in place and subsequent shipping industry which costs less per K/Nautical mile than either road or rail. It is more efficient and less impact on the environment. Rail and road transport workers are still employed to deliver and pick up freight from ports to consignees. Lets get our priorities right.

 

[candyflip]

Good grief! Stupidest idea I've heard all week. :evil:

Use someone else's tax dollars thanks - the last thing it should be used for is 'comping' people to the greatest country (and show) on Earth.

We're in a downturn, people are travelling less, get used to it. Giving our country away for nothing is not going to bring us a continued flow of new wealthy visitors over the long term. Only an improved economic conditon can do that.

Everyone, including all the tourist shops, hotels, and even Australian Zoo, are going to have to learn to live on less for a little while. When the good times return, so will their profits.

But giving it away? Sorry - no retailer in their right mind would do that.

 

[taswegian77]

Yes we do JK, we have to all work harder and longer, pay more taxes to keep KR's love of first class travel afloat

Don't forget your place in the big picture!!




Mr!

KR does not fly first class, he flies Royal Australian Air Force Class. He is also forced to fly RAAF Class for security reasons and fair enough in my opinion.

 

[letsgo]

As someone who makes a visit to Europe every 12-18 months to visit aging relatives, my first instinct would be to get a cheap one-way to the UK and then see how I could wangle a free return LHR - Aus under the guise of being a tourist. It would be interesting to see the paperwork required to get a free flight - probably you have to prove you have left the country before you get a refund and use the return flight within a year, also use a non-Aus passport (but there again, an ex-pat domiciled abroad should be encouraged to come back and visit the relos for a month...?).
Hmmm... looks like it's got more holes than a sieve, let's see how it unfolds.

 

[straitman]

As someone who makes a visit to Europe every 12-18 months to visit aging relatives, my first instinct would be to get a cheap one-way to the UK and then see how I could wangle a free return LHR - Aus under the guise of being a tourist. It would be interesting to see the paperwork required to get a free flight - probably you have to prove you have left the country before you get a refund and use the return flight within a year, also use a non-Aus passport (but there again, an ex-pat domiciled abroad should be encouraged to come back and visit the relos for a month...?).
Hmmm... looks like it's got more holes than a sieve, let's see how it unfolds.

letsgo,

Welcome to AFF.

By posting what you did you have saved me a post. I agree completely :!:

 

[Flashback]

letsgo,

Welcome to AFF.

By posting what you did you have saved me a post. I agree completely :!:

AMEX 5000 points for 5tx all over again?

 

[Prof Henry]

The sheer number of loopholes previous posters have already identified suggest 2 things.
1. If this is actually introduced, this thread would have a field day coming up with even more ways to exploit it;
2. which means that the greatest impact this will have is on the public servants who will have to develop the procedures to monitor and risk-manage the loopholes that've already been identified!

 

[Dougo]

The sheer number of loopholes previous posters have already identified suggest 2 things.
....
2. which means that the greatest impact this will have is on the public servants who will have to develop the procedures to monitor and risk-manage the loopholes that've already been identified!

Prof, that's how the government is going to pull us out of the recession -it's called "job ceation".

It's the natural course of events that naturally flows on from last year's exercise which was called "cost cutting", "right-sizing", "down-sizing", etc etc.

Eventually the job creation excerise will run it's natural course and then we'll have "down-sizing" etc - you get the picture. But don't worry, the scheme would not have lost money - $$ would be buried somewhere in some account coding that cannot be easily extracted.

The architect of this "free flights" scheme has probably watched too many episodes of "Yes Minister".