Investing in quality
It is necessary to emphasize that when the State has capacity of investment for attraction of such events with quality, the return of these resources is maximized through the Tourism; that was the strategy of the Australia in the competitive market of the Tourism, to seek the excellence of its product, offering a mix of attractions diversified, since the activities ecoturísticas, radical sports and contact with the native culture, as also the Heavenly beaches and the execution of events and business in the country.
In practice the Tourism employs 550 thousand people – 6% of the Australian labor force; and in the year 2001 the contribute total to the economy was of 71 thousand million dollars (Beames, 2003). The evolution of the Australian Tourism in two decades sample that in the year from 1988 the country had received 9.208 South Korean visitors, being in 1997 of 23.3815 south Korean (Mu Kim, Prideaux, 1999), and the forecast for 2015 is estimated in 473 thousand native tourists of South Korea (Tourism Research Australia, 2006).
What emphasizes Australia globally is the characterization of the its product; the Tourism of Australia in recent years was fortified for being of short distance, that is to say, the Tourism intraregional, of fast trips. Australia is located fence to the islands of the Pacific.
The fact is that Australia has the main countries world suppliers of tourism and tourist expenses: New Zealand, United Kingdom, Japan, United States, Singapore, Korea, Chinese, Malaya, Hong Kong and Germany (Fields, 2005).
The practical result indicated that in 2005 the Australia received 5.497 million tourists, a relatively small flow for a country of its dimensions, but in terms of income occupied the 10ª placement of the ranking of the World Organization of the Tourism (2006) from among those countries that more make money with the tourist activity, having received 14,9 thousand million dollars. Only to title of comparison Austria in 9º places with incomes received of 15,5 thousand million dollars, and Austria had in the same thing period a flow 265% greater with an entrance of tourists of 20 million. Brazil also with a flow of 5.358 million, very next al of Australia, achieved an income of alone 3.861 thousand million dollars.
Tourism Research Australia (2006), institution of the Australian Tourism, calculates that to the year 2015 that country will have a tourist growth of the 5% al year and the income will grow al 7,1% al year, that is to say, a greater growth. All in all Australia has therefore more important are the incomes or sustainable profit value by tourism and the impact in the economy. Tourism Research Australia (2006), institution of the Australian Tourism, calculates that to the year 2015 that country will have a tourist growth of the 5% al year and the income will grow al 7,1% al year, that is to say, a greater growth. All in all Australia has therefore more important are the incomes or sustainable profit value by tourism and the impact in the economy.
The variables of the success
If nostros we evaluate the characteristics of the main Asian countries that send tourism for Australia, we observe that 79,6% are holidays travel, 38,8% are graduates, 40,6% never had visited the country, 36,4% they did it for the third time, 24,3% they pass in average 7 days (Reisinger, Turner, 2002).
We can affirm that the pecularities of the Australian Tourism are the following:
• Demand well-distributed, diversified among countries with being able of trip and stable. • Public Management optimized • Destiny differentiated.
These three elements form the base of the planning of the Tourism of Australian and the consequent beating of their disadvantages. Australia is a model for those countries that intend to promote its tourist activity.
Analysis of market
We see the example of Canada, country of hardly tourist potential by the organization of its cities, exotic landscapes, favorable cold climate a practical of ski, and other sports of ice.
Canada possesses similarities relating to Australia, the one that occurs, nevertheless, in 1977, 90,4% of the demand that traveled al Canada was native of the United States, being that in 1980 the day expenses of a north-American was of 145,40 Canadian dollars, the United Kingdom corresponded in 1977 to 2,6% of the demand, Germany for 1%, France and Japan 0,6%, and other 4,8 %. Still the expense of British was of 332 Canadian dollars, French was 423,70, Japanese was 454 and German was 473,80 Canadian dollars (Qiu, Zhang, 1995).
Comparatively the medium expense of the countries that stopped the smaller participation in the all of the Canadian Tourism was greater relating to visitors of the United States of America. Two points that should be observed: first as much as greater is the origin of the visitors to a country then is greater its capacity of beating set against variables exogenous that influence the tourist activity. Likewise, as much as greater stimulus a demands with greater high expenses is the capacity to achieve sustainable advantages. Those they are you differentiate important between the management of the Tourism of Canada and the tourism of Australia.
Evidently that in Canadian case exists a proximity with the United States that transforms into a great market, nevertheless, there are two aspects: first, the stimulus al increase of the expenses of the Americans inside Canada; second, a greater very dynamic product.
It is logical that the degree of quality and differential of a destiny is determinant if that country receives a greater quantity or less than native tourists of distant regions. For example, if an American intends to spend the holiday in a beautiful beach, not existieren positive elements that stimulate him to travel al Brazil, therefore the tourist will pass his holidays in Bahamas. The variables for that decision they are: The proximity with the destiny, greater information’s about the place, and the cost of the trip.
If a country not to receive tourists of high expenses and of distant markets, then that country has to promote visitors of its neighboring countries. It is known that the costs of the intercontinental trips are high, and also that the expense of the neighboring countries is smaller.
We see, in 1984, 42,6% of the north-American tourists they traveled al Canada and 20,9% to Europe Western, nevertheless, 31,5% of the expenses of the American tourists in this same period they occurred in the Europe Western, while in Canada was of alone 15,1% (Gibbons, Fish, 1986). Which the practical fact that occurs today with Canada? This country is not found neither among the 10 greater receivers, neither among the 10 greater sensors of prescription of the international Tourism (OMT, 2006).
This fact is equal for Mexico; country that depends on the north-American demand. In 1980, 73,7% of the tourists that visited Mexico they were North American, but while a tourist U.S. spent 358 dollars, a European tourist spent 808 dollars (Gibbons, Fish, 1984). This investigated itself after the attack against the Twin Towers in New York (2001). Just then, the demand of the north-American tourism affected the main dependent destinies of those trips; the result was the fall in it flow and of the tourist incomes of Canada and of Mexico.
Sheldon (1993) al to study the expenses and the arrivals of the international tourists in 15 countries of the OECD confirmed that 9 of 15 countries they had a variation of more or less 5% among the demand and the incomes. The conclusion is that the expenses of the international Tourism oscillate for different reasons. As: by the joint of the international Tourism, the internal variables of the country receiver, or also the influences related to the tourists transmitters countries.
For example, al to analyze us the data of the Tourism in the South Korea, we arrive a conclusion that of the 19 years studied, in 12 the incomes obtained a greater growth that relating to entrance of visitors, in the years in which such tendency did not occur to explanation was given a Asian crisis, al world period of the play and the recession economic international.
With these facts is verified that since 1985 the international tourist demand that visited South Korea grew 234%, while the incomes grew in 1527%. This fact shows that the degree of growth of the profit value of the Tourism in the economy of Korea is greater that in other countries. (Korea Tourism Organization, 2006).
Thus it can be seen that the best form to multiply the benefits of the tourist activity is through the following trio: Quality-innovation-sustainability. This was said by the economist Vebel (apud Baptist, 1997): "Provided that a high price of a well or of a service is understood for the consumers as a sign of quality, the demand will enlarge even with a high price".
The Tourism then should capitalize its resources to be able to fortify its activity in the regional context and to avoid that the excess of visitors overloads them limit of the space, with future problems and the possible fall of the incomes and the sustainable tourism.