The Place Where Ludington Talks
Pure Michigan or Pure Malarkey?
You may have heard commercials about "Pure Michigan" or heard about it, if not here is a sample advertisement from that campaign. .
The last decade was an especially tough one for Michigan: The state had the highest unemployment figures in the country for four years straight, peaking around 14 percent. Over the last decade, the population in 15 of its 20 largest cities shrank. It faced the near collapse of the auto industry and a national bailout.
But the state is working to change its luck with tourism. Right in the middle of all its economic woes the Pure Michigan campaign was born. Its advertisements on radio, TV, and billboards celebrate the “kick-back and relax” spirit of the state, encouraging visitors to “take time to smell the roses,” or in this case, “take time to walk along the thousands of miles of freshwater coastlines.”
Mark Canavan is the creative director for Pure Michigan. He's a 40-something guy with casual clothes and a gentle confidence. In 2006 he was hired by the Michigan Economic Development Corporation, a public-private state marketing agency, to develop a campaign to grab the attention of residents, drive traffic to Michigan.org and boost the overall state tourism market.
He admits he had his work cut out for him. “People had an image of Detroit with its manufacturing and automotive history," Canavan says. "But we really kind of had to re-awaken and refocus on what the state was all about.”
The Pure Michigan ads celebrate the state’s traditions: "Hundreds of lakes, thousands of rivers and streams, begging you to hang up, gone camping, gone swimming, gone sailing…”
But what about the gone jobs and the gone 401 K’s? What about gone homes, foreclosed left and right? The Pure Michigan campaign ploughed full speed ahead without dwelling on that. The campaign burst through the recession’s darkest days and dared people to think differently.
Canavan says that the Pure Michigan campaign inspires different thinking because it was created with a different approach. As a lifelong resident of the state, he decided that Michigan’s ads couldn’t compete with other states using “destination” or “attraction” tourism. He is proud of the approach they chose. “All we did was we just tilted the lens a little, to say how you’re going to feel there," he says. "That changed everything.”
Feeling good in Michigan
Turns out, reminding people that they can feel good in Michigan works. According to a study by the Michigan Economic Development Corporation (MEDC) and the market research group Longwoods International, 2 million new visitors came to Michigan in 2010, spending an additional $605 million.
Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder decided to endorse and help fund the Pure Michigan campaign with an annual $25 million.
Critics of the campaign say cash-strapped Michigan shouldn’t be dishing out money to advertise for private tourism companies, but others, like Mark Canavan, argue that the campaign is earning its keep. For every $1 it spends to promote the state, it brings in over $3.
The boost in tourism seems to be having a ripple effect across the state.
[The above is from this website]
But should we take the word of the creative director behind the "Pure Michigan" campaign and studies from the publicly funded MEDC, both who stand to benefit greatly from having the Michigan state government invest $25 million in advertising and economic development? Let's investigate further.
One could argue convincingly that the P.M. campaign directly benefits those in the tourism industry above all others. If they get over $3 per every $1 they spend as they promote, wouldn't it be to their benefit if they invested their own dollars into advertising for Michigan to get that 300%+ return? But when funding was to be withheld from P.M., did the tourism industry decide to put their own money forward to keep the campaign alive?
No. A recent tourism industry report titled "Michigan Tourism Strategic Plan" stated:
"There is absolutely no industry support for a broad-based industry self-assessment approach to generate sufficient monies to fund Travel Michigan. Last year, TICOM (Tourism Industry Coalition of Michigan) created a special task force to explore such an approach. Without exception, representatives from a variety of tourism industry segments indicated their members and/or Boards would strongly oppose such an approach."
To rephrase it, members of the Michigan tourism industry decided "Pure Michigan" and the like would not provide a sufficient return on their investment in it if they had to foot the bill. But when the funding comes from the taxpayers of the State of Michigan, they feel the campaign is indispensable.
But the Michigan tourism industry say it lacks the cohesion and ability to pay for the advertising campaign. Yet they do have the clout to buttonhole the politicians into funding this program with public funds for tens of millions each year. Let's do our own research.
For reference, the Blue Water Bridge connects Port Huron to Sarnia and the Mackinac links the upper and lower peninsula, and give some indication of trends in tourism. Note that with the exception of last year, 2010, the combined travel over both bridges have decreased each year since 2004 after peaking in 2000.
One would think that when Pure Michigan was introduced in 2006, and when it was most generously funded and had its presence across America broadcast in 2008, we should have had a bump in travellers, but we had a decrease. The recessionary times since late 2008 may have been a recent factor in depressing the numbers, but the effect wouldn't show up until 2009. But note the recession actually increased the Mackinac numbers both years. It doesn't look like the numbers here show the effectiveness of P.M., but this is far from conclusive proof. Here's a better indication of Michigan tourism compared to national tourism.
This graph shows hotel occupancy (HO) for Michigan, Detroit, and the U.S.A. in whole. Except for 2002 to 2003 the trend in Michigan HO is the same as the national HO for increasing or decreasing. However, Michigan HO has always been lower than the national average by at least 4%. An interesting point to notice is that until last year, HO has decreased in Michigan since 2006 after the Pure Michigan campaign started and was fresh, and it had consistently been 8-10% below the national average. Is this the mark of a successful campaign, when our hotels are less full?
I also can't help notice that Detroit's HO increased in the year after P.M. debuted, in contrast to the trend. Ironically, Pure Michigan glorifies the natural wonders of our outdoors, and Detroit has little of what they advertise.
Putting $30 million of public funds into advertising for a campaign that has no real proof that it has made a return on its investment, let alone a threefold increase of money, is a waste. Pure Michigan may make us Michiganders proud and do good for our soul, but if we really want to maximize our investment return, we need the state's tourist industry to step up to the plate and fund this program if they feel it is profitable for them and the state.
Governor Snyder made a mistake by upping its funding this year, and caving in to the economic development crowd that wants to be able to choose which favored businesses and locations will profit, and which ones will be overlooked. You cannot have a state-run advertising campaign for the state that doesn't spotlight some areas and businesses, and ignore others. This is its inherent unfairness, and an unfairness that will exist as long as the taxpayers pay for it.
Views: 390
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Lisa O'Brien on
-
There is more to tourism than bridge activity and hotel occupancy. Many visitors to Michigan come from other states, Michigan also attracts many campers and boaters. The state looks at many different things when determining tourism. Means of travel - planes, trains and buses. Hotel occupancy, camp site occupancy, marina occupancy. They look at various industries - charter boat fishing (is the only one I can thing of at the moment) - how many out of state fishing, hunting license that are sold. I am sure there are many markers that they draw their statistical data from, to pick just 2 and call the program a failure is not an accurate measuring stick .
-
Permalink Reply by XLFD on
-
Lisa,
I wholeheartedly agree that these two indicators are by no means a refutation of Pure Michigan or a complete look at Michigan tourism. However, they are indicators that have been measured over time, and their results cannot be easily manipulated by statisticians into being different than what it is. I invite you and others to look for and find other such 'solid' data that refutes what these appear to show. I would myself show credible exculpatory data for the Pure Michigan ads having a positive effect on tourism, but I could not find any.
The Michigan tourist industry does estimate what the impact of tourism is for each year, which isn't always consistent, verifiable, or easy to find. In 2006, before P.M. took effect in earnest, they say the money Michigan received from tourism was $17.5 billion. In 2009, they put out the figure of $15.1 billion, and for 2010 it recovered up to $17.2 billion.
But the ad campaign itself has been almost universally applauded, even being called one of the best ad campaigns ever by some national agencies. I love them myself, but the main points are: 1) Should we be putting a large amount of public money where private money fears to tread? and 2) Is it fair to smaller tourism-based businesses and unfeatured areas for public funds to be used for advertising their competitors?
The questions about its effectiveness in attracting and retaining visitors is a minor point, but should be objectively looked at as well. I think the Michigan tourism industry doesn't think so, because they are not willing to continue it, only in having Michigan taxpayers-- and people from out of state who sometimes pay over twice the rate of Michiganders on their property taxes-- pay for it.
If you still own land here in Michigan, Lisa, enjoy those Pure Michigan commercials we're sending over your way, paid for with help from some of those taxes on that property.
-
-
Generally the extra property taxes paid are not for the tourism bureau. It goes to the school districts because for some unknown reason the full time residents who actually use the school system seem to think it is not their responsibility to pay for their children's education that they should pass the buck onto citizens that have a vacation home in the area, because for reasons known only to them they think if you have a second home you must be wealthy and should foot the bill for their child's education (talk about passing the buck - bunch of losers).
-
Permalink Reply by Willy on
-
It would be interesting to know exactly how revenues from tourism are calculated.
-
-
Seconded! The tourism industry readily admits it is not an exact science; at best it is an estimate based on a lot of unknowns and suppositions.
-
-
That's great Kid Rock bringing tourism to Michigan. Maybe some of our other "stars" should make videos and references to how great Michigan is so the fans will come.
-
-
Kid Rock? He seems very pro-Michigan and although rich, loves his roots. Has a place on Torch Lake, property in the UP and loves our sports teams. My best friend ran into him at the St. Ignace casino, remarked, you look like Kid Rock. Free beer, lol. His video? Years of bike, nice car camping in that area that brought me home. I love PRNLS.
-
-
It's been a few years since I've been to Pictured Rocks, but thanks for that video. I've heard the song plenty but that was the first time I saw it. The Superior lakeshore is mostly rocky and beautiful all over, and seeing the video makes me want to revisit it next summer myself. Never felt that way after a "Pure Michigan" ad.
Let's keep an eye on Mackinac Bridge crossing data for next year to see whether this had any effect on it.
© 2024 Created by XLFD.
Powered by
