View
2
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1
A SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF THE
COMRADES MARATHON EVENT 2003
(13th
- 16th
June 2003)
Date submitted:
12 August 2003
Report submitted to:
Durban Africa/ TKZN
Submitted by:
Environment and Development Programme
University of Durban Westville
Private Bag X54001
Durban, 4000
(031) 204 4322
In consultation with:
Wholistic Consulting and Development CC
P.O. Box 215
Pavilion
Westville, 3611
(031) 262 6105
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 3
Research methodology 3
Data analysis 4
Estimates of the number of people attending the event 4
Demographic profile of spectators 5
Economic evaluation 6
Primary reason for visiting Durban 8
Factors influencing decision to attend the event 8
Future attendance of the event and knowledge of other Durban events 9
Sponsor identification and perception 9
Knowledge of “Durban: South Africa’s Playground” slogan 10
Perceptions/ attitudes of the event and the Durban Unicity 10
Suggestions to organisers on the event quality 10
Positive and negative features of Durban 11
Analysis of interviews with other stakeholders 11
Organiser 11
Stall-holders 13
Conclusion 14
Appendix 1 15
Addendum: Day preferred for next year’s event 26
3
INTRODUCTION
The Comrades Marathon is one of South Africa’s largest sporting events and is the
dominant annual athletics event in the country. On an international stage it competes
favourably as one of the world’s premier ultra marathons. The 2003 event took place
from the 13th
– 16th
June 2003 and comprised of the following major components:
The Comrades Marathon (main event): a premier international road race from
Pietermaritzburg to Durban on the 16th
June 2003.
The Comrades Marathon Experience (Expo): was held at the Durban Exhibition
Centre from the 13th
– 15th
June 2003.
Durban Africa contributed R300 000 toward the event. A fundamental requirement by
Durban Africa (one of the sponsors) and Octagon South Africa, who manage the event
tourism strategy on behalf of Durban Africa, was an assessment of the event as a
potential benefit to the stimulation and increase in tourism and its socio-economic impact
on the Durban economy. The socio-economic assessment of the event was conducted by
members from the Environment and Development Programme, University of Durban-
Westville in association with Wholistic Consulting and Development.
In terms of the study itself, the main objectives were:
To estimate the total numbers of people attending the event.
To evaluate the perceptions and spending patterns of spectators at the event.
To establish the costs incurred and revenue generated for the Durban economy
from the event by interviewing key stakeholders viz. organisers and sponsors.
This report comprises the following sub-sections: an explanation of the methodology,
data presentation of information from the questionnaire analysis, crowd estimations, key
findings and socio-economic implications. The conclusion of this report attempts to
forward some suggestions on issues that would impact on future events.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
For the above objectives of the study to be achieved, the methodology adopted included
the implementation of 200 questionnaire surveys with a spatially based random selection
of people attending the event (spectators) at the Kingsmead stadium on race day and at
the Durban Exhibition Centre on the days of the Comrades Marathon Experience to
ascertain information on issues such as spending power, perceptions of the event and
respondents' demographic profiles. Additionally, 200 questionnaires were administered to
the participants. One hundred were administered on race day and a further 100
participants were interviewed telephonically after the event. A random sampling
approach of respondents from the list provided by the organisers was used to select the
participants for the telephonic interviews. Ten stall-holders were also interviewed on the
last day of the Comrades Marathon Experience (15th
June 2003). The organiser and
sponsor questionnaires, which included a range of aspects, were forwarded to the
organiser for implementation. No sponsor responses were received by the researchers for
analysis. Fieldwork was conducted during the course of the event by graduate and
4
postgraduate students, trained in interview techniques, from the Environment and
Development Programme, University of Durban-Westville. The co-ordinators closely
managed and supervised the fieldwork at the event.
Samples of respondents were taken at various times during the event. The samples were
therefore unbiased in terms of space, time and selection. Crowd estimates were
undertaken by the researchers at the event locations. The capturing and processing of data
was undertaken using SPSS software to generate the necessary tabulations. Appendix 1
displays the output tables of the SPSS exercise.
The number of samples of the different groups that was interviewed is indicated in the
table below.
Respondents
Respondent Group Intended sample Actual sample
Spectators 200 200
Participants 200 200
Stallholders 10 10
Sponsors 5 -
Organiser 1 1
Total 416 411
DATA ANALYSIS
The analysis of the data gathered will be structured around the following categories:
Number of people who attended the event
Economic impact
Demographic profile of people attending the event
Advertising and awareness of the event
People’s perception of the event and Durban generally
Evaluation of stakeholder responses
Estimates of the number of people attending the event
In terms of the methodology adopted and outlined earlier, the Table below synthesises the
attendance figures provided by the organiser.
Crowd estimates
CROWD
ESTIMATE
Comrades Expo (13th
– 15th
June 2003) 68 000
Race day (spectator numbers at Kingsmead stadium on the 16th
June) 42 000
Number of participants 13 374
TOTAL 123 374
5
The volume attendance at the events was therefore 123 374. However, Table 40
(Appendix 1) illustrates that the average number of days people attended the event was
1.3 among the spectators. Thus, the actual number of spectators was 84 615 over the four
days of the event.
Demographic Profile of Spectators
Slightly more than half of the respondents (52.5%: 56.5% among the participants and
48.5% among the spectators) were males and 47.5% were females (Table 37, Appendix
1). In terms of historical race classification (Table 38, Appendix 1), the event attracted
Whites (43.75%), Africans (27.75%), Coloureds (14.75%) and Indians (13.75%).
Respondents interviewed ranged in ages from less than 20 years to 70 years. The average
age of respondents was calculated to be 38.7 years (37.4 years among the participants and
40 years among the spectators) (Table 35, Appendix 1).
The event was attended by individuals from a range of income groups. The average
income of respondents was R7 239 per month (R6 655 among the participants and R7
823 among the spectators) and ranged from R1 000 to R50 000 (Table 39, Appendix 1).
Some of the respondents (6.25%) stated that their income was confidential. Additionally,
9.5% of the respondents did not earn any income.
Occupational categories that were clearly evident amongst respondents were (Table 36,
Appendix 1):
Administrator/ manager 26.5%
Professional 21.25%
Businessperson 12.25
Sales/ marketing 11%
The permanent places of residence of the respondents are outlined in Table 1 (Appendix
1). However, an illustration of the broad areas of permanent residence is undertaken
below.
Permanent Place of Residence of Respondents (%)
Place of residence Total (n=100)
Durban Unicity 40.5
Other KwaZulu-Natal Areas 11.75
Other SA provinces 46
International visitors 1.75
Total 100
Residents from other South African provinces (46%) and the Durban Unicity (40.5%)
were dominant amongst respondents. The visitors from other South African provinces
came from Gauteng (28.25%), Western Cape (7%), North West (4.5%), Free State
(3.5%), Limpopo (1.5%) and Eastern Cape (0.75%). Among the respondents,
6
international visitors came from Russia, Kenya, Mozambique, Britain, Zimbabwe and
Botswana.
The average immediate group size of people attending the event was 6 persons (5.6
among the participants and 6.4 among the spectators) (Table 6, Appendix 1). The groups
comprised of mostly family members (48.25%), athletic/running club (17.25%), friends
(15.75%) and friends and family members (14%) (Table 7, Appendix 1). Other groups
discernible were business associates (2.5%), tour groups (2%) and one school group
(0.25%).
Economic Evaluation
The direct economic impact of the event on the Durban Unicity economy is measured by
the direct expenditure of people who attended the event. This includes their daily
spending as well as the accommodation costs of tourists attending the event.
Among the spectators, most of the respondents (85.5%) attending the event indicated that
they spent money (Table 27, Appendix 1). Purchases made were of food and
refreshments (83.5%), clothes (14.5%), arts and crafts (0.5%) and shoes (0.5%) (Table
28, Appendix 1). The average daily expenditure of people attending the event was
calculated to be R166 (Table 29, Appendix 1). As stated earlier, 85.5% of the total
number of spectators (84 615) attending the event purchased items. This would imply that
72 346 persons spent an average of R166 at the event. This translates into R12 009 436
being generated for the Durban economy in terms of spectators’ daily expenditure at the
event.
Among the participants, with the exception of one respondent (0.5%), all other
respondents attending the event indicated that they spent money (Table 27, Appendix 1).
Purchases made were of food and refreshments (93.5%), clothes (37%), energy boosters
(29.5%) and jewellery (0.5%) (Table 28, Appendix 1). The average daily expenditure of
participants attending the event was calculated to be R165 (Table 29, Appendix 1). As
stated earlier, 99.5% of the total number of participants (13 374) attending the event
purchased items (13 307). However, among the participants the average number of days
they attended the event was 2.1. This would imply that 27 845 person days was
generated. Thus, 27 845 persons (in terms of volume among the participants) spent an
average of R165 at the event. This translates into R4 594 425 being generated for the
Durban economy in terms of spectators’ daily expenditure at the event. In total, R16 603
861 was generated for the Durban economy in terms of peoples’ daily spend at the event.
In terms of the accommodation industry, Table 1 (Appendix 1) illustrates that 43.5% of
the spectators were tourists. Of this, 11.5% stayed in luxury hotels, 9.2% in holiday flats,
20.7% in family hotels, 3.4% in bed and breakfast establishments, 14.9% in self-catering
units, 3.4% in holiday homes and 36.8% with friends and family (Table 2, Appendix 1).
The average number of nights spent in paid accommodation was 4.1. (Table 3, Appendix
1). The average rate per room during the event period was calculated to be R450 (Table
6, Appendix 1). Since 27.5% of the total spectators attending the events indicated that
they lived in paid accommodation, this can be translated into 23 269 people attending the
7
event residing in paid accommodation. The average immediate group size of tourists
attending the event was 6.1 persons (Table 5, Appendix 1). Thus, 3 815 room nights per
day was generated during the course of the event. Given that the average number of days
in paid accommodation was 4.1 nights, a total of 15 642 room nights were generated.
Since the average room rate was R450 per night (Table 6, Appendix 1), it is estimated
that R7 038 900 was generated by the Durban accommodation industry from spectator
stay in paid accommodation. Since 98.8% of the tourists staying in paid accommodation
indicated that they came specifically for the event or scheduled their visits to Durban to
coincide with the event (Tables 8 and 9, Appendix 1), the direct economic impact of the
accommodation industry on the Durban Unicity in terms of spectators was R6 954 433.
In terms of the accommodation industry, Table 1 (Appendix 1) illustrates that 66.5% of
the participants were tourists. Of this 9% stayed in luxury hotels, 4.5% in holiday flats,
36.8% in family hotels, 9% in bed and breakfast establishments, 13.5% in self-catering
units, 6.8% in the comrades train and 20.4% with friends and family (Table 2, Appendix
1). The average number of nights spent in paid accommodation was 3.2. (Table 3,
Appendix 1). The average rate per room during the event period was calculated to be
R374 (Table 6, Appendix 1). Since 53% of the total participants attending the events
indicated that they stayed in paid accommodation, this can be translated into 7 088
participants residing in paid accommodation. The average immediate group size of
tourists attending the event among the participants was 5.8 persons (Table 5, Appendix
1). Thus, 1 222 room nights per day were generated during the course of the event. Given
that the average stay in paid accommodation was 3.2 nights, a total of 3 910 room nights
were generated. Since the average room rate was R374 per night (Table 6, Appendix 1), it
is estimated that R1 462 340 was generated by the Durban accommodation industry from
participant stay in paid accommodation. Since all the participants who were tourists
staying in paid accommodation indicated that they came specifically for the event (Table
8), the direct economic impact of the accommodation industry on the Durban Unicity in
terms of spectators was R1 462 340. In total, R8 416 773 accrued via spend in the
accommodation industry can be directly attributed to the Comrades event.
From the above estimations, it can be deduced that the total revenue generated in terms of
peoples’ daily expenditure (R16 603 861) and from the accommodation industry (R8 416
773) that can be attributed directly to the event is R25 020 634.
Durban Africa contributed R300 000 toward this event. Similar to other studies of this
nature, an important aspect to consider is that of leverage. Leverage refers to the ratio of
public sector input against private sector response. This calculation entails the derivation
of a ratio which indicates the amount of money accrued to the private sector with every
rand spent by the public sector. In this respect the estimated amount that is considered is
the total revenue generated by peoples’ daily expenditure and the accommodation
industry (R25 020 634) and the public sector input of R300 000. This translates into a
ratio of 1:83.4. This means that for every rand spent by the public sector on the event,
R83.40 was generated by the private sector. It should be noted at the outset that other
variables having multiplier effects such as transport, financial transactions, product
8
suppliers and guided tours were not included in the analysis of the economic impact on
the Unicity.
Responses from the tourists (55% of the respondents: 66.5% among the participants and
43.5% among the spectators) show that on average this group spent R1 542 (R1 230
among the participants and R2 019 among the spectators) during their stay in Durban
(that is, in addition to monies spent at the event) (Table 31, Appendix 1). Among the
spectators, taking into consideration the immediate group size of tourists (6.1), this
translates into respondents who were visitors (a total of 36 808 were visitors) spending
R12 182 844 during their stay in Durban. Since among the spectators, 98.8% of the
visitors came to Durban specifically for the comrades event or coincided their visit to
Durban with the event, the direct economic impact of tourist spending was R12 036 649.
Among the participants, taking into consideration the immediate group size of tourists
(4.8), this translates into respondents who were visitors (a total of 8 894 were visitors)
spending R2 279 087 during their stay in Durban. Since all participants came to Durban
specifically for the comrades event or coincided their visit to Durban with the event, the
total direct economic impact of tourist spending was R14 315 736.
Primary Reason for Visiting Durban
The majority of the respondents (98.3%) who were tourists/visitors indicated that their
primary reason for visiting Durban was to attend the event (Table 8, Appendix 1). The
other primary reasons forwarded were vacation purposes (0.9%), rugby tour (0.4%) and
business (0.4%). Furthermore, all the respondents indicated that they came specifically to
the location for the event (Table 10, Appendix 1).
Visitors used private vehicles (68.2%), airplanes (11.8%), buses (8.2%), trains (5.9%),
mini-bus taxis (4.1%) and rental vehicles (1.8%) to come to Durban (Table 11, Appendix
1). The primary modes of transportation to the event for all the respondents were private
vehicles (62%), mini-bus/taxis (11.25%), buses (7.25%) and rental vehicles (3%) (Table
12, Appendix 1). The rest (16.5%), walked to the stadium.
Factors Influencing Decision to Attend the Event
The following were the main influencing agents (Table 13, Appendix 1):
Participants 65%
Television 27.5%
Word of mouth (non-participant) 25.25%
Newspaper ads 22.5%
Radio ads 11%
Posters/ banners/ flyers 5.5%
All the respondents were of the opinion that the advertisements were generally fair and
accurate (Table 14, Appendix 1).
9
Future Attendance of the Event and Knowledge of Other Durban Events
The majority of the respondents (94.25%) stated that they would attend the event if it was
held again next year. The rest (5.75%) stated that they did not know if they would attend
the event next year (Table 17, Appendix 1).
When questioned on their knowledge of other events taking place in Durban, 30% of the
respondents had some knowledge of other events taking place (Table 15, Appendix 1).
On average, the respondents intended to visit between 0.9 (0.5 among the participants and
1.1 among the spectators) other events in Durban (Table 16, Appendix 1).
Additionally, 36.75% of the respondents (31.5% among the participants and 42% among
the spectators) stated that they visited or planned to visit other places/events while in
Durban (Table 21, Appendix 1). Some of the main events/places identified by these
respondents were:
Beaches 22.5%
Shopping malls 16%
Rugby match 10.5%
Sponsor Identification and Perception
An important component of the study was the identification of sponsors by respondents.
All the respondents were able to identify at least one sponsor of the event. Twenty three
sponsors were identified in total. The main sponsors identified are listed below (Table 18,
Appendix 1).
MTN 65%
Mr Price 32.75%
Pick ‘n Pay 31.5%
People’s Bank 28.75%
Imperial 15.75%
Nike 13.5%
In general, the respondents who identified sponsors had an unchanged or more positive
image of these sponsors (Table 19, Appendix 1). Most of the respondents (76.25%) stated
that it was likely that they would buy an event sponsored product whilst 23.75% stated
that it was unlikely that they would buy an event sponsored product (Table 20, Appendix
1).
10
Knowledge of “Durban: South Africa’s Playground” Slogan
Slightly less than half of the respondents (47.5%: 52.5% among the participants and
42.5% among the spectators) were aware of the slogan: “Durban: South Africa’s
Playground” (Table 33, Appendix 1). The respondents who had knowledge of “Durban:
South Africa’s Playground” slogan indicated that the slogan represented the following
organisations (Table 34, Appendix 1):
The Durban City 14.8%
KZN Tourism Authority 7.8%
Durban Tourism Board 7.5%
Tourism body 3.8%
Tourist Junction 3.3%
The majority of the respondents (62.7%) of the respondents stated that they did not know
which organisation the slogan represented.
Perception/ Attitudes of the Event and the Durban Unicity
The respondents rated their event experience in the following way (Table 22, Appendix
1):
Excellent 48%
Good 40.75%
Okay 11.25%
Only one respondent stated that he/she experienced an unsavoury incident at the event
(Table 23, Appendix 1). The incident was experienced in the stadium and entailed a
child being terrified by a man in a green suit. Three respondents (among the spectators)
stated that they experienced unsavoury incidents in Durban more generally (Table 24,
Appendix 1). The incidents took place in Central Durban and the Durban beachfront.
The incidents were a mugging, a robbery and a car accident. One spectator stated that he/
she experienced other problems at the event (Table 25, Appendix 1). The problem
identified was parking.
Suggestions to Organisers on the Event Quality
The majority of the respondents (79%) did not forward any suggestions to improve the
event in the future, indicating that there was generally a high level of satisfaction among
the respondents. The rest forwarded suggestions and the following were the main
suggestions (Table 26, Appendix 1):
Organise accommodation for runners at a reasonable rate 7.75%
Have direction to race venue 7%
Ensure that entrance is not blocked by too many people 6%
Organise accommodation for runners 4.5%
Have more big screens 4.25%
11
Positive and Negative Features of Durban
The table below illustrates the most important responses obtained regarding the positive
and negative features of Durban (Tables 31 and 32, Appendix 1).
Positive and Negative Features of Durban as a Tourist Destination (Multiple
Responses)
Positive Feature Percent Negative features Percent
Beaches 72.5 Crime 41
Weather 33.75 Beggars 3.5
Friendly people 22.75 Security at night 2
Hotels 20.25 Unfriendly people 2
Sporting events 14.5
N=400
As is evidenced from the table above, respondents indicated that the most important
positive features of Durban as a tourist destination were the beaches. The main and
dominant negative feature is crime.
Analysis of Interviews with Other Stakeholders
Organiser
The organiser of the event was the Comrades Marathon Association (CMA). CMA was
responsible for all aspects of the event. The overall budget allocated for the event was R7
500 000. The expenditure items were:
Administration R2 900 000
Expo R400 000
Hire of finish venue R400 000
Marketing R300 000
Television broadcast R2 000 000
Publications R400 000
Other R1 100 000
The organiser outsourced about 40%-50% of the services to KZN service providers.
These services included finish venue, Expo, publications, catering, marshals,
amabeadibeadi bead production, printing and publishing. However, only one aspect (the
amabeadibeadi bead production) was specifically outsourced to Affirmable Business
Enterprises (ABEs).
12
The types of media leveraged for the event is presented in the Table below.
TYPE OF MEDIA NATIONAL INTERNATIONAL
Name Cost Name Cost
Television SABC R47 000 000 US Marathon Show R250 000
Radio SABC, ECR Not disclosed
Print National R8 000 000 Various
Washington Post
Posters/ banners/ flyers Posters R150 000
Internet R500 000
SMS To runners R500 000
Publications Brochure
Beyond 42
R250 000
R800 000
The overall assessment of the media coverage by the organiser was that all aspects of the
media coverage were absolutely essential. The support of the media, especially radio, TV
and print, was regarded as being immense and significant.
The organiser did not identify the main sponsors of the event.
The organiser employed approximately 300 people. Some of the types of jobs people
were employed for were administration, finish construction, marshals and
communication.
In terms of the overall expectation of the event, the organiser stated that the intention was
once again to stage the most prestigious ultra marathon in the world. The organiser was
satisfied that these expectations were met. In terms of the overall impression of the event,
the organiser felt that the event was very positive. The organiser also felt that the
economic impacts of the event in the Durban area were significant as per usual. The
organiser indicated that the event was adequately publicised since no other single event in
South Africa enjoys the publicity of the Comrades Marathon.
The location was deemed to be well suited for the event since the organiser felt that there
could be no other event location. The organiser took steps to control/prevent crime by
liaising closely with the SAP and other authorities since security is regarded as a major
priority. These steps were deemed to be successful. However, the organiser did indicate
that petty crime was a problem and one overseas runner was mugged. The organisation of
the event also included steps to control crowds and traffic. This was done by having
marshals along the route and involving traffic authorities. The organiser felt that the steps
taken to control crowds and traffic were successful. The organiser stated that no problems
were experienced at the event.
According to the organiser, the main lesson learnt from the event was that security issues
were highlighted and will be improved on next year. The organiser was of the opinion
that similar events/activities should not become annual events in Durban.
13
The organiser was satisfied with the roles played by the DEC and Durban Africa but felt
that Octagon added no value since all aspects of their role took place at the very last
moment. The organiser felt that Octagon did not have a long term planning approach.
Stall-holders
Ten stall-holders were interviewed at the event. The main services/products provided by
the stall-holders were health-related products (including sport supplements and sport
drinks), food and refreshments, camping and running gear (including clothes and foot
wear) and eye-wear apparel. While two of the respondents indicated that they did not
know how much was paid to acquire a stall at the Expo, the average cost of acquiring a
stall for the rest was R26 375.
Thirty percent (30%) of the respondents employed additional staff. On average, 3.5
persons were employed. The types of jobs additional persons were employed for were to
assist with sales and promotion.
Level of satisfaction with:
Location of stalls: 90% the respondents expressed satisfaction with the location of
the stalls.
Location of event: 80% of the respondents indicated that they were satisfied with
the location of the event.
Organisation: All the respondents expressed satisfaction with the organisation of
the event.
Attendance: 70% the interviewees indicated that they were satisfied with the
attendance at the event.
Security: 80% of the respondents expressed satisfaction with security at the
events.
Advertising/publicity: 70% of the respondents were satisfied with the advertising
of the event.
Fees/cost for acquiring a stall: 70% of the respondents expressed satisfaction with
the fees/costs for acquiring a stall at the event.
In general, there was a high level of satisfaction with regard to components of the event
among the stall-holders. In relation to dissatisfaction, the reasons forwarded were:
Show is smaller than the previous year
The Expo did not attract many people (again, in comparison to last year)
Inadequate advertising/advertising to the wrong group
Lack of security
Asbestos falling from the roof
Only one respondent experienced problems at the event which was related to parking.
The respondent suggested that there should be two entrances and that all stall-holders/
exhibitors should be given clearly marked access passes to their designated parking area
that should be located close to the event venue.
14
Some of the suggestions forwarded to improve the event in the future were:
Make the event bigger
Advertise more
Extend the period of the Expo
Separate dining hall for exhibitors
Eighty percent of the respondents revealed their average turnover per day. On average,
these respondents had a turnover per day of R6 938. The rest of the respondents indicated
that they were not engaged in retail activities. Ninety percent of the respondents stated
that events like the Comrades Marathon attracted tourists to Durban. All the respondents
stated that the event should take place again next year. Ninety percent of the respondents
stated that they would participate in the Comrades Marathon Expo if it is held again next
year. One respondent indicated that he/she was not sure of attendance next year.
Respondents also indicated that the following events/activities should take place
annually:
Festivals
More running events
Sport events
Outdoor events
CONCLUSION
The socio-economic impact assessment of the 2003 Comrades Marathon event indicates
that it was an extremely successful event attracting both national and international
participants. The event also generated immense national and international media
coverage. The leverage ratio is relatively high and indicates that for every Rand spent by
the public sector, R83.40 was generated through the event by the private sector. In
general, the event was well organised and managed. An issue of concern is that the
involvement of ABEs was minimal with their participation only in the amabeadibeadi
bead production. This issue needs to be seriously addressed by the organisers of the
event.
15
APPENDIX 1: COMRADES MARATHON TABLES
Table 1: Permanent place of residency of respondents (%)
Place of residence Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Durban (40.5)
Central 6 12 9
South 5.5 15.5 10.5
North 8 11 9.5
West 9 14 11.5
Kwazulu-Natal (11.75)
South Coast 1.5 4.5 3
North Coast 3 2.5 2.75
Midlands 6.5 5.5 6
South Africa provinces outside KZN (46)
Gauteng 28.5 28 28.25
Free State 4.5 2.5 3.5
Eastern Cape 1 0.5 0.75
Western Cape 11.5 2.5 7
Mpumalanga 1 - 0.5
North West 9 - 4.5
Limpopo 3 - 1.5
Foreign tourists (1.75)
Kenya 0.5 - 0.25
Mozambique 0.5 - 0.25
Russia 0.5 0.5 0.5
Britain 0.5 - 0.25
Zimbabwe - 0.5 0.25
Botswaba - 0.5 0.25
Table 2: Accommodation of holiday-maker (in %)
Place of residence Participants (n=133) Spectators (n=87) Total (n=220)
Luxury hotel 9 11.5 10
Family hotel 36.8 20.7 30.4
Bed and breakfast 9 3.4 6.8
Holiday flat 4.5 9.2 6.4
Self-catering 13.5 14.9 14.1
Holiday home - 3.4 1.4
Friends and family 20.4 36.8 26.8
Comrades train 6.8 - 4.1
16
Table 3: Number of nights stayed in paid accommodation by holiday-maker (in %)
Place of residence Participants (n=106) Spectators (n=55) Total (n=161)
1 8.5 5.4 7.5
2 16.9 20 18
3 40.6 14.5 31.7
4 26.5 32.7 28.6
5 0.9 5.4 2.5
6 4.7 1.9 3.7
7 1.9 9.1 4.4
8 - 1.9 0.6
10 - 3.6 1.2
14 - 3.6 1.2
15 - 1.9 0.6
X = 3.2 X=4.1 X=3.5
Table 4: Daily cost of accommodation (in %)
Cost (in Rands) Participants (n=106) Spectators (n=55) Total (n=161)
Not disclosed 7.5 - 4.9
None 5.7 - 3.7
75 - 1.8 0.6
100 - 5.4 1.9
150 - 9.1 3.1
170 3.8 - 2.5
200 7.5 - 4.9
230 1.9 - 1.2
250 16.9 - 11.3
290 0.9 - 0.6
300 5.7 12.8 8.1
380 0.9 - 0.6
400 12.3 9.1 11.3
440 1.9 - 1.2
450 - 9.1 3.1
500 16.9 29.2 21.2
550 8.5 3.6 6.8
600 2.8 - 1.9
650 1.9 9.1 4.3
750 2.8 3.6 3.1
800 1.9 3.6 2.5
900 - 3.6 1.2
X = R374 X=R450 X=R402
17
Table 5: Number of people in immediate group (holiday-maker) (in %)
No. of people Participants (n=133) Spectators (n=87) Total (n=220)
1 0.8 - 0.4
2 16.6 18.4 17.3
3 24.8 9.3 18.6
4 28.7 27.6 28.2
5 11.3 12.6 11.8
6 8.3 17.3 11.8
7 - 3.4 1.4
8 1.5 5.8 3.2
10 - 1.1 0.4
11 2.2 - 1.4
12 0.7 - 0.4
13 0.7 - 0.4
14 0.7 - 0.4
15 1.5 1.1 1.4
20 1.5 - 0.9
36 0.7 - 0.4
50 - 3.4 1.4
54 1.5 - 0.9
X = 4.8 X = 6.1 X= 5.3
Table 6: Number of people in immediate group (all) including respondent (in %)
No. of people Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
1 1 5.5 3.25
2 12 18.5 15.25
3 9 15.5 12.25
4 39 15 27
5 11 11 11
6 17 14.5 15.75
7 - 5 2.5
8 3 3.5 3.25
10 1 5.5 3.25
11 1 - 0.5
13 0.5 - 0.25
15 0.5 1.5 1
20 2.5 - 1.25
25 0.5 - 0.25
36 2 0.5 1.25
50 - 4 2
X = 5.6 X = 6.4 X = 6
Table 7: Description of immediate group (in %)
Description of group Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Family 43 53.5 48.25
Friends 13 18.5 15.75
Friends and family 17 11 14
Business associates - 5 2.5
Tour group 3.5 0.5 2
Athletic/ running club 23.5 11 17.25
School group - 0.5 0.25
18
Table 8: Tourists’ primary reason for visiting Durban (in %)
Primary reason Participants (n=133) Spectators (n=87) Total (n=220)
Rugby tour - 1.1 0.4
Vacation - 2.3 0.9
Business - 1.1 0.4
This event 100 95.5 98.3
Table 9: Did respondents plan their visit to Durban to coincide with the event (in %)
Spectators (n=4)
Yes 75
No 25
Table 10: Did respondents specifically come to the location for the events (in %)
Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Yes 100 100 100
Table 11: Tourist mode of transportation to Durban (in %)
Transportation Participants (n=133) Spectators (n=87) Total (n=220)
Private vehicle 69.9 65.5 68.2
Rental vehicle - 4.6 1.8
Bus 7.5 9.3 8.2
Airplane 8.3 17.2 11.8
Train 9.8 - 5.9
Mini-bus taxi 4.5 3.4 4.1
Table 12: Mode of transportation to event by all respondents (in %)
Transportation Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Private vehicle 57 67 62
Rental vehicle - 6 3
Bus 10 4.5 7.25
Mini bus taxi 8.5 14 11.25
Walked 24.5 8.5 16.5
Table 13: Most influential medium in respondents decision to attend the events (in %):
Multiple responses
Medium Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Word of mouth 11.5 39 25.25
TV ads 26.5 28.5 27.5
Radio ads 14 8 11
Posters/ banners/ flyers - 11 5.5
Newspaper Ads 15.5 9.5 12.5
Participant 78.5 51.5 65
19
Table 14: Accuracy and fairness of advertisement (in %)
Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Yes 100 100 100
Table 15: Knowledge of other events taking place in Durban during this period (in %)
Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Yes 20.5 39.5 30
No 79.5 60.5 70
Table 16: If yes, how many events respondent attended or planned to attend (in %)
Participants (n=41) Spectators (n=79) Total (n=120)
None 48.8 8.9 22.5
1 51.2 72.1 65
2 - 17.7 11.7
3 - 1.3 0.8
X = 0.5 X = 1.1 X = 0.9
Table 17: Intention to attend event if held next year (in %)
Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Yes 97.5 91 94.25
Don’t know 2.5 9 5.75
Table 18: Knowledge of event sponsors (in %): Multiple Response
Name of sponsors Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Mr Price 37.5 28 32.75
Imperial 2 29.5 15.75
Reebok 11.5 - 5.75
MTN 60.5 69.5 65
Nike 12 15 13.5
Adidas 3 - 1.5
Liberty 0.5 - 0.25
Powerade 11.5 - 5.75
Pick ‘n Pay 12 51 31.5
3M 0.5 - 0.25
People’s Bank 12.5 45 28.75
Durban 1.5 2 1.75
Energade 8.5 - 4.25
Voltaren 3.5 0.5 2
Old Mutual 0.5 0.5 0.5
Shoprite - 3.5 1.75
Harmony 1 9.5 5.25
Standard Bank - 9.5 4.75
Eskom - 0.5 0.25
KZN Athletics - 3 1.5
Topsport - 0.5 0.25
Nashua - 8.5 4.25
Greyhound - 3 1.5
20
Table 19: Effect of sponsorship on respondent’s attitudes towards company image (in %):
Multiple responses
Name of sponsors Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Mr Price
More positive company image
Unchanged company image
36.5
1
28
-
32.25
0.5
Imperial
More positive company image
2
29.5
15.75
Reebok
More positive company image
11.5
-
5.75
MTN
More positive company image
Unchanged company image
60
0.5
66.5
3
63.25
1.75
Nike
More positive company image
12
15
13.5
Adidas
More positive company image
3
-
1.5
Liberty
More positive company image
0.5
-
0.25
Powerade
More positive company image
Unchanged company image
10
1.5
-
-
5
0.75
Pick ‘n Pay
More positive company image
12
51
31.5
3M
More positive company image
0.5
-
0.25
People’s Bank
More positive company image
Unchanged company image
12.5
-
44
1
28.25
0.5
Durban
More positive company image
1.5
2
1.75
Energade
More positive company image
8.5
-
4.25
Voltaren
More positive company image
3.5
0.5
2
Old Mutual
More positive company image
0.5
0.5
0.5
Shoprite
More positive company image
-
3.5
1.75
Harmony 1 9.5 5.25
Standard Bank
More positive company image
Unchanged company image
-
-
9
0.5
4.5
0.25
Eskom
More positive company image
-
0.5
0.25
KZN Athletics
More positive company image
-
3
1.5
Topsport
More positive company image
-
0.5
0.25
Nashua
More positive company image
-
8.5
4.25
Greyhound
More positive company image
-
3
1.5
21
Table 20: Intention to buy an event sponsored product when considering products/ services
of a similar price/ quality (in %)
Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Yes 78.5 74 76.25
No 21.5 26 23.75
Table 21: Other places/ activities except the event did/ will respondents plan to attend in
Durban (in %): Multiple responses
Activity/ place Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
None 68.5 58 63.25
Rugby match 7.5 13.5 10.5
Beaches 11 34 22.5
Shopping malls 12.5 19.5 16
Racing events 3.5 - 1.75
Botha’s Hill 0.5 - 0.25
Waterfront 0.5 - 0.25
Victoria Street Market 0.5 - 0.25
Fleamarkers 2 8.5 5.25
NBS House and Garden Show 2 - 1
Theatres - 2 1
Kings Park - 3.5 1.75
Sharks Board - 0.5 0.25
Restaurants - 1.5 0.75
Night clubs - 2 1
Expo centre - 5.5 2.75
Umlazi - 0.5 0.25
Dolphinarian - 0.5 0.25
ICC - 0.5 0.25
VBA - 2.5 1.25
Music festival - 3.5 1.75
Spar 10K - 0.5 0.25
Soccer match - 6 3
Sports events - 7.5 3.75
July Handicap 0.5 11.5 6
Table 22: Rating of event experience (in %)
Rating Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Excellent 41.5 54.5 48
Good 40.5 41 40.75
Okay 18 4.5 11.25
Table 23: Experience of any unsavoury incidents at event (in %)
Participants
(n=200)
Spectators
(n=200)
Total
(n=400)
Type of incident Location of incident
Yes 0.5 - 0.25 Child terrifies by the
man in the green suite
In the stadium
No 99.5 100 99.75 - -
22
Table 24: Experience of any unsavoury incidents in Durban (in %)
Participants
(n=200)
Spectators
(n=200)
Total
(n=400)
Type of incident Location of incident
Yes - 1.5 0.75 Mugging
Robbery
Car accident
Durban beachfront (2)
Central Durban (1)
No 100 98.5 99.25 - -
Table 25: Experience of other problems at event (in %)
Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400) Type of incident
Yes - 0.5 0.25 Parking problems
No 100 99.5 99.75 -
Table 26: Suggestions to organisers to improve event/s in the future (in %)
Suggestion Participants
(n=200)
Spectators
(n=200)
Total
(n=400)
No Comment/ none 79.5 78.5 79
Have seating places to eat 3 - 1.5
Ensure that entrance is not blocked by too many people 8.5 3.5 6
Products should be more affordable 5.5 - 2.75
Organise accommodation for runners 6.5 2.5 4.5
Organise accommodation for runners at a reasonable rate 7 8.5 7.75
Need more security 1 - 0.5
Should have more places for massaging 0.5 - 0.25
Need information brochures 3.5 - 1.75
Consider race course as a venue for finishing race 0.5 - 0.25
Have directions to race venue - 2 1
Arrange better parking facilities 5.5 8.5 7
Separate race times between males and females - 0.5 0.25
Give more attention to first one hundred runners - 0.5 0.25
Big screen should be better situated - 5.5 2.75
Have more big screens - 8.5 4.25
Have a cultural event to explain June 16th
day - 0.5 0.25
Table 27: Monies spent at the event (in %)
Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Yes 99.5 85.5 92.5
No 0.5 14.5 7.5
Table 28: Items money spent on (in %): Multiple responses
Items Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Food/ refreshments 93.5 83.5 88.5
Clothes 37 14.5 25.75
Jewellery 0.5 - 0.25
Arts and crafts - 0.5 0.25
Shoes - 0.5 0.25
Energy boosters 29.5 - 14.75
N/A 0.5 14.5 7.5
23
Table 29: Amount spent daily at event (in %)
Amount ® Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
None 0.5 14.5 7.5
20 4.5 2.25
30 0.5 3 1.75
50 8 9.5 8.75
80 1 7.5 4.25
100 31.5 24 27.75
120 0.5 4.5 2.5
150 - 5.5 2.75
200 19 13.5 16.25
250 3.5 - 1.75
300 11.5 2 6.75
400 1.5 3.5 2.4
450 - 0.5 0.25
500 12.5 8.5 10.5
700 - 3.5 1.75
800 1 - 0.5
1000 3 - 1.5
1200 0.5 - 0.25
1500 1 - 0.5
X = R165 X=166 X=166
Table 30: Amount spent while in Durban by holiday-makers (in %)
Amount ® Participants (n=133) Spectators (n=87) Total (n=220)
Not disclosed 6 - 3.6
150 - 1.1 0.5
200 - 3.4 1.4
300 2.2 - 1.4
400 1.5 4.6 2.7
500 21 13.8 18.2
650 - 6.9 2.7
700 - 2.4 0.9
800 3 - 1.8
1000 36.8 14.9 28.2
1200 3 - 1.8
1500 8.4 16.2 11.4
2000 9.8 17.3 12.6
2500 3.8 4.6 4.1
3000 1.5 4.6 2.7
5000 3 4.6 3.6
6000 - 1.1 0.5
10000 - 3.4 1.4
20000 - 1.1 0.5
X = R1230 X = R2019 X = R1 542
24
Table 31: Positive features of Durban as a tourist destination (in %): Multiple responses
Features Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
None/ No response 1.5 0.5 1
Shopping malls 11.5 13.5 12.5
Friendly people 22 23.5 22.75
Beaches 71.5 73.5 72.5
Casinos - 4.5 2.25
Weather 31.5 36 33.75
Sporting events 11 18 14.5
Very clean - 6 3
Good food - 0.5 0.25
Entertainment - 1 0.5
Victoria Street Market - 1 0.5
Sardine run - 0.5 0.25
Point Waterfront - 7.5 3.75
Hotels 19.5 21 20.25
Diverse cultures - 2.5 1.25
Restaurants 0.5 - 0.25
Conferences/ ICC 0.5 11.5 6
Relaxed atmosphere 0.5 - 0.25
Fishing 0.5 - 0.25
Good security 0.5 - 0.25
Fleamarkets 2 9.5 5.75
Infrastructure - 7.5 3.75
Table 32: Negative features of Durban as a tourist destination (in %): Multiple responses
Features Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
None 58.5 44 51.25
Crime 38.5 43.5 41
Pollution/ dirty city 0.5 2.5 1.5
Security at night - 4 2
Street kids 0.5 - 0.25
Casinos are disgusting 0.5 - 0.25
Unfriendly people - 4 2
Overcrowding - 0.5 0.25
Prostitutes 0.5 - 0.25
Timeshare agents 0.5 - 0.25
Litter 3 - 1.5
Beggars - 7 3.5
Drugs 0.5 - 0.25
Weather 0.5 - 0.25
Rude taxi drivers - 0.5 0.25
Table 33: Knowledge of slogan, “Durban: South Africa’s Playground” (in %)
Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Yes 52.5 42.5 47.5
No 47.5 57.5 52.5
25
Table 34: If aware of slogan, which organization does it represent (in %)
Participants (n=105) Spectators (n=85) Total (n=190)
Don’t know 71.5 51.8 62.7
The Durban city 13.3 17.6 14.8
KZN Tourism 9.5 5.9 7.9
Durban Tourism Board 5.7 9.4 7.5
Tourism body - 8.2 3.8
Tourism Junction - 7.1 3.3
Table 35: Age of respondents (in %)
Age (yrs) Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
<20 4 0.5 2.25
21-30 11 24.5 17.75
31-40 48 45.5 46.75
41-50 33.5 17 25.25
51-60 2 9.5 5.75
61-70 1.5 3 2.25
X = 37.4 X = 40 X = 38.7
Table 36: Occupation of respondents (in %)
Occupation Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Student 2 9 5.5
Unemployed 5.5 3.5 4.5
Home executive 1 6 3.5
Retired 1 - 0.5
Labourer/ unskilled 0.5 3 1.75
Artisan/ technician 8.5 0.5 4.5
Sales/ marketing 11 11 11
Administrator/ manager 33.5 19.5 26.5
Businessperson 13.5 11 12.25
Professional 18.5 24 21.25
Self-employed 5 12.5 8.75
Table 37: Gender of respondents (in %)
Sex Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Male 56.5 48.5 52.5
Female 43.5 51.5 47.5
Table 38: Historical race category of respondents (in %)
Race Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
African 26.5 29 27.75
Indian 11 16.5 13.75
White 43.5 44 43.75
Coloured 19 10.5 14.75
26
Table 39: Income of respondents (in %)
Income Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
Confidential 8 2.5 6.25
N/A 7 11.5 9.5
<1000 5 5.5 7
1000-1999 6.5 2.5 5
2000-2999 1 1 1
3000-3999 10.5 7.5 10
4000-4999 10 7 8.5
5000-5999 4 6.5 5.75
6000-6999 8.5 6 7.25
7000-7999 8 3 5.5
8000-8999 7 12.5 9.75
9000-9999 6 6.5 6.25
10000-10999 7 11.5 10.25
12000 3 - 1.5
15000 5.5 11 8.25
20000 2 3 2.5
30000 1 2 1.5
50000 - 0.5 0.25
X = R6655 X = R7823 X = R7239
Table 40: Number of days attending event (in %)
No. of days Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)
1 13.5 74.5 44
2 64 18 41
3 22.5 7.5 15
X=2.1 X = 1.3 X = 1.7
27
ADDENDUM: DAY PREFERRED FOR NEXT YEAR’S EVENT
The organiser requested that during the telephonic interviews with the participants,
responses be ascertained as to which day participants prefer the main race be held next
year since June 16th
2004 falls on a Wednesday. The results are presented in the Table
below.
Day preferred Percentage (n=100)
Saturday (12th
June 2004) 26
Sunday (13th
June 2004) 28
Saturday or Sunday (12th
or 13th
June 2004) 35
Late in May 9
June 16th
2
With the exception of two respondents that indicated that the main race day be June 16th
2004, the rest indicated that it should be held during the weekend prior to June 16th
. In
this regard, 26% preferred Saturday (12th
June 2004), 28% preferred Sunday (13th
June
2004) and the rest (35%) indicated Saturday or Sunday (12th
or 13th
June 2004). The main
reason forwarded for the weekend preference was that it was more convenient for the
runners since they would need fewer days leave from work. The two respondents who
preferred June 16th
felt that the significance of the day and its association with the
Comrades Marathon should be sustained. It is important to note that additionally 9% of
the respondents stated that the organisers need to reconsider the dates of the Comrades
Marathon and move it even earlier in the year (in May or the first week of June). They
stated that the cold weather is not ideal for the runners.
Recommended