I have actually travelled quite a bit, and I always prefer hotels both because they’re cheap and because they’re not as damaging to local communities. Hotels usually include breakfast, and for relatively cheap you can also eat and have dinner there. Even when taking into account the price of the food and restaurants, they mostly still end up being cheaper.
Holiday rentals open in residential areas that are not built to handle big number of tourists.
Tourists will fill up residential areas even if there are no hotels/apartments in them. Cities themselves are not made to cope with that amount of tourists.
Residents don’t want to share buildings with tourists because they are laud and destroy the property.
This is an issue, but the main issue with rentals is that they drive up the prices and push people away to suburbs.
What the size of business has to do with anything? A local Rolex store will have as many employees as local fridge magnet store.
Rolex is not a local company, and will take most of that money away from the local economy. Small shops can be owned by locals, so most of the money spent there stays in the local economy.
Poor tourists only generate a lot of low paying jobs because you need a lot of them to make any real money. Cities are trying to bring more rich tourists to maintain the level of revenue and instead of creating low paying jobs serving poor tourists grow other sectors of economy.
I’m pretty sure Rolex pays its employees the same as any other company. Probably close to minimum wage. Rolex doesn’t care about creating high paying jobs.
No tourist city I’ve ever lived in has ever worried about rich tourists. In fact, most people want them gone first.
I actually live in a touring city right now and the reality here is the exact opposite of what you’re describing. One night in a hotel or in a holiday rental cost pretty much the same. Cooking at home is much cheaper than eating in restaurants. Even breakfast in a hotel is not included for free, you pay extra for it. You would have to stay in a very lousy hotel and eat lousy food to pay less than in a rental.
Rolex sells watches but someone local owns the store. Very few things are actually still made locally. Some food and traditional souvenirs maybe. Most things sold at local stores are still cheap, Chinese made items. What stays in local economy are taxes and salaries and I’m pretty sure someone working in a luxury restaurants earns more money than someone working at McDonalds.
Tourists will fill up residential areas even if there are no hotels/apartments in them. Cities themselves are not made to cope with that amount of tourists.
Tourist don’t go to residential areas because there’s nothing there for them. All restaurants, museums and other attractions are in city centers. Where do you travel where tourist go visiting apartment buildings and hang out in residential areas?
The city I live in opened port for luxury yachts right next to city center. Michelin starts are a thing. Fancy restaurants are promoted all the time. Maybe you think the cities don’t care about rich tourists because you’re not one of them? You see news all the time about cities complaining about mass tourism and trying to limit it. Ibiza, Rome, Venice, Canary Islands, Valencia… You really think they want to kick out few rich tourists staying in 5 star hotels and not the masses staying in AirBnBs?
I have actually travelled quite a bit, and I always prefer hotels both because they’re cheap and because they’re not as damaging to local communities. Hotels usually include breakfast, and for relatively cheap you can also eat and have dinner there. Even when taking into account the price of the food and restaurants, they mostly still end up being cheaper.
Tourists will fill up residential areas even if there are no hotels/apartments in them. Cities themselves are not made to cope with that amount of tourists.
This is an issue, but the main issue with rentals is that they drive up the prices and push people away to suburbs.
Rolex is not a local company, and will take most of that money away from the local economy. Small shops can be owned by locals, so most of the money spent there stays in the local economy.
I’m pretty sure Rolex pays its employees the same as any other company. Probably close to minimum wage. Rolex doesn’t care about creating high paying jobs.
No tourist city I’ve ever lived in has ever worried about rich tourists. In fact, most people want them gone first.
I actually live in a touring city right now and the reality here is the exact opposite of what you’re describing. One night in a hotel or in a holiday rental cost pretty much the same. Cooking at home is much cheaper than eating in restaurants. Even breakfast in a hotel is not included for free, you pay extra for it. You would have to stay in a very lousy hotel and eat lousy food to pay less than in a rental.
Rolex sells watches but someone local owns the store. Very few things are actually still made locally. Some food and traditional souvenirs maybe. Most things sold at local stores are still cheap, Chinese made items. What stays in local economy are taxes and salaries and I’m pretty sure someone working in a luxury restaurants earns more money than someone working at McDonalds.
Tourist don’t go to residential areas because there’s nothing there for them. All restaurants, museums and other attractions are in city centers. Where do you travel where tourist go visiting apartment buildings and hang out in residential areas?
The city I live in opened port for luxury yachts right next to city center. Michelin starts are a thing. Fancy restaurants are promoted all the time. Maybe you think the cities don’t care about rich tourists because you’re not one of them? You see news all the time about cities complaining about mass tourism and trying to limit it. Ibiza, Rome, Venice, Canary Islands, Valencia… You really think they want to kick out few rich tourists staying in 5 star hotels and not the masses staying in AirBnBs?