NEWS — ANALYSIS
Research on consumer views of travel prices during school holidays confirms industry fears that the blame falls on companies. IAN TAYLOR reports
A majority of UK consumers believe travel companies profiteer from the prices of peak summer holidays, despite most accepting the cost is driven by demand. The proportion of people
believing this is true is highest among parents and regular holidaymakers.
That is the conclusion of TNS
research among 2,000-plus UK adults carried out exclusively for Travel Weekly. Asked whether they agreed with the claim that “travel companies hold parents to ransom with high prices during school holidays”, 76% of respondents said they did. Of these, 57% agreed strongly. Fewer than one in 10 (9%) disagreed. The rate among those with
children aged five to 15 was 85%, against 73% among those with no children. Women were more likely to think companies are profiteering than men – 60% of women agreeing ‘strongly’ compared with 54% of men. The belief was fairly consistent
across income groups, apart from a spike among those in lower-paid occupations where 67% agreed strongly against 57% overall. Londoners were least likely to agree strongly (45%) and those
from the north most likely (62%). The proportion in strong
agreement was higher among those who last took a holiday in 2013 (62%) than those with a holiday booked this year (53%). But it was highest among those who last had an overseas holiday before 2011 (68%) – suggesting those who can least afford to travel feel most put out by prices.
Summer spike Parents’ preference for peak summer holidays was clear. The survey found 39% of those intending to go abroad this summer planned to go in July-August, but 52% of adults with children and 62% of those with children aged five to 15 – double the rate among those with children under five or no children. Asked if the Government should
cap prices in school holidays – a highly unlikely event – 67% of adults agreed (47% strongly) and 80% of those with children. Less than one in five adults (18%) disagreed – with disagreement
10 •
travelweekly.co.uk — 17 July 2014
strongest at 29% among those in higher income groups. Adults in the north were more
likely to agree strongly (55%) than those in the south (43%) and Midlands (44%). Again, those who last took a
57%
Proportion of parents with
school-age kids who disagreed with fines
holiday in 2013 were more keen on a cap (74%) than those booked to travel this year (60%), with two out of five (40%) of this year’s holidaymakers disagreeing with a price cap or having no view. However, the numbers reversed when respondents were asked whether they agreed “Supply and demand makes prices higher in peak summer”. More than
four out of five (83%)
agreed with the statement, 59% strongly, and 85% of parents with school-age children did so – while wanting prices capped. The proportion who disagreed was near negligible at 7%.
Term-time fines Under a third of adults (29%) agreed with the policy of fining parents who take children out of
school for holidays, against 53% who disagreed. Almost two-thirds (62%) of those with children below school age and 57% of parents with children at school disagreed. Fining parents was most popular among 25-34-year-olds, of whom 31% agreed with the policy, and least popular in the north, where 40% disagreed ‘strongly’.
Those who had a holiday in 2013, but not so far this year, seemed more accepting of fines than those booked to travel or who had already been away this year: 31% of last year’s holidaymakers agreed with fines against 27% of this year’s. This may reflect the fact the policy changed last September. Responses were more mixed when asked what to do about prices during school holidays. Just over half (51%) agreed school terms should be staggered to reduce demand, and 56% of parents with children at school agreed. But 26% disagreed and 23% had no view. More than one third (35%) of those on higher incomes disagreed.
❯ TNS interviewed 2,011 UK adults, May 30-June 3, as part of its TNS Omnibus survey
ANALYSIS
Families think firms are profiteering
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76