SL’s goal to attract 2.5 mn high-end tourists unrealistic: Intrepid Tarvel Co-Founder

Darrell Wade Pic by Pradeep Pathirana

Intrepid through the Intrepid Foundation in Sri Lanka has been working with Zero Plastic Movement for the past two years to create a behavioural change among citizens and institutions to reduce plastic waste while building a demand for plastic alternatives. Intrepid also recently partnered with an International Development Programme (MDF) on a new government cross-industry partnership to boost female participation in tourism in Sri Lanka.
As a global leader in responsible tourism, Intrepid Travel offers sustainable experience-rich travel via more than 900 trips on all seven continents.

The world’s largest adventure travel company and the largest travel B Corp, Intrepid Travel Chairman and its Co-Founder Darrell Wade casted doubts on Sri Lanka’s 10-year tourism strategy to attract 2.5 million high-end tourists, expressing  concerns on the lack of a sustainable programmed focused on such travellers.
Wade recently visited Sri Lanka to reaffirm Intrepid’s commitment to Sri Lanka within its 2030 strategy. Intrepid plans to foster greater economic growth in Sri Lanka, supporting a vibrant tourism industry and engaging local community philanthropy under its 2030 strategy.
During his visit, Wade spoke to Mirror Business where he touched on sustainability, emerging free visa travel and Sri Lanka’s long term tourism goals. 
Following are the excerpts of the interview:

 
Let’s talk about sustainability, how Sri Lanka is faring in terms of sustainable tourism?

We are slightly worried about Sri Lanka at the moment in terms of sustainability, because of the drive for growth. We understand that it’s good for the economy, jobs, balance of payments and all sorts of things. But, if the growth is too fast and doesn’t factor in sustainability, then that’s a major problem. We haven’t seen enough attention on sustainability.
We need government support, industry bodies’ support, both hoteliers and tour operators, you need that collective interest. You need collective attention to work towards guidelines that could steer SLTDA or whoever is in charge to say that we need to oblige with the rules being laid on sustainability
Otherwise, we are very happy to take a leadership role on sustainability and we do that everywhere in the world. But, in order to make material progress, you need to have all the industry players. It’s particularly hard when you have a government that is chasing jobs and dollars, we understands that. Sometimes sustainability is not on top of your agenda as it is supposed to be.

How would you rate Sri Lanka in terms of sustainability?

I would say four or five out of ten. There are some countries faring  seven or eight out of ten. When you look at some countries like Norway its nine out of ten, it’s a wealthy country and they can afford it. But then again countries such as Costa Rica too are faring nine out of ten. 

How are some of Sri Lanka’s regional competitors such as Thailand faring in sustainable tourism?  

Thailand is increasingly looking at sustainability. Thailand was late, all the development happened in 1980s, 1990s and early 2000s and sustainability was not on the agenda, but it was very different in last ten years, and sustainability improved a lot over that period. It has the attention of Thai government and Tourism Authority. Also, Thai Airways, as a national carrier promotes sustainability which helps quite a lot. So Thailand is a good example. 
Vietnam is significantly better. Again, it got the government’s attention. Naturally when you receive government’s attention, you get industry attention.

So, do you view government attention as focal to sustainable tourism? 

It’s not just government. It requires everyone’s support. The thing you have to understand is that customers are becoming increasingly sustainability-centric. So, over the next 2-3 years, Sri Lanka will grow really well. But I worry about Sri Lanka in 4-6 years, considering its efforts as of now.

The high cost is often given as an example for lack of focus on sustainability by governments as well as industry stakeholders. Do you see this as a major obstacle? 

Sustainability doesn’t have to be expensive. For an example, you can get rid of plastic and save money. Solar energy is another example, which you can again save money. It’s not about the money, it’s about the mindset. People sometimes present expenses as an excuse not to pursue something, and it is not the case.

What are Intrepid’s top source markets?

 
Globally, United States (U.S.), U.K, Australia are our top three markets. Our secondary markets are Canada, English speaking Europe and New Zealand. In addition, we are looking at a significant acquisition in France, if that happens, France will become a significant source market down the line. 
U.S in particular is a fast growing market. So it’s tempting to do something  there. We had 72 percent growth in U.S, driven by demand for sustainable vacations. There’s a hunger in U.S market for sustainability and meaningful holidays, we see no limits for growth in the market. We are fortunate that we are not a premium supplier, our products are affordable and we are picking up in this space. We will continue to grow in this market. 

Is connectivity the key barrier to attract U.S travellers to Sri Lanka?  

Yes, Sri Lanka is a problem, India is surprisingly doing well. Having said that, I got to learn that we here in Sri Lanka get more Americans than expected, given connectivity is a problem.  As India is doing really well, our team here wants to connect American travellers to India via Sri Lanka. I believe it’s a sound strategy. For an example, we take lot of people into Egypt, and probably 30  percent of them have a week in Jordan from the American market for instance. So, same can happen in Sri Lanka too. 

There’s a global trend towards offering visa free travel to attract tourists. What’s your take on this? 

You got to have it, it’s simple as that. If you look at the top two tourist arrival destinations in Asia: Thailand and Singapore, neither of them ever had visas. There’s a message in that. Whenever you have visas, it gives a reason for people not to travel into that destination. E-visas are fine, but it’s still a friction point.
With global direct connectivity, all arrive by airlines. So, you know exactly who the people coming in. So, you only need to connect with the airline global distribution systems (GDS), then you have enough information, and the people can be stamped in for two or four weeks or whatever the government wants (at the point of arrival). 

SLTDA imposed minimum room rates for Colombo City hotels has become a hot topic here in Sri Lanka. Do you agree with the logic behind minimum room rates? 

Personally, I think it’s crazy. Why would you dictate to a hotelier or any other establishment and set a minimum price? That’s really odd. Where else in the world they do that? It doesn’t make any sense to me. 

As you are aware, the government aims to attract 5 million tourists by 2029, of which 2.5 million would be “high-end” travellers. Do you see this to be a sound and a realistic strategy? Is this move from mass tourists to affluent tourists achievable?

 
In terms of ambition, I am not sure. Travellers will always go to places where they want to visit. It’s not for government of Sri Lanka or Australia or any other country to say we want this kind of tourists and, not this kind of tourists. For an example, let’s say that we are not working with too many hotels and we are going to premium exclusive level, then of course, it will work. But you can’t have both, you can’t say you want affluent tourists and we also want to grow mass tourism. 
The country needs to decide what it wants to do, what its true strategy is , and you got to be honest about it. Personally, I think it would be crazy to go after that premium market too much. There are a lot of other countries chasing after that same premium market, why is Sri Lanka going to win in that market?   On the one side, you have Dubai and Saudi Arabia really going after that market. Moreover, increasingly Thailand is going after that market, and similarly parts of Indonesia are doing the same. Why would Sri Lanka win against those players?
So, where is Sri Lanka’s natural advantage? You got good natural parks, great historic sites, obviously good beaches, great cultural erections etc. Those advantages are not necessarily best suited for the premium market. It has a middle market if you really get the infrastructure in place for that. That’s my opinion.