4.2 DATA COLLECTION
4.2.10 Economic impact
The direct economic impact of the Comrades Marathon on the Cities of Durban and
Pietermaritzburg in relation to the participants and their supporters at the event was measured by the direct expenditure related to daily spending as well as accommodation costs of the visitors attending the event. The following are the responses to questions about the spending patterns of the respondents at the Comrades Expo, at the event and after the event.
4.2.10.1 Responses: Daily expenditure Table 4.7: Average daily spend
AMOUNT FOOD AND
DRINKS
RUNNING GEAR
RACE MEMORABILIA
ARTS AND CRAFTS
Mean R221.21 R436.45 R253.36 R291.42
Standard
Deviation R377.42 R523.77 R302.40 R1 445.42
(ANOVA: p≤0.001)
4.2.10.2 Durban: Estimated average daily expenditure
Table 4.7 represents the combined daily expenditure of the runners and their supporters who resided in both cities. It revealed that the greater percentage of the respondents’ funds was
expended on running gear. This was achieved by calculating the percentage of the total spent and a chi-square test was used conducted.
Information provided by the respondents confirmed that all of them spent money in Durban.
They also identified a range of items on which the monies was spent viz. food and beverages, road-running gear, race memorabilia and arts and crafts (Table 4.7). The p-value was calculated as 0.00 (Table 4.19). This confirmed that there was a significant difference in the items on which the respondents expended their funds in the cities.
The respondents also provided data on the range of amounts that they spend at the event. This data was used to compute the average amount spend by the respondents which was R601. The large standard deviation amount of R722 is due to the number of extreme amounts that ranged from zero rand to R5 000 which was an indication that the respondents had an open budget or had not given serious thought as to the amount they would spend purchasing items at the event.
Figure 4.1 revealed that 46 200 people visited the Expo over the three-day registration period.
As previously stated, all the respondents indicated that all of them spent money at the event. As stated early, it was computed that the average number of days that the respondents visited the Bonitas Comrades Expo in Durban was 2.8 days. Hence, it was computed that 129 360 person days (46 200 x 2.8) were generated in Durban.
Table 4.7 revealed that the items purchased by the respondents were similar. The p-value was calculated as 0.878 (Table 4.19). This confirmed that there was no significant difference in the money expended in the cities. It can therefore be deduced that in terms of the respondents in Durban, 129 360 persons spent an average of R722. Thus, it was estimated that the total new
income generated into the economy of Durban was R93 397 920 (R722 x 129 360) in terms of the respondents’ average daily expenditure.
4.2.10.3 Pietermaritzburg: Estimated average daily expenditure
Information provided by the respondents confirmed that all of them spent money in
Pietermaritzburg. They also identified a range of items on which the monies was spent viz. food and beverages, road-running gear, race memorabilia and arts and crafts (Table 4.7).
It was previously established that all the participants and supporters i.e.12 529 spent money at the registration venue in Pietermaritzburg. Figure 4.1 was utilised to determine the average number of days that the respondents visited the Pietermaritzburg venue i.e. 1.8 days. Thus, it was projected that 22 553 (12 529 x 1.8) person days were generated in Pietermaritzburg. Hence, it was estimated that an amount of R16 283 266 (R722 x 22 553) i.e. new income, was generated into the Pietermaritzburg economy in 2010.
4.2.10.4 Responses on accommodation expenditure
Table 4.8 revealed data provided by the participants, their family members and supporters that identified the different types of accommodation establishments that the respondents lived in during their stay in Durban and Pietermaritzburg. The types of accommodation included
“Luxury Hotels”, “Bed and Breakfast” Establishments, “Self-Catering” Establishments and
“Holiday Homes”. Information from the respondents also indicated that a few participants and their supporters lived at establishments such as “Backpackers”, “Timeshare” facilities and
“Hostels”. The most popular places of accommodation for the international and local visitors were the four-star luxury hotels (67%). In addition, a small percentage of the respondents stayed with family and friends. The chi-square test was employed to compute the p-value which was
0.20 (Table 4.19). This confirmed that there was no significant difference in the various types of accommodation establishments that the respondents lived in the cities.
Table 4.8 also disclosed the cost of accommodation that all the participants and their supporters expended on the different types of establishments in both the cities. The estimated average cost of accommodation per night in Durban was estimated to be R566.74 whilst it was R606.89 in Pietermaritzburg.
Table 4.8: Cost of accommodation (in Rands) (n=604)
TYPE OF
ACC0MM0DATION
LOCATION
DURBAN PIETERMARITZBURG
INTER- NATIONAL
LOCAL INTER-
NATIONAL
LOCAL
Luxury Hotel (4-5)* 1 572 1 469 1 493 1 013
Family Hotel (1-3)* 925 873 1 033 1 069
Bed and Breakfast 385 597 763 686
Holiday Flat 620 609 300 519
Self-Catering 1 130 435 358 462
Holiday Home 267 315 1 000 540
Friends and Family 183 170 207 194
Other 145 234 0 330
A = R566.74 B = R606.89 (ANOVA: p≤0.001)
4.2.10.5 Duration of stay
Table 4.9: Duration of stay in nights (n=604)
TYPE OF ACC0M- M0DATION
LOCATION
DURBAN PIETERMARITZBURG INTER-
NATIONAL LOCAL INTER-
NATIONAL LOCAL
Luxury Hotel
(4-5)* 6 4 5 2
Family Hotel
(1-3)* 5 3 5 3
Bed and Breakfast 4 3 4 3
Holiday Flat 5 4 6 4
Self-Catering 6 4 11 3
Holiday Home 6 4 3 4
Friends and Family 5 4 13 4
Other 5 4 0 4
C = 4.37 days D = 4.04 days (ANOVA: p≤0.001)
Table 4.9 denoted the average number of the nights that the respondents resided in the various types of accommodation in both the cities. The estimated average number of nights that the respondents resided in these establishments in Durban was 4.37 and it was 4.04 in
Pietermaritzburg.
The p-value calculated was 0.00 (Table 4.19). This result indicated that there was a significant difference in the duration of stay between the respondents who resided in Durban and those who resided in Pietermaritzburg.
4.2.10.6 Size of the group (including respondent)
Table 4.10: Size of the group (including respondent) (n=768)
SIZE OF GROUP
DURBAN PIETERMARITZBURG INTER-
NATIONAL LOCAL INTER-
NATIONAL LOCAL
1
3.0 4.9
2.7
2.6 2 – 3
6.7 10.4 9.8 8.5
4+
90.3
84.7 87.5
88.9
E = 4.73 persons F = 4.94 persons (Chi-square test: p≤0.05)
The group refers to the international and local participants, their family members and their supporters. Table 4.10 indicated the number of people in the respondent’s group. The results disclosed that the frequency of the size of the group in Durban was 4.73 persons and in Pietermaritzburg it was 4.94 persons. Within this specific group, the largest number of the international tourists (90.3) resided in Durban whilst the largest number of the local tourists (88.9) resided in Pietermaritzburg.
The p-value computed was 0.001 (Table 4.19). Hence, there is no significant difference in the number of people in the respondents’ immediate group that resided in Durban in comparison to the respondents’ group that resided in Pietermaritzburg.
4.2.10.7 Durban: Estimated accommodation cost
Since 70% of the total respondents that visited the Expo confirmed that they lived in paid
accommodation (Figure 4.1), it was computed that 32 354 (70% x 46 220) respondents resided in
paid accommodation. The average size of the group of participants and their supporters and family members was estimated as 4.73 persons for Durban (Table 4.10). Hence, it was computed that 6 841 (32 354 ÷ 4.73) rooms were generated per night. It was calculated that the average stay was 4.37 nights (Table 4.9). Thus, 29 895 (6 841 x 4.37) rooms were generated. Table 4.8 was utilised to compute the estimated average cost for accommodation which was R566.74 per room. Consequently, it was estimated that R16 942 692 was generated by the Durban
accommodation industry.
4.2.10.8 Pietermaritzburg: Estimated accommodation cost
It was also presumed that 70% of the participants and their group that visited the registration venue in Pietermaritzburg lived in paid accommodation (Figure 4.1). Hence, it was computed that 8771 (70% x 12 529) respondents resided in paid accommodation. The average size of the group of participants and their supporters and family members was estimated as 4.94 persons (Table 4.9). Hence, it was computed that 1 776 (8 771 ÷ 4.94) rooms were generated per night.
Table 4.8 was used to calculate that the average stay which was 4.04 nights. Thus, 7 175 rooms (6 841 x 4.37) were generated. Table 4.7 was utilised to compute the estimated average cost per room which was calculated as R606.89. Therefore, it was estimated that R4 354 436 (R606.89 x 7175) was generated by the Pietermaritzburg accommodation industry.