july 2011 tns 212 224946 houston visitor profile calendar year 2010

July 2011TNS 212 224946

Houston Visitor ProfileCalendar Year 2010

2© 2011 TNS

Table of contents

Introduction and Purposes of Research 4Glossary 5Research Methods 6Topics 8The Houston Visitor 11Brief Abstract 12Executive Summary/Implications 13Appendix 1: Results of TravelsAmerica Research 19

Volume 20Visitor Types 21Trip Purpose 22Visitor Source 23Visitor Demographics 25Trip Planning/Booking 29Trip Characteristics 34Destination Competitors 42Satisfaction 44

3© 2011 TNS

Table of contents continued

Appendix IIa: Results of Follow-up Research: Opinions 45Demographics 46Attribute Importance 48City Destination Preference 50City of Residence Evaluation 53City Opinions/Ratings 55Future Visitation 67

Appendix IIb: Results of Follow-up Research: Media Choices 69

Appendix IIc: Results of Follow-up Research: General Advertising 71

Appendix IId: Results of Follow-up Research: Specific GHCVB Ads 78

Appendix IIe: Results of Follow-up Research: Website Usage 91

Appendix IIf: Results of Follow-up Research: Houston Visitors 103

Appendix IIg: Results of Follow-up Research: Attitudes/Behaviors 109

Appendix IIh: Results of Follow-up Research: Final Comments 112

4© 2011 TNS

Introduction and purposes of research

TNS is pleased to present the third TravelsAmerica report for the Greater Houston Convention & Visitors Bureau (CVB). This online (data collection) project is conducted continuously throughout the year by TNS as a nationwide syndication. The results enable the Greater Houston CVB to assess visitor volumes and build a profile of leisure visitors to the area, specifically:

Volume and source of visitors

Basic demographics: age, number of people in household, average household income

Trip characteristics: day vs. overnight, business travel, travel expenditures, length of stay, activities selected

Mode of transportation: air, own auto/truck, and other choices

Visitor residence by state and selected DMAs.

In addition, a separate follow-up survey of Houston visitors measures the “whys behind visitation,” advertising effectiveness/ROI, and web usability such as:

Important aspects of choosing a destination and travel planning and booking

Perceptions, motivators, and interest in Houston vs. competitors

Media usage

Awareness, recall, and influence of ads

Impact of website on brand, affinity, and purchase intent

The report continues with a description of the research methods, then an Executive Summary. The following Appendix details the results of the research.

5© 2011 TNS

GlossaryTerm Definition

DMA Designated Market Area: Counties that share the same primary TV broadcast signals (210 DMAs in US)

Calendar Year (CY) January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010

In-State Texas

Person-Trip Total person-trips are all trips taken by all people; i.e. a couple taking three trips counts as six (two people, each taking three trips)

Respondent/Household Level Respondent information – one count per respondent

Source of Visitors Residence of visitors

State/Region Level Information about all trips taken to a particular state/region (each trip to an area counts)

State Volume All trips taken to/within the state

Travel Party Traveler plus all companions, including children

Trip Travel 50 miles or more (one-way) away from home or stayed overnight. Excludes commuters or commercial travel (flight attendants, commercial vehicle operator). This eliminates some leisure day trips, such as some visitors from Galveston, since the distance is about 50 miles

Trip Level Information about all trips – each trip counts

Trip Volume All trips summed together

Visitor Person who has visited Houston in the past month; all are US residents, thus, travel is domestic travel only (domestic consumer).

6© 2011 TNS

Research methodsThe syndicated TravelsAmerica study collects data via a web based methodology. Sample is selected from the TNS 6th dimension USA Panel with e-mail invitations sent monthly to representative households. TNS constantly strives to keep Internet penetration high and panel fatigue low by carefully monitoring and limiting the number of contacts with each household.

Each month, potential respondents receive an e-mail request to participate in the study; TNS targets a response rate of 45%. The field period runs for two weeks each month, usually starting in the middle of the first week.

To enhance relevance, the data are weighted two ways:

Demographic weights adjust respondents by demographic factors such as region, age, income, household size, and marital status to closely represent the characteristics of US households

Trip and state projection calculations counts every trip taken by respondents for total trips taken. Detailed information collected for up to three trips in the past month is projected to the actual number of trips taken. In the case of city level calculations, each trip taken to that city counts. A few tables represent person-trips – these take into account the immediate travel party size for each trip as well. For projections, the counts are weighted to reflect the actual number of US households and total trips.

TNS supervises all fieldwork, editing, coding, and tabulation of the results.

This special report focuses on results for Greater Houston. For the calendar years 2008 through 2010, respondents (does not include others in travel party) for Houston and total are shown below.

CY 2008#of Travelers (Unweighted)

CY 2008# of Travelers

(Weighted)



(Weighted)



(Weighted)Region

713 715 760 784 666 721 Houston Visitors

75,001 73,382 74,203 73,910 74,413 75,741 Total for TravelsAmerica

7© 2011 TNS

Research methods continued

For the follow up survey three groups who had completed the TravelsAmerica study in 2008-2010 were re-contacted. Those groups include:

Texas residents

Houston residents

Houston overnight leisure visitors

Potential respondents received email invitations to participate in the follow up survey. The field period ran May 16-26, 2011, somewhat earlier than in prior years (June 16-28 in 2010 and August 11-24, 2009).

# of Respondents 2009



Sample Group

326 471 404 Past Year Overnight Leisure Visitors (subset of total)

309 373 296 Houston Residents

259 664 829 Texas Residents Outside Of Houston

124 143 109 Non-Texas Residents Who Have Visited Houston

692 1,180 1,234 Total

8© 2011 TNS

Topics

Derived from the TNS TravelsAmerica syndication, this third annual report prepared for the Houston CVB for Calendar Year 2010 addresses these topics in this order:

TNS TravelsAmerica syndication:Volume of visitorsVisitor types (business/leisure; day/overnight)Purpose (business/leisure) and source (Texas resident or not)Source of visitors (top states and top DMAs)Percent of Texas residents visiting HoustonVisitor demographicsTrip planning (timing and source of information)Trip booking methodsTrip characteristics: purpose, transportation, day/overnight, accommodations/length of stay, travel party, activities, expendituresDestinations: Houston visitors – competitive statesDestinations: Houston visitors – competitive citiesSatisfaction with Houston.

9© 2011 TNS

Topics

The TNS 2011 follow-up survey to Houston visitors and/or Texas residents:Demographics and residence

Attributes for choosing a destination – importance and Houston ranking

Opinion of own city (the one in which respondent lives) as a leisure destination

Image of Houston and competitive cities as “ideal” leisure destination

Percent visiting Houston or competitors

Visitors’ opinions of Houston vs. competitors on value for the money, experience, likelihood to return, and likelihood to recommend

Future visitation

Media usage

Unaided advertising awareness, media recall, and effect of advertising

Aided advertising awareness for specific Houston ads – print, TV commercials, online ads and reactions to them

Advertising impact (all ads combined)

Website usage and evaluations

Houston trip behaviors: number of visits, timing, spending levels, satisfaction

General feelings and attitudes – overall travelers and Houston visitors

General comments.

The Houston Visitor and Brief Abstract

11© 2011 TNS

The typical Houston visitor

Houston VisitorsAge 45

High Income ($72.800)

Married (60%)

College Grad (58%)

Caucasian (81%)

Choose urban activities – shopping, fine dining, urban sightseeing

Avoid outdoor activities – rural sightseeing, beaches, national /state parks

Have children at home (34%)

Act as advisors to friends and family on travel

Like to travel to exotic places

Will pay more to travel someplace original

Drive practical cars

Typical US TravelerAge 47

High Income, but less than Houston Visitor ($70,800)

Married (58%)

College Grad (54%)

Caucasian (86%)

Choose urban activities at levels similar to Houston visitors

Choose more outdoor activities more often than Houston visitors

Children at home (33%)

Prime (Lucrative) Houston Visitors(Past Year Overnight Visitors)

Label readers

Will pay more to visit original places

Will pay more to save time or for higher quality

Will not buy clothes for comfort only – need style too

Shoppers, but not bargain hunters


More likely drive an SUV than average

12© 2011 TNS

Brief abstractThe recession eases a bit for the travel, but Houston still battles other destinations to attract visitors. Houston can potentially use its advocates to strengthen its tourism image:

With 59% of Houston visitors living in Texas, most drive; however, Houston needs to nurture all Texas metro markets as the proportion of Texans that visited Houston in the past three years plunges (22% from 32% in 2009)Overnight leisure visitors shorten their time in Houston, with an average stay that drops by almost half a night in 2010 (3.3 vs. 3.7 in 2009); now placing near the US average (3.4)The proportion intending to visit Houston in the future continues to decline, dropping nearly a third from two years ago (44% from 54% last year and 70% in 2009) among those in the follow-up studyMore positively, the proportion of leisure overnight visitors remains high (60% of visitors spent the night for leisure in 2010 vs. 61% in 2009 – much higher than the 51% in 2008) and very beneficial for Houston – easier to encourage to stay longer than business travelers and the longer they stay, the more they spend, and the more time they have to enjoy Houston’s featuresHouston enjoys an above average proportion of business visitors (18%), who generally spend more on each trip (vs. 13% business travelers for US destinations)Houston ranks among the preferred destinations when looking for exciting urban activities, particularly variety of dining options and cultural/performing arts; travelers also highly regard its handicapped accessibilityHouston usually outperforms New Orleans and sometimes Dallas/Ft. Worth on the 24 destination attributesAdvertising awareness continues to climb (29% from 23% in 2010 and 19% in 2009), suggesting good decisions by GHCVB. The new Jim Parsons commercial edges ahead of the ZZ Top ad for the highest praiseHouston has strong advocates who love the city “To see, do, eat, drink, or even think about it, do it in Houston.” Discover ways to harness their support.

Executive Summary/Implications

14© 2011 TNS

Executive summary/implicationsImportance of tourism to HoustonSeveral measures underscore the importance of tourism to Houston:

Volume of Visitors. Nationally, US tourism is recovering from the late 2008-2009 recession. Although Houston was more resilient in 2009 than the US as a whole, the reverse occurs in 2010, where Houston loses ground (-8%) while the US (+7%) and Texas (+5%) post gains.

Travel Spending in Houston. Although continuing to drop, visitors still spend substantial amounts in Houston, averaging $432 per travel party (from $492 last year). As expected, business travelers ($713) spend more than leisure travelers ($368) and overnight visitors ($435 leisure; $843 business) spend much more than day-trip visitors ($110 leisure). Spending notably more on lodging and transportation, overnight non-Texas residents ($936) average higher spending levels than Houston residents ($476) and non-Houston Texas residents ($421).

Source of Visitors. Texas supplies the majority (59%) of Houston visitors; Louisiana ranks a very distant 2nd place (9%).

Trip Purpose. Most visitors to Houston are tourists (not business travelers); however, Houston attracts more business travelers than the national average (see business travel below). With proportionately more business travelers, leisure trips fall behind the norm (71% Houston; 79% all trips), but they still make up over two-thirds of all Houston travel. Of all Houston leisure trips, most are overnight (83%).

Timing. The heaviest travel to Houston peaks in June – similar to last year.

Business Travel. Business travel behaviors/choices differ from leisure travelers; for example, they more often stay in hotels/motels and travel alone. Houston attracts a larger proportion of business travelers than other destinations (18% Houston; 13% total) while also capturing a larger share of personal business/other (10% vs. 8%).

15© 2011 TNS

Executive summary/implications continued

Profile: trip and travel characteristicsDemographics: Houston Visitors Resemble Visitors Elsewhere, With Some Variations:

Visitors from New York City/Chicago/Washington DC ($113,700) report higher earnings than others ($72,800 total Houston visitors), a gap similar to two years ago

Ethnicity comparisons with total US travelers show a larger proportion of African American visitors (10% vs. 7%) and Spanish origin (9% vs. 4%) – particularly those from Dallas-Ft. Worth, Austin, or San Antonio (12%, both ethnicities).

Travel Planning Horizons Are Short. Many (43%) Houston visitors decide to take the trip within two weeks of departure – similar to the total US (40%). As expected, leisure overnighters (34%) less frequently plan to visit on short notice (within two weeks) than leisure day-trippers (63%) or than Houston residents (67%).

Travelers Primarily Rely on “Offline” Information Sources. Houston visitors rely primarily on their own experience (27%) and friends/relatives (21%) to gather travel information, similar to other travelers.

Houston Visitors Most Often Book “Online.” More Houston visitors rely on online booking sources (56% vs. 49% all travelers), booking at least one trip element (air/hotel/entertainment/etc.) that way.

Most Visitors Drive. Two-thirds (67%) drive to Houston, somewhat less than overall travelers (72%). The greater proportion of overnight business travel to Houston contributes to the above average level of air travel (23% Houston visitors, 17% all travelers).

Overnighters Spend More than Day-trippers. Because of the additional time to see/do more things and because they incur lodging expenses, leisure overnight visitors spend more than twice as much as day-trippers ($435 vs. $110). Business overnighters spend the most ($843) with a length of stay similar to overnight leisure (3.4 vs. 3.4 nights leisure). However, overall, Houston visitors spend less money and time (# of overnights) in Houston than last year.

16© 2011 TNS


Houston Relies on Texas Tourism

Houston Attracts Texans. Proximity plays a substantial role in Houston tourism. Over half (59%) of visitors live in Texas; Louisiana, in second place, contributes far fewer (9%). The top six city sources are in Texas (led by Houston, Dallas-Ft. Worth, Austin, and San Antonio).

Geography influences competitive market set. Dallas-Ft. Worth, Austin, and San Antonio residents prefer southern or western states for additional vacation travel while New York, Chicago, and Washington DC residents take additional vacations clustered in the Northeast plus Florida and California. Despite this polarization, both groups most often select Florida and California as places they want to visit in the future.

Houston Tends to Trail San Antonio in Image and Attribute Rankings

Preference for Houston depends on visitation. Past year overnight leisure travelers prefer Houston on most destination attributes. However, travelers as a whole more often choose San Antonio when comparing Texas metropolitan areas. San Antonio excels (over Houston and other competitors) on attributes ranked most important in a travel destination including good value for the money, reasonable costs, friendly/welcoming, lots to see/do, and good service. Travelers view Houston as competitive to other areas for urban activities, notably variety of dining options and cultural/performing arts.

Opinion ratings of Houston remain positive, but trail other Texas cities. The majority of visitors perceive Houston positively in most ratings, virtually unchanged from last year: overall opinion (49% from 51%), value for the money (60%; 61%), experience in Houston (69%; 68%), likely to return (69%; 70%), and a place to recommend (64%; 65%). However, visitors to other Texas cities rate those cities more strongly, especially San Antonio (80%, 75%, 87%, 86%, 88% respectively).

17© 2011 TNS


Advertising Awareness Directly Relates to Distance from Houston and Visitation Houston’s unaided ad awareness trails San Antonio. San Antonio leads in overall unaided ad awareness (32%), above all other Texas cities in the study (Houston 16%, DFW at 15%, and Austin 13%). Past year visitors (21%) and Houston residents (21%) most often remember a Houston ad. Among the GHCVB ads, overall awareness increases from last year. Print ad awareness remains about the same (12% from 13%), but television recall (25% from 13%) nearly doubles – indicating memorable ads that target potential visitors. Even without measuring online ads this wave, nearly one in three remembers at least one ad (29% from 23% in 2010 and 19% in 2009). The Jim Parsons commercial generates a better impression of Houston than other ads. The Jim Parsons commercial improves perceptions of Houston more than any other ad (43% vs. 36% for ZZ Top, 31% for Lyle Lovett; and 13% for the print ads).People like both the Jim Parsons and ZZ Top commercials. Viewers rate its likeability very highly (65% Jim Parsons; 64% ZZ Top; 56% Lyle Lovett; 28% for the print ads).Finally, both Jim Parsons and ZZ Top commercials build higher interest in future visitation. More viewers think they will travel to Houston because of these ads than other ads (25% Jim Parsons; 24% ZZ Top; 20% Lyle Lovett; 15% for the print ads).Advertising effectiveness for Houston. Advertising generates about one out 10 visits to Houston – not counting the effective on any online advertising.

Greater Houston CVB Website – Value Still KeyDestination website users look for deals. More travelers choose savings/value as the top desired feature in a travel destination website while save money ranks 20th out of 22 statements about the GHCVB website by its users. Thus, Houston has an opportunity to improve already high levels of satisfaction by making savings/value a stronger element.

Houston Generates Good Levels of Satisfaction, but Declines From the PastSatisfaction Varies by Proximity. Continuing to decline (57% extremely/very satisfied from 62% last year and 71% in 2009), a majority of visitors still grant Houston high praise (necessary for strong word-of-mouth “advertising”). Houston residents, especially, seem most satisfied and perceive improvement from last year (82% from 71%).

18© 2011 TNS


AssessmentHouston Draws The Business Traveler. As companies continue to cut spending in harsh economic conditions and find alternatives to face-to-face meetings, company travel budgets will continue to decrease. Houston will need to counter this trend by remaining attractive to business travelers, but also by spurring greater interest as a leisure destination as well. Key images to underscore in promoting Houston include its value (a growing concern) and urban appeal.

Houston Visitors Are Within “Easy Reach.” Since many live within easy access to Houston, visitors need less time to plan/decide trips. Thus, marketing can be flexible in media choices, can develop quick promotions, and probably see results faster than destinations which rely on more distant markets.

Houston Leisure Travel Potentially More Lucrative. With nearly two-thirds (63%) of Houston overnighters currently opting to stay in a hotel, Houston already excels in encouraging guests to use paid accommodations. However, finding ways to encourage these travelers to stay more days in the city could increase tourism spending – especially if hotels can capture more of those visiting friends and family.

Tough Economy Impacts Tourism. The general downturn noted for the US economy hit the discretionary-income-dependent tourism industry especially hard. Houston still struggles to build tourism as the US as a whole begins to recover. Emphasis on Houston as a culturally diverse cosmopolitan city near the gulf can attract more overnight leisure visitors and strong advertising (continuously improving) will help the city become more competitive.

Messaging. Promoting hotels’ affordability, relaxation value, avoidance of being an intrusive houseguest, and easy access to Houston’s cosmopolitan dining/entertainment could entice travelers to choose paid accommodations.

Media. Most people view television (83%) and Internet sites (92%) daily, with vast messaging potential … however, capturing the attention of the target population of potential visitors remains the challenge.

Appendix I: Detailed Results of the ResearchFrom TravelsAmerica Syndicated Survey

20© 2011 TNS

Volume of visitorsMarket Overview (Person Trips):

Compared to the prior year, 2010 person-trips gain in the US and Texas, but continue to erode in Houston as follows: All US Trips ( +7%; to 913 million); Texas (+5%; to 63 million); Houston (-8%; to 9 million).

Although declining, Houston tourism gained in Quarter 3, as it collected a large share of travelers in the traditionally heavy summer travel season (July – September). As the economy began to stabilize in 2010, most tourism began to rebound, but Houston continues to lag its prior levels through most of the year.

Q4a. Please indicate the US state(s) visited (Person Trips - proj.) (day or overnight trip)

Q4d. Please indicate the US cities(s) visited (Person Trips - proj.) (day or overnight trip)

US, Non-Texas 871,714,000 US, Non-Texas

506,332,000US, Non-Texas

344,539,000

CY 2006 CY 2007 CY 2008 CY 2009 CY 20102009 - 2010 % Change

Type of Person Trips (Visitors)

Total US 1,084,344,000 1,233,242,000 938,563,000 852,967,000 913,318,000 +7%

Total Texas 80,625,000 76,424,000 66,849,000 60,409,000 63,318,000 +5%

Total Houston 12,087,000 12,661,000 9,488,000 9,812,000 9,010,0000 -8%

Q1 2,838,000 2,994,000 2,302,000 2,283,000 2,062,000 -10%

Q2 2,793,000 2,787,000 2,649,000 2,706,000 2,075,000 -23%

Q3 3,109,000 3,218,000 2,310,000 1,977,000 2,488,000 +26%

Q4 3,348,000 3,661,000 2,227,000 2,847,000 2,385,000 --16%

21© 2011 TNS

Visitor types

Day/Overnight Varies by Type of Trip:

Trips of 50+ miles typically involve an overnight stay for both Business and Leisure trips

Houston hosts far more leisure than business visitors – and nearly matches the level of last year.

Houston VISITORS by TYPEBase: Houston Visitors

PB*: Personal Business/Other

Total: Day 19%Overnight 81%Leisure: Day

17%Overnight 83%Q1b. Please select the primary purpose for trips . . . (demo wtd; trip level)

Leisure = 71%Leisure = 67% Leisure = 73%

22© 2011 TNS

Trip purpose/visitor sourceOverall:

Almost three-quarters (71%) of Houston visitors primarily travel for leisure – slightly fewer than for total US visitors (79%) and for the state of Texas (74%), but all three areas remain near the prior year. Somewhat more than half (58%) of Houston visitors live in Texas – very consistent with the past.

Trip/Visitor Characteristics% of Visitors to StateTYPE OF TRIP

Base: Visitors to Houston; Texas; US LOCATION OF RESIDENCEBase: Visitors to Houston

Q1b. Which of the following was the PRIMARY purpose of trip to . . . (Household Trip Level – demo wtd, not adjusted for travel party size)

Panel: Residence of visitors (Household Level)

21%

13%

16%

18%

13%

16%

18%

7%

10%

8%

10%

10%

77%

72%

67%

79%

76%

73%

79%

74%

71%

15%

18%

8%

8%

12%

11%

2008 All Trips

2008 Trips to Texas

2008 Trips to Houston

2009 All Trips

2009 Trips to Texas


2010 All Trips

2010 Trips to Texas


Business Personal Business/Other Leisure

42% 42% 41%

58% 58% 59%

2008 2009 2010

Non-Texas Resident Texas Resident

23© 2011 TNS

Visitor source by state/DMAProximity Counts:

As noted earlier, more than half (59%) of visitors reside in TexasNearby Louisiana and more populated states (CA, IL, FL) also contribute heavily to Houston’s tourismTexas DMAs, particularly Dallas-Ft. Worth, and larger US cities add the most visitors to the count.

Source of Visitors: Top States (1%+)

Base: Visited Houston% of Visitors Residing in . . .

Panel: State/DMA residence of those who visited Houston (Household Level)

Source of Visitors: Top DMAs (2%+)

Base: Visited Houston% of Visitors Residing in . . .

1%

2%

1%

1%

4%

0%

3%

4%

7%

58%

1%

2%

1%

0%

2%

0%

2%

4%

8%

58%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

4%

9%

59%

Colorado

Oklahoma

Michigan

Mississippi

Florida

Arkansas

Illinois

California

Louisiana

Texas

CY 2010CY 2009CY 2008

1%

2%

1%

0%

2%

2%

1%

4%

3%

5%

9%

16%

14%

1%

2%

1%

2%

2%

2%

2%

5%

3%

5%

8%

15%

16%

1%

1%

1%

2%

2%

2%

3%

5%

5%

6%

9%

10%

17%

Shreveport

Chicago

Corpus Christi

Harlingen-Weslaco-Brownsville-McAllen

Lafayette, LA

Los Angeles

New Orleans

Beaumont-Port Arthur

Waco-Temple-Bryan

San Antonio

Austin

Dallas-Ft. Worth

Houston

24© 2011 TNS

Destinations: Houston visitationA Different Viewpoint – How Many Texans and Non-Texans Visit Houston:

Fewer Texans remember visiting Houston than in the past (1 to 3 years) or plan to visit Houston in the next 2 years than in the last two surveys – underscoring the competitive travel destination environment

Typical of most destinations, Houston draws over half of its visitors from within the state (59%, shown earlier). Non-Texans have many destinations from which to choose, with only a few (2%) visiting Houston in the past three years. Non-Texans contribute not quite half (41%, also shown earlier) of Houston’s total tourism.

NON-TEXAS RESIDENTNON-TEXAS RESIDENTTEXAS (Non-Houston) RESIDENTTEXAS (Non-Houston) RESIDENT

Visitation Patterns for Houston – Household Level, All Travelers

Q8a: Please indicate US cities visited for leisure in past three years. Q8b. Please indicate cities visited within the past 12 months. Q8c: Which US cities plan to visit within the next two years for leisure? (Household Level)

13%

19%

30%

13%

20%

32%

10%

16%

22%

Plan to VisitHouston Within 24

Months

Visit HoustonPast 12 Months

Visit HoustonPast 3 Years

CY 2010

CY 2009

CY 20082%

2%

2%

2%

1%

4%

2%

1%

2%

25© 2011 TNS

Visitor demographicsHouston Visitors Resemble Visitors to Other Areas, With a Few Variations:

Houston visitors closely mirror the incomes of both overall US and Texas travelers. Although a very small sample, those living in New York, Chicago, or Washington, DC continue to report higher earnings,

Overall household composition for Houston visitors often (44%) includes three or more people in the household – similar to overall US travelers – thus, the family market is important for Houston

Ethnicity comparisons show a larger proportion of Houston visitors, especially those from Dallas Ft. Worth, Austin, and San Antonio are African-American, as noted last year as well.

Panel: Age, Income, Children, Ethnicity. (Household Level – demo wtd)

CY 2010Demographics

All TravelersTexas Visitors

Houston Visitors

Houston Visitor & Houston Resident

Houston Visitor & DFW/Austin/San Antonio Resident

Houston Visitor & NY/Chicago/DC

Resident*

Average Age 47 46 45 45 44 50

Average Hhld Income $70,800 $70,600 $72,800 $69,100 $73,600 $113,700

% Male 38% 40% 36% 36% 39% 70%

% Married 58% 61% 60% 56% 60% 85%

Household Composition

% One Person 22% 21% 23% 19% 26% 7%

% Two People 35 34 33 37 29 59

% Three or More 43 45 44 44 45 34

Ethnicity

% Caucasian 86% 85% 81% 85% 76% 87%

% Spanish Origin 4 8 9 8 12 -

% African-American 7 7 10 8 12 7

*Very small sample (12); treat as qualitative only

26© 2011 TNS

Visitor demographics

CY 2009Demographics


Houston Visitors




Resident*

Average Age 46 46 44 46 43 48


% Male 39% 41% 39% 44% 39% 25%

% Married 59 63 60 47 69 46


% One Person 22% 19% 24% 31% 20% 37%

% Two People 35 36 34 30 33 34

% Three or More 44 45 43 39 47 30

Ethnicity

% Caucasian 85% 86% 79% 80% 73% 82%

% Spanish Origin 4 8 7 8 8 0


*Very small sample; treat as qualitative only

Prior year data provided for ease of comparison


27© 2011 TNS

Visitor demographics2008 data provided for ease of comparison

CY 2008Demographics


Houston Visitors




Resident*

Average Age 46 45 44 45 43 46


% Male 43% 46% 47% 44% 43% 68%

% Married 58 62 66 65 65 79


% One Person 22% 20% 19% 19% 19% 21%

% Two People 34 35 30 35 29 19

% Three or More 44 45 51 47 52 60

Ethnicity

% Caucasian 86% 86% 81% 91% 79% 85%



*Very small sample; treat as qualitative only


28© 2011 TNS

Visitor age distributionGreater Detail by Age:

Shows that Houston consistently draws slightly fewer older visitors than other destinations

Visitors from New York, Chicago, or Washington, DC more often place in the middle age group; relatively few young adults from these markets visit Houston.

Age of Visitor

QD. How old are you . . . (Respondent Level, demo weighted)

CY 2009CY 2009

CY 2008CY 2008

CY 2010CY 2010

US Travelers Texas Visitors Houston Visitors Houston Visitor & Houston Resident

Houston Visitor & DFW/San

Antonio/Austin Resident


Resident*

*Very small sample (12 in CY 2010); treat as qualitative only

29© 2011 TNS

Trip planning: timingLogical Patterns Occur for Trip Planning:

With fewer travel considerations (such as lodging or number of meals), day-trip visitors to Houston as well as Houston residents have the freedom to be much more spontaneous – considering and deciding within two weeks of the trip

Overnight business travelers spend less time planning a trip than overnight leisure travelers

Houston visitors from Houston continue to plan (consider and decide to take) trips with much shorter time horizons than travelers from farther away

Slightly fewer Houston visitors take three months or more to consider and decide on a trip than all US travelers combined.

Q4i. Please indicate how far in advance you considered traveling to . . . // Decided to visit . . . (State Level-demo wtd)

CY 2010Trip Planning (Time Before Visit)

All Travelers

Houston Visitors Total

Houston Visitors Ls Overnight

Houston Visitors Ls Day Trip

Houston Visitors Bz Overnight*

Houston Visitors & Houston

Residents

Houston Visitor & DFW/Austin/

San Antonio Resident


Resident**

Considered

Within Two Weeks

32% 34% 23% 55% 38% 60% 30% 9%

2 – 4 Weeks 14 13 15 5 14 6 16 22

1 – 3 Months 20 22 24 19 25 15 26 15

3+ Months 34 31 39 22 23 20 28 55

Decided

Within Two Weeks

40% 43% 34% 63% 42% 67% 40% 9%

2 – 4 Weeks 15 16 18 11 15 14 17 22

1 – 3 Months 20 18 20 14 25 3 24 31

3+ Months 26 23 29 13 18 15 19 39

*Business (Bz) Day Trips not shown (too few for reliable comparisons)** Very small sample; treat as qualitative only

30© 2011 TNS

Trip planning: timing



All TravelersHouston Visitors Total

Houston Visitors

Ls Overnight


Houston Visitors

Bz Overnight

*


Residents

Houston Visitor &

DFW/Austin/San Antonio Resident

Houston Visitor &

NY/Chicago/DC Resident**

Considered

Within Two Weeks

32% 34% 24% 68% 35% 54% 35% 27%

2 – 4 Weeks 14 15 14 6 26 12 20 24

1 – 3 Months 20 24 28 12 19 17 23 13

3+ Months 34 27 35 15 20 17 23 37

Decided

Within Two Weeks

41% 42% 33% 74% 42% 62% 44% 27%

2 – 4 Weeks 15 17 17 9 25 13 19 24

1 – 3 Months 19 20 24 7 17 13 20 21

3+ Months 25 21 27 11 16 13 17 28



31© 2011 TNS

Trip planning: timing



All TravelersHouston Visitors Total

Houston Visitors

Ls Overnight


Houston Visitors

Bz Overnight

*


Residents

Houston Visitor &

DFW/Austin/San Antonio Resident

Houston Visitor &


Considered

Within Two Weeks

34% 37% 25% 58% 41% 64% 33% 16%

2 – 4 Weeks 14 15 14 13 21 16 15 9

1 – 3 Months 19 21 26 12 18 9 25 48

3+ Months 33 26 35 16 20 11 27 26

Decided

Within Two Weeks

42% 46% 34% 70% 47% 72% 45% 19%

2 – 4 Weeks 15 17 17 13 23 12 16 18

1 – 3 Months 19 17 22 4 15 5 19 38

3+ Months 25 21 28 13 16 11 19 26


2008 data provided for ease of comparison

32© 2011 TNS

Trip Planning Sources:

To be selected, destinations must provide potential travelers with information that encourages visits:

Generally, Houston visitors use similar information sources as other travelers

However, compared to last year, they rely slightly less on online sources but about the same as total travelers.

Trip planning: sources of information

Information Sources to Plan a TripRanked by All Sources (5%+)

Q4j. What sources did you use in planning your trip to . . . (State Level – demo wtd)

51%

28%19%

26%

10% 10% 8%

31%

8%

50%

28%19%

27%

10% 10% 8%

31%

8%

51%

29%20%

26%

9% 9% 7%

30%

9%

NET OFFLINE Own Experience Friends/Relatives

NET ONLINE DestinationWebsite

Travel Provider(airline etc.)

Online FullService (Expedia

et al)

NO PLANS MADE SOMEONE ELSEMADE PLANS

All US Travelers - CY 2008 All US Travelers - CY 2009 All US Travelers - CY 2010

48%

28%19%

27%

9% 11% 9%

31%

10%

45%

26%20%

30%

8%13% 9%

32%

8%

48%

27%21% 25%

7% 9% 8%

31%

11%

NET OFFLINE Own Experience Friends/Relatives


Travel Provider(airline etc.)

Online FullService (Expedia

et al)

NO PLANS MADE SOMEONE ELSEMADE PLANS

Houston Visitors - CY 2008 Houston Visitors - CY 2009 Houston Visitors - CY 2010

33© 2011 TNS

Trip bookingTrip Booking Methods:

Travelers, especially Houston visitors, place greater emphasis on online than offline channels:

Houston visitors book online more often (56% vs. 49%) than all travelers and, consequently, book offline less often (29% vs. 38%)

Compared to a year ago, booking via an online travel provider slips among Houston visitors, but still exceeds that for total travelers (19% vs. 15%).

Method Used to Book Trip Components Ranked by All Sources (5%+)

Q4k. Please indicate the method(s) you used to book your trip . . . (State Level – demo wtd)

40%

14% 11% 7%

50%

11%20% 15% 19%

53%38%

13% 11% 6%

52%

11%21%

15% 19%

53%38%

13% 12%6%

49%

11%20% 15% 20%

53%

NET OFFLINE Direct w/ Dest./Attraction

Direct w/ TravelProvider

CorporateTravel Dept.


Travel ProviderWebsite

Online FullService

(Expedia et al)

Someone ElseBooked

No BookingsMade

All US Travelers - CY 2008 All US Travelers - CY 2009 All US Travelers - CY 2010

34%

8% 12% 10%

56%

13%25%

14%22%

52%

25%

5% 8% 7%

65%

7%

28%21% 17%

52%

29%

7% 12% 6%

56%

8%19% 19% 22%

51%

NET OFFLINE Direct w/ Dest./Attraction

Direct w/ TravelProvider

CorporateTravel Dept.


Travel ProviderWebsite

Online FullService

(Expedia et al)

Someone ElseBooked

No BookingsMade

Houston Visitors - CY 2008 Houston Visitors - CY 2009 Houston Visitors - CY 2010

34© 2011 TNS

Trip characteristics: purpose & transportationMost Visitors Come to Houston to Play:

Three-quarters (71%) of Houston visitors come primarily for leisure, often to visit friends/relatives (52%)

Although most come to play, Houston draws more business travelers than the national average (18% vs. 13%), especially those traveling from New York, Chicago, and Washington, DC (41%).

Q1b: Which was the primary purpose of trip? Q2b: Which was the primary mode of transportation? (Trip Level – demo wtd)

CY 2010 All Travelers






Residents

Houston Visitor & DFW/Austin/

San Antonio Resident

Houston Visitor & NY/Chi/DC Resident**

PRIMARY TRIP PURPOSE

NET Leisure/Personal 79% 71% 100% 100% -- 75% 73% 52%

Visit Friends/ Relatives 41 52 77 51 -- 44 56 41

Entertainment/Sightsee 13 7 9 17 -- 13 4 12

Outdoor Recreation 7 2 2 5 -- 5 2 --

NET Business 13 18 -- -- 100 9 19 41

Personal Bs/Other 6 8 -- -- -- 14 5 --

PRIMARY MODE

% Own Auto/Truck 72% 67% 72% 89% 28% 89% 86% 15%

% Air Travel 17 23 20 3 57 4 4 80

% Rental Car 4 5 5 1 8 3 7 --

% Other 3 3 1 7 3 2 3 --


35© 2011 TNS

Trip characteristics: purpose & transportation


CY 2009All

TravelersHouston

Visitors Total





Residents


Houston Visitor &




Visit Friends/Relatives 42 51 73 60 -- 49 54 31


Outdoor Recreation 7 2 3 1 -- 1 4 --

NET Business 13 18 -- -- 100% 6 16 56

Personal Bs/Other 8 10 -- -- -- 17 7 7

PRIMARY MODE

% Own Auto/Truck 71% 65% 65% 97% 27% 90% 87% 11%

% Air Travel 18 24 23 1 57 4 6 72

% Rental Car 4 5 5 -- 9 2 3 9

% Other 8 6 7 2 7 4 4 9



36© 2011 TNS

Trip characteristics: purpose & transportation


CY 2008All

TravelersHouston

Visitors Total





Residents


Houston Visitor &




Visit Friends/Relatives 41 48 77 55 -- 45 53 34


Outdoor Recreation 7 3 5 7 -- 8 3 4

NET Business 15 21 -- -- 100% 16 11 16

Personal Bs/Other 8 12 -- -- -- 12 18 33

PRIMARY MODE

% Own Auto/Truck 70% 66% 69% 96% 34% 89% 83% 17%

% Air Travel 18 24 21 3 52 5 7 71

% Rental Car 4 5 5 -- 10 2 7 5

% Other 8 5 5 1 4 4 3 7


2008 data provided for ease of comparison

37© 2011 TNS

Most Trips Include an Overnight Stay:

Most (71%) domestic (US) trips include an overnight stay, similar to Texas visitors, and rises for Houston visitors (77%)

Houston continues to draw a larger share overnight visitors – especially among those traveling on business.

Trip characteristics: day/overnight

DAY/OVERNIGHT TRIPS% of Trips to Area

Base: Trips to Houston; Texas; Total US

Q4e. Please specify which visits included at least one overnight stay . . . (State/Area Level-demo wtd)

CY 2010CY 2010

CY 2008CY 2008

CY 2009CY 2009

29% 28% 25% 28% 26% 21% 23% 20% 19%

71% 72% 75% 72% 74% 79% 77% 80% 81%

All US Trips LEISURETrips - US

BUSINESSTrips - US

Total Tripsto Texas

LEISURETrips toTexas

BUSINESSTrips toTexas

Total Tripsto Houston

LEISURETrips toHouston

BUSINESSTrips toHouston

Overnight Trip

Day Trip

29% 28% 25% 25% 25% 20% 22% 20% 14%

71% 72% 76% 75% 75% 80% 78% 80% 86%Overnight Trip

Day Trip

30% 28% 24% 29% 28% 21% 22% 24% 15%

70% 72% 76% 71% 72% 79% 78% 76% 85%Overnight Trip

Day Trip

38© 2011 TNS

Trip characteristics: lodging and length of stay

Q4f: Please specify the number of nights stayed at each listed accommodation. (State Level – demo wtd)

LODGING All

Travelers





Houston Visitors & Houston Residents



Resident**

CY 2010AVG # NIGHTS (if any) 3.4 3.4 3.3 - 3.4 2.2 2.7 5.1

Private Home 1.5 1.7 2.0 - 0.4 0.9 1.5 2.2

Hotel/Motel 1.2 1.3 0.9 - 2.8 1.1 1.0 2.9

All Other 0.2 0.1 0.1 - 0.2 - 0.2 0.0

CY 2009AVG # NIGHTS (if any) 3.4 3.6 3.7 -- 3.4 2.9 2.4 3.9

Private Home 1.6 2.1 2.6 -- 0.6 2.2 1.4 2.3

Hotel/Motel 1.2 1.2 0.8 -- 2.7 0.6 0.7 1.5

All Other 0.6 0.3 0.3 -- 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2

CY 2008AVG # NIGHTS (if any) 3.2 3.8 4.0 -- 3.6 4.1 2.7 4.0

Private Home 1.5 2.2 2.9 -- 0.4 2.8 1.4 1.8

Hotel/Motel 1.2 1.2 0.6 -- 2.6 0.4 0.9 2.2

All Other 0.5 0.4 0.5 -- 0.4 0.8 0.5 0.1


Most Visitors Spend a Few Days in Houston:

Business and leisure overnight visitors spend a similar number of nights in Houston (3.3 to 3.4 nights), but business travelers stay in hotels (82% of nights) at three times the rate of leisure travelers (27%)

The shortest stays (2.2 nights) occur among Houston residents – who probably more often opt for a short getaway

The length of stay shortens for overall Houston visitors for the second year in a row.

39© 2011 TNS

Trip characteristics: travel partyTravel companions vary by purpose of the trip:

Over a third of Houston’s leisure visitors arrive in pairs, both day (38%) and overnight (37%)

Business travelers sometimes have one companion (14%), but usually travel solo (68%, not shown)

As expected, leisure travelers more likely travel with children (30% vs. 8% business travelers).

Q3a: Please indicate number of travel party members (including yourself) under 18 and 18+. (Trip Level-demo wtd)

Trip Characteristics (Trip Level)

All US Travelers


Houston Ls Visitors

Houston Ls Visitors –Overnight

Houston Ls Visitors – Day

Trip

Houston Bz Visitors – Total

CY 2010AVERAGE # IN TRAVEL PARTY (Q3a) 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.8 3.1

% Travel in Pairs 38% 34% 37% 37% 38% 14%

% Traveling with Children 26 24 30 29 37 8

Avg. # of Children on Trip (if any) 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.7

Average # in Travel Party in Household 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.4 1.3


% Travel in Pairs 38% 35% 38% 37% 41% 15%





% Travel in Pairs 37% 32% 36% 34% 46% 19%




40© 2011 TNS

Trip characteristics: vacation activities/attractions

Activities Participated/Attractions Visited% Participated/Visited – Ranked by Houston Visitors (Activities with 2% or fewer for Houston not shown)

Q4h. When you visited (state) during trip/month, please check all of the following activities did/attractions visited. (State Level-demo wtd)

Top Vacation Activities/Attractions:Somewhat different from total US travelers, Houston visitors more often visit for social engagements -- visiting relatives and visiting friends capture two of the top three spots. Urban highlights such as shopping, fine dining, and urban sightseeing round out the most popular activities while more outdoorsy options (rural sightseeing, beaches, and State/National Park) lag the national average.

12%

9%

13%

18%

16%

27%

12%

9%

13%

18%

16%

28%

12%

9%

13%

18%

16%

27%

8%

11%

13%

21%

20%

38%

6%

9%

12%

19%

21%

39%

7%

10%

12%

17%

21%

34%

RuralSightseeing

UrbanSightseeing

Fine Dining

Shopping

VisitingFriends

VisitingRelatives

3%

7%

7%

10%

5%

6%

3%

7%

8%

10%

4%

7%

3%

7%

7%

11%

4%

7%

5%

3%

4%

9%

7%

7%

3%

4%

5%

8%

4%

7%

4%

4%

5%

6%

6%

7%

FamilyReunion

State/ NationalPark

Historic Sites/Churches

Beach

Nightclubs/Dancing

Museums

3%

4%

5%

2%

3%

2%

3%

4%

5%

2%

3%

2%

3%

4%

5%

2%

3%

2%

2%

4%

4%

0%

3%

4%

1%

4%

2%

2%

2%

4%

2%

3%

3%

3%

3%

4%

Art Galleries

Theme Park

WildlifeViewing

Theater/Drama

Gardens

Zoos

Houston Visitors - CY 2010



All Travelers - CY 2010



41© 2011 TNS

Trip characteristics: expenditures by type of travel

Note: Transportation includes parking/tolls. Food includes food/beverage/dining/groceries. Entertainment includes gaming. Other includes amenities/other.

Average Spending in Houston by Trip Type Total Spending by Travel Party (Total Spending, including 0)

Total VisitorsTotal Visitors

Q4g. Please indicate the total dollar amount spent by your travel party (all) in Texas (Houston) for . . . (State Level-demo wtd)

Leisure TotalLeisure Total

Business TotalBusiness Total

Leisure OvernightLeisure Overnight

Leisure DayLeisure Day

Business OvernightBusiness Overnight

SpendingCY 2008 CY 2009

$508 $492

$416 $398

$911 $821

$501 $448

$153 $196

$1,010 $932

Value of Visitors by Type of Trip:

Overnight LEISURE visitors spend three times as much as day-trip visitors ($432 vs. $110)

With no lodging expense, Houston day visitors spend a greater proportion of their budget on shopping

Usually staying in hotels, business travelers almost double leisure travelers’ spending ($713 vs. $368)

Houston visitors feel the impact of the economy – all groups spend less than in the prior year.

33%

42%

34%

35%

35%

34%

2%

10%

7%

2%

7%

5%

39%

0%

20%

37%

19%

24%

7%

20%

11%

6%

11%

10%

1%

0%

3%

1%

3%

4%

19%

28%

25%

19%

25%

23%

CY 2010 ($843)

CY 2010 ($110)

CY 2010 ($435)

CY 2010 ($713)

CY 2010 ($368)

CY 2010 ($432)

Transportation Food Entertainment Lodging Shopping Other

42© 2011 TNS

Destinations: competitive statesSouthern State Destinations Compete with Houston:

Houston visitors who live in Texas usually choose other southern or western states for additional vacation travel; conversely, Houston visitors who live in New York, Chicago, or Washington DC tend to travel in the North.Florida and California rank highly for both groups – especially as a destination of interest for future travel.

Other States Visited/Planned by Houston Visitors (Key Competitors)% Visiting State/DMA Past Three Years (Ranking), Past Year, Planned Next Two Years

Top States: DFW/Austin/San Antonio Residents Base: Visited Houston

Top States: NY/Chicago/DC Residents* Base: Visited Houston

Q7a: Please indicate US states visited for leisure in past three years. Q7b. Please indicate states visited within the past 12 months. Q7c: Which US states plan to visit within the next two years for leisure? (Household Level)

*Caution: Very small base

10%

5%

5%

6%

4%

8%

11%

6%

18%

18%

14%

10%

1%

3%

3%

3%

6%

6%

5%

9%

4%

6%

13%

10%

9%

9%

9%

9%

9%

12%

13%

16%

16%

18%

18%

23%

New York

Illinois

Georgia

Arizona

Arkansas

New Mexico

Nevada

Oklahoma

California

Florida

Louisiana

Colorado

Past 3 YearsPast Year

Plan Next 2 Years

17%

25%

8%

8%

17%

25%

33%

33%

33%

17%

50%

67%

25%

17%

17%

25%

17%

25%

33%

33%

33%

33%

25%

50%

25%

25%

25%

25%

25%

33%

33%

33%

33%

42%

42%

58%

Virginia

Nevada

Missouri

Georgia

Connecticut

Wisconsin

New York

Michigan

Massachusetts

Pennsylvania

California

Florida

43© 2011 TNS

Destinations: competitive citiesOther Texas Cities Attract Houston Visitors:

Houston visitors within Texas often visit other Texas destinations (Dallas/Ft. Worth and San Antonio)Residents of the larger cities tend to travel to other larger cities.

Other Areas Visited/Planned by Houston Visitors (Key Competitors)% Visiting State/DMA Past Three Years (Ranking), Past Year, Planned Next Two Years

Q8a: Please indicate US cities visited for leisure in past three years. Q8b. Please indicate cities visited within the past 12 months (too few to show on NY/Chicago/DC chart) Q8c: Which US cities plan to visit within the next two years for leisure? (Household Level)

Top Cities: DFW/Austin/San Antonio Residents Base: Visited Houston

Top Cities: NY/Chicago/DC Residents* Base: Visited Houston

*Caution: Very small base

1%

6%

2%

5%

8%

11%

10%

9%

7%

17%

17%

2%

2%

3%

2%

6%

6%

6%

8%

10%

20%

33%

6%

6%

6%

7%

8%

10%

11%

14%

14%

30%

39%

St. Louis

Phoenix Area

Chicago

San Diego

New York City

Orlando Area

Las Vegas

New Orleans

Denver Area

San Antonio

Dallas/Ft. Worth

Past 3 YearsPast Year

Plan Next 2 Years

42%

25%

42%

25%

8%

25%

25%

25%

42%

8%

33%

8%

17%

17%

17%

17%

17%

17%

17%

25%

25%

25%

33%

42%

San Diego

Los AngelesArea

Anaheim/OrangeCounty

Chicago

Branson, MO

Washington, DC

San Antonio

Las Vegas

Orlando Area

Boston Area

New York City

Philadelphia

44© 2011 TNS

Satisfaction: Houston by residenceOverall Satisfaction with Houston:

Houston satisfies more than four out of five (84%) visitors, similar to the prior two years

In total, few visitors (2% - 4%) express displeasure with Houston, but NY/Chicago/DC residents seem more reluctant to assign the higher levels of praise (extremely/very satisfied), especially in CY 2010.

Satisfaction with Houston Visit By Group (Base)

Q4l: Using a scale of 1-5 (5=extremely satisfied), please indicate satisfaction with Houston. (State Level-demo wtd.)

SomewhatNot Pleased Very Extremely

* Very small sample; treat as qualitative onlyNote: Not pleased includes Not At All and Not Very Pleased

NET Top Two

84%

87%

69%

86%

88%

86%

84%

87%

79%

Total Houston Visitors

DFW/Austin/San Antonio Residents

NY/Chicago/DC Residents*







CY 2010

CY 2008

CY 2009

31%

10%

14%

4%

3%

2%

0%

3%

2%

56%

42%

41%

46%

41%

32%

48%

44%

30%

41%

44%

28%

42%

43%

21%

11%

15%

10%

9%

12%

0%

2%

1%

47%

47%

39%

40%

Appendix IIa: Results of the ResearchFrom Follow-up Survey:Opinions About Houston and Competitors

46© 2011 TNS

DemographicsCharacteristics vary slightly by residence:

Non-Texas residents continue to report the highest income and education levels; thus, Texas residents report lower income and education levels

Houston residents continue to have a slightly higher share of African-Americans while slightly more Texas residents outside of Houston claim Spanish heritage, especially in 2009 and 2010.

QA. What is your age? // QB. Are you . . . (male/female) // Panel: Income, Ethnicity.

2010 SurveyAverage Age 53 52 52 53 52 50Average Hhld Income $68,300 $73,000 $72,600 $63,100 $81,700 $72,800% Male 34% 38% 34% 33% 38% 35%% Married 64 66 64 64 66 66% College Grads+ (Males) 35 39 36 32 46 38

Ethnicity

% Caucasian 86 82 82 87 87 75% Spanish Origin 6 8 5 8 3 11% African-American 8 9 10 7 8 17

2009 SurveyAverage Age 50 49 51 51 49 52Average Hhld Income $71,500 $74,500 $70,200 $69,600 $78,800 $74,800% Male 29% 29% 28% 27% 32% 26%% Married 64 64 66 63 61 66% College Grads+ (Males) 35 38 34 34 41 40

Ethnicity

% Caucasian 86 86 82 88 90 81% Spanish Origin 8 9 7 10 3 10% African-American 8 7 11 6 4 10

2011 SurveyDemographics

All Travelers

Past Yr. O/N Leisure Visitors

Houston Residents

Other Texas Residents

Non-Texas Residents

Website Visitor

Average Age 53 52 53 53 51 52Average Hhld Income $67,800 $71,200 $72,800 $64,900 $77,000 $66,800

% Male 34% 34% 32% 34% 35% 34%

% Married 65 65 66 65 64 65

% College Grads+ (Males) 32 37 33 31 41 35

Ethnicity

% Caucasian 86% 81% 82% 87% 84% 74%



47© 2011 TNS

ResidenceCity of residency:

The majority of respondents (72%) live within Texas, similar to last year (71%)

A declining share lives in Houston (24% in 2011) while more live in other parts of Texas, especially Dallas/Ft. Worth

The proportion outside of Texas remains relatively stable.

City of residence comes from TNS panel.

2009 Survey 2010 Survey

HoustonDFWAustinSan AntonioNew York/ Chicago/ DC

Other

2011 Survey

48© 2011 TNS

Attribute importanceImportant attributes when choosing a destination:

Those who have traveled to Houston overnight for leisure within the past year rank destination attributes similarly to other travelers; however:

They give a slight edge to cosmopolitan features (dining, culture/performing arts, and alternate lifestyles)

Family/children also ranks higher for Houston overnight leisure visitors than others

Few shifts appear in the importance of attributes over time.

Attribute Importance (% Top 2 Box)Ranked by Total

Q1a/b. Abridged: Using a scale of 1 (not at all important) to 5 (extremely important) please rate the importance of each of the following attributes when selecting a destination.

89% 83% 83% 83% 82% 82% 79% 76% 71% 66% 64% 60%

92% 85% 86% 86% 82% 83% 80%74% 68% 68% 64%

45%

89% 81% 82% 82% 78% 81% 78% 76%67% 62% 62% 59%

90% 84% 85% 86% 83% 85% 80% 79%68% 67% 65%

59%

Good Valuefor Money

ReasonableCosts of

Hotels/ Meals

Friendly/Welcoming

Lots to See/Do

Weather/Climate

Good Service Access (Time/Transp.)

Dining Variety Explore/ Sight-see by Car

Something forEveryone

History/Culture

AccurateWebsite

7

Total 2011 PY O/N Leisure HV 2009* PY O/N Leisure HV 2010* PY O/N Leisure HV 2011*

59%

44% 46% 41% 41% 39% 35% 35%28% 23% 22%

15%

58% 55% 60%

42% 42%36% 41% 36% 32%

25% 20% 20%

59%48% 44% 44% 41% 38% 39%

32% 28% 24% 20% 17%

61%50% 51%

45% 42% 37% 42%35% 31% 27% 22% 18%

Prefer for O/NLeisure

Family/Children

Easy-to-UseWebsite

Culture/Performing

Arts

CulturallyDiverse

Good Review son TravelWebsites

Friend/Relative

Recommend

Nightlife/Entertainment

Family/ RootsThere

AlternateLifestyles OK

Access forDisabled

Hip/Fashionable

*PY O/N Leisure HV = Past Year Overnight Leisure Houston Visitor

49© 2011 TNS

Attribute importanceImportant attributes when choosing a destination:

Regardless of geography, travelers tend to agree on the important aspects of a travel destination.

Attribute Importance (% Top 2 Box)Ranked by Total

Q1a/b. Abridged: Using a scale of 1 (not at all important) to 5 (extremely important) please rate the importance of each of the following attributes when selecting a destination.

89% 83% 83% 83% 81% 82% 79% 76% 71% 66% 64% 60%

90% 84% 83% 83% 83% 81% 79% 74% 68% 65% 60% 57%

89% 78% 82% 80% 84% 83% 78%71%

61% 61% 58% 53%

Good Valuefor Money

ReasonableCosts of

Hotels/ Meals

Friendly/Welcoming

Lots to See/Do

Weather/Climate

Good Service Access (Time/Transp.)

Dining Variety Explore/ Sight-see by Car

Something forEveryone

History/Culture

AccurateWebsite

Houston Residents Other TX Residents Non-TX Residents

59%44% 46% 41% 41% 39% 35% 35%

27% 22% 20% 17%

56%47% 43% 37% 36% 32% 33% 28% 28% 23% 23%

14%

52%41%

49%36%

45%32% 31% 34%

26% 23% 17% 16%

Prefer for O/NLeisure

Family/Children

Easy-to-UseWebsite

Culture/Performing

Arts

CulturallyDiverse

Good Review son TravelWebsites

Friend/Relative

Recommend

Nightlife/Entertainment

Family/ RootsThere


Access forDisabled

Hip/Fashionable

50© 2011 TNS

Preference for Houston Ranked by Total Importance (top 2 box)

Q2a/b. For each of the attributes mentioned below, please select the destinations you prefer . . . % selecting each city.

Houston tends to place equal to or slightly above last year, but generally below 2009 in preference; however, it maintains the general pattern of strengths:

Houston receives the highest marks on variety of dining options, lots to see/do, easy accessibility, and something for everyone

Travelers also recognize Houston for its culture/ performing arts and cultural diversity

The weakest scores occur for: the preferred place for overnight leisure vacations, friendliness to alternative lifestyles, and hip/fashionable.

Good Value for Money (89%)

Reasonable Hotel/Meal Costs (83%)

Friendly/Welcoming (83%)

Lots to See/Do (83%)

Good Service (82%)

Whether/Climate (82%)

Easily Accessible (79%)

Variety of Dining Options (74%)

Explore/Sight-see by Car (68%)

Something for Everyone (65%)

Experience History/Culture (61%)

Accurate Website (57%)

Prefer for O/N Leisure (56%)

Easy to Use Website (44%)

Good for Family/Children (46%)

Culture/Performing Arts (38%)

Culturally Diverse (38%)

Good Reviews on Travel Websites (34%)

Good Nightlife/Entertainment (31%)

Friends/Relatives Recommend (33%)

Family/Roots There (28%)

Friendly to Alternate Lifestyles (23%)

Accessible for Disabled (22%)

Hip/Fashionable (15%)

51© 2011 TNS

Preference for each Texas city Ranked by Total Importance (top 2 box)


Travelers view Houston as comparable with other major Texas cities on many destination attributes while San Antonio excels on most attributes, including those with the highest overall importance:

Travelers view Houston as competitive among these five cities on variety of dining options, cultural/performing arts, family/roots there, and accessibility for disabled

Houston trails San Antonio and Austin and sometimes others on the six overall most important attributes: good value for the money, reasonable costs, friendly/welcoming, lots to see/do, good service, and weather/climate

In contrast, Houston usually outperforms New Orleans and sometimes Dallas-Ft. Worth, especially on cultural diversity.





Good Service (82%)




















52© 2011 TNS

Preference for Houston Ranked by Total Importance (top 2 box)


As expected, since a visit indicates strong interest almost by definition, those who visited Houston overnight for leisure in the past year tend to rank Houston very high on most attributes; Houston residents join them in the accolades:

Past year overnight Houston leisure visitors prefer Houston as a destination more often than the average for all travelers on every attribute

Consistent with results from last year, Non-Houston Texas residents least prefer Houston as a destination on every attribute

Houston residents make good advocates – consistently preferring Houston, especially for dining, accessibility, a place with something for everyone, culture and performing arts, cultural diversity, friendly/ welcoming, and as a place good for family/children.





Good Service (82%)




















53© 2011 TNS

Cities “good to visit” for non-resident visitorsEvaluating city of residence:A destination’s own residents can be the best ambassadors for the city. Houston’s populace knows the city best, often scoring Houston above the average of other cities by their residents:

Houston residents see their city as an active urban playground with strikingly above average scores for dining variety (77% Houston; 65% Other TX; 59% Non-TX), culturally diverse (69%; 55%; 44%), shopping (68%; 56%; 44%), and culture/ performing arts (61%; 46%; 39%).

In contrast, Houston residents would not be as quick to recommend the city for a relaxing vacation or weather/climate.

Attribute Description of City by Residents (% Top 2 Box)Ranked by Houston Residents

Q3. Now, please think about the city where you live. Please rate how well each statement describes your city as a leisure destination for those who do not live there.

77%71% 69% 68% 67% 66% 66% 65% 65% 63% 61%65%

71%

55% 56% 60%67%

55% 56%50%

63%

46%59% 62%

44% 44%51%

65%

50% 51%43%

53%39%

Dining Variety Friendly/Welcoming

CulturallyDiverse

Shopping Good Service Family/ Children Something forEveryone

Summer Sports/Activities

Lots to See/ Do Access (Time/Transp.)

Culture/Performing Arts

Houston Residents Other TX Residents Non-TX Residents

61% 60% 60% 58% 56% 56% 53% 52% 51% 46% 41%

66%

45%58% 56% 56% 51% 49%

63%

35% 34% 37%

63%

33%

49% 51% 44%36% 39%

52%37%

27%38%

Relaxing Nightlife/Entertainment

Good Value forMoney

Explore/ Sight-see by Car

ReasonableCosts of Hotels/

Meals

Access forDisabled

History/ Culture Weather/Climate


Hip/ Fashionable Good Review son TravelWebsites

54© 2011 TNS

Houston “good to visit” trendsCompared to prior years, a few trends appear:

Houston residents see their city as increasingly culturally diverse (69% from 58% in 2009), tolerant of the weather (52% from 40%), and accepting of alternate lifestyles (51% from 41%).

No attribute trends steadily downward.

Attribute Description of Houston (% Top 2 Box)Ranked by Houston Residents

Q3. Now, please think about the city where you live. Please rate how well each statement describes your city as a leisure destination for those who do not live there.

77%70%

58%67%

61%69%

61% 62% 63% 63% 65%73%

65% 67% 64% 60% 64% 62% 61% 56% 58% 57%

77%71% 69% 68% 67% 66% 66% 65% 65% 63% 61%

Dining Variety Friendly/Welcoming

CulturallyDiverse

Shopping Good Service Family/ Children Something forEveryone

Summer Sports/Activities

Lots to See/ Do Access (Time/Transp.)

Culture/Performing Arts

Houston Residents - 2009 Houston Residents - 2010 Houston Residents - 2011

59% 55%63%

56% 59% 55% 48%40% 41% 39% 38%

57%50%

58%49% 54% 52% 49% 43% 43%

35% 34%

61% 60% 60% 58% 56% 56% 53% 52% 51% 46% 41%

Relaxing Nightlife/Entertainment

Good Value forMoney

Explore/ Sight-see by Car

ReasonableCosts of Hotels/

Meals

Access forDisabled

History/ Culture Weather/Climate


Hip/ Fashionable Good Review son TravelWebsites

55© 2011 TNS

Quality of cities as destinations

Q4. Now, we would like you to rate each of the listed cities, whether or not you live there or have visited them, on a 10-point scale (10=perfect; 1=terrible). Taking into account everything you look for in a leisure destination, how would you rate each city?

Similar to attribute rankings, travelers generally rate San Antonio higher than other cities when thinking of “everything you look for in a leisure destination”:

Houston places last among the five cities testedResidents of Texas cities outside Houston rate Houston lower than other groups (42%)Past year overnight leisure Houston visitors (65%), Houston residents (64%), and non-Texas residents (64%) rate the city higher than Houston or other Texas residents.

Perfect

Good

Average

Poor

Opinion of Each City Opinion of Houston

NET Perfect + Good:

49% 58% 69% 80% 59% 49% 65% 64% 42% 64%

36% 34% 26% 17%28% 36% 28% 28%

40%29%

8%

19%

7%

33% 38% 41% 40% 34% 33% 39% 33% 31%44%

17%20%

28% 40%

26%17%

26% 31%11%

20%

7%15%

12%5%15% 9%

3%

Houston Dallas Austin San Antonio New Orleans Total Past Yr. O/NLeisureVisitors

HoustonResidents

Other TexasResidents

Non-TexasResident

56© 2011 TNS

Quality of cities as destinations - trends

Q4. Now, we would like you to rate each of the listed cities, whether or not you live there or have visited them, on a 10-point scale (10=perfect; 1=terrible). Taking into account everything you look for in a leisure destination, how would you rate each city?

Compared to last year, when thinking of “everything that is wanted in a leisure destination,” travelers:

Continue to praise San Antonio above other citiesRate Houston slightly behind New Orleans and Dallas, as well as San Antonio and AustinLiving in Texas, but outside of Houston, find the greatest fault with Houston (only 42% perfect/good), very similar to last year.

Opinion of Each City (Top Scores: Perfect/Good) Opinion of Houston (Top Scores)

61%55%

71%

79%

58%61%

69% 67%

53%

63%

51%54%

67%

75%

58%

51%

66%

59%

43%

67%

49%

58%

69%

80%

59%

49%

65% 64%

42%

64%

Houston Dallas Austin San Antonio New Orleans Total Past Yr. O/NLeisure Visitors

HoustonResidents


Non-TexasResident

2009 2010 2011

57© 2011 TNS

88%

65% 64% 58%

36%

91%

72%62% 64%

42%

78% 72%80%

64%

42%

100%

32% 36%27%

38%

100%

68% 64% 62%

40%

Houston San Antonio DFW Austin New Orleans

Competitive cities visitedCompetitors:

In a pattern similar to last year, Houston visitors show interest in these other cities:

San Antonio attracts many, reigning as the most popular (after Houston) among Houston residents

Dallas-Fort Worth claims the lead for non-Houston Texas residents and non-Texans

Texas residents, regardless of where they live, often stay in Texas while traveling.

Cities VisitedRanked by Total

Q5. Which of the following cities have you visited in the past 5 years?

2009

2010

201168% 63% 68%58%

28%

92%

71%

54% 59%

40%56%

66%77%

64%

23%

100%

23%39%

16%31%

100%

70% 70% 67%

36%


8

76%63% 65% 58%

30%

89%

68%52% 58%

39%

64% 66%77%

65%

23%

100%

33% 39%26%

43%

100%

68% 66% 62%

38%


Total Houston Residents Other TX Residents Non-TX Residents Houston Visitors (O/N Past Year)

58© 2011 TNS

Value for the money - cities as destinations

Q6. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=excellent value; 1=terrible value) overall, how would you rate the value for the money of each city?

Overall, visitors view Texas cities as destinations with good value for the money:

All Texas cities meet or exceed New Orleans

San Antonio (75%) takes the lead in the value for the money image

Houston (60%), Dallas (58%), Austin (63%), and New Orleans all vie for second, but Houston and Austin have a larger share of very high (9/10) ratings

Non-Houston Texans assign lower ratings to Houston than other segments.

Each City Houston

9 – 10 Ratings

7 - 8

4 - 6

1 - 3

NET Excellent + Good:

60% 58% 63% 75% 60% 60% 68% 70% 51% 67%

35% 37% 33% 23% 32% 35% 30% 25%41% 31%

5%

8%

2%

38% 40% 41% 44% 40% 38% 42% 38% 36%49%

22% 18% 23%30%

19% 22%26% 33%

16%

18%

3%6%9%4%6% 6%

2%

Houston(n=836)

Dallas (844) Austin (720) San Antonio(780)

New Orleans(342)

Total (836) Past Yr. O/NLs Visitors

(404)

HoustonResidents

(273)


(465)

Non-TexasResident (98)

59© 2011 TNS

Value for the money - cities as destinations

Q6. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=excellent value; 1=terrible value) overall, how would you rate the value for the money of each city?

Compared to last year:

Most cities’ value for the money image remains fairly stable

Except for Houston residents, the opinions about Houston’s value for the money fluctuate at least slightly over time, most notably among Non-Houston Texas residents.

Each City (Top Scores: Excellent/Good) Houston (Top Scores)

68%

59%

68%

75%

62%68%

72%69%

65%70%

61% 61% 63%

72%

55%61%

68% 70%

53%

63%60% 58%

63%

75%

60% 60%

68% 70%

51%

67%

Houston Dallas Austin San Antonio New Orleans Total Past Yr. O/N LsVisitors

HoustonResidents


Non-TexasResidents

2009 2010 2011

60© 2011 TNS

Experience in each destination city

Q7. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=excellent value; 1=terrible value) overall, how would you rate the experience you had in each city?

San Antonio claims the lead as the city with the best overall experience for visitors:

Houston ranks last (69%), but not far behind Dallas (73%)

Among those who have visited Houston, non-Houston Texas residents rate their overall experience the lowest (62%); others (Houston residents, past-year overnight visitors, and non-Texans) praised Houston more highly.

Each City Houston

9 – 10 Ratings

7 - 8

4 - 6

1 - 3

NET Excellent + Good:

69% 73% 78% 87% 80% 69% 77% 78% 62% 77%

26% 23% 20%11% 14%

26% 21% 17%32%

22%6%

6%

2%

34% 40% 36% 37% 34% 34% 35% 32% 34% 36%

35%33% 42%

50%46%

35% 42% 46%27%

41%

3%6%

6%2%6% 4%

2%

Houston(n=836)


New Orleans(342)


(404)

HoustonResidents

(273)


(465)


61© 2011 TNS

Experience in each destination city

Q7. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=excellent value; 1=terrible value) overall, how would you rate the experience you had in each city?

Compared to last year, most of the cities match on best overall experience for visitors:

New Orleans recovers from its dip last year

No other city varies by more than two percentage points from last year, although Houston and Austin still place below the two-year-ago level

Non-Houston Texas residents are increasingly the most critical of Houston.

Each City (Top Scores: Excellent/Good) Houston (Top Scores)

76%73%

86% 86%80%

76%81%

75% 74%

81%

68%71%

79%85%

71%68%

77%71%

64%

74%69%

73%78%

87%

80%

69%

77% 78%

62%

77%


HoustonResidents


Non-TexasResident

2009 2010 2011

62© 2011 TNS

Likely to return to destination city

Q8. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=very likely; 1=not at all likely), please indicate how likely you are to return to each city for an overnight, leisure trip?

Visitors’ expected repeat visitation varies substantially by city:

San Antonio and Austin visitors have the highest expectations to return

Houston most closely competes with Dallas

Non-Houston Texans show the lowest interest in returning to Houston.

Each City Houston

9 – 10 Ratings

7 - 8

4 - 6

1 - 3

NET Very + Probably

69% 72% 79% 86% 75% 69% 81% 76% 64% 72%

20% 18% 15% 11% 14% 20% 15% 16% 23% 18%

8%13%

9%

21% 23% 23% 22% 23% 21% 22% 17% 23% 26%

47% 49% 56% 63% 52% 47%59% 59% 41%

47%

4%11%

12%6%11% 10%3%

Houston(n=836)


New Orleans(342)


(404)

HoustonResidents

(273)


(465)


63© 2011 TNS

Likely to return to destination city

Q8. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=very likely; 1=not at all likely), please indicate how likely you are to return to each city for an overnight, leisure trip?

Compared to last year, most cities lure about the same level of expected repeaters:

However, New Orleans rebounds from last year’s dip and San Antonio climbs a bit

Houston and Austin nearly match last year, but place below 2009

Non-Houston Texans have the least interest in returning to Houston.

Each City (Top Scores: Very/Probably) Houston (Top Scores)

78%74%

83% 83%

76% 78%

85%79% 77%

74%70% 72%

78%83%

71% 70%

82%

74%

65%

78%

69%72%

79%

86%

75%69%

81%76%

64%

72%


HoustonResidents


Non-TexasResident

2009 2010 2011

64© 2011 TNS

Likely to recommend city as destinationBy city:

Visitors to San Antonio most often (would) recommend the city to friends and family

Houston ranks behind all competitors, including Dallas

Recent leisure visitors and Houston residents most often recommend the city to others

Texas residents outside of Houston are the least likely to recommend Houston.

Each City Houston

Q9. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=very likely; 1=not at all likely), please indicate how likely you are to recommend traveling to each city to friends/family.

9 – 10 Ratings

7 - 8

4 - 6

1 - 3

NET Very + Probably

64% 70% 78% 88% 78% 64% 74% 75% 58% 66%

24% 22% 17% 9% 12%24% 20% 16%

29% 27%9%

14%7%

24% 28% 24% 26% 25% 24% 26% 22% 24% 28%

40%42% 54%

61%53%

40%48% 52%

34%39%

4%8%11%

5%10%

11%6%

Houston(n=836)


New Orleans(342)


(404)

HoustonResidents

(273)


(465)


65© 2011 TNS

Likely to recommend city as destinationCompared to last year, recommendations for cities remain in place or improve:

San Antonio, New Orleans, and Dallas recover from 2009 slippage while Austin and Houston match/nearly match last year

Texas residents outside of Houston remain the least likely to recommend Houston.

Each City (Top Scores: Very/Probably) Houston (Top Scores)

Q9. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=very likely; 1=not at all likely), please indicate how likely you are to recommend traveling to each city to friends/family.

72% 71%

84% 87%

78%72%

78%74%

70%73%

65% 67%

78%

84%

71%65%

74% 72%

59%

68%64%

70%

78%

88%

78%

64%

74% 75%

58%

66%


HoustonResidents


Non-TexasResident

2009 2010 2011

66© 2011 TNS

NET Top Four Ratings:2011 49% 60% 69% 69% 64%

2010

2009

51%

61%

61%

68%

68%

76%

70%

78%

65%

72%

NET Top Two Ratings:2011 17% 22% 35% 47% 40%2010

2009

22%

25%

22%

27%

33%

41%

49%

58%

40%

49%

Summary of opinions/ratings about HoustonHalf or more (49%- 69%) of all visitors to Houston perceive the city positively on each measure:

The patterns mirror last year, with the same two measures, positive experience in Houston (69%) and likelihood to return (69%), leading all others

Overall opinion of Houston as a leisure destination shows the most room for improvement, all 3 years.

Q4. Now, we would like you to rate each of the listed cities, whether or not you live there or have visited them, on a 10-point scale (10=perfect; 1=terrible). Taking into account everything you look for in a leisure destination, how would you rate each city?Q6. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=excellent; 1=terrible) overall, how would you rate the value for the money of each city? Q7. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=excellent; 1=terrible) overall, how would you rate the experience you had in each city? Q8. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=very; 1=not at all), how likely you are to return to each city for an overnight, leisure trip? Q9. Abridged: On a 10-point scale (10=very; 1=not at all), how likely you are to recommend traveling to each city to friends/family.

Houston (Visited in Past 5 Years)

9 – 10 Ratings

7 - 8

4 - 6

1 - 3

36% 35% 26% 20% 24%

33% 38% 34%21% 24%

17%22% 35%

47% 40%

11%6%

15% 6%

11%

Overall Opinion (n=1234) Value for the Money (836) Experience in Houston(836)

Likely to Return (836) Would Recommend (836)

67© 2011 TNS

Next future visit to cityMore travelers expect to visit Dallas within the next year than any other city:

However, Houston ranks second (44%), just slightly ahead of the other two Texas cities measured – Austin and San Antonio (43% each).

Geographically, the most likely group to visit Houston within the next six months lives in Houston.

Each City Houston

Q10. Please indicate the next time you plan to visit each of the following cities?

< 6 Months

6 Mos. – 1 Year

1 – 2 Years

Over 2 YearsNo Plans to Visit

NET Within a Year:2011 44% 49% 43% 43% 14% 44% 75% 78% 31% 50%2010 54% 46% 40% 42% 15% 54% 76% 82% 37% 63%2009 70% 45% 41% 41% 20% 70% 87% 81% 58% 65%

13% 14% 18% 22% 19% 13% 12% 5% 16%

33% 28% 28% 23%

48%

33%

6% 15%

41%24%

12% 12% 18% 19% 8% 12% 18%3% 14%

32% 37% 25% 24%75%

17%29%

13%14%11%

2%

12%9%9% 11% 20%

9% 6%

20%6%

32%

57%

Houston (n=1234)

Dallas (1,234) Austin (1,234) San Antonio(1,234)

New Orleans(1,234)

Total (1,234) Past Yr. O/NLs Visitors

(404)

HoustonResidents

(296)


(829)


68© 2011 TNS

Next future visit to cityCompared to the past, expected visits to:

Houston drop substantially from last year (44% this wave from 54% last year and 70% from two years ago)

New Orleans declines as well, but the other Texas destinations place near or above prior years

Houston by non-Houston Texas residents lag all other groups.

Each City (Plan to Visit Within a Year) Houston (Plan to Visit Within a Year)

Q10. Please indicate the next time you plan to visit each of the following cities?

70%

45%41% 41%

20%

70%

87%81%

58%

65%

54%

46%40% 42%

15%

54%

76%82%

37%

63%

44%49%

43% 43%

14%

44%

75%78%

31%

50%


HoustonResidents


Non-TexasResident

2009 2010 2011

Appendix IIb: Results of the ResearchFrom Follow-up Survey:Media Choices

70© 2011 TNS

Media used

Q40. How often would you say you do each of these activities?

Choosing the right media affects the success of any ad campaign:

TV: Nearly universal – almost everyone (99%) watches television – and four out of five watch it daily

Radio: Two-thirds (66%) listen to the radio at least 4 times per week, likely many listen while driving

Newspapers: Only a third (31%) read a daily newspaper, but it rises (37%) for past year overnight Houston visitors; in contrast, nearly one in four (24% total; 21% Houston overnighter) never reads them

Magazines: Not designed for daily use, fewer than half read magazines weekly, the proportion rises among past year overnight Houston leisure visitor (54%)

Internet: Everyone connects to the Internet, usually daily (note: this is influenced by the online data collection methodology).

Media Consumption (n=664)

Never: 1% 0% 9% 6% 24% 21% 17% 11% 0% 0%

Appendix IIc: Results of the ResearchFrom Follow-up Survey:Advertising Awareness: General Advertising

72© 2011 TNS

City advertising awareness (unaided)

Q11. In the past 3 months, for which of the following cities have you seen advertising?

Advertising plays an important role in building interest in destination selection:

All travelers: About half (47%) of all travelers recall advertising for at least one of the featured cities (Houston, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Austin, San Antonio, or New Orleans), with San Antonio (32%) and New Orleans (29%) generating, by far, the greatest recall

Houston ranks third (16%), recovering somewhat from last year’s dip.

Any Ad Awareness (n=1234)

Note: in 2009 and 2010, Atlanta and Denver were included, so seven cities could have been noticed rather than just these five

49%

19%15% 15%

32% 32%

48%

13% 15% 13%

31% 31%

47%

16% 15% 13%

32% 29%

ANY of 5 Cities Houston Dallas/ Ft. Worth Austin San Antonio New Orleans

2009 2010 2011

73© 2011 TNS

Houston advertising awareness (unaided)

Q11. In the past 3 months, for which of the following cities have you seen advertising?

Advertising can directly influence who visits a destination and when:

Past year overnight leisure visitors to Houston are more likely to recall advertising for Houston, demonstrating the relationship between advertising exposure and visitation

The closer a traveler lives to Houston the more likely they are to be aware of advertising – Houston residents recall advertising at twice the rate of non-Texans

The patterns are the same as prior years (higher for past year visitors and Houston residents, lower for others), with the level of awareness partially recovering from last year’s dip in every group.

Any Ad Awareness of Houston (n=1234)

19%24% 24%

17%12%13% 16% 16%

12%7%

16%21% 21%

15%10%

Any Ad Awareness Past Yr O/N Ls Visitors Houston Residents Other TX Residents Non-TX Residents

2009 2010 2011

74© 2011 TNS

City advertising awareness by media - unaidedAdvertising recall varies by medium:

Electronic Media: Television leads as a source of ad awareness, especially for New Orleans (78%)

Houston partially recovers from last year in TV, Internet, and E-mail recall, but drops for radio

Print Media: Houston lags magazine awareness (among these competitive destinations) from magazine ads, but places near average for newspapers and direct mail

Houston awareness via magazines and newspapers drops from the past.

Each City (2011 unless labeled otherwise)

ELECTRONIC

PRINT

Q12. Abridged: For each of the cities, please indicate what type of media you recall seeing/hearing advertising.

59%

16% 10%19%

47%

9% 7%19%

56%

12% 9% 11%

59%

12% 10% 14%

56%

17%10% 14%

64%

11% 9% 9%

75%

13% 9% 8%

TV Internet/ Banner E-mail Radio

Houston 2009 (n=134) Houston 2010 (n=151) Houston 2011 (n=195) DFW (183) Austin (155) San Antonio (397) New Orleans (359)

39% 37%

13%

38%48%

7%

28% 33%

9%

45%36%

10%

45%34%

7%

41%34%

10%

33%21%

6%

Magazines Newspapers Direct Mail

75© 2011 TNS

Houston advertising awareness by media (unaided)Advertising recall within groups stays fairly consistent with a few exceptions:

Electronic Media: Houston residents have the greatest recall of radio and TV advertising, which suggests strong promotion within the city from local broadcast stations; the Internet works well for non-Texas residents

Print Media: Magazines generate the highest recall among non-Texas residents (31%) and newspapers works best among Houston residents.

Houston

ELECTRONIC

PRINT

Q12. Abridged: For each of the cities, please indicate what type of media you recall seeing/hearing advertising.* Very small sample; treat as qualitative only

56%

12% 9% 11%

55%

13% 15% 15%

59%

18% 13% 16%

56%

8% 7% 8%

36%27%

9%18%

TV Internet/ Banner E-mail Radio

Total Houston (n=195) Past Yr O/N Ls Visitors (n=86) Houston Residents (n=61) Other TX Residents (n=123) Non-TX Residents (n=11)*

28% 33%

9%

28%34%

15%23%

41%

15%

31% 31%

6%18% 18%

9%

Magazines Newspapers Direct Mail

76© 2011 TNS

General Advertising – By City

Travelers may positively react to destination advertising in one of three listed ways: motivate them to seek more information, convince them to book a trip, or encourage them to stay longer/visit additional attractions:

In overall positive impact, San Antonio (24%) leads while Houston (20%), Austin (21%), and New Orleans (19%) vie for second place

San Antonio’s advertising convinces the most travelers to visit (8%); however, low scores across the board give all destinations room for improvement. More than any other behavior, advertising causes travelers to seek more information

Ads do not affect everyone positively; potential visitors may decide not to visit (3% for Houston, not shown) or simply believe that ads do not influence them at all (77%, similar to other TNS studies).

Each City (2011 unless labeled otherwise)

Perceived impact of (unaided) advertising – each city

Q13. Abridged: How has the advertising you have seen affected your leisure travel plans?

22%

14%

8% 10%

21%

11%6%

9%

20%

14%

5% 6%

18%

9% 7% 8%

21%

12%7% 8%

24%

18%

8% 9%

19%16%

4% 5%

NET POSITIVE IMPACT Sought More Information Convinced to Go Lengthen Stay/ Add Attractions

Houston 2009 (n=134) Houston 2010 (n=151) Houston 2011 (n=195) DFW (183) Austin (155) San Antonio (397) New Orleans (359)

77© 2011 TNS

General Advertising – By Group

Advertising must not only reach its audience but also have a positive impact:

Houston reaps the largest benefits from advertising among past year overnight leisure visitors (29% claim a positive impact) and Houston residents (20%) .

(Note: too few to cite non-Texas residents)

Perceived impact of (unaided) Houston advertising

Houston

Q13. Abridged: How has the advertising you have seen affected your leisure travel plans?* Very small sample; treat as qualitative only

20%14%

5% 6%

29%20%

8% 9%20%

13%2%

10%18% 13%

6% 5%

36%27%

9%0%


Houston (n=195) Past Year O/N Ls Visitors (86) Houston Resident (61) Other TX Resident (123) Non-TX Resident (11)*

Appendix IId: Results of the ResearchFrom Follow-up Survey:Advertising Awareness: Specific Houston CVB Ads

79© 2011 TNS

Houston print ads

GHCVB Full Page

GHCVB Spread

80© 2011 TNS

Houston print advertising awareness

Q27. Below you will see two different print ads that advertise Houston as a leisure destination. Please indicate which, if any, of these ads you have seen before.

Travelers recall specific Houston CVB print ads at nearly the same level as last year:

Aided awareness places near last year (12% from 13%), with similar recall for both ads

Past year overnight Houston visitors (17%) more likely recall a Houston CVB print ad than other groups.

Awareness of Specific Houston CVB Print Ads (2011 unless labeled otherwise)

18%

13%12%

17%

14%12% 11%

Any Print Awareness

Total Houston 2009 Total Houston 2010 Total Houston 2011 Past Yr O/N Ls Visitors Houston Residents Other TX Residents Non-TX Residents

5% 6%6%

9%

4%

8%

5% 5%4% 5%

GHCVB Spread GHCVB Full Page

81© 2011 TNS

Opinions/reaction to Houston CVB print adsOverall, respondents remain relatively neutral in the opinions of the Houston CVB print ads:

A large majority (86%) of travelers appear unaffected by the ads

Over two-thirds (70%) of the travelers neither like nor dislike the ads; a quarter (28%) liked them

Half (54%, slightly above last year’s 49%) do not believe the ads will affect future visitation to Houston

The proportion selecting the top two ratings place somewhat lower than last year.

NET Top Two Ratings2011: 13% 28% 15%2010: 15% 35% 21%2009: 17% 40% 22%

Top Rating

Second

Neutral

Bottom 2 Ratings

Summary of Opinion/Reaction to Houston CVB Print Ads Base: All (1,234)

Q28a. Based on these print ads, how has your impression of Houston changed? Much more positive (5) to much more negative (1)Q28b. Overall, how much did you like these ads? Like them very much (5) to dislike very much (1)Q28c. Based on these print ads, how likely are you to take an overnight vacation or pleasure trip to Houston in the future? (extremely (5) to not at all likely (1).

86%70%

31%

9%20%

10%

3%

1%

54%

5%

8%

4%

Impression Likeability Future Visitation

82© 2011 TNS

Impression of Houston based on print adsThose most familiar with the city tend to be most influenced by the advertising:

The print ads most improve the impression of Houston for Houston residents (12% somewhat more positive, 7% much more positive) and for past year overnight leisure visitors (12%, 6%)

Non-Houston residents (Texans or not) are the least affected by the ads (88% neutral).

Much More Positive

Somewhat More

Neutral

More Negative

Reaction to Houston CVB Print Ads - ImpressionNET Positive:2011: na na 13% 18% 19% 11% 11%2010: na 15% na 20% 16% 15% 12%2009:17% na na 21% 20% 13% 15%

Q28a. Based on these print ads, how has your impression of Houston changed? Much more positive (5) to much more negative (1).

80% 84% 86% 81% 80%88% 88%

12% 12% 9% 12% 12% 8% 7%

6%

1%1%1%

1%4%

1% 1%

5% 3% 4% 7%4%3%

Total 2009 (692) Total 2010(1180)

Total (1234) Past Yr O/NVisitor (404)

HoustonResident (296)

Other TXResident (829)

Non-TX Resident(109)

83© 2011 TNS

Likeability of Houston print adsTravelers who have visited or live in Houston find the ads the most likable:

Houston residents and past year overnight leisure visitors have the highest overall positive reaction to ads’ likeability (35% - 36%)

Houston residents most frequently like the ads very much (14%)

Similar to 2010 (3% in 2011; 2% in 2010), far fewer dislike the ads than in 2009 (9%).

Like Very Much

Somewhat

Neutral

Dislike Ads

Reaction to Houston CVB Print Ads - Likeability

NET Positive:2011: na na 28% 35% 36% 25% 28%2010: na 35% na 43% 37% 34% 36%2009:40% na na 44% 45% 36% 38%

Q28b. Overall, how much did you like these ads? Like them very much (5) to dislike very much (1).

51%63% 70% 63% 60%

73% 72%

26% 25% 20% 26% 23% 18% 22%

14% 10%8%

10% 13%6% 6%

2%2%9%

3%

4%

2%

Total 2009 (692) Total 2010(1180)





84© 2011 TNS

Print ad impact of taking vacations to HoustonOverall, the print ads do not strongly influence future visitation for the majority of travelers:

Only about one in seven (15%) believes that the ads will encourage them to visit Houston, fewer than last year (21%)

As seen with the other ad measures, past year overnight leisure visitors (29%) to Houston and Houston residents (24%) continue to be most influenced by print advertising – over twice as many expect to visit Houston as a result of the ad as non-Houston Texas residents (12%).

Extremely Likely

Very

Somewhat

Not Likely

Reaction to Houston CVB Print Ads – Influence on Future VacationNET Positive:2011: na na 15% 29% 24% 12% 16%2010: na 21% na 37% 24% 16% 32%2009: 22% na na 33% 27% 17% 19%

Q28c. Based on these print ads, how likely are you to take an overnight vacation or pleasure trip to Houston in the future? (extremely (5) to not at all likely (1).

33% 31% 31%42%

32% 29%43%

13% 14% 10% 18% 15% 8% 9%

9% 6%5%

11% 10%4% 6%

29%49%45%54%

44%59%

41%

Total 2009 (692) Total 2010(1180)





85© 2011 TNS

Houston TV commercial awareness

Q30/Q30b. Have you seen this commercial before on TV?

A quarter (25%) remember the 2011 TV commercials:

Past year overnight leisure visitors (27%) and non-Houston Texas residents (26%) most often notice the commercial, but even the lowest group (non-Texans) places not far behind (20%)

Continuing the upward trend, the commercials build more than twice as much recognition as last year , which in turn, doubled the year before (25% from 13% from 5%)

Awareness of the ZZ Top commercial places higher than either of the other commercials for every group.

Awareness of Specific Houston CVB TV Commercial (2011 unless labeled otherwise)

5%13%

25%

8%

19%11%

6%15%

27%

9%

22%14%

9%16%

22%

3%

16% 14%

3%11%

26%

10%

21%11%

1%

15%20%

3%

19%

8%

Any 2009 TV AdAwareness



Aware Jim Parsons Aware ZZ Top Aware Lyle Lovett

Total Houston Past Yr O/N Ls Visitors Houston Residents Other TX Residents Non-TX Residents

86© 2011 TNS

Opinions/reaction to Houston CVB TV commercialsOverall opinions of the TV commercials markedly outpace the print ads:

Houston’s TV ads improve perceptions much more often than the print ads, especially Jim Parsons (43%)Most travelers like the ads (56% to 65%), double or more the rate of the print ads (28%)Relatively few travelers believe they would be more likely to visit Houston based on the ads, but television develops more interest than print (25% Jim Parsons; 24% ZZ Top; 20% Lyle Lovett; 15% print ads).

NET Top Two Ratings: 2011: 43% 65% 25% 36% 64% 24% 31% 56% 20%2010: na na na 42% 73% 27% 33% 63% 23%

Top Rating

Second

Neutral

Bottom 2 Ratings

Summary of Opinion/Reaction to Houston CVB TV Commercials Base: 1,220 for Lyle Lovett; 1,222 for ZZ Top

Q31a/b. Based on this commercial, how has your impression of Houston changed? Much more positive (5) to much more negative (1)Q31b/bb. Overall, how much did you like this commercial? Like them very much (5) to dislike very much (1)Q31cb. Based on this commercial, how likely are you to take an overnight vacation or pleasure trip to Houston in the future? (extremely (5) to not at all likely (1).

Top 2 Ratings in 2009:42% Impression71% Likeability30% Future Visitation

Jim Parsons ZZ Top Lyle Lovett

55%30% 31%

60%

28% 29%

68%

38% 30%

2%

6%

50%

30% 35%16% 24% 32%

14% 22%35%

12%

13%29%

9%13%

33%

10%8%

21%

8%

5%

2% 44% 4%

8%

47%

Impression Likeability FutureVisitation



87© 2011 TNS

Impression of Houston based on TV commercialThe commercials’ impact on impressions of Houston vary by ad:

The newer Jim Parsons ad (43%) builds a somewhat more positive impression of Houston than the ZZ Top (36%) or Lyle Lovett (31%) ad

Regardless of commercial, past year overnight Houston visitors react more positively than other groups while non-Houston Texas residents’ scores lag others.

Much More Positive

Somewhat More

Neutral

More Negative

Reaction to Houston CVB TV Commercial - Impression

NET Positive: 2011: 43% 51% 44% 41% 49% 36% 42% 40% 35% 38% 31% 36% 34% 29% 34%2010: na na na na na 42% 47% 42% 43% 38% 33% 39% 32% 34% 30% 2009: na na na na na 42% 46% 41% 42% 42% 42% 46% 41% 42% 42%

Q31a/b. Based on this commercial, how has your impression of Houston changed? Much more positive (5) to much more negative (1).


55% 48% 54% 57% 51% 60% 56% 58% 61% 60% 68% 62% 64% 69% 65%

3% 2% 4% 2%2%

2% 3% 2% 1%

30% 32% 25% 31% 37%24% 23% 20% 25% 25% 22% 24% 20% 22% 27%

13% 19%19% 11%

12%13% 19% 20% 10% 13%

8% 12% 13% 7% 7%

2%2%2% 2% 4%

Total(1211)

P ast YrO/N

Visitor(398)

HoustonResident

(291)

Other TXResident

(814)

Non-TXResident

(106)

Total(1222)

P ast YrO/N

Visitor(399)

HoustonResident

(295)

Other TXResident

(819)

Non-TXResident

(108)

Total(1220)

P ast YrO/N

Visitor(397)

HoustonResident

(292)

Other TXResident

(821)

Non-TXResident

(107)

88© 2011 TNS

Likeability of Houston CVB TV commercialLikeability measures also vary by ad:

Half (56%) to two-thirds (65%) of viewers find the commercial very to somewhat likeable

The groups tend to praise the commercials similarly, with past year overnight visitors to Houston reacting most favorably

Jim Parsons and ZZ Top scores nearly match and both rank above Lyle Lovett.

Like Very Much

Somewhat

Neutral

Dislike Ads

Reaction to Houston CVB TV Commercial - Likeability

Q31b/bb. Overall, how much did you like this commercial? Like them very much (5) to dislike very much (1).

NET Positive: 2011: 65% 72% 73% 61%68% 64% 71% 70% 63% 59% 56% 64% 63% 54% 56%2010: na na na na na 73% 76% 74% 73% 67% 63% 69% 65% 61% 65% 2009: na na na na na 71% 75% 73% 71% 70% 71% 75% 73% 71% 70%


30% 24% 22%33% 29% 28% 23% 24% 29% 33% 38% 32% 31% 40% 42%6% 6%

8% 7% 6%5% 6%

6% 2%

35% 33% 35% 34% 43% 32% 28% 28% 33% 32% 35% 34% 37% 34% 37%

29% 39% 38%27%

25%33% 43% 42% 30% 27% 21% 30% 26%

19% 19%

6%4%5% 5% 3% 8%

Total(1211)

P ast YrO/N

Visitor(398)

HoustonResident

(291)

Other TXResident

(814)

Non-TXResident

(106)

Total(1222)

P ast YrO/N

Visitor(399)

HoustonResident

(295)

Other TXResident

(819)

Non-TXResident

(108)

Total(1220)

P ast YrO/N

Visitor(397)

HoustonResident

(292)

Other TXResident

(821)

Non-TXResident

(107)

89© 2011 TNS

TV commercial impact of taking vacation to HoustonOne in four to five expect to visit Houston, based on the commercial:

The three commercials lure visitors to Houston to about the same degree (25% Jim Parsons; 24% Lyle Lovett; 20% ZZ Top), but results trail the impact of last year (27% for ZZ Top and 23% for Lyle Lovett)

Past year overnight leisure Houston visitors view the ads most positively. Extremely Likely

Very

Somewhat

Not Likely

Reaction to Houston CVB TV Commercial – Influence on Future Vacation

Q31c/cb. Based on this commercial, how likely are you to take an overnight vacation or pleasure trip to Houston in the future?

NET Positive: 2011: 25% 44% 38% 20% 33% 24% 40% 35% 19% 31% 20% 34% 30% 16% 22%2010: na na na na na 27% 41% 32% 24% 28% 23% 38% 28% 18% 28% 2009: na na na na na 30% 45% 33% 26% 29% 30% 45% 33% 26% 29%


31% 32% 28% 32% 32% 29% 34% 26% 29% 32% 30% 37% 33% 28% 38%

26% 39%52% 38% 50% 29% 38% 56% 39%

16% 26% 20% 13%26%

14% 21% 18% 12% 19% 12% 20% 15% 11% 16%9%

17% 18%6%

8%10%

19% 18%7%

11%8%

14% 14%5% 7%

49%

24%44% 34% 35%

47%

Total(1211)

P ast YrO/N

Visitor(398)

HoustonResident

(291)

Other TXResident

(814)

Non-TXResident

(106)

Total(1222)

P ast YrO/N

Visitor(399)

HoustonResident

(295)

Other TXResident

(819)

Non-TXResident

(108)

Total(1220)

P ast YrO/N

Visitor(397)

HoustonResident

(292)

Other TXResident

(821)

Non-TXResident

(107)

90© 2011 TNS

Since the primary goal of advertising is to convert potential travelers to visitors, looking beyond simple awareness becomes important:

Advertising appears very effective – encouraging roughly one out of 10 to visit, regardless of group or year

Compared to last year, Houston advertising awareness rises among all groups, especially Texans outside of Houston

Two caveats – this measure combines the features of current advertising with past travel – so it really measures Houston’s ongoing awareness and effectiveness, rather than these specific ads and two of the measures, by definition, includes Houston visitors, so the effectiveness looks much stronger than would be expected (Past Year Houston Visitors and Non-Texas Residents).

Total advertising impact on Houston visitation

NET Aware: 2011: na na 29% 34% 28% 30% 25%2010: na 23% na 29% 27% 21% 20%2009: 19% na na 24% 26% 16% 11%

Q14. Please indicate the total number of overnight leisure trips you have made to the Houston area in the past 12 months.Q27. Below you will see 2 different print ads that advertise Houston as a leisure destination. Which have you have seen before.Q30/Q30b/Q30c. Have you seen this commercial before on TV (Jim Parsons/ZZ Top/Lyle Lovett)?Q28c/Q31c/Q31cb/Q31cc. Based on these ads, how likely are you to take an overnight vacation or pleasure trip to Houston in the future?

9% 10% 10%

29%

11% 8%14%

5% 8% 11% 10% 12%6%5%

5%9%

5%

7% 10%5%

Total 2009(692)

Total 2010(1,180)

Total (1,234) Past YearHouston

Visitors (404)

HoustonResidents

(296)

Other TXResidents

(829)

Non-TXResidents

(109)

Aware Only

Aware and Positive Impact

Visited, Aware, and Pos. Imp.

Appendix IIe: Results of the ResearchFrom Follow-up Survey: Website Usage

92© 2011 TNS

General Website FeaturesMany travelers find it important to research their travel destination, especially those with which they are unfamiliar. Travel destination websites provide a wealth of information whenever a traveler needs it, with the primary topics varying little over time:

Ranked as 1-3: Very similar to last year, travelers consistently rank where to stay, what to do, and savings/value as the most important destination website features

Top Rank Only: The top ranking mimics the importance of features ranked 1-3 with saving/value clearly leading other reasons, probably impacted by the economy as travelers want to know how to best spend their travel dollar.

Most important features on website

% Rank in Importance (2011 unless labeled otherwise)

Ranked as 1-3

Top Rank (#1) Only

Q13a. Abridged: Now, we would like you to consider travel destination websites. Please choose the 7 most important features on a travel destination website and rank them in order of importance (1=most important; 7 least important)?

65%

40%

60%

26%

60%

29%20%

61%

41%

60%

27%

61%

29%21%

64%

41%

62%

24%

63%

29%17%

Where to Stay Where to Eat What to Do Recommend Local/Insider Tips

Savings/ Value Events Tours/ Itineraries

Total 2009 (n = 692) Total 2010 (n = 1,180) Total 2011 (n = 1,234)

23%

4%

25%

6%

29%

7% 6%21%

5%

23%

7%

31%

7% 6%21%

5%

22%

6%

34%

8% 4%



93© 2011 TNS

General Website Features by GroupRegardless of group, most travelers look for the same things in a destination website:

Ranked as 1-3: Groups rate the same three topics rank at the top: where to stay, what to do, and savings/value

Top Rank Only: The top ranking mimics the importance of features ranked 1-3 with saving/value usually leading. However, those who live further away (Non-Texas residents) emphasize where to stay and what to do somewhat above savings/value, likely because they have less experience/familiarity with Houston and have a greater need to know the basics about Houston.

Most important features on website continued

% Rank in Importance (2011 unless labeled otherwise)

Q13a. Abridged: Now, we would like you to consider travel destination websites. Please choose the 7 most important features on a travel destination website and rank them in order of importance (1=most important; 7 least important)?

Ranked as 1-3

Top Rank (#1) Only

58%43%

62%

27%

59%

31%17%

61%43%

60%

25%

59%

33%17%

65%

41%

62%

23%

65%

27%17%

67%

40%

61%

29%

57%

31%13%



Past Year O/N Ls Visitors (404) Houston Resident (296) Other TX Resident (829) Non-TX Resident (109)

18%7%

26%

6%

30%

8% 4%

20%6%

21%

5%

35%

9%2%

20%5%

22%

6%

35%

8% 5%

27%

4%

28%

6%

23%

6% 6%



94© 2011 TNS

Other important features on WebsitesGeneral Website Features

Only a few travelers have website features to add to those already listed. These vary widely, but generally include a desire for more information and a much greater emphasis on pricing in 2011:

Other Features Cited as Important: 2010A good local map; maps; interactive map (4)Easy to get there; Ease of travel to destination (3)Something for children to do/ suggestions for kids/ family (3)Price, cost (2)Safety (2)Travel information – directions, local airports, public transit (2)Accessibility for disabled peopleAbility to relaxBundle travel dealsActivities; hiking possibilities and walking trailsSportsLocations: RV campground, resorts, Walmart SupercenterEase of use, simplicity, speed of websiteTimes that events are openWeather patternsUnbiased reviews of hotels, restaurants, places to visit – need a good way to make choices besides just providing informationLocal historyCruises

Number of mentions = 1 unless in parens (#)

Q13b. What other feature is important on travel destination websites?

Other Features Cited as Important: 2011Pricing/costs/correct pricing/packages/discounts/ coupons/free “stuff” (9)Transportation - air/ground/parking (5)Weather at different times of year – when pleasant (4)Hotels – selection/prices/bedbugs/book on web (4)Sightseeing/sights/new sights/fun event schedule (4)Maps/directions/distance to attractions (4)Historical sites/gardens (4)Shopping (3)Safety (2)User/visitor reviews (2)Pictures/scenic descriptions (2)Nightlife (2)Entertainment RCI/II Timeshare location Birding infoFitness/Health optionsWhere the locals go Good restaurantsFishing Believability Most popular destinationsAccess for physically disabilesPet friendliness


95© 2011 TNS

Houston websites visited Most website users are unsure which link they used to access the Greater Houston CVB website:

Travelers rarely recall visiting VisitaHoustonTexas, HoustonReunions, or AskVeronica

Not surprisingly, past year overnight leisure Houston visitors are the most likely to have used the website, probably as they plan their trip.

Houston (.com) Websites

Q19. Which of the following websites for the Greater Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau, if any, have you visited in the past 12 months?

12%

3% 4% 0%

10%3% 3% 0%

9%2% 2% 1%

16%

4% 6%1%

13%

3% 4%0%

7%2% 2% 1%

13%

2% 4% 1%

Any Website Visited VisitMyHouston VisitHouston Texas VisitaHouston Texas

Total 2009 (692) Total 2010 (1180) Total 2011 (1234) Past Yr O/N Ls Visitors (404) Houston Residents (296) Other TX Residents (829) Non-TX Residents (109)

0% 0%6%

1% 0%5%

1% 0%5%

1% 1%8%

1% 0%7%

1% 1% 4%0% 1%

6%

Houston Reunions AskVeronica Unsure

96© 2011 TNS

Houston website discovery Most travelers find the Greater Houston CVB website via the Internet:

Regardless of residency, both Texas and non-Texas website users most often find the website through a search engine or while browsing the Internet

Texas residents find the site nearly equally as often from a search engine (40%) as through browsing (43%) the Internet.

Website Visitors’ Source of Information(2011 unless labeled otherwise)

Q20. Please indicate how you found out about the Greater Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau’s website?* Very small sample; treat as qualitative only

16%11% 13%

31%39%

6%

18%

7% 6%

46%37%

3%

18%8%

15%

43% 41%

5%

17%10%

17%

40% 43%

5%

21%

0% 0%

57%

29%

0%

Friends/ Family TV Commercial Magazine/Newspaper Ad Looked Via Search Engine Browsing the Internet Other

Total 2009 Website Visitors (80) Total 2010 Website Visitors (114) Total 2011 Website Visitors (108) TX Resident (94) Non-TX Resident (14)*

97© 2011 TNS

Characteristics/features of Houston’s websiteWebsite users agree with most statements about the GHCVB website’s characteristics or features:

Houston’s website performs exceedingly well on communicating and strengthening Houston’s image, promoting local attractions, and ease of useAreas with the most room for improvement continue to center around functionality: getting feedback from website representatives and ability to book/purchase.

NET Agee:2011:75% 73% 72% 72% 71% 71% 71% 70% 69% 68% 67%2010:68% 74% 73% 68% 74% 63% 63% 65% 67% 62% 61%2009:71% 71% 69% 70% 70% 66% 65% 61% 60% 60% 64%

NET Agree:2011:66% 65% 65% 64% 62% 60% 57% 56% 53% 53% 52%2010:68% 58% 55% 51% 62% 59% 47% 49% 55% 47% 41%2009:68% 65% 59% 55% 63% 61% 53% 50% 55% 54% 48%

Website Characteristics/Features

Q21. How much do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding GHCVB website’s characteristics or features?

40% 42% 38% 37% 42% 43% 49% 43% 42% 41% 32%

35% 32% 34% 35% 30% 29% 22% 28% 27% 27% 35%

Helps ChooseAttractions,Events, etc.

Communi-cates

Houston'sQualities

GoodImpression of

Houston

Easy to Use EffectivelyDescribes

Attractions,etc.

Shows MyInterests

SensiblyOrganized

HelpfulSuggestions

& Tips

HomepageUnderstand-

able

Good ContactInfo

DetailedEnough

Agree Completely

Agree Somewhat

35% 38% 35% 41% 33% 36% 33% 31% 34% 26% 31%

31% 27% 30% 23% 29% 24% 23% 25% 19% 27% 21%

Useful Maps Helps ChooseRestaurants

Helps ChooseLodging

Helps PlanTo/Fro

Houston

Makes MeWant to Visit

Houston

Good Balance Easy toForward

Website Infoto Others

ConfidentPurchasing on

This Site

Save Money Easy/Convenient toBook on This

Site

EasyFeedback

From WebsiteReps

98© 2011 TNS

What the website says about HoustonFrom the website, most users “take away” the variety of activities available in Houston:

Travelers perceive lots to see/do with something for everyone, family activities and museums, cultural diversity, exciting urban experiences, and good value for the money as the leading website messages

Most of the images that slipped last year rebounded; only one, lots to see/do, placed below both 2009 and 2010.

Website’s MessageBase: 108 GHCVB Visitors

Q22. What does the Greater Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau website tell you about Houston?

66% 65% 63%58% 60%

55%

70%

59% 56%51% 47%

40%

62% 62% 60% 58% 58% 58%

Lots to See/Do Something for Everyone Family Activities &Museums

Culturally Diverse Exciting UrbanExperiences

Good Value for Money

2009 2010 2011

64%55%

65%

33% 33%28%

23%

47% 46% 47%

25%17% 21%

8%

57% 57%51%

34% 32%27%

14%

Culture/ PerformingArts

Fun Friendly People Big City/ Small TownAtmosphere

Hip/ Fashionable Easy to Access forDisabled

Unlike Any Place Else

99© 2011 TNS

Satisfaction with Houston websiteSatisfaction levels of the website nearly matches last year (82% from 84%):

More than four out of five (82%) website users are very satisfied to somewhat satisfied with the website

Notable growth occurs in the highest rating (53% from 47% very satisfied)

None claims dissatisfaction.

NET Satisfied:2011: na na 82% 81% 86%2010: na 84% na 86% 78%2009: 78% na na 76% 82%

* Very small sample; treat as qualitative only

Very Satisfied

Somewhat

Neutral

Somewhat Not

Very Dissatisfied

Satisfaction with Houston Website

Q23. What is your overall satisfaction with the Greater Houston CVB website?

21% 16% 19% 19% 14%

28% 37% 29% 29% 29%

50%47%

53% 52% 57%

1%

Total 2009 WebsiteVisitors (80)



Website Visitors fromTX (94)

Website Visitors Non-TX (14)*

100© 2011 TNS

Houston’s website competitive comparison

Half (49%) of Houston’s website visitors deem it as much better or somewhat better than similar websites for city destinations; none in 2011 rates others better.

NET Better:2011: na na 49% 48% 57%2010: na 51% na 51% 52%2009: 54% na na 56% 47%


Much Better

Somewhat

Comparable

Somewhat Worse

Much Worse

Houston Website’s Competition

Q24. How well does the Greater Houston CVB’s website compare to similar websites for city destinations?

38% 45% 44% 45% 43%

1%1%

30% 37% 32% 31%43%

24% 14% 17% 17%14%




Website Visitors fromTX (94)

Website Visitors Non-TX (14)*

101© 2011 TNS

Website features to improveIn general, most website users express overall satisfaction with the site, even when reflecting on possible improvements. While suggestions vary, posting events, website improvements, and providing coupons and discount emerge as the strongest themes.

Website Features to Improve: 2011Great/comprehensive website/complete/good as is (11)Easier/more user friendly/navigation/hyperlinks (hard to get back to home page)/chat support/Twitter link (8)Current/up-to-date/Seasonal activities and events/ things to do/graphics showing activities (7)Coupon/discount offers/more savings/discounts (4)Cost-related: Cost estimates/hotel prices/prices of admissions/ affordable suggestions for family (4) Transportation: options, ease of getting around without car/pictures of freeways (3)Night activities/nightlife (3) Museums, landmarks, and history (2) Maps: show what else is in area/downloadable maps (2)Sightseeing/things to do (2)Make family entertainment places easy to findPicturesMore info on restaurants and shoppingMore realism – such as the heavy smogFewer graphicsClubsOptions for disabled people


Q25. What features or sections should the website improve?

Website Features to Improve: 2010Coupons, discounts, reviews of places to go (2) More special offers; savings (2)More up-to-date; Houston changes every day (2)Current events; Monthly section – events for the month (2)Faster speed (2)Front Page does not contain enough guiding informationThings to doAbility to narrow interests; e.g., free events, family eventsMore insider informationAccurate pricesBetter information on downtown tunnelsLinks to activitiesMore links to lodging/restaurants by areaCleaner site – too much color/clutterCost effectiveness of safe places to stayKid friendlyHandicapped accessible placesMore videos/picturesMore information on restaurants, food, entertainmentLess sports info and more grandparent/grandchildren info


102© 2011 TNS

Perceived impact of Houston’s websiteWebsite users may positively react to Houston’s website in one of three listed ways: content may motivate them to seek more information, convince them to book a trip, or encourage them to stay longer/visit additional attractions:

The website causes users to seek more information twice as often as convincing them to go or lengthening stay/adding attractions

The website dose not affect everyone positively; potential visitors may decide not to visit (8% for total website visitors, not shown) or simply believe that the website did not influence them at all (36%)

The website motivates about two in five to seek more information, regardless of year (39% in 2011).

Impact of Houston’s Website (2011 unless labeled otherwise)


Q26. How did your visit to the Greater Houston CVB website affect your leisure plans?

49%35%

14% 11%

59%42%

14% 11%

56%

39%

19% 13%

54%38%

19% 12%

64%

43%

21% 21%


Total 2009 Website Visitors (n=80) Total 2010 Website Visitors (n=114) Total 2011 Website Visitors (n=108) TX Residents (n=94) Non-TX Resident (n=14)*

Appendix IIf: Results of the ResearchFrom Follow-up Survey: Houston Visitors (Choices and Characteristics)

104© 2011 TNS

Trips to HoustonLogical Patterns Occur for Types of Trips to Houston:

Living within close proximity to city events and attractions, Houston residents take 12 times the average number of day trips to Houston as residents outside of Texas and 10 times as many as other Texans.

Visitation declines slightly from last year – both day trips (34% from 40%) and overnight trips

Only about one in five Texas residents (21% from Houston; 19% other Texans) stay in a hotel on their visit; however, of those who spend the night, nearly two-thirds (59% from Houston; 65% other Texans) opt for a hotel

Hotel guests from Houston – who visit more often – spend 4,0 nights a year in a hotel – and average 1.7 nights per trip; other visitors come less often, but stay longer per trip.

Total 2009 (n=692)

Total 2010

(n=1,180)Total 2011(n=1,234)

Past Yr. O/N Leisure Visitors

(n=404)

Houston Residents

(n=296)

Other Texas Residents

(n=829)

Non-Texas Residents

(n=109)

Day Trips

NET Any 45% 40% 34% 55% 70% 22% 21%

Mean (Inc. 0) 2.9 2.7 1.9 3.4 6.0 0.6 0.5

Mean (Excl. 0) 6.4 6.7 5.5 6.2 8.5 2.6 2.6

Overnight (O/N) Trips

NET Any 47% 40% 33% 100% 36% 29% 55%

Mean (Inc. 0) 1.8 1.4 1.3 3.9 2.7 0.7 1.6

Mean (Excl. 0) 3.8 3.5 3.9 3.9 7.5 2.5 2.9

Hotel Nights in Houston

% With a Hotel Stay in Houston na na 21% 63% 21% 19% 35%

% of Houston O/Ns w/ Hotel Stay na na 63% 63% 59% 65% 63%

Average Total Nights (if any) na na 3.6 3.6 4.0 2.8 5.7

Average Hotel Nights/Trip (if any) na na 2.2 2.2 1.7 2.0 3.7

Q14. Please indicate the total number of leisure trips you have made to the Houston area in the past 12 months. Q14a. Of all your overnight trips to Houston in the past 12 months, how many total nights did you stay in a hotel?Q14b. On your last overnight trip to Houston, how many total nights did you stay in a hotel?

105© 2011 TNS

Recency of last overnight leisure trip to HoustonBy design, non-Texas residents must have visited Houston in the past five years, either for business or leisure with no overnight stay required. That said:

About a third (37%) of non-Houston Texas residents have stayed overnight in Houston within the past two years – a proportion that steadily declines each year

However, half (53% in 2011) of Houston residents spent the night in the last two years, changing little over time.

NET: Within Past 2 Years: 2011: na na 44% 100% 53% 37% 66% 2010: na 51% na 100% 49% 46% 84%2009: 62% na na 100 % 51% 65% 84%

Within Past 12 Months

1 – 2 Years Ago

3 – 5 Years Ago

6+ Years Ago

Never

Elapsed Time Since Last Houston Overnight Visit (2011 unless labeled otherwise)

Q15. When was your last overnight leisure trip to the Houston area?

8% 10% - 6% 11% 15%

18%

23%

-

31% 12%

15% 11% 17% 9% 11%

47%40% 33%

36%29%

55%

9% -

18%13%24%

10%

30%7%

21%21%

11%

100%

Total 2009(692)

Total 2010(1,180)

Total 2011(1,234)

Past Yr. O/N LsVisitors(404)

HoustonResidents

(296)


(829)

Non-TexasResident

(109)

106© 2011 TNS

Timing by Month

A gradual increase in Houston visitation occurs throughout the spring and peaks in the summer months (notably June), followed by a sharp drop:

Peak visitation noted in both 2010 and 2011 occurs earlier than in 2009, probably impacted by the timing of the survey (surveyed in May/June in 2011 and 2010; mid-August in 2009)

Houston resident visits peak slightly earlier than other Texas residents (May rather than June).

Past year visitors vary their timing less than other groups, with more stability from April through June.

Timing of last visit to HoustonMonth of Last Houston Overnight Visit - History

Month of Last Houston Overnight Visit

Q16. What was the month of your last overnight leisure trip to the Houston area?

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Total Houston Visitors 2009 (570)



0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Total Houston Visitors (952)Past Year Visitors (540)Houston Residents (203)Other Texas Residents (653)Non-Texas Residents (96)

107© 2011 TNS

Overnight spending amounts to visit HoustonImportant points from the overnight spending categories for the group include:

Spending more on lodging and transportation, non-Texas residents double the spending level of their Texas resident counterparts. Even when excluding transportation to and from Houston, non-Texas residents still spend notably more than the average Houston traveler

Overnight visitors living in Texas but outside of Houston spend the least overall

Total spending places between the levels in the two most recent prior years ($485 from $496 in 2010 and $479 in 2009).

Total Travel Party Overnight Spending on Last Trip to Houston(Column Height Impacted by Expenditure)

2011: na na $485 $515 $476 $421 $936 Average Total Spendingna na $371 $401 $392 $329 $608 Average exc. Travel To/Fro Houston

2010: na $496 na $580 $453 $420 $888 Average Total Spendingna $376 na $435 $383 $338 $520 Average exc. Travel To/Fro Houston

2009: $479 na na $524 $438 $380 $741 Average Total Spending$365 na na $404 $359 $304 $492 Average exc. Travel To/Fro Houston

Q17. Please estimate the dollars your travel party spent for each of the categories below on your last overnight leisure trip to Houston?

$55$42 $49 $28$42$82 $80 $71 $82 $92

$58

$110$113 $120 $114 $115 $84$92

$328$97 $99 $100 $106 $96

$92

$159

$92 $109 $122 $119 $98$119

$192

$31$19 $18 $20 $20 $23 $18$19$15 $14 $15 $15 $12 $15

$19$21 $25 $20 $22 $14$40 $34 $39

Houston Visitor2009(570)



Past YearVisitor(540)

HoustonResident

(203)

Other TXResident

(653)

Non-TXResident

(96)

Lodging

Meals

Transport. TO/FRO Houston

Shopping

Entertainment

Transport. IN Houston

Outdoor Recreation

Other

108© 2011 TNS

Satisfaction with Houston visitHouston satisfies a majority of its overnight leisure visitors, but the proportion declines steadily:

Past year leisure visitors remain happy with Houston, but even that group slips from prior years (71% extremely satisfied/very satisfied from 75% last year and 82% in 2009)

As seen consistently in image and satisfaction levels, Texas residents outside of Houston tend to rate Houston lower than the other groups; the same pattern occurs for satisfaction

Except for Houston residents, whose ratings climb, all groups rate their satisfaction below last year.

NET Top Four Ratings (7-10): 2011: na na 57% 71% 82% 48% 69% 2010: na 62% na 75% 71% 55% 74%2009: 71% na na 82% 70% 67% 78%

Extremely

Very

Somewhat

Not Pleased

Houston

Q18. Overall, how pleased were you with your last overnight leisure trip to the Houston area?

24% 30% 33% 26%14%

40%27%

44% 42% 38% 44% 47%36% 35%

26%21% 19%

27%35%

12%33%

4%

12%

4%

10%

5%8% 4%

Total HoustonVisitors 2009

(570)


(929)


(952)

Past YearHouston Visitors

(540)

HoustonResidents

(203)

Other TXResidents

(653)

Non-TXResidents

(96)

Appendix IIg: Results of the Research From Follow-up Survey: Attitudes and Behaviors

110© 2011 TNS

General description/feelings of travelerPast year overnight Houston visitors describe themselves as similar to other travelers except that:

More of them search for travel information, pay more to visit original places, like to travel to exotic places, and drive an SUV

Fewer of them buy clothes for comfort rather than style and fewer seek the lowest possible prices.

Traveler Descriptions/Feelings% Strongly Agree

Q37. For each statement below, can you please tell me how much you agree or disagree that the statement describes you or your feelings.

8% 7%15%

8% 4%11% 8%

18%

2%

22%12% 9%

17%11%

6%12% 8%

20%

4%

20%

Search forTravel Info

Family/ FriendsSeek My Travel

Advice

Label Reader;Read Small

Print

Pay More toVisit Original

Places

Time SavingsWorth Extra

$$$

Love to ShopMkts &

SpecialtyStores

Income Enoughto SatisfyImportantDesires

Uncomfortablew/o ConfirmedReservations

Buy Fashion;Doesn't Matter

if Pay More

Buy Clothes forComfort, Not

Style

Total Travelers

Pst Yr O/N LeisureHouston Visitor

22%

9% 8%

22%

8% 12% 8%

23%

5%15%19%

11% 9%

24%

8%17%

8%

22%

7%18%

Seek LowestPossible Prices

Quality GoodsWorth More

$$$

I Buy Quality,Not Price

I Like to ShopBefore

Purchase

Rather DoWhat I Know I

Will Enjoy ThanDo New

Like to Travel toExotic Places

Prefer to Travelwithin Driving

Distance

Drive aPractical Car

Drive a LuxuryCar

Drive an SUV

111© 2011 TNS

General description/feelings of traveler

Q37. For each statement below, can you please tell me how much you agree or disagree that the statement describes you or your feelings.

Characteristics of Travelers More Likely to Have Visited Houston

Family and friends ask advice on travel matters

Prepared to pay more to visit places that offer something really original

Higher income


Younger

Characteristics of Travelers More Likely to Visit Houston in Next 2 Years

Prepared to pay more to visit places that offer something really original


Frequently search magazines and websites about travel destinations that interest me

Family and friends ask advice on travel matters

Higher incomes

Drive a car that is practical

Note: Neither of the models with Q37 and the demos (age, income, marital status presence of children, gender) explained much of the variance of visiting Houston or

not, but the ones noted above had the strongest impact, with the ones in bold stronger than the non-bolded ones – in rank order

Appendix IIh: Results of the ResearchFinal Comments

113© 2011 TNS

Comments regarding HoustonGeneral Comments

Travelers often commend Houston as a travel destination, but adamantly complain about the weather. Comments center around its diversity, food, and a place to visit family or travel there together:

“Best time to come is March-May or October-November. There really IS good shopping, really good restaurants, nice hotels, and things for every taste.”“Houston has lots of variety – museum district, Zoo, parks, and historical sites and much more.”“I have lived in Houston all my life and love it.”“Greatest on earth. Amusement parks, NASA, the Kemah boardwalk, and the Galleria.”“Great and affordable. Variety of art, music, entertainment, and dining. Lots for all ages.”

Common comments regarding Houston: 2011

Positive“Never cease to be amazed at new things I discover here”

“Has all different kinds of food – a reason we retired here”

“Houston hosts the biggest Rodeo and livestock show”

“Very culturally diverse; the food is great”

“One of the major metropolitan areas in the US”

“As a native Houstonian, I love the ads! Makes me proud to be from Houston”

“To see, do, eat, drink, or even think about it, do it in Houston”

“The closeness of the gulf is a natural highlight”

“I love, love, love Houston”

“Houston is a best-kept secret – needs a signature ‘thing’ to define it as a destination”

“I visit family here”

Negative“High crime and bad traffic”

“Bad traffic & more road rage than anywhere I know”

“Advertising for ‘Summer’ vacations not a good idea considering it is blazing hot then.”

“Can be great, but you absolutely must have a car”

“Horrible weather and summer is unbearable”

“Hurricanes, Humidity, and Heat”

“Too many rough parts of town”

“It’s dirty, smoggy, and dangerous”

“Too humid and too crowded

“Great except for weather – hot, humid, & bugs

“Dirty, overcrowded dump”

“Racist, violent, sexist, corporate Houston?”

Q32. Please share below any additional comments you may have regarding Houston, TX as a travel destination?

july 2011 tns 212 224946 houston visitor profile calendar year 2010

Documents