I can see that is perhaps a balance in some areas and one of the tricks is recognizing an area with potentialvalue and ones with obvious value- I’m thinking here of some of the self-contained and underdeveloped Scottish island communities – in other words, as you say, destinations in their own right.

I suspect that the kind of area that might not qualify as a destination in its own right would be peripheral areas outside of already established destinations – I’m thinking here about semi-industrial suburb communities and the like and I assume BC has these just as much as Scotland.

Right,off to Orkney for a few days of bracing air (as a tourist) – apologies to all if posts are approved more slowly than usual.

Having been a past employee of Tourism Vancouver, I am never surprised where Rick will show up next. He is a great speaker. His points are relevant to destinations, like Vancouver, “that has value”. I witness the new convention centre that Tourism Vancouver spearheaded, and see merchandise for the 2010 Olympics, which Tourism Vancouver bid on, every day.

Would we have these amazing facilities and events without the hotel tax? Not likely.

Would people be willing to pay a hotel tax in a location that isn’t a destination in its own right?
Maybe…

There is a fine balance, and I think that Tourism Vancouver is a shining example of how it can work.

PS my word of the day is ‘Anathema’