a socio-economic impact assessment of the comrades

1

A SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF THE

COMRADES MARATHON EVENT 2003

(13th

- 16th

June 2003)

Date submitted:

12 August 2003

Report submitted to:

Durban Africa/ TKZN

Submitted by:

Environment and Development Programme

University of Durban Westville

Private Bag X54001

Durban, 4000

(031) 204 4322

In consultation with:

Wholistic Consulting and Development CC

P.O. Box 215

Pavilion

Westville, 3611

(031) 262 6105

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction 3

Research methodology 3

Data analysis 4

Estimates of the number of people attending the event 4

Demographic profile of spectators 5

Economic evaluation 6

Primary reason for visiting Durban 8

Factors influencing decision to attend the event 8

Future attendance of the event and knowledge of other Durban events 9

Sponsor identification and perception 9

Knowledge of “Durban: South Africa’s Playground” slogan 10

Perceptions/ attitudes of the event and the Durban Unicity 10

Suggestions to organisers on the event quality 10

Positive and negative features of Durban 11

Analysis of interviews with other stakeholders 11

Organiser 11

Stall-holders 13

Conclusion 14

Appendix 1 15

Addendum: Day preferred for next year’s event 26

3

INTRODUCTION

The Comrades Marathon is one of South Africa’s largest sporting events and is the

dominant annual athletics event in the country. On an international stage it competes

favourably as one of the world’s premier ultra marathons. The 2003 event took place

from the 13th

– 16th

June 2003 and comprised of the following major components:

The Comrades Marathon (main event): a premier international road race from

Pietermaritzburg to Durban on the 16th

June 2003.

The Comrades Marathon Experience (Expo): was held at the Durban Exhibition

Centre from the 13th

– 15th

June 2003.

Durban Africa contributed R300 000 toward the event. A fundamental requirement by

Durban Africa (one of the sponsors) and Octagon South Africa, who manage the event

tourism strategy on behalf of Durban Africa, was an assessment of the event as a

potential benefit to the stimulation and increase in tourism and its socio-economic impact

on the Durban economy. The socio-economic assessment of the event was conducted by

members from the Environment and Development Programme, University of Durban-

Westville in association with Wholistic Consulting and Development.

In terms of the study itself, the main objectives were:

To estimate the total numbers of people attending the event.

To evaluate the perceptions and spending patterns of spectators at the event.

To establish the costs incurred and revenue generated for the Durban economy

from the event by interviewing key stakeholders viz. organisers and sponsors.

This report comprises the following sub-sections: an explanation of the methodology,

data presentation of information from the questionnaire analysis, crowd estimations, key

findings and socio-economic implications. The conclusion of this report attempts to

forward some suggestions on issues that would impact on future events.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

For the above objectives of the study to be achieved, the methodology adopted included

the implementation of 200 questionnaire surveys with a spatially based random selection

of people attending the event (spectators) at the Kingsmead stadium on race day and at

the Durban Exhibition Centre on the days of the Comrades Marathon Experience to

ascertain information on issues such as spending power, perceptions of the event and

respondents' demographic profiles. Additionally, 200 questionnaires were administered to

the participants. One hundred were administered on race day and a further 100

participants were interviewed telephonically after the event. A random sampling

approach of respondents from the list provided by the organisers was used to select the

participants for the telephonic interviews. Ten stall-holders were also interviewed on the

last day of the Comrades Marathon Experience (15th

June 2003). The organiser and

sponsor questionnaires, which included a range of aspects, were forwarded to the

organiser for implementation. No sponsor responses were received by the researchers for

analysis. Fieldwork was conducted during the course of the event by graduate and

4

postgraduate students, trained in interview techniques, from the Environment and

Development Programme, University of Durban-Westville. The co-ordinators closely

managed and supervised the fieldwork at the event.

Samples of respondents were taken at various times during the event. The samples were

therefore unbiased in terms of space, time and selection. Crowd estimates were

undertaken by the researchers at the event locations. The capturing and processing of data

was undertaken using SPSS software to generate the necessary tabulations. Appendix 1

displays the output tables of the SPSS exercise.

The number of samples of the different groups that was interviewed is indicated in the

table below.

Respondents

Respondent Group Intended sample Actual sample

Spectators 200 200

Participants 200 200

Stallholders 10 10

Sponsors 5 -

Organiser 1 1

Total 416 411

DATA ANALYSIS

The analysis of the data gathered will be structured around the following categories:

Number of people who attended the event

Economic impact

Demographic profile of people attending the event

Advertising and awareness of the event

People’s perception of the event and Durban generally

Evaluation of stakeholder responses

Estimates of the number of people attending the event

In terms of the methodology adopted and outlined earlier, the Table below synthesises the

attendance figures provided by the organiser.

Crowd estimates

CROWD

ESTIMATE

Comrades Expo (13th

– 15th

June 2003) 68 000

Race day (spectator numbers at Kingsmead stadium on the 16th

June) 42 000

Number of participants 13 374

TOTAL 123 374

5

The volume attendance at the events was therefore 123 374. However, Table 40

(Appendix 1) illustrates that the average number of days people attended the event was

1.3 among the spectators. Thus, the actual number of spectators was 84 615 over the four

days of the event.

Demographic Profile of Spectators

Slightly more than half of the respondents (52.5%: 56.5% among the participants and

48.5% among the spectators) were males and 47.5% were females (Table 37, Appendix

1). In terms of historical race classification (Table 38, Appendix 1), the event attracted

Whites (43.75%), Africans (27.75%), Coloureds (14.75%) and Indians (13.75%).

Respondents interviewed ranged in ages from less than 20 years to 70 years. The average

age of respondents was calculated to be 38.7 years (37.4 years among the participants and

40 years among the spectators) (Table 35, Appendix 1).

The event was attended by individuals from a range of income groups. The average

income of respondents was R7 239 per month (R6 655 among the participants and R7

823 among the spectators) and ranged from R1 000 to R50 000 (Table 39, Appendix 1).

Some of the respondents (6.25%) stated that their income was confidential. Additionally,

9.5% of the respondents did not earn any income.

Occupational categories that were clearly evident amongst respondents were (Table 36,

Appendix 1):

Administrator/ manager 26.5%

Professional 21.25%

Businessperson 12.25

Sales/ marketing 11%

The permanent places of residence of the respondents are outlined in Table 1 (Appendix

1). However, an illustration of the broad areas of permanent residence is undertaken

below.

Permanent Place of Residence of Respondents (%)

Place of residence Total (n=100)

Durban Unicity 40.5

Other KwaZulu-Natal Areas 11.75

Other SA provinces 46

International visitors 1.75

Total 100

Residents from other South African provinces (46%) and the Durban Unicity (40.5%)

were dominant amongst respondents. The visitors from other South African provinces

came from Gauteng (28.25%), Western Cape (7%), North West (4.5%), Free State

(3.5%), Limpopo (1.5%) and Eastern Cape (0.75%). Among the respondents,

6

international visitors came from Russia, Kenya, Mozambique, Britain, Zimbabwe and

Botswana.

The average immediate group size of people attending the event was 6 persons (5.6

among the participants and 6.4 among the spectators) (Table 6, Appendix 1). The groups

comprised of mostly family members (48.25%), athletic/running club (17.25%), friends

(15.75%) and friends and family members (14%) (Table 7, Appendix 1). Other groups

discernible were business associates (2.5%), tour groups (2%) and one school group

(0.25%).

Economic Evaluation

The direct economic impact of the event on the Durban Unicity economy is measured by

the direct expenditure of people who attended the event. This includes their daily

spending as well as the accommodation costs of tourists attending the event.

Among the spectators, most of the respondents (85.5%) attending the event indicated that

they spent money (Table 27, Appendix 1). Purchases made were of food and

refreshments (83.5%), clothes (14.5%), arts and crafts (0.5%) and shoes (0.5%) (Table

28, Appendix 1). The average daily expenditure of people attending the event was

calculated to be R166 (Table 29, Appendix 1). As stated earlier, 85.5% of the total

number of spectators (84 615) attending the event purchased items. This would imply that

72 346 persons spent an average of R166 at the event. This translates into R12 009 436

being generated for the Durban economy in terms of spectators’ daily expenditure at the

event.

Among the participants, with the exception of one respondent (0.5%), all other

respondents attending the event indicated that they spent money (Table 27, Appendix 1).

Purchases made were of food and refreshments (93.5%), clothes (37%), energy boosters

(29.5%) and jewellery (0.5%) (Table 28, Appendix 1). The average daily expenditure of

participants attending the event was calculated to be R165 (Table 29, Appendix 1). As

stated earlier, 99.5% of the total number of participants (13 374) attending the event

purchased items (13 307). However, among the participants the average number of days

they attended the event was 2.1. This would imply that 27 845 person days was

generated. Thus, 27 845 persons (in terms of volume among the participants) spent an

average of R165 at the event. This translates into R4 594 425 being generated for the

Durban economy in terms of spectators’ daily expenditure at the event. In total, R16 603

861 was generated for the Durban economy in terms of peoples’ daily spend at the event.

In terms of the accommodation industry, Table 1 (Appendix 1) illustrates that 43.5% of

the spectators were tourists. Of this, 11.5% stayed in luxury hotels, 9.2% in holiday flats,

20.7% in family hotels, 3.4% in bed and breakfast establishments, 14.9% in self-catering

units, 3.4% in holiday homes and 36.8% with friends and family (Table 2, Appendix 1).

The average number of nights spent in paid accommodation was 4.1. (Table 3, Appendix

1). The average rate per room during the event period was calculated to be R450 (Table

6, Appendix 1). Since 27.5% of the total spectators attending the events indicated that

they lived in paid accommodation, this can be translated into 23 269 people attending the

7

event residing in paid accommodation. The average immediate group size of tourists

attending the event was 6.1 persons (Table 5, Appendix 1). Thus, 3 815 room nights per

day was generated during the course of the event. Given that the average number of days

in paid accommodation was 4.1 nights, a total of 15 642 room nights were generated.

Since the average room rate was R450 per night (Table 6, Appendix 1), it is estimated

that R7 038 900 was generated by the Durban accommodation industry from spectator

stay in paid accommodation. Since 98.8% of the tourists staying in paid accommodation

indicated that they came specifically for the event or scheduled their visits to Durban to

coincide with the event (Tables 8 and 9, Appendix 1), the direct economic impact of the

accommodation industry on the Durban Unicity in terms of spectators was R6 954 433.

In terms of the accommodation industry, Table 1 (Appendix 1) illustrates that 66.5% of

the participants were tourists. Of this 9% stayed in luxury hotels, 4.5% in holiday flats,

36.8% in family hotels, 9% in bed and breakfast establishments, 13.5% in self-catering

units, 6.8% in the comrades train and 20.4% with friends and family (Table 2, Appendix

1). The average number of nights spent in paid accommodation was 3.2. (Table 3,

Appendix 1). The average rate per room during the event period was calculated to be

R374 (Table 6, Appendix 1). Since 53% of the total participants attending the events

indicated that they stayed in paid accommodation, this can be translated into 7 088

participants residing in paid accommodation. The average immediate group size of

tourists attending the event among the participants was 5.8 persons (Table 5, Appendix

1). Thus, 1 222 room nights per day were generated during the course of the event. Given

that the average stay in paid accommodation was 3.2 nights, a total of 3 910 room nights

were generated. Since the average room rate was R374 per night (Table 6, Appendix 1), it

is estimated that R1 462 340 was generated by the Durban accommodation industry from

participant stay in paid accommodation. Since all the participants who were tourists

staying in paid accommodation indicated that they came specifically for the event (Table

8), the direct economic impact of the accommodation industry on the Durban Unicity in

terms of spectators was R1 462 340. In total, R8 416 773 accrued via spend in the

accommodation industry can be directly attributed to the Comrades event.

From the above estimations, it can be deduced that the total revenue generated in terms of

peoples’ daily expenditure (R16 603 861) and from the accommodation industry (R8 416

773) that can be attributed directly to the event is R25 020 634.

Durban Africa contributed R300 000 toward this event. Similar to other studies of this

nature, an important aspect to consider is that of leverage. Leverage refers to the ratio of

public sector input against private sector response. This calculation entails the derivation

of a ratio which indicates the amount of money accrued to the private sector with every

rand spent by the public sector. In this respect the estimated amount that is considered is

the total revenue generated by peoples’ daily expenditure and the accommodation

industry (R25 020 634) and the public sector input of R300 000. This translates into a

ratio of 1:83.4. This means that for every rand spent by the public sector on the event,

R83.40 was generated by the private sector. It should be noted at the outset that other

variables having multiplier effects such as transport, financial transactions, product

8

suppliers and guided tours were not included in the analysis of the economic impact on

the Unicity.

Responses from the tourists (55% of the respondents: 66.5% among the participants and

43.5% among the spectators) show that on average this group spent R1 542 (R1 230

among the participants and R2 019 among the spectators) during their stay in Durban

(that is, in addition to monies spent at the event) (Table 31, Appendix 1). Among the

spectators, taking into consideration the immediate group size of tourists (6.1), this

translates into respondents who were visitors (a total of 36 808 were visitors) spending

R12 182 844 during their stay in Durban. Since among the spectators, 98.8% of the

visitors came to Durban specifically for the comrades event or coincided their visit to

Durban with the event, the direct economic impact of tourist spending was R12 036 649.

Among the participants, taking into consideration the immediate group size of tourists

(4.8), this translates into respondents who were visitors (a total of 8 894 were visitors)

spending R2 279 087 during their stay in Durban. Since all participants came to Durban

specifically for the comrades event or coincided their visit to Durban with the event, the

total direct economic impact of tourist spending was R14 315 736.

Primary Reason for Visiting Durban

The majority of the respondents (98.3%) who were tourists/visitors indicated that their

primary reason for visiting Durban was to attend the event (Table 8, Appendix 1). The

other primary reasons forwarded were vacation purposes (0.9%), rugby tour (0.4%) and

business (0.4%). Furthermore, all the respondents indicated that they came specifically to

the location for the event (Table 10, Appendix 1).

Visitors used private vehicles (68.2%), airplanes (11.8%), buses (8.2%), trains (5.9%),

mini-bus taxis (4.1%) and rental vehicles (1.8%) to come to Durban (Table 11, Appendix

1). The primary modes of transportation to the event for all the respondents were private

vehicles (62%), mini-bus/taxis (11.25%), buses (7.25%) and rental vehicles (3%) (Table

12, Appendix 1). The rest (16.5%), walked to the stadium.

Factors Influencing Decision to Attend the Event

The following were the main influencing agents (Table 13, Appendix 1):

Participants 65%

Television 27.5%

Word of mouth (non-participant) 25.25%

Newspaper ads 22.5%

Radio ads 11%

Posters/ banners/ flyers 5.5%

All the respondents were of the opinion that the advertisements were generally fair and

accurate (Table 14, Appendix 1).

9

Future Attendance of the Event and Knowledge of Other Durban Events

The majority of the respondents (94.25%) stated that they would attend the event if it was

held again next year. The rest (5.75%) stated that they did not know if they would attend

the event next year (Table 17, Appendix 1).

When questioned on their knowledge of other events taking place in Durban, 30% of the

respondents had some knowledge of other events taking place (Table 15, Appendix 1).

On average, the respondents intended to visit between 0.9 (0.5 among the participants and

1.1 among the spectators) other events in Durban (Table 16, Appendix 1).

Additionally, 36.75% of the respondents (31.5% among the participants and 42% among

the spectators) stated that they visited or planned to visit other places/events while in

Durban (Table 21, Appendix 1). Some of the main events/places identified by these

respondents were:

Beaches 22.5%

Shopping malls 16%

Rugby match 10.5%

Sponsor Identification and Perception

An important component of the study was the identification of sponsors by respondents.

All the respondents were able to identify at least one sponsor of the event. Twenty three

sponsors were identified in total. The main sponsors identified are listed below (Table 18,

Appendix 1).

MTN 65%

Mr Price 32.75%

Pick ‘n Pay 31.5%

People’s Bank 28.75%

Imperial 15.75%

Nike 13.5%

In general, the respondents who identified sponsors had an unchanged or more positive

image of these sponsors (Table 19, Appendix 1). Most of the respondents (76.25%) stated

that it was likely that they would buy an event sponsored product whilst 23.75% stated

that it was unlikely that they would buy an event sponsored product (Table 20, Appendix

1).

10

Knowledge of “Durban: South Africa’s Playground” Slogan

Slightly less than half of the respondents (47.5%: 52.5% among the participants and

42.5% among the spectators) were aware of the slogan: “Durban: South Africa’s

Playground” (Table 33, Appendix 1). The respondents who had knowledge of “Durban:

South Africa’s Playground” slogan indicated that the slogan represented the following

organisations (Table 34, Appendix 1):

The Durban City 14.8%

KZN Tourism Authority 7.8%

Durban Tourism Board 7.5%

Tourism body 3.8%

Tourist Junction 3.3%

The majority of the respondents (62.7%) of the respondents stated that they did not know

which organisation the slogan represented.

Perception/ Attitudes of the Event and the Durban Unicity

The respondents rated their event experience in the following way (Table 22, Appendix

1):

Excellent 48%

Good 40.75%

Okay 11.25%

Only one respondent stated that he/she experienced an unsavoury incident at the event

(Table 23, Appendix 1). The incident was experienced in the stadium and entailed a

child being terrified by a man in a green suit. Three respondents (among the spectators)

stated that they experienced unsavoury incidents in Durban more generally (Table 24,

Appendix 1). The incidents took place in Central Durban and the Durban beachfront.

The incidents were a mugging, a robbery and a car accident. One spectator stated that he/

she experienced other problems at the event (Table 25, Appendix 1). The problem

identified was parking.

Suggestions to Organisers on the Event Quality

The majority of the respondents (79%) did not forward any suggestions to improve the

event in the future, indicating that there was generally a high level of satisfaction among

the respondents. The rest forwarded suggestions and the following were the main

suggestions (Table 26, Appendix 1):

Organise accommodation for runners at a reasonable rate 7.75%

Have direction to race venue 7%

Ensure that entrance is not blocked by too many people 6%

Organise accommodation for runners 4.5%

Have more big screens 4.25%

11

Positive and Negative Features of Durban

The table below illustrates the most important responses obtained regarding the positive

and negative features of Durban (Tables 31 and 32, Appendix 1).

Positive and Negative Features of Durban as a Tourist Destination (Multiple

Responses)

Positive Feature Percent Negative features Percent

Beaches 72.5 Crime 41

Weather 33.75 Beggars 3.5

Friendly people 22.75 Security at night 2

Hotels 20.25 Unfriendly people 2

Sporting events 14.5

N=400

As is evidenced from the table above, respondents indicated that the most important

positive features of Durban as a tourist destination were the beaches. The main and

dominant negative feature is crime.

Analysis of Interviews with Other Stakeholders

Organiser

The organiser of the event was the Comrades Marathon Association (CMA). CMA was

responsible for all aspects of the event. The overall budget allocated for the event was R7

500 000. The expenditure items were:

Administration R2 900 000

Expo R400 000

Hire of finish venue R400 000

Marketing R300 000

Television broadcast R2 000 000

Publications R400 000

Other R1 100 000

The organiser outsourced about 40%-50% of the services to KZN service providers.

These services included finish venue, Expo, publications, catering, marshals,

amabeadibeadi bead production, printing and publishing. However, only one aspect (the

amabeadibeadi bead production) was specifically outsourced to Affirmable Business

Enterprises (ABEs).

12

The types of media leveraged for the event is presented in the Table below.

TYPE OF MEDIA NATIONAL INTERNATIONAL

Name Cost Name Cost

Television SABC R47 000 000 US Marathon Show R250 000

Radio SABC, ECR Not disclosed

Print National R8 000 000 Various

Washington Post

Posters/ banners/ flyers Posters R150 000

Internet R500 000

SMS To runners R500 000

Publications Brochure

Beyond 42

R250 000

R800 000

The overall assessment of the media coverage by the organiser was that all aspects of the

media coverage were absolutely essential. The support of the media, especially radio, TV

and print, was regarded as being immense and significant.

The organiser did not identify the main sponsors of the event.

The organiser employed approximately 300 people. Some of the types of jobs people

were employed for were administration, finish construction, marshals and

communication.

In terms of the overall expectation of the event, the organiser stated that the intention was

once again to stage the most prestigious ultra marathon in the world. The organiser was

satisfied that these expectations were met. In terms of the overall impression of the event,

the organiser felt that the event was very positive. The organiser also felt that the

economic impacts of the event in the Durban area were significant as per usual. The

organiser indicated that the event was adequately publicised since no other single event in

South Africa enjoys the publicity of the Comrades Marathon.

The location was deemed to be well suited for the event since the organiser felt that there

could be no other event location. The organiser took steps to control/prevent crime by

liaising closely with the SAP and other authorities since security is regarded as a major

priority. These steps were deemed to be successful. However, the organiser did indicate

that petty crime was a problem and one overseas runner was mugged. The organisation of

the event also included steps to control crowds and traffic. This was done by having

marshals along the route and involving traffic authorities. The organiser felt that the steps

taken to control crowds and traffic were successful. The organiser stated that no problems

were experienced at the event.

According to the organiser, the main lesson learnt from the event was that security issues

were highlighted and will be improved on next year. The organiser was of the opinion

that similar events/activities should not become annual events in Durban.

13

The organiser was satisfied with the roles played by the DEC and Durban Africa but felt

that Octagon added no value since all aspects of their role took place at the very last

moment. The organiser felt that Octagon did not have a long term planning approach.

Stall-holders

Ten stall-holders were interviewed at the event. The main services/products provided by

the stall-holders were health-related products (including sport supplements and sport

drinks), food and refreshments, camping and running gear (including clothes and foot

wear) and eye-wear apparel. While two of the respondents indicated that they did not

know how much was paid to acquire a stall at the Expo, the average cost of acquiring a

stall for the rest was R26 375.

Thirty percent (30%) of the respondents employed additional staff. On average, 3.5

persons were employed. The types of jobs additional persons were employed for were to

assist with sales and promotion.

Level of satisfaction with:

Location of stalls: 90% the respondents expressed satisfaction with the location of

the stalls.

Location of event: 80% of the respondents indicated that they were satisfied with

the location of the event.

Organisation: All the respondents expressed satisfaction with the organisation of

the event.

Attendance: 70% the interviewees indicated that they were satisfied with the

attendance at the event.

Security: 80% of the respondents expressed satisfaction with security at the

events.

Advertising/publicity: 70% of the respondents were satisfied with the advertising

of the event.

Fees/cost for acquiring a stall: 70% of the respondents expressed satisfaction with

the fees/costs for acquiring a stall at the event.

In general, there was a high level of satisfaction with regard to components of the event

among the stall-holders. In relation to dissatisfaction, the reasons forwarded were:

Show is smaller than the previous year

The Expo did not attract many people (again, in comparison to last year)

Inadequate advertising/advertising to the wrong group

Lack of security

Asbestos falling from the roof

Only one respondent experienced problems at the event which was related to parking.

The respondent suggested that there should be two entrances and that all stall-holders/

exhibitors should be given clearly marked access passes to their designated parking area

that should be located close to the event venue.

14

Some of the suggestions forwarded to improve the event in the future were:

Make the event bigger

Advertise more

Extend the period of the Expo

Separate dining hall for exhibitors

Eighty percent of the respondents revealed their average turnover per day. On average,

these respondents had a turnover per day of R6 938. The rest of the respondents indicated

that they were not engaged in retail activities. Ninety percent of the respondents stated

that events like the Comrades Marathon attracted tourists to Durban. All the respondents

stated that the event should take place again next year. Ninety percent of the respondents

stated that they would participate in the Comrades Marathon Expo if it is held again next

year. One respondent indicated that he/she was not sure of attendance next year.

Respondents also indicated that the following events/activities should take place

annually:

Festivals

More running events

Sport events

Outdoor events

CONCLUSION

The socio-economic impact assessment of the 2003 Comrades Marathon event indicates

that it was an extremely successful event attracting both national and international

participants. The event also generated immense national and international media

coverage. The leverage ratio is relatively high and indicates that for every Rand spent by

the public sector, R83.40 was generated through the event by the private sector. In

general, the event was well organised and managed. An issue of concern is that the

involvement of ABEs was minimal with their participation only in the amabeadibeadi

bead production. This issue needs to be seriously addressed by the organisers of the

event.

15

APPENDIX 1: COMRADES MARATHON TABLES

Table 1: Permanent place of residency of respondents (%)

Place of residence Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Durban (40.5)

Central 6 12 9

South 5.5 15.5 10.5

North 8 11 9.5

West 9 14 11.5

Kwazulu-Natal (11.75)

South Coast 1.5 4.5 3

North Coast 3 2.5 2.75

Midlands 6.5 5.5 6

South Africa provinces outside KZN (46)

Gauteng 28.5 28 28.25

Free State 4.5 2.5 3.5

Eastern Cape 1 0.5 0.75

Western Cape 11.5 2.5 7

Mpumalanga 1 - 0.5

North West 9 - 4.5

Limpopo 3 - 1.5

Foreign tourists (1.75)

Kenya 0.5 - 0.25

Mozambique 0.5 - 0.25

Russia 0.5 0.5 0.5

Britain 0.5 - 0.25

Zimbabwe - 0.5 0.25

Botswaba - 0.5 0.25

Table 2: Accommodation of holiday-maker (in %)


Luxury hotel 9 11.5 10

Family hotel 36.8 20.7 30.4

Bed and breakfast 9 3.4 6.8

Holiday flat 4.5 9.2 6.4

Self-catering 13.5 14.9 14.1

Holiday home - 3.4 1.4

Friends and family 20.4 36.8 26.8

Comrades train 6.8 - 4.1

16

Table 3: Number of nights stayed in paid accommodation by holiday-maker (in %)


1 8.5 5.4 7.5

2 16.9 20 18

3 40.6 14.5 31.7

4 26.5 32.7 28.6

5 0.9 5.4 2.5

6 4.7 1.9 3.7

7 1.9 9.1 4.4

8 - 1.9 0.6

10 - 3.6 1.2

14 - 3.6 1.2

15 - 1.9 0.6

X = 3.2 X=4.1 X=3.5

Table 4: Daily cost of accommodation (in %)

Cost (in Rands) Participants (n=106) Spectators (n=55) Total (n=161)

Not disclosed 7.5 - 4.9

None 5.7 - 3.7

75 - 1.8 0.6

100 - 5.4 1.9

150 - 9.1 3.1

170 3.8 - 2.5

200 7.5 - 4.9

230 1.9 - 1.2

250 16.9 - 11.3

290 0.9 - 0.6

300 5.7 12.8 8.1

380 0.9 - 0.6

400 12.3 9.1 11.3

440 1.9 - 1.2

450 - 9.1 3.1

500 16.9 29.2 21.2

550 8.5 3.6 6.8

600 2.8 - 1.9

650 1.9 9.1 4.3

750 2.8 3.6 3.1

800 1.9 3.6 2.5

900 - 3.6 1.2

X = R374 X=R450 X=R402

17

Table 5: Number of people in immediate group (holiday-maker) (in %)

No. of people Participants (n=133) Spectators (n=87) Total (n=220)

1 0.8 - 0.4

2 16.6 18.4 17.3

3 24.8 9.3 18.6

4 28.7 27.6 28.2

5 11.3 12.6 11.8

6 8.3 17.3 11.8

7 - 3.4 1.4

8 1.5 5.8 3.2

10 - 1.1 0.4

11 2.2 - 1.4

12 0.7 - 0.4

13 0.7 - 0.4

14 0.7 - 0.4

15 1.5 1.1 1.4

20 1.5 - 0.9

36 0.7 - 0.4

50 - 3.4 1.4

54 1.5 - 0.9

X = 4.8 X = 6.1 X= 5.3

Table 6: Number of people in immediate group (all) including respondent (in %)

No. of people Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

1 1 5.5 3.25

2 12 18.5 15.25

3 9 15.5 12.25

4 39 15 27

5 11 11 11

6 17 14.5 15.75

7 - 5 2.5

8 3 3.5 3.25

10 1 5.5 3.25

11 1 - 0.5

13 0.5 - 0.25

15 0.5 1.5 1

20 2.5 - 1.25

25 0.5 - 0.25

36 2 0.5 1.25

50 - 4 2

X = 5.6 X = 6.4 X = 6

Table 7: Description of immediate group (in %)

Description of group Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Family 43 53.5 48.25

Friends 13 18.5 15.75

Friends and family 17 11 14

Business associates - 5 2.5

Tour group 3.5 0.5 2

Athletic/ running club 23.5 11 17.25

School group - 0.5 0.25

18

Table 8: Tourists’ primary reason for visiting Durban (in %)

Primary reason Participants (n=133) Spectators (n=87) Total (n=220)

Rugby tour - 1.1 0.4

Vacation - 2.3 0.9

Business - 1.1 0.4

This event 100 95.5 98.3

Table 9: Did respondents plan their visit to Durban to coincide with the event (in %)

Spectators (n=4)

Yes 75

No 25

Table 10: Did respondents specifically come to the location for the events (in %)

Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Yes 100 100 100

Table 11: Tourist mode of transportation to Durban (in %)

Transportation Participants (n=133) Spectators (n=87) Total (n=220)

Private vehicle 69.9 65.5 68.2

Rental vehicle - 4.6 1.8

Bus 7.5 9.3 8.2

Airplane 8.3 17.2 11.8

Train 9.8 - 5.9

Mini-bus taxi 4.5 3.4 4.1

Table 12: Mode of transportation to event by all respondents (in %)

Transportation Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Private vehicle 57 67 62

Rental vehicle - 6 3

Bus 10 4.5 7.25

Mini bus taxi 8.5 14 11.25

Walked 24.5 8.5 16.5

Table 13: Most influential medium in respondents decision to attend the events (in %):

Multiple responses

Medium Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Word of mouth 11.5 39 25.25

TV ads 26.5 28.5 27.5

Radio ads 14 8 11

Posters/ banners/ flyers - 11 5.5

Newspaper Ads 15.5 9.5 12.5

Participant 78.5 51.5 65

19

Table 14: Accuracy and fairness of advertisement (in %)


Yes 100 100 100

Table 15: Knowledge of other events taking place in Durban during this period (in %)


Yes 20.5 39.5 30

No 79.5 60.5 70

Table 16: If yes, how many events respondent attended or planned to attend (in %)


None 48.8 8.9 22.5

1 51.2 72.1 65

2 - 17.7 11.7

3 - 1.3 0.8

X = 0.5 X = 1.1 X = 0.9

Table 17: Intention to attend event if held next year (in %)


Yes 97.5 91 94.25

Don’t know 2.5 9 5.75

Table 18: Knowledge of event sponsors (in %): Multiple Response

Name of sponsors Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Mr Price 37.5 28 32.75

Imperial 2 29.5 15.75

Reebok 11.5 - 5.75

MTN 60.5 69.5 65

Nike 12 15 13.5

Adidas 3 - 1.5

Liberty 0.5 - 0.25

Powerade 11.5 - 5.75

Pick ‘n Pay 12 51 31.5

3M 0.5 - 0.25

People’s Bank 12.5 45 28.75

Durban 1.5 2 1.75

Energade 8.5 - 4.25

Voltaren 3.5 0.5 2

Old Mutual 0.5 0.5 0.5

Shoprite - 3.5 1.75

Harmony 1 9.5 5.25

Standard Bank - 9.5 4.75

Eskom - 0.5 0.25

KZN Athletics - 3 1.5

Topsport - 0.5 0.25

Nashua - 8.5 4.25

Greyhound - 3 1.5

20

Table 19: Effect of sponsorship on respondent’s attitudes towards company image (in %):

Multiple responses

Name of sponsors Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Mr Price

More positive company image

Unchanged company image

36.5

1

28

-

32.25

0.5

Imperial


2

29.5

15.75

Reebok


11.5

-

5.75

MTN



60

0.5

66.5

3

63.25

1.75

Nike


12

15

13.5

Adidas


3

-

1.5

Liberty


0.5

-

0.25

Powerade



10

1.5

-

-

5

0.75

Pick ‘n Pay


12

51

31.5

3M


0.5

-

0.25

People’s Bank



12.5

-

44

1

28.25

0.5

Durban


1.5

2

1.75

Energade


8.5

-

4.25

Voltaren


3.5

0.5

2

Old Mutual


0.5

0.5

0.5

Shoprite


-

3.5

1.75

Harmony 1 9.5 5.25

Standard Bank



-

-

9

0.5

4.5

0.25

Eskom


-

0.5

0.25

KZN Athletics


-

3

1.5

Topsport


-

0.5

0.25

Nashua


-

8.5

4.25

Greyhound


-

3

1.5

21

Table 20: Intention to buy an event sponsored product when considering products/ services

of a similar price/ quality (in %)


Yes 78.5 74 76.25

No 21.5 26 23.75

Table 21: Other places/ activities except the event did/ will respondents plan to attend in

Durban (in %): Multiple responses

Activity/ place Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

None 68.5 58 63.25

Rugby match 7.5 13.5 10.5

Beaches 11 34 22.5

Shopping malls 12.5 19.5 16

Racing events 3.5 - 1.75

Botha’s Hill 0.5 - 0.25

Waterfront 0.5 - 0.25

Victoria Street Market 0.5 - 0.25

Fleamarkers 2 8.5 5.25

NBS House and Garden Show 2 - 1

Theatres - 2 1

Kings Park - 3.5 1.75

Sharks Board - 0.5 0.25

Restaurants - 1.5 0.75

Night clubs - 2 1

Expo centre - 5.5 2.75

Umlazi - 0.5 0.25

Dolphinarian - 0.5 0.25

ICC - 0.5 0.25

VBA - 2.5 1.25

Music festival - 3.5 1.75

Spar 10K - 0.5 0.25

Soccer match - 6 3

Sports events - 7.5 3.75

July Handicap 0.5 11.5 6

Table 22: Rating of event experience (in %)

Rating Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Excellent 41.5 54.5 48

Good 40.5 41 40.75

Okay 18 4.5 11.25

Table 23: Experience of any unsavoury incidents at event (in %)

Participants

(n=200)

Spectators

(n=200)

Total

(n=400)

Type of incident Location of incident

Yes 0.5 - 0.25 Child terrifies by the

man in the green suite

In the stadium

No 99.5 100 99.75 - -

22

Table 24: Experience of any unsavoury incidents in Durban (in %)

Participants

(n=200)

Spectators

(n=200)

Total

(n=400)

Type of incident Location of incident

Yes - 1.5 0.75 Mugging

Robbery

Car accident

Durban beachfront (2)

Central Durban (1)

No 100 98.5 99.25 - -

Table 25: Experience of other problems at event (in %)

Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400) Type of incident

Yes - 0.5 0.25 Parking problems

No 100 99.5 99.75 -

Table 26: Suggestions to organisers to improve event/s in the future (in %)

Suggestion Participants

(n=200)

Spectators

(n=200)

Total

(n=400)

No Comment/ none 79.5 78.5 79

Have seating places to eat 3 - 1.5

Ensure that entrance is not blocked by too many people 8.5 3.5 6

Products should be more affordable 5.5 - 2.75

Organise accommodation for runners 6.5 2.5 4.5

Organise accommodation for runners at a reasonable rate 7 8.5 7.75

Need more security 1 - 0.5

Should have more places for massaging 0.5 - 0.25

Need information brochures 3.5 - 1.75

Consider race course as a venue for finishing race 0.5 - 0.25

Have directions to race venue - 2 1

Arrange better parking facilities 5.5 8.5 7

Separate race times between males and females - 0.5 0.25

Give more attention to first one hundred runners - 0.5 0.25

Big screen should be better situated - 5.5 2.75

Have more big screens - 8.5 4.25

Have a cultural event to explain June 16th

day - 0.5 0.25

Table 27: Monies spent at the event (in %)


Yes 99.5 85.5 92.5

No 0.5 14.5 7.5

Table 28: Items money spent on (in %): Multiple responses

Items Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Food/ refreshments 93.5 83.5 88.5

Clothes 37 14.5 25.75

Jewellery 0.5 - 0.25

Arts and crafts - 0.5 0.25

Shoes - 0.5 0.25

Energy boosters 29.5 - 14.75

N/A 0.5 14.5 7.5

23

Table 29: Amount spent daily at event (in %)

Amount ® Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

None 0.5 14.5 7.5

20 4.5 2.25

30 0.5 3 1.75

50 8 9.5 8.75

80 1 7.5 4.25

100 31.5 24 27.75

120 0.5 4.5 2.5

150 - 5.5 2.75

200 19 13.5 16.25

250 3.5 - 1.75

300 11.5 2 6.75

400 1.5 3.5 2.4

450 - 0.5 0.25

500 12.5 8.5 10.5

700 - 3.5 1.75

800 1 - 0.5

1000 3 - 1.5

1200 0.5 - 0.25

1500 1 - 0.5

X = R165 X=166 X=166

Table 30: Amount spent while in Durban by holiday-makers (in %)

Amount ® Participants (n=133) Spectators (n=87) Total (n=220)

Not disclosed 6 - 3.6

150 - 1.1 0.5

200 - 3.4 1.4

300 2.2 - 1.4

400 1.5 4.6 2.7

500 21 13.8 18.2

650 - 6.9 2.7

700 - 2.4 0.9

800 3 - 1.8

1000 36.8 14.9 28.2

1200 3 - 1.8

1500 8.4 16.2 11.4

2000 9.8 17.3 12.6

2500 3.8 4.6 4.1

3000 1.5 4.6 2.7

5000 3 4.6 3.6

6000 - 1.1 0.5

10000 - 3.4 1.4

20000 - 1.1 0.5

X = R1230 X = R2019 X = R1 542

24

Table 31: Positive features of Durban as a tourist destination (in %): Multiple responses

Features Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

None/ No response 1.5 0.5 1

Shopping malls 11.5 13.5 12.5

Friendly people 22 23.5 22.75

Beaches 71.5 73.5 72.5

Casinos - 4.5 2.25

Weather 31.5 36 33.75

Sporting events 11 18 14.5

Very clean - 6 3

Good food - 0.5 0.25

Entertainment - 1 0.5

Victoria Street Market - 1 0.5

Sardine run - 0.5 0.25

Point Waterfront - 7.5 3.75

Hotels 19.5 21 20.25

Diverse cultures - 2.5 1.25

Restaurants 0.5 - 0.25

Conferences/ ICC 0.5 11.5 6

Relaxed atmosphere 0.5 - 0.25

Fishing 0.5 - 0.25

Good security 0.5 - 0.25

Fleamarkets 2 9.5 5.75

Infrastructure - 7.5 3.75

Table 32: Negative features of Durban as a tourist destination (in %): Multiple responses

Features Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

None 58.5 44 51.25

Crime 38.5 43.5 41

Pollution/ dirty city 0.5 2.5 1.5

Security at night - 4 2

Street kids 0.5 - 0.25

Casinos are disgusting 0.5 - 0.25

Unfriendly people - 4 2

Overcrowding - 0.5 0.25

Prostitutes 0.5 - 0.25

Timeshare agents 0.5 - 0.25

Litter 3 - 1.5

Beggars - 7 3.5

Drugs 0.5 - 0.25

Weather 0.5 - 0.25

Rude taxi drivers - 0.5 0.25

Table 33: Knowledge of slogan, “Durban: South Africa’s Playground” (in %)


Yes 52.5 42.5 47.5

No 47.5 57.5 52.5

25

Table 34: If aware of slogan, which organization does it represent (in %)


Don’t know 71.5 51.8 62.7

The Durban city 13.3 17.6 14.8

KZN Tourism 9.5 5.9 7.9

Durban Tourism Board 5.7 9.4 7.5

Tourism body - 8.2 3.8

Tourism Junction - 7.1 3.3

Table 35: Age of respondents (in %)

Age (yrs) Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

<20 4 0.5 2.25

21-30 11 24.5 17.75

31-40 48 45.5 46.75

41-50 33.5 17 25.25

51-60 2 9.5 5.75

61-70 1.5 3 2.25

X = 37.4 X = 40 X = 38.7

Table 36: Occupation of respondents (in %)

Occupation Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Student 2 9 5.5

Unemployed 5.5 3.5 4.5

Home executive 1 6 3.5

Retired 1 - 0.5

Labourer/ unskilled 0.5 3 1.75

Artisan/ technician 8.5 0.5 4.5

Sales/ marketing 11 11 11

Administrator/ manager 33.5 19.5 26.5

Businessperson 13.5 11 12.25

Professional 18.5 24 21.25

Self-employed 5 12.5 8.75

Table 37: Gender of respondents (in %)

Sex Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Male 56.5 48.5 52.5

Female 43.5 51.5 47.5

Table 38: Historical race category of respondents (in %)

Race Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

African 26.5 29 27.75

Indian 11 16.5 13.75

White 43.5 44 43.75

Coloured 19 10.5 14.75

26

Table 39: Income of respondents (in %)

Income Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

Confidential 8 2.5 6.25

N/A 7 11.5 9.5

<1000 5 5.5 7

1000-1999 6.5 2.5 5

2000-2999 1 1 1

3000-3999 10.5 7.5 10

4000-4999 10 7 8.5

5000-5999 4 6.5 5.75

6000-6999 8.5 6 7.25

7000-7999 8 3 5.5

8000-8999 7 12.5 9.75

9000-9999 6 6.5 6.25

10000-10999 7 11.5 10.25

12000 3 - 1.5

15000 5.5 11 8.25

20000 2 3 2.5

30000 1 2 1.5

50000 - 0.5 0.25

X = R6655 X = R7823 X = R7239

Table 40: Number of days attending event (in %)

No. of days Participants (n=200) Spectators (n=200) Total (n=400)

1 13.5 74.5 44

2 64 18 41

3 22.5 7.5 15

X=2.1 X = 1.3 X = 1.7

27

ADDENDUM: DAY PREFERRED FOR NEXT YEAR’S EVENT

The organiser requested that during the telephonic interviews with the participants,

responses be ascertained as to which day participants prefer the main race be held next

year since June 16th

2004 falls on a Wednesday. The results are presented in the Table

below.

Day preferred Percentage (n=100)

Saturday (12th

June 2004) 26

Sunday (13th

June 2004) 28

Saturday or Sunday (12th

or 13th

June 2004) 35

Late in May 9

June 16th

2

With the exception of two respondents that indicated that the main race day be June 16th

2004, the rest indicated that it should be held during the weekend prior to June 16th

. In

this regard, 26% preferred Saturday (12th

June 2004), 28% preferred Sunday (13th

June

2004) and the rest (35%) indicated Saturday or Sunday (12th

or 13th

June 2004). The main

reason forwarded for the weekend preference was that it was more convenient for the

runners since they would need fewer days leave from work. The two respondents who

preferred June 16th

felt that the significance of the day and its association with the

Comrades Marathon should be sustained. It is important to note that additionally 9% of

the respondents stated that the organisers need to reconsider the dates of the Comrades

Marathon and move it even earlier in the year (in May or the first week of June). They

stated that the cold weather is not ideal for the runners.

a socio-economic impact assessment of the comrades

Documents