Article: 'We must act now': Netherlands tries to control tourism boom

[SeaCBear]

For those who may be planning to visit Amsterdam or The Netherlands soon, this Guardian article may be of interest.

 

'We must act now': Netherlands tries to control tourism boom. Strategy may involve tourist tax and closing down attractions in crowded regions.

[Nebr.cruiser]

Having just returned from Amsterdam, tourists and crowds were awful--and it's just May!  I can't imagine what it must be in the height of summer.  I hope they can find a solution for their beautiful city/country.

[Ine]

3 hours ago, Nebr.cruiser said:

Having just returned from Amsterdam, tourists and crowds were awful--and it's just May!  I can't imagine what it must be in the height of summer.  I hope they can find a solution for their beautiful city/country.

May is one of the busiest months because of the blooming tulipfields andf Keukenhof and  also some holidays in that month.

Apart from that  since a few months Amsterdam has a leftwing ruling. One of the proposed rules are a tax of 8.-  Euro per cruisepasssenger. One of the reasons some companies changed there stop from Amsterdam to Rotterdam or IJmuiden. Then tours from those places into Amsterdam of course still might  be offered.  Also groups visiting town are not allowed anymore in some sections of town, or are limited to a certain numbers. Also in the future touristsbuses or dieselcars might not be allowed anymore into town.

Not all dutch and tourists are happy with some restrictions.

Edited May 21, 2019 by Ine

[AmazedByCruising]

 

On 5/21/2019 at 9:23 AM, Ine said:

Apart from that  since a few months Amsterdam has a leftwing ruling.

 

It has been (reasonable) left wing for ages, but now the left wing acts as if they entered a competition to be the best left wing possible. They abolished "I Amsterdam",  two words attracting more visitors than Rijksmuseum, because it is "too individualistic". The most "inclusive" slogan ever has an "I" in it that raised the red flag. After this bold move, I think only Pisa can top that by destroying their tower as it "enables inappropriate reproduction organ oriented jokes", which could be offensive to people who don't identify as male or whatever.  IMHO, the rulers of Amsterdam have gone mad.

 

On 5/21/2019 at 9:23 AM, Ine said:

Not all dutch and tourists are happy with some restrictions.

 

After spending millions "to put Amsterdam on the map", suddenly they realize what exactly they wished for.  Roller cases and Nutella everywhere. And then, to extinguish the fire they started themselves, they aim at the small percentage of people who came by ship, who are not responsible for problems, who simply visit museums, eat in better restaurants, apologize for not speaking Dutch, and after spending loads of money politely say thank you very much before returning to the ship. It's absurd.

[Ine]

4 hours ago, AmazedByCruising said:

 

 

It has been (reasonable) left wing for ages, but now the left wing acts as if they entered a competition to be the best left wing possible. They abolished "I Amsterdam",  two words attracting more visitors than Rijksmuseum, because it is "too individualistic". The most "inclusive" slogan ever has an "I" in it that raised the red flag. After this bold move, I think only Pisa can top that by destroying their tower as it "enables inappropriate reproduction organ oriented jokes", which could be offensive to people who don't identify as male or whatever.  IMHO, the rulers of Amsterdam have gone mad.

 

 

After spending millions "to put Amsterdam on the map", suddenly they realize what exactly they wished for.  Roller cases and Nutella everywhere. And then, to extinguish the fire they started themselves, they aim at the small percentage of people who came by ship, who are not responsible for problems, who simply visit museums, eat in better restaurants, apologize for not speaking Dutch, and after spending loads of money politely say thank you very much before returning to the ship. It's absurd.

I agree with you. It looks like they seem to prefer the weekend tourists that come for (to many) drinks and drugs. I donot understand this.

[Globaliser]

6 hours ago, AmazedByCruising said:

after spending loads of money politely say thank you very much before returning to the ship

 

2 hours ago, Ine said:

It looks like they seem to prefer the weekend tourists that come for (to many) drinks and drugs. I donot understand this.

 

I would be interested to see how much money each cruise passenger brings in to Amsterdam on average, compared to the average amount that each weekend drink/drugs tourist brings in. In many other places, one of the big problems with cruise passengers is precisely that they don't actually bring a lot of money to the port, because (amongst other things) they don't spend any money on accommodation.

[Ine]

14 minutes ago, Globaliser said:

 

 

I would be interested to see how much money each cruise passenger brings in to Amsterdam on average, compared to the average amount that each weekend drink/drugs tourist brings in. In many other places, one of the big problems with cruise passengers is precisely that they don't actually bring a lot of money to the port, because (amongst other things) they don't spend any money on accommodation.

Indeed, I am sure more then those budget tourists that make a lot of noise and donot spend that much money. I also never understood why cruiselines will be charged E. 8 per visiting passenger.  A reason why already now some lines changed their destination into Rotterdam.

Also the dutch national tourism office will stop promoting The Netherlands as they think too many tourists are coming....☹️

[Globaliser]

I don't think that the Netherlands are alone in asking this question. We all know the problems that Venice is facing because of cruise ship passengers (and cruise ships themselves), which is perhaps the starkest European difficulty. Even in London, it is unclear that tourism brings any overall net financial benefit because the money that tourists bring in may be somewhere in the region of the additional costs burden imposed on everyone else in London from the consequences of tourism and tourists.

[AmazedByCruising]

3 hours ago, Globaliser said:

 

 

I would be interested to see how much money each cruise passenger brings in to Amsterdam on average, compared to the average amount that each weekend drink/drugs tourist brings in. In many other places, one of the big problems with cruise passengers is precisely that they don't actually bring a lot of money to the port, because (amongst other things) they don't spend any money on accommodation.

 

I read they bring in about $70 a day. But that's not something thing the "natives" in Amsterdam would care about. Almost no one needs tourism for their income (which might be different from Venice). They do see people who came solely for the drugs and red light district, or to celebrate a bachelor party. A demographic that unfortunately scores high on vomiting, urinating in public and being agressive. Who spend $20 to sleep and don't want breakfast because they enter the hotel minutes before breakfast is served. And then there's the constant sound of roller cases, and local shops being replaced by Nuttella shops and T-Shirt sellers at a large scale.

 

Compare that to the (usuallly) well-behaved cruisers, who don't need to drag luggage around, who might giggle a bit about the Red Light district and marihuana before following the guide with the umbrella to Rijksmuseum or the line for Anne Frank museum unless they leave the city to see tulips and windmills. Amsterdam should love those. Instead, they started a war with the cruise lines, inventing a new tax because "a ship is a hotel, too" and we want less tourists anyway. I can't prove it, but I think it has more to do with jealousy than actually lessening the burden on the city.

 

The number of tourists in Venice coming from ships is far less than the total amount of tourists. I see at most 5 ships in port, which would be about 15,000 passengers max. Venice has 30 million tourists per year. While the ships themselves do impose a problem (which they don't in Amsterdam as its harbour can handle those few more ships easily), I think all the reasons why there's a difference in "quality" of tourists in Amsterdam is very similar in Venice.

[Ine]

Donot forget those passengers starting their cruise in Amsterdam. Most of them stay precruise arrive at least one night earlier or more. Some of them before heading home too. They certainly spend more then US$ 70 per person and donot stay in low budget hotels.  

Also quite a few Amsterdammers have a job at the cruise terminal because of the ships.

Edited May 31, 2019 by Ine

[Globaliser]

23 hours ago, AmazedByCruising said:

I read they bring in about $70 a day. But that's not something thing the "natives" in Amsterdam would care about. Almost no one needs tourism for their income (which might be different from Venice).

 

If there's an Amsterdam "native" who does not care about how much money a cruise ship tourist brings in, then they would not care about how much money any other tourist brings in. Almost by definition, that person's opinion is being formed on a limited subset of information about whether tourism in general, or any particular tourist, is on balance a good thing or a bad thing for the city. For a policy-maker, the overall picture is always much more complex and subtle than "I don't like drunk youths throwing up on the street".

[Turtles06]

6 hours ago, Ine said:

Donot forget those passengers starting their cruise in Amsterdam. Most of them stay precruise arrive at least one night earlier or more. Some of them before heading home too. They certainly spend more then US$ 70 per person and donot stay in low budget hotels.  

 

 

Agreed, Ine!  My wife and I will be visiting Amsterdam for the first time next spring, and staying several nights pre-river-cruise in a hotel that is decidedly not "low budget."  We'll be paying for several days of meals, museum tickets, canal boats, trams, etc.    Those few days alone will be in four figures in euros and U.S. dollars.     

 

[And I'll add how excited we both are to be visiting Amsterdam! ]
 

[GrJ Berkshire]

But the issue is spreading out the tourists. Holland (The Netherlands) is so much more than Amsterdam. So few people go to or visit cities like Leiden, Delft, Breda, Dordrecht, all have much to offer. Plus unfortunately Amsterdam has this stag/hen do 'label' plus the Brown cafes and Red light district. Even The Hague fails to get it's share of the tourist trade.

[dogs4fun]

I love Holland - Amsterdam is arguably my favorite city but the surrounding countryside is gorgeous. I also love Delft (huge Vermeer fan), Utrecht, the Hague, Leiden ... the list goes on. I usually do not visit via cruise ship but, I have on occasion.  Nothing short of death will deter me from a future visit.

[PeetNL]

For those interested: the new vision of the NBTC Holland Marketing organisation.

Perspective 2030 Destination the Netherlands

[ducklite]

On 5/30/2019 at 5:17 AM, Globaliser said:

 

 

I would be interested to see how much money each cruise passenger brings in to Amsterdam on average, compared to the average amount that each weekend drink/drugs tourist brings in. In many other places, one of the big problems with cruise passengers is precisely that they don't actually bring a lot of money to the port, because (amongst other things) they don't spend any money on accommodation.

I must agree.  We typically have lunch and often make a purchase from a local artisan (my "souvenirs" tend to be original  pieces--paintings, sculpture, etc.), a few admissions or perhaps a local guide in port.  But without the additional $300-600 per night being spent on accommodation, breakfast, and dinner that we would spend on a land based trip, other than the art, it's a pretty minimal amount spent in port.  

The hen and stag do groups spend a large amount in a single weekend. Typically a number of hotel rooms, many meals, and enormous bar bills.  That said, there is a downside to that in terms of needing added law enforcement, NHS care, and loss of other tourists (who might spend far more in the long run) who give up on certain cities because they get turned off by the boisterous groups.