Queen's visit sparks tourists' interest in visiting Ireland

Sully

The Queen’s visit to Ireland has sparked a surge in interest in tourist trips.

So far this month, searches on the Hotels.com UK website have risen by 69% for Dublin, 74% for Cork, 191% for Kildare and 80% for Tipperary compared with the same period last year.

Ireland has also become more attractive due to a 4% fall – to an average of €80 - in hotel room prices, Hotels.com said.

The company’s survey showed the average cost of a room in Dublin has dipped 7% to €78.50 and Dublin is one of the 15 best-value cities for high-end accommodation, with four-star hotel rooms at €84 and five-star ones at €150.

Another boost comes from the cutting of the VAT rate for the tourism industry from 13.5% to 9% to stimulate the economy.

Hotels.com Ireland and UK market management director Seamus MacCormaic said: “There is no doubt that Ireland currently offers excellent value to visitors and the high-profile visits of the Queen and President Obama have led to a boost in interest in the destination.

“Average hotel prices in Ireland are now the cheapest in western Europe and we expect to see them remain at this level for some time.”

Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/queens-visit-sparks-tourists-interest-in-visiting-ireland-506833.html#ixzz1Njsf9Q4m

With all the talk about how the visits from the Queen and Obama won't do anything for Ireland, how the whole government were misleading and lying to us saying it will provide a boost to tourism, how the Queen should pay B&B etc. I thought this article would be worth pointing out. Its the second article which has proved a lot of people wrong in the past 24hours

It was fantastic exposure, which has raised interests in Ireland not only because her majesty (:P) and the US President visited but because the worlds press descended on Ireland and show cased the various places. It was free advertising for Ireland, pretty much. It had a lot of Europe talking about us.

So going forward, people will visit. But, if we maintain our high prices then it will just fizzle out again as people want to visit places on holiday that are nice but are cheap. At the moment, we are an expensive country and nobody seems to want to drop their prices. Bit of a stalemate!

mike65

Of course an idle query needs to become an actual booking but its a start.

gaffer91

Sully wrote: »

Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/queens-visit-sparks-tourists-interest-in-visiting-ireland-506833.html#ixzz1Njsf9Q4m

With all the talk about how the visits from the Queen and Obama won't do anything for Ireland, how the whole government were misleading and lying to us saying it will provide a boost to tourism, how the Queen should pay B&B etc. I thought this article would be worth pointing out. Its the second article which has proved a lot of people wrong in the past 24hours

It was fantastic exposure, which has raised interests in Ireland not only because her majesty (:P) and the US President visited but because the worlds press descended on Ireland and show cased the various places. It was free advertising for Ireland, pretty much. It had a lot of Europe talking about us.

So going forward, people will visit. But, if we maintain our high prices then it will just fizzle out again as people want to visit places on holiday that are nice but are cheap. At the moment, we are an expensive country and nobody seems to want to drop their prices. Bit of a stalemate!

I wonder will FG and Labour be as quick to give FF the credit for being the instigators (or at least, participants) behind bringing the queen over as they are to give them blame when justifying a difficult decision?;)

Its good news, that searches have increased to such an extent is a very pleasant surprise.

GSF

mike65 wrote: »

Of course an idle query needs to become an actual booking but its a start.

There will be plenty who wont believe it had any economic benefit unless they get sworn affadavits and even then they would want to have a SC cross examine the witness.

Dozen Wicked Words

The difference between Obamas visit to Ireland and the rest of Europe was how much fun it all looked, one long tourism ad. The fact the Queen was so well recieved (generally) and that she seemed to enjoy herself in Ireland, was a fantastic advert for here.

I still think it was a huge amount of money to spend on security but it has been nothing but positive PR for Irish Tourism. I hope it does result in an upturn to people visiting.

later12

This proves causal link to the Queen? Economists everywhere are tearing up their theses.

How did figures for counties in which the Queen did not visit compare to those outside Dublin which she did visit?

Does anybody think that the fact that Summer has now come around again, a year has passed, the economic situation has changed for the worse in Ireland, and stabilised in Britain, have anything to do with this?

Ireland has also become more attractive due to a 4% fall – to an average of €80 - in hotel room prices, Hotels.com said.

Could there not be an economic reason why tourists are visiting these traditionally touristy areas compared with 2010? Could there not be reasons specific to hotels.com?

Deaf jumping spiders, that's all I'm saying.

Laminations

later10 wrote: »

This proves causal link to the Queen? Economists everywhere are tearing up their theses.

How did figures for counties in which the Queen did not visit compare to those outside Dublin which she did visit?

Does anybody think that the fact that Summer has now come around again, a year has passed, the economic situation has changed for the worse in Ireland, and stabilised in Britain, have anything to do with this?


Could there not be an economic reason why tourists are visiting these traditionally touristy areas compared with 2010? Could there not be reasons specific to hotels.com?

Deaf jumping spiders, that's all I'm saying.

Just admit that you were wrong. Its getting embarrassing at this stage.

later12

Laminations wrote: »

Just admit that you were wrong. Its getting embarrassing at this stage.

Do you understand the meaning of establishing a causal link? I'm curious as to why you would discount economic variables, or website effect, from a link such as this?

It seems to me that some people on here are pretty blinded by gold tiaras.

pog it

This is almost June for god's sake, of course there will be an increase in tourism, and of course the queen's visit will make a dent in visitor numbers increasing also. But let's not forget this is summer, holidays time anyway.

Laminations

later10 wrote: »

Do you understand the meaning of establishing a causal link? I'm curious as to why you would discount economic variables, or website effect, from a link such as this?

It seems to me that some people on here are pretty blinded by gold tiaras.

Obama might wear a gold tiara in your fantasy, and have a spreadsheet documenting the exact monetary return for each step that he takes, but when the tourism industry is lauding the visits, when international media is lauding the visits and when interest is up on many web-based measures then I'd accept that the visit was positive for Ireland and will give a return to the exchequer and a boost to the economy. But hey, you keep looking for those causal links, economics is a science aftera.... ah crap, no wait.

Einhard

later10 wrote: »

This proves causal link to the Queen? Economists everywhere are tearing up their theses.

How did figures for counties in which the Queen did not visit compare to those outside Dublin which she did visit?

Does anybody think that the fact that Summer has now come around again, a year has passed, the economic situation has changed for the worse in Ireland, and stabilised in Britain, have anything to do with this?


Could there not be an economic reason why tourists are visiting these traditionally touristy areas compared with 2010? Could there not be reasons specific to hotels.com?

Deaf jumping spiders, that's all I'm saying.

Ah look, this is getting silly. You're just determined to ignore any and all indications that the visit might lead to economic benefits.

Laminations

pog it wrote: »

This is almost June for god's sake, of course there will be an increase in tourism, and of course the queen's visit will make a dent in visitor numbers increasing also. But let's not forget this is summer, holidays time anyway.

Yes and last year it was summer holiday time too

So far this month, searches on the Hotels.com UK website have risen by 69% for Dublin, 74% for Cork, 191% for Kildare and 80% for Tipperary compared with the same period last year.

Bottle_of_Smoke

I think its likely the visit will be a benefit to tourism because the protests were so small. Had it been like the love ulster riots it could have had a negative effect.

I'm quietly confident it will bring in more tourism but still though - lets not count our chickens before they hatch. They are just hotel searches.

caseyann

Funny i read it was up 13% before she even came

Laminations

Failte Ireland reckon the €30mil cost is worth €300million in advertising.

10 fold, eat those words

RMD

pog it wrote: »

This is almost June for god's sake, of course there will be an increase in tourism, and of course the queen's visit will make a dent in visitor numbers increasing also. But let's not forget this is summer, holidays time anyway.

"So far this month, searches on the Hotels.com UK website have risen by 69% for Dublin, 74% for Cork, 191% for Kildare and 80% for Tipperary compared with the same period last year."

It isn't just the usual increase in tourism, it's the figures in relation to this time last year. Summer has nothing to do with the increased numbers as this time last year it was also nearing Summer as well.

latenia

GSF wrote: »

There will be plenty who wont believe it had any economic benefit unless they get sworn affadavits and even then they would want to have a SC cross examine the witness.

Absolutely. Press releases from web companies are the only science I need.

BlaasForRafa

pog it wrote: »

This is almost June for god's sake, of course there will be an increase in tourism, and of course the queen's visit will make a dent in visitor numbers increasing also. But let's not forget this is summer, holidays time anyway.

Again I have to give rolleyes today :rolleyes:

Did you actually read the piece or did you just read the headline?

So far this month, searches on the Hotels.com UK website have risen by 69% for Dublin, 74% for Cork, 191% for Kildare and 80% for Tipperary compared with the same period last year.

Laminations

latenia wrote: »

Absolutely. Press releases from web companies are the only science I need.

I'm sure press releases from government won't satiate people's appetite for hard stats either. I'm really not sure what 'type' of figures people want. I knew the visits would give us more publicity than we could pay for (and the €300mil figure seems to show that) but I wasn't expecting the boost to our tulip industry.

the groutch

there are so many holes in the OP's arguement of Liz bringing in tourism that I don't know where to begin

firstly Obama was over here as well, so there's just as much chance it was because of him.
secondly they are only searches, not bookings, and I'm sure there's alot more people booking holidays online than last year.
thirdly, as was stated in your quote, it's a whole lot cheaper to holiday over here

so the thread title is very very misleading, and this story seems to be a desperate attempt to justify the €30m wasted on her visit

slimjimmc

the groutch wrote: »

there are so many holes in the OP's arguement of Liz bringing in tourism that I don't know where to begin

firstly Obama was over here as well, so there's just as much chance it was because of him.
secondly they are only searches, not bookings, and I'm sure there's alot more people booking holidays online than last year.
thirdly, as was stated in your quote, it's a whole lot cheaper to holiday over here

so the thread title is very very misleading, and this story seems to be a desperate attempt to justify the €30m wasted on her visit

I think the point is that without the visits, and the resulting publicity, Ireland wouldn't have been so prominent and those searches would never have occured in that volume. Price is irrelevant if a potential tourist is not interested in looking at it.

What % of the increased interest would be need to be converted into hard bookings to bring in €30m to the economy (ignoring the likelihood that the bulk of the €30m outlay was retained within this economy anyway)?

thebman

It really wouldn't matter if we saw a 1000% increase in tourism.

The people that were against the visits will stay say there is no evidence that is what made them decide to come here and will point towards anything else.

It isn't provable and best to just let such people cry about the visits IMO. The horrible phrase, haters gonna hate comes to mind.

Personally I think many people in Ireland enjoyed the visits and found them uplifting at a time when we had nothing but bad news so for nationwide morale alone, I think they were worth it.

Sand

Einhard wrote: »

Ah look, this is getting silly. You're just determined to ignore any and all indications that the visit might lead to economic benefits.

Hes theoretically correct in that its impossible to prove what visits would have been without the queens visit.

However, in practise: the common sense view would be that the Queens visit was a massive advertising campaign for Irish holidays directed straight into UK sitting rooms, and a pickup in bookings since then can only reasonably be explained by its positive effects.

Dont expect Later10 to accept that though - hes on record as stating Anglo-Irish had tough and demanding lending standards.

later12

Laminations wrote: »

Obama might wear a gold tiara in your fantasy

economics is a science aftera.... ah crap, no wait.

Were these supposed to hurt?

Anyway I'm sorry but this is just not causal evidence. I could just as unreasonably argue that this interest is down to the worldwide advertising of Irish deflation (--lower prices afterall) since the bailout last winter. It isn't that such an argument in itself is unreasonable, but it would be unreasonable of me to pin this increase in interest on hotels.com on that bailout and the Irish debt crisis.

While the theory that this is all down to the Queen itself is not unreasonable, it is unreasonable to skip over all other factors just because you want to.

Again, why are you discounting the media effect with respect to the collapse of the Irish economy and falling prices? What makes you so sure it's all down to the Queen.

It isn't a bad proposal but it isn't a logical approach to evidence.

later12

Laminations wrote: »

Failte Ireland reckon the €30mil cost is worth €300million in advertising.

10 fold, eat those words

Wow, you just increased it by 100% The figure was 150 million. Well done.

I am still waiting on an email from Tourism Ireland with regard to how that figure was arrived at before the monarch actually touched down.

KeithAFC

What does it matter what the people against the visit say? They are in a very tiny minority. The whole visit showed us that. It was frankly embarrassing at how crap the protests were from a small element within the Irish Republican movement.

later12

You almost sound disappointed.

KeithAFC

later10 wrote: »

You almost sound disappointed.

Not at all. Does nothing for me either way.

Laminations

later10 wrote: »

Wow, you just increased it by 100% The figure was 150 million. Well done.

For someone so concerned about figures you really shouldn't mix them up. Im talking about the figure put on the cost of all the publicity - that's €300 million, not the €150 million from earlier in the thread. You really need to keep up.

I'll make the link really BIG to avoid further confusion.

I am still waiting on an email from Tourism Ireland with regard to how that figure was arrived at before the monarch actually touched down.

You also shouldn't confuse your agencies. I've cited Failte Ireland regarding the €300 million figure, nothing to do with your correspondence with Tourism Ireland.

Do you not consider it a good deal getting massive exposure (~38,000 broadcast and print pieces) in our tourism markets for a tenth of the cost? Even an economist with the fanciest calculator must recognise that as a good thing.

later12

Laminations wrote: »

For someone so concerned about figures you really shouldn't mix them up. Im talking about the figure put on the cost of all the publicity - that's €300 million, not the €150 million from earlier in the thread. You really need to keep up.

Interesting. I would be fascinated to know how a figure of 8,000 euro per internet, newspaper or audiovisual article was reached at. And how informative articles were related with professional marketing efficiency in terms of ad pricing. And whether the coverage of protests were included, and if coverage within Ireland was included. Anyway, fair enough, lets put the figure at 300 million.

I wonder what all of the coverage with regard to Irelands worsening economic situation has made for us in the media. Enough to clear the national debt maybe.

Let me ask you this, what would you expect this to translate into in terms of revenue to the country?

And I really have to ask you for a third time, why are you discounting from the hotels.com findings the posibility of economic variables in relation to falling costs in visiting Ireland at the beginning of the Summer season when compared with 2010? Why do you pin this change on the Queen? Please dont make me have to ask you a fourth time.

slimjimmc

later10 wrote: »

Wow, you just increased it by 100% The figure was 150 million. Well done.

I am still waiting on an email from Tourism Ireland with regard to how that figure was arrived at before the monarch actually touched down.

No he didn't, the €300m sum has already been officially published.
http://www.transport.ie/pressRelease.aspx?Id=337
and also in some media
http://www.98fm.com/2011/category-news-sport/e300m-worth-of-publicity-generated-by-state-visits/


Where are you getting your €150m from?

Laminations

later10 wrote: »

Interesting. I would be fascinated to know how a figure of 8,000 euro per internet, newspaper or audiovisual article was reached at. And how informative articles were related with professional marketing efficiency in terms of ad pricing. And whether the coverage of protests were included, and if coverage within Ireland was included. Anyway, fair enough, lets put the figure at 300 million.

Keep it going. Doubt everything. Your last sentence is the only one that matters.

I wonder what all of the coverage with regard to Irelands worsening economic situation has made for us in the media. Enough to clear the national debt maybe.

Irrelevant. Or if you do want to drag that in it only heightens the value of this positive publicity.

Let me ask you this, what would you expect this to translate into in terms of revenue to the country?

>€30million

And I really have to ask you for a third time, why are you discounting from the hotels.com findings the posibility of economic variables in relation to falling costs in visiting Ireland at the beginning of the Summer season when compared with 2010? Why do you pin this change on the Queen? Please dont make me have to ask you a fourth time.

Nobody is discounting out those factors. Look back at the replies to gurramok on the earlier 'Things that cost €30 million' thread. Everyone else bar him was acknowledging that it is better value here now. And this is still beside the point. These tens of thousands of web/print/broadcast pieces were not generated in response to falling costs - though they may indeed publicise irelands lowering prices - they were a direct result of the visits. That's €300 million in publicity for €30 million. Now answer my question, is that a good thing?

heh...
Even the 30 million cost is greatly exaggerated as it's all paid mostly to Gardaí and army as overtime which at the marginal rate for them 50%+ of it is taxed.
So the real cost is about €15 million,most of which is spent in this economy creating more tax revenue and more trickle down effects further whittling down the cost.

Some people would argue with a stone when it involves their favourite bailey wick...the past.

later12

slimjimmc wrote: »

No he didn't, the €300m sum has already been officially published[...]
Where are you getting your €150m from?

Yeah I saw that, the Failte Ireland sponsored official estimate has been revised upwards from Tourism Ireland's estimate of €150m to, €300m.
The press release was only released yesterday for the Monday papers so in fairness I don't think it's that unforgivable that I hadn't heard about it straight away.

Irrelevant. Or if you do want to drag that in it only heightens the value of this positive publicity.

why is Ireland's debt crisis with its inevitably falling costs for tourists irrevelant? Yes I find it credible that it could enhance the publicity of the Queen's visit, but I also find it credible that it could be a major factor behind increased interest in coming to Ireland since the death of the celtic tiger, a beast which could have caused some to shy away in the past.

I do think however, it would be unreasonable and illogical of me to pin this success on that - we simply cannot be so certain. Neither do we know the impact of website effect on this figure. I went to Athens last summer for this exact reason - financial crisis - reasonable Athens.

Now this 'evidence' which is actually only a correlation, has been described as 'proof' in this thread, and the implication has been made by you too that it is 'proof' of the Queen's impact. I have to ask you for a fourth time, and I hop not a fifth: why are you detaching the economic variables?

Laminations

later10 wrote: »

Now this 'evidence' which is actually only a correlation, has been described as 'proof' in this thread, and the implication has been made by you too that it is 'proof' of the Queen's impact. I have to ask you for a fourth time, and I hop not a fifth: why are you detaching the economic variables?

Firstly you have a fascination with the Queen, the rest of us are discussing two visits. Secondly I've answered your badgering question. We are not discounting or decoupling or detaching the economic variables but the publicity, the 3&,000 articles were not generated by our lowering costs and economic situation - they were generated by the visits. If it was mainly our lowering costs you would see similarly large increases in interest via web searches throughout this year. The web search interest exploded as a result of the visits, this can be deduced based on timing and search phrases.

later12

Laminations wrote: »

Firstly you have a fascination with the Queen

No, I dont. I neither have any problem with the Queen nor any truck with Eirigi or SF types.

I think it is the people who are easily impressed with Kings and Queens and symbolism and brass bands and trumpet players, and those of the unthinking Irish nationalists on here who are having difficulty in detaching their emotions from analysing this in a logical manner. I would almost use the word hysterical, quite frankly. Both sides are being equally daft and emotional.

econdly I've answered your badgering question. We are not discounting or decoupling or detaching the economic variables

Yes you are. You suggested earlier that this thread proves that I was wrong. How does it show that?

but the publicity, the 3&,000 articles were not generated by our lowering costs and economic situation

It is likely that far, far more articles were generated by our deflationary and financial problems, dont you agree? Why discount those, it is significant marketing surely?

If it was mainly our lowering costs you would see similarly large increases in interest via web searches throughout this year.

Not necessarily, since with school holidays coming in about one month and the Summer starting, one would naturally be expecting a significant pick up in May. But you must also remember that we have no information for April, nor for counties for which the Queen did not visit, nor for any other website in order to diminish the website effect on any increase in searches. How do you get over all of these factors in your enthusiasm for the story?

later12

By the way does anybody want to buy ice cubes from me? I am selling them now at just 10 euro per cube. I can prove (using the Laminations model) that ice cubes are positively correlated with hot weather, therefore if you buy this ice from me today, you too will enjoy hot weeather.

passive

later10 wrote: »

By the way does anybody want to buy ice cubes from me? I am selling them now at just 10 euro per cube. I can prove (using the Laminations model) that ice cubes are positively correlated with hot weather, therefore if you buy this ice from me today, you too will enjoy hot weeather.

The grown up arguments weren't working out for you then?

GSF

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/tourism-enjoys-timely-boost-in-wake-of-vips-2660971.html

The Rock of Cashel in Co Tipperary has so far been the biggest beneficiary from the queen's visit, with an almost 50pc leap in visitor numbers.
Around 655 people had been visiting each day on the week before the regal visit, but that increased to more than 1,000 per day the week after.

I would just like to issue a disclaimer that I havent personally interrogated each visitor and they may have chosen to visit Cashel because they received a coded message from a visiting space craft.

slimjimmc

later10 wrote: »

By the way does anybody want to buy ice cubes from me? I am selling them now at just 10 euro per cube. I can prove (using the Laminations model) that ice cubes are positively correlated with hot weather, therefore if you buy this ice from me today, you too will enjoy hot weeather.

Thanks for publicising the fact you're selling ice cubes, (how much would it have cost you to put an ad on TV) , we wouldn't have known otherwise Now if we can haggle on the price...

later12

passive wrote: »

The grown up arguments weren't working out for you then?

Causation and correlation is pretty much statistics 101... apparently this is inconvenient to some.

Son Of A Vidic

Long story short, it will be nice to reap some economic benefits from the recent visit's from The Queen and Obama.

later12

Yes it would be great, indeed. But it has not been deminstrated.

Amhran Nua

It's quite likely given the high regard the Queen is held in by the British public that her visit had a beneficial effect on visitor numbers from the UK. It will be difficult to tell until a couple of years have passed however, and I don't think it's a great idea to be trumpeting success before the tourist season for the year is over and we have some hard figures.

In the probable event that the visit brought positive coverage, it will be up to the various tourism bodies to capitalise on that and build ongoing growth from the UK.

Laminations

later10 wrote: »

By the way does anybody want to buy ice cubes from me? I am selling them now at just 10 euro per cube. I can prove (using the Laminations model) that ice cubes are positively correlated with hot weather, therefore if you buy this ice from me today, you too will enjoy hot weeather.

Ice cubes? You better check your refrigeration unit because all we're getting is hot air.

People go on holidays here all year. If this recent increase was mostly just a response to economic circumstances then since these circumstances have existed all year, we'd be seeing increases (in relation to last year) for every month of this year. The large increases have come in the recent days. The increases, as reported, are specific to counties that the queen visited.

This interest is likely related to the €300 million worth of publicity we recently got as a result of the visit. If it was more to do with cost (and we mow have the lowest average hotel prices in western Europe) then we'd be seeing sumilar increases all year.

later12

Laminations wrote: »

People go on holidays here all year.

Sorry, but Ireland has a high season and a low season, and its high season is in Summer. Saying people go on holidays on here all year is a load of rubbish, Ireland does see bigger tourist numbers in Summer months, and May is a time when a lot of people will start seriously looking into their holidays., Now after six months of Ireland and in its financial troubles in the news, how on earth can you exlcude that as a factor, and the resultant falling prices as a factor in increased tourist interest? And how can you exlcude website effect? I keep asking you this and am not getting any credible answers. Why not?

What were the hotels.com figures for December btw? Or January? Or February?

The increases, as reported, are specific to counties that the queen visited.

Well in fairness, these counties also are some of the most visited counties in the country, and one is the capital city. What were the figures for Kerry, since you seem to know the county differentials?

later12

With correlation now having been shown to equal causation, outrage is growing that Obama has caused job losses at Guinness!!!!!!

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/diageo-jobs-to-go-despite-obama-photo-2656347.html

Drinks giant Diageo has announced plans to cut scores of jobs from its marketing wing just a day after securing the ultimate photo-op - US President Barack Obama with a pint of Guinness.
The company is to slash 8 million euro off the wage bill in its Irish operation.

jank

later10 wrote: »

Do you understand the meaning of establishing a causal link? I'm curious as to why you would discount economic variables, or website effect, from a link such as this?

It seems to me that some people on here are pretty blinded by gold tiaras.

Do you like apples..?

I was in Fiji when the queen visited and it was the headline news on CNN and BBC World over the first two days. There was also multiple pieces on the Irish economy especially on CNN on that the banks have ****ed us up and the property crash was the cause of this BUT and this is the big BUT we are not Greece or even Portugal, we have world class international multinational companies still investing in Ireland and exports are driving us on...

The conclusions was that in the next few years if we can clean up the deficit and sort out the banking crisis we have a great foundation to move on and compete in the world economy. (granted they are big if's)

As I said this was in Fiji so I would imagine those in Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai and all those other Asian powerhouse cities would have gotten the same reports...

How you like them for apples!!

getz

Amhran Nua wrote: »

It's quite likely given the high regard the Queen is held in by the British public that her visit had a beneficial effect on visitor numbers from the UK. It will be difficult to tell until a couple of years have passed however, and I don't think it's a great idea to be trumpeting success before the tourist season for the year is over and we have some hard figures.

In the probable event that the visit brought positive coverage, it will be up to the various tourism bodies to capitalise on that and build ongoing growth from the UK.

the TV coverage in the UK of the queens visit to ireland will have a big impact on tourism in ireland ,people who have never been before are now asking me about it,older brits are the ones who want to tour, the younger ones who have only been on that boozing/shopping trip to dublin,are now looking to go to the likes of cork and galway,

later12

getz wrote: »

the younger ones who have only been on that boozing/shopping trip to dublin,are now looking to go to the likes of cork and galway,

But the Queen was in Dublin, and didn't go to Galway... not sure that's a direct link there, Ted.

later12

jank wrote: »

I was in Fiji when the queen visited and it was the headline news on CNN and BBC World over the first two days. There was also multiple pieces on the Irish economy especially on CNN on that the banks have ****ed us up and the property crash was the cause of this BUT and this is the big BUT we are not Greece or even Portugal, we have world class international multinational companies still investing in Ireland and exports are driving us on...

How you like them for apples!!

I don't believe for a second that any serious organisation or investor with a few million to spend in Ireland was only recently made aware of our MNCs and exports. I don't think it is going to do much for the economy, because I haven't seen any evidence to that effect.

If I walk into an epicerie in France, or a bar in South America, or a cafe in Italy, or a pub in Australia and I say I am from Ireland, what do you think it more likely to come out of the local's mouth

''Ah, Ireland, yeah you guys are in big financial trouble'', or ''Ah, you did the most wonderful monarchial visit... I was glued to the telly!''