In its simplest and most basic terms, on Nov. 8, in a very practical and unselfish act, the voters of the Branson area voted to, among others, tax themselves so that adequate funds were available to bring new visitors into the Branson area as soon as possible. Now don’t get all riled up, the Ole Seagull knows that, in pure legal terms, the purpose of the tax is to provide funds for “the marketing, advertising, and promotion of tourism, the administration thereof, and a reasonable reserve” to “enhance the economic health of the district.”
That said however, the reality of the situation appears pretty simple. If, the end results of all that legalese and the Nov. 8 election, is not a timely significant increase in the number of new visitors to the Branson area the marketing will be of as much value to Branson as Terrell Owens is to the Philadelphia Eagles’ hopes of going to the super Bowl this year.
Prior to the passage of the tax the voters were told, and bought into the concept, that Branson needs to quickly and significantly increase the number of its first time visitors. They voted for a new tax so that there would be enough marketing money for Branson to market itself against its competitors who all have marketing budgets significantly greater than Branson’s $3.1 million i.e. Gatlinburg/Pigeon Forge’s $11 million and Wisconsin Dells’ $7.1 million.
They were led to believe that the new tax would raise about $6 million dollars, which, when added to the approximately $3.1 million currently used to market Branson, would, for the first time, give the Branson area the marketing funds needed to competitively market it against other tourist destinations, approximately $9.1 million. But what happens to that competitiveness if the approximately $3.1 million currently being used to market Branson is reduced, eliminated, or used for other purposes?
The net result is that instead of having an additional $6 million dollars to market Branson there would only be an additional $2.9 million. Even worse, however, is the distinct possibility of still not having enough money to market Branson effectively against its competitors. How can this happen after the voters just provided another $6 million dollars so that Branson would be able to market itself competitively?
Hypothetically, let’s go to the “Tourist Destination 500” auto race. It’s a winner take all challenge with the winner getting one million new first time visitors. The Branson car is racing against the Gatlinburg/Pigeon Forge and Wisconsin Dells cars. At a minimum, it will require 100 gallons of fuel to finish the race. The Gatlinburg/Pigeon Forge car has 120 gallons, the Wisconsin Dells car has 110 gallons, and the Branson car has 66 gallons. Anyone want to guess which car doesn’t have a chance of finishing the race let alone winning?
To an Ole Seagull, marketing’s fuel is funding. If it takes $8-9 million to finish the “marketing race” and Branson only has $6 million will the final result be much different than it will be in the “Tourist Destination 500” race described above? It won’t make any difference how brilliant the race strategy was, how skillfully the car was driven, or how far ahead Branson was when the car ran out of gas short of the finish line, the Branson area still loses.
For the sake of discussion, let’s say that Branson’s $3.1 current million marketing effort is funded with $2.3 million from the current City of Branson Tourism Tax and about $800,000 from Marketing Partners, local tourism businesses that contribute marketing funds to the marketing of Branson. Obviously, if that support is not maintained it will reduce the amount of “new” funds available to market the Branson area from $6 million to $2.9 million.
To keep that from happening, doesn’t it make sense for the City of
To an Ole Seagull it does. Why? In addition to insuring that faith is kept with the voters, it will also provide the Branson area with the benefit of its best funded market effort ever at a time when it is sorely needed. If made in a timely manner, this effort can help those businesses that are hurting now, and, trust an Ole Seagull on this, the many more, particularly existing retail, that will be hurting over the next year or two if significantly more new and return visitors are not brought into the Branson area quickly, like “yesterday.”
