• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
A marketing analysis and economic impact of the Sting concerts

A marketing analysis and economic impact of the Sting concerts






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    A marketing analysis and economic impact of the Sting concerts A marketing analysis and economic impact of the Sting concerts Presentation Transcript

    • ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis cherished survey of this magnitude was conducted and would nothave been possible without the help and assistance of severalindividuals. The authors would like to thank the following peopleand institutions:1. The Chief Financial Officer, Mr Justin van Wyk, for all his support, for allowing the research to be conducted and especially for providing the economical information.2. Ms Desti Loeijs for her kindness and for her help in providing the passes for the fieldworkers.3. Big Concerts for financial support.4. Prof. Melville Saayman for his support and for believing in the research.5. The following tourism staff and students from the North West University for the distribution of the questionnaires at the Grand West Arena at the Grand West Casino in Cape Town and the Big Top Arena at Carnival City in Johannesburg.• Ms B Manners• Mr D Van der Lingen• Ms T Herbst• Ms Engel• Ms T van der Walt• Mr Q Hannekom• Mr M Scholtz• Ms L Geldenhuys• Ms E Myburgh• Ms D Prinsloo• Ms D Botha• Ms Z du Preez• Ms L Koekemoer• Ms K Hoffman i
    • 6. The concert attendees for their positive attitude and participation in the survey.7. Rod Taylor for the language editing. 2
    • Table of contents1. INTRODUCTION 12. RESEARCH AIMS 23. METHOD OF RESEARCH 24. PROFILE OF THE STING CONCERT ATTENDEE 3SOSIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 34.1 Gender 34.2 Age 34.3 Marital status 44.4 Home language 54.5 Province of residence 54.6 Level of education 64.7 Occupation 7ECONOMIC PROFILE 84.8 Number of people in travelling group 84.9 Number of people paid for 94.10 Local resident 94.11 Length of stay in the area 104.12 Number of tickets purchased 114.13 Expenditure 12CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR 124.14 Initiator of attendance 124.15 Decision to attend 134.16 Heard about the concert 144.17 Motivation to attend 17MUSICAL INTEREST 204.18 Number of musical events attended in 2011 204.19 Preference of artists/bands/performers to perform in South Africa 214.20 Attendance of other music festivals 22 3
    • 4.21 Preferred type of music 224.22 All time favourite artist/band/performers 23KEY MANAGEMENT ASPECTS 244.23 Key management aspects for a memorable visitor experience 255. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF A MEGA EVENT 295.1 Total spending of attendees 315.2 Economic value based on SAM calculations 326. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 396.1 Profile of the Sting concert attendee 396.2 Conclusions 416.3 Recommendations made by respondents 42 4
    • List of Tables4. PROFILE OF THE STING CONCERT ATTENDEE 3SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 3Table 4.1: Age 4Table 4.2: Marital status 4Table 4.3: Province of residence 6Table 4.4: Level of education 7Table 4.5: Occupation 7ECONOMIC PROFILE 8Table 4.6: Number of people in travelling group 8Table 4.7: Number of people paid for 9Table 4.8: Length of stay 10Table 4.9: Number of tickets purchased 11Table 4.10: Expenditure per group 12CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR 12Table 4.12: Initiator of attendance 12Table 4.13: Heard about the concert 15Table 4.14: Motivation to attend the Sting concerts at Cape Town and Johannesburg 18MUSICAL INTEREST 19Table 4.15: Number of musical events attended in 2011 19Table 4.16: Preference of artists/bands/performers to perform in South Africa 21Table 4.17: Preferred type of music 23Table 4.18: All time favourite artist/band/performer 24KEY MANAGEMENT ASPECTS 24Table 4.19 Key management aspects for a memorable visitor experience 265. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE STING CONCERTS 30Table 5.1: Total spending of attendees 31 5
    • Table 5.2: Total direct spending due to the event 32Table 5.3: Impact through output and GVA multipliers (ZAR, 2006 prices) - attendees 34Table 5.4: Impact on output (ZAR, 2006 prices) – event organisers 35Table 5.5: Total impact on regional output and gross value added (R million) 37Table 5.6: Total impact on regional income (R million) 386. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 39Table 6.1: Profile of the Sting concert attendee 39 6
    • List of Figures4. PROFILE OF THE STING CONCERT ATTENDEE 3SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 3Figure 4.1: Gender 3Figure 4.2: Home language 5Figure 4.3: Local resident 10Figure 4.4: Decision to attend 14MUSICAL INTEREST 20Figure 5.4: Attendance of other music festivals 22 7
    • 1. INTRODUCTIONBig Concerts is South Africas premier concert promoter with over eighteen yearsexperience of more than a thousand shows, including those of Robbie Williams, U2,Neil Diamond, Roxette, James Blunt and Michael Jackson. They were recentlyincluded in the Pollstar list of the Worlds Top 100 Promoters at number 20. Noother African promoter features in the Top 100. Big Concerts was also voted thePeoples Choice as South Africas top event company (The Star 2006). In theeighteen years that BIG Concerts has promoted music in South Africa, the companyhas grown from one to twenty full-time employees and, today, almost everysignificant international tour promoted in South Africa sees Big Concerts involved insome capacity.In 2011 it was announced that the British singer and bassist, Sting will be joined by aband including his long-time guitarist Dominic Miller, as well as Rufus Miller(guitar), Vinnie Colaiuta (drums), Peter Tickell (electric fiddle), and Jo Lawry(backing vocals) to perform in South Africa as part of the back to bass tour on March24 and 25, 2012, at the Coca-Cola Dome in Johannesburg and at the Grand WestArena in Cape Town on March 27 and 28, 2012.Gordon Matthew Thomas Summer, known as Sting, was born on 2 October 1951, inWallsend, north-east England. This astonishing artist’s life started to change theevening when a fellow musician in the Phoenix Jazzmen caught sight of his black andyellow striped sweater and decided to re-christen him as “Sting”. Sting, as a solomusician and a member of The Police, has received sixteen Grammy Awards for hiswork where he received his first Grammy for Best Rock Instrumental Performance in1981, three Brit Male Awards in 1994, a Golden Globe, an Emmy Award, and severalOscar nominations for Best Original Song. He has varied his musical stylethroughout his career from 1971, where he incorporated distinct elements of jazz,reggae, classical, new age and worldbeat into music and is particularly know forsongs such as Fields of Gold, Fortress around your heart, Fragile, If you lovesomebody set them free, Brand new day and Desert Rose. Today, Sting is still anactive artist and, as ever, he still continues to surprise the fans 1
    • 2. RESEARCH AIMSThis research project had the following primary aims: • To determine the profile of the visitors attending the Sting concerts at both host cities (Cape Town and Johannesburg) • To determine the spending patterns of the visitors at the event • To determine what motivates visitors to attend Big Concerts events • To determine the key management aspects for a memorable visitor experience • To estimate the economic impact of the event3. METHOD OF RESEARCHTo achieve these aims, the following approach was implemented: A questionnairewas developed by TREES at the North-West University in cooperation with the eventorganisers, focusing on the following aspects: • Demographic data • Expenditure patterns • Consumer behaviour • Travel motivations • Musical interest • Critical Success FactorsVisitors were approached before the show and the fieldworkers explained the goal ofthe survey as well as the questionnaire. Based on simple random sampling, 416visitors formed part of the survey in Cape Town and 471 visitors formed part of thesurvey in Johannesburg.The results from the respective surveys will be discussed in the next section. 2
    • 4. PROFILE OF THE STING CONCERT ATTENDEE SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE4.1 GenderFigure 4.1: GenderAs shown in Figure 4.1, more female respondents participated in the survey at bothSting concerts. Sixty percent (60%) of the respondents in Cape Town were femalewhile 40% were male, whereas 58% of the respondents at the Coca-Cola Dome inJohannesburg were female and 42% were male.4.2 AgeThe largest category of respondents who attended the Sting concert at bothJohannesburg and Cape Town were aged between 35-49 years (49% and 44%respectively), followed by attendees between 25-34 years of age (25% and 22%respectively). Respondents in the age group 50-64 years accounted for 17% and 23%respectively, whereas younger respondents aged 20-24 years accounted forrespectively 4% and 6% and respondents 19 years and younger accounted for 4% and3% of the attendees. Only one percent (1%) and a mere 2% of the respondents to theSting concert respectively indicated that they were 65 years and older (Table 4.1). 3
    • Based on the average age of the attendees, Cape Town had the oldest respondents (40 years) and Johannesburg’s average age of the respondents was 39 years. Table 4.1: AgeAGE JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN< 19 4% 3%20-24 4% 6%25-34 25% 22%35-49 49% 44%50-64 17% 23%65+ 1% 2%Average age 39 years 40 years 4.3 Marital status Table 4.2 indicates that the majority of the respondents at both Sting concerts in Johannesburg and Cape Town were married (60% and 62% respectively). However, a significant percentage of the respondents also indicated that they were single (20% and 18% respectively), in a relationship(11% and 12% respectively) or not married, (11% and 12% respectively). The remaining respondents were divorced (5% and 4% respectively), living together (3% and 2% respectively) or widowed (1% and 2% respectively). Table 4.2: Marital statusMARITAL STATUS JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNSingle 20% 18%In a relationship (not 11% 12%married)Married 60% 62% 4
    • Living Together 3% 2%Divorced 5% 4%Widow/er 1% 2%4.4 Home languageFigure 4.2: Home LanguageThe greater part of the concert attendees at the Sting concerts in Johannesburg andCape Town were English speaking (64% and 71% respectively) while respectively 32%and 28% of the respondents were Afrikaans speaking (Figure 4.2). Only 4% at theJohannesburg concert and 1% at the Cape Town concert indicated other languages astheir home language which included Dutch, French, Italian, Portuguese, Sotho,Swedish, Tswana and Zulu.4.5 Province of residenceThe majority of respondents at the respective Sting concerts originated from the hostprovince: 88% from Gauteng at the Johannesburg concert and 90% from theWestern Cape at the Cape Town concert. However, the concert held at Coca-ColaDome in Johannesburg attracted visitors from across the country compared to CapeTown that only attracted respondents from certain parts of the country. The Cape 5
    • Town concert did, however, attract more foreign attendees. Respondents fromoutside RSA borders who attended the Sting concerts where mainly from: Belgium,Botswana, Canada, England, France, Italy, Mozambique, Netherlands, Swaziland,Zambia and the United Kingdom.Table 4.3: Province of residencePROVINCE JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNWestern Cape 1% 90%Gauteng 88% 1%Eastern Cape 1% 5%North West 2% -Mpumalanga 2% -Northern Cape - -Kwazulu-Natal 3% 1%Limpopo 1% -Free State 1% -Outside RSA borders 1% 3%4.6 Level of educationTable 4.4 indicates that the greater part of the respondents at both the Sting concertswere well educated with either a diploma or a degree (37% and 39% respectively)while 25% and 21% respectively indicated that they obtained a postgraduatequalification. Eighteen percent (18%) at the Johannesburg concert and 16% at theCape Town concert had matric as their highest level of education whereas 17%(Johannesburg) and 21% (Cape Town) had a professional qualification and 2% of therespondents at both concerts (Cape Town and Johannesburg) indicated that theywere still scholars. 6
    • Table 4.4: Level of educationLEVEL OF EDUCATION JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNScholar 2% 2%Matric 18% 16%Diploma/Degree 37% 39%Post-graduate 25% 21%Professional 17% 21%Other 1% 1% 4.7 Occupation Fifty-nine percent (59%) and fifty-one percent (51%) of the respondents respectively indicated that they are in a professional occupation, followed by 17% and 20% respectively who were self-employed (Table 4.5). Five percent (5%) and 7% respectively indicated that they were students, 5% at each concert indicated that they were in a technical field and 4% and 5% respectively were occupied in sales. Other occupations included a boutique shop owner, a lecturer, a plumber, a wildlife handler, a researcher, a pilot, a musician and a tattoo apprentice. Table 4.5: OccupationOCCUPATION JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNProfessional 59% 51%Self-employed 17% 20%Technical 5% 5%Sales 4% 5%Work at mine 1% 1%Civil service 1% 2%Housewife 2% 3% 7
    • Pensioner 1% 2%Student 5% 7%Unemployed 1% 1%Other 4% 3% ECONOMIC PROFILE4.8 Number of people in travelling groupTable 4.6: Number of people in travelling groupPEOPLE IN GROUP JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN1 person 2% 6%2 people 53% 61%3 people 13% 9%4 people 24% 16%5 people 4% 4%6 people 3% 2%7+ people 1% 2%Average 3.01 persons 2.6 personsThe majority of the respondents at the Johannesburg and Cape Town concertstravelled in groups of two people (53% and 61% respectively), followed by people whotravelled in groups of four people (24% and 16% respectively) and three people (13%and 9% respectively) (Table 4.6). The average size of the attendees’ travelling groupto the concert at Coca-Cola Dome in Johannesburg and Grand West Casino in CapeTown was 3 people. 8
    • 4.9 Number of people paid for Table 4.7: Number of people paid forNUMBER OF PEOPLE PAID JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN FORNone 17% 20%1 person 17% 20%2 people 48% 51%3 people 5% 3%4 people 9% 4%5 people 4% 2%Average 1.94 persons 1.66 persons According to Table 4.7, respondents at both concerts paid for two people (48% and 51% respectively). Respondents not financially responsible for anyone or only paying for one person accounted for respectively 17% and 20% of the respondents at the Johannesburg and Cape Town concerts, while 9% and 4% were respectively financially responsible for four people. The average number of people for whom respondents at the Johannesburg and Cape Town concerts were financially responsible was two people. 4.10 Local residents As shown in Figure 4.3, the greater part (71% and 80% respectively) of the respondents who attended the Sting concerts at Johannesburg and Cape Town indicated that they were local residents, whereas 29% of the Johannesburg respondents and 20% of the Cape Town respondents indicated that they were not local residents. The higher percentage of non-local visitors at the Johannesburg concert could be explained by the fact that this concert attracted a variety of attendees from across South Africa. 9
    • Figure 4.3: Local Residents4.11 Length of stay in the areaTable 4.8 Length of stayLENGTH OF STAY JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNNone 65% 28%1 night 15% 17%2 nights 12% 9%3 nights 2% 7%4 nights 1% 11%5 nights 3% 10%6 nights - 1%7 nights - 4%8+ nights 2% 13%Average nights spent 0.78 4.09 10
    • It is evident from Table 4.8 that the respondents at the Johannesburg and CapeTown concerts did not overnight in the area (65% and 28% respectively) – theseattendees were likely to be local residents. Of the attendees that were not localresidents at Cape Town, 17% spent one night in the area whereas 13% spent eight ormore nights in the area and 11% stayed four nights in the area. Fifteen percent (15%)of the visitors to the Johannesburg concert spent one night in the area whereas 12%indicated that they stayed two nights in the area. Based on the average length of stay,attendees at the Johannesburg concert spent an average of only one night in the area,whereas respondents to the Cape Town concert spent an average of four nights in thearea.4.12 Number of tickets purchasedTable 4.9 indicates that the majority of respondents to the Sting concerts atJohannesburg and Cape Town purchased two tickets (53% and 58% respectively),followed by one ticket (13% and 15% respectively) and four tickets (13% and 7%respectively). At both concerts 9% and 10% respectively indicated that they did notbuy a ticket. On average, respondents purchased two tickets for both theJohannesburg and Cape Town concerts.Table 4.9: Number of tickets purchased NUMBER OF TICKETS JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN PURCHASEDNone 9% 10%1 Ticket 13% 15%2 Tickets 53% 58%3 Tickets 7% 5%4 Tickets 13% 7%5 Tickets 2% 2%6+ Tickets 3% 3%Average 2.23 1.91 11
    • 4.13 ExpenditureAttendees at the Cape Town concert had the highest average spending per group(R1 730.15) (Table 4.10). The highest spending categories included tickets(R786.89), accommodation (R240.00), transport (R236.99), food (R222.98) andSouvenirs (R84.08). Johannesburg’s average spending per group was R1 442.17where this amount comprised mainly of tickets (R949.45), food (R133.61),accommodation (R105.95) and transport (R101.61). It is clear that the respondents’length of stay had a significant influence on the average spent at each concert.Table 4.10: Expenditure per group (in ZAR)ITEMS JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNTickets 949.45 786.89Accommodation (if applicable) 105.95 240.00Food 133.61 222.98Beverages 80.57 76.34Transport (return) 101.61 236.99Souvenirs and merchandise 38.73 84.08Parking 10.39 15.82Other 21.86 67.06TOTAL 1,442.17 1,730.15 CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR4.14 Initiator of attendanceThe respondents at both the Sting concerts (45% at Johannesburg and 52% at CapeTown) indicated that they initiated their attendance themselves while others wereinitiated by respondents’ spouses (18% and 21% respectively), family (18% each) andfriends (18% and 12% respectively). One percent (1%) at both the Johannesburg 12
    • concert and Cape Town concert indicated that their attendance was initiated eitherby Sting’s website or fan club or that Emperor’s Palace initiated the attendance.Table 4.12: Initiator of attendanceINITIATOR OF JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN ATTENDANCE YES NO YES NOSelf 45% 55% 52% 48%Friends 18% 82% 12% 88%Media 5% 95% 7% 93%Spouse 18% 82% 21% 79%Family 18% 82% 18% 82%Work 8% 98% 1% 99%Boyfriend/Girlfriend 3% 97% 5% 95%Other 1% 99% 1% 99%4.15 Decision to attendAccording to Figure 4.4, 57% of the respondents at the Johannesburg concert and65% of the respondents at the Cape Town concert made their decision to attend whenBig Concerts announced that Sting will perform in South Africa. Twenty-fourpercent (24%) and 18% of the respondents respectively decided to attend the Stingconcert more than a month before. Respectively, 6% and 8% of the respondents tothe Johannesburg and Cape Town concerts indicated their decision to attend wasmade when respondents received a ticket as a gift, a prize or as complementarytickets or when they were invited to attend the concert. 13
    • Figure 4.4: Decision to attend4.16 Heard about the concertAccording to Table 4.13, respondents to the various Sting concerts indicated on afour point Likert scale the extent to which the different media motivated them toattend the Sting concerts.The following media influenced the respondents to a greater extent or completely toattend the Sting concerts:MEDIA JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNComputicket’s Website 67% 51%Word-of-Mouth 60% 55%Radio 58% 50% 14
    • The following media aspects were indicated to have influenced the respondents’choice to attend the Sting concerts not at all or to a lesser extent:MEDIA JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNInternet Blogs 87% 90%Magazines 86% 88%Twitter 85% 93%Other 86% 82%Newspapers 79% 79%Big Concert’s website 78% 79%Facebook 76% 78%Television 74% 79% 15
    • Table 4.13: Heard about the concertMEDIA JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN NOT AT TO A LESSER TO A COMPLETELY NOT AT TO A LESSER TO A COMPLETELY ALL EXTENT GREATER ALL EXTENT GREATER EXTENT EXTENTTelevision 65% 9% 12% 14% 69% 10% 12% 9%Radio 34% 8% 29% 29% 40% 10% 24% 26%Big Concerts’ 68% 10% 12% 10% 63% 16% 9% 12%websiteMagazines 71% 15% 9% 5% 75% 13% 8% 4%Newspapers 66% 13% 12% 9% 67% 12% 12% 9%Word-of- 32% 8% 22% 38% 35% 10% 25% 30%mouthFacebook 67% 9% 10% 14% 67% 11% 10% 12%Twitter 78% 7% 9% 6% 84% 9% 3% 4%Internet blogs 79% 8% 5% 8% 80% 10% 5% 5%Computicket’s 36% 7% 17% 40% 38% 11% 17% 34%websiteOther 80% 6% - 14% 73% 9% 6% 12% 16
    • 4.17 Motivation to attendTable 4.14 shows that attendees at the Sting concerts considered the following motivesto attend the event as important to extremely important: JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNMOTIVE % %To enjoy the music 86% 89%To see my favourite artist perform 86% 88%It is a unique, once in a lifetime experience 78% 78%Sting is well-known international act 77% 78%I always wanted to see Sting perform live 71% 72%The following motives were considered as less important to not important at all: JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNMOTIVE % %Because of social status 75% 82%Because I got tickets free or as a present 58% 63%Because I have seen this artist before and 57% 59%wanted to do so againBecause of the possibility of meeting the 54% 53%artist in person 17
    • Table 4.14: Motivation to attend the Sting concerts at Johannesburg and Cape TownMOTIVATION JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN Not at all Slightly Important Very Extremely Not at all Slightly Important Very Extremely important important important important important important important importantTo see my favourite artist 1% 2% 11% 24% 62% 1% 2% 9% 23% 65%performBecause I got tickets free or as 45% 13% 19% 8% 15% 45% 18% 16% 11% 10%a presentTo spend time with family, 12% 15% 24% 25% 24% 13% 16% 24% 28% 19%friends or someone specialIt’s a sociable event 13% 13% 31% 23% 20% 18% 18% 32% 22% 10%This concert is value for 10% 10% 30% 26% 24% 14% 15% 29% 22% 20%moneyI try to attend as many of 19% 19% 24% 17% 21% 19% 23% 25% 15% 18%these music events as possibleSting is a well-known 4% 4% 15% 29% 48% 6% 4% 16% 26% 48%international actIt is a unique, once in a 4% 3% 15% 30% 48% 3% 4% 15% 25% 53%lifetime experienceI always wanted to see Sting 5% 8% 16% 22% 49% 4% 6% 18% 20% 52%perform liveTo be part of this unique and 7% 9% 21% 26% 37% 6% 7% 25% 24% 38%exciting eventTo have fun and because I 5% 8% 25% 28% 34% 5% 8% 25% 32% 30%enjoy these types of specialeventsThese concerts are 5% 6% 21% 35% 33% 3% 6% 20% 37% 34%entertainment at its best 18
    • T o enjoy the music 1% 1% 12% 30% 56% 1% 2% 8% 28% 61%For nostalgic reasons 7% 10% 23% 27% 33% 7% 9% 21% 26% 37%For a chance to be with 16% 12% 29% 25% 18% 13% 19% 27% 23% 18%people who are enjoyingthemselvesTo experience new things 11% 12% 25% 26% 26% 13% 14% 27% 24% 22%These concerts enable one to 16% 15% 27% 22% 20% 17% 19% 26% 18% 20%experience the possibility ofthe artist singing a song forthe first time or a song thathas not yet been recorded onCDBecause these concerts enable 14% 16% 24% 25% 21% 12% 18% 28% 21% 21%one to get physically close tothe artists when performing asongBecause I have seen this artist 41% 16% 16% 11% 16% 42% 17% 13% 11% 17%before and wanted to do soagainBecause the attendance 16% 18% 27% 21% 18% 20% 15% 30% 19% 16%makes one part of theperformanceBecause of social status in 60% 15% 9% 7% 9% 69% 13% 9% 4% 5%terms of being seen by othersBecause of the possibility of 36% 18% 16% 13% 17% 34% 19% 18% 12% 17%meeting the artist in personTo relax and escape from 16% 9% 26% 21% 28% 15% 9% 27% 25% 24%daily tension and my busyeveryday environment 19
    • MUSICAL INTEREST4.18 Number of musical events attended in 2011?According to Table 4.15, a significant percentage of the attendees at both Sting concertsindicated that they attended one similar event in 2011/12 (24% and 25% respectively) ortwo similar events (24% and 22% respectively). Twenty-four percent (24%) at theJohannesburg concert and 21% of the respondents at the Cape Town concert indicatedthat they did not attend any similar concerts in 2011/12. The average number of musicalevents attended in 2011/12 by attendees at both the concerts was two concerts.Table 4.15: Number of musical events attended in2011NUMBER OF MUSICAL JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNEVENTS ATTENDEDNone 24% 21%1 event 24% 25%2 events 24% 22%3 events 11% 15%4 events 7% 9%5 events 5% 2%6 events 2% 2%7 events 1% 1%8+ events 2% 2%Average 1.94 2.15 20
    • 4.19 Preference of artists/bands/performers to perform in South AfricaRespondents indicated that they would also like to have the followingartists/bands/performers perform in South Africa (Table 4.16):Table 4.16: Preferred artists/bands/performers to perform in South Africa JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN• AC/DC • Adele• Adele • Annie Lennox• Bon Jovi • Bon Jovi• Bruce Springsteen • Bruce Springsteen• Dave Matthews • Coldplay• Eric Clapton • Dave Matthews• Foo Fighters • Dire Straits• John Mayer • Eric Clapton• Lady Gaga • Foo Fighters• Madonna • John Mayer• Nickleback • Linken Park• Pearl Jam • Madonna• Pink • Metallica• Red Hot Chili Peppers • Pearl Jam• Sade • Phil Collins• Seal • Pink 21
    • • Snow Patrol • Pink Floyd• U2 • The Rolling Stones • U24.20 Attendance of other music events or festivalsThe majority of the respondents at the Johannesburg and Cape Town concerts (84% and82% respectively) indicated that they do attend other musical festivalsFigure 4.5: Attendance of other music festivals4.21 Preferred type of musicAs shown in Table 4.17, the majority of the respondents at the Sting concerts prefer tolisten to pop, rock ’n roll, classical and jazz music. It is notable that the attendees atconcerts such as Sting’s do not prefer music such as rap, folk/traditional, Afrikaans,country, heavy metal, reggae and R&B. Other music respondents identified that theyprefer to listen to alternative, commercial, dance, dubstep, gospel, house andLatin/Spanish music. 22
    • Table 4.17: Preferred type of musicTYPE OF MUSIC JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN YES NO YES NOPop 72% 28% 69% 31%Punk Rock 32% 68% 24% 76%Classical 47% 53% 47% 53%Instrumental 38% 62% 44% 56%Jazz 41% 59% 50% 50%Blues 39% 61% 46% 54%Heavy metal 24% 76% 22% 78%Rap 12% 88% 11% 89%Rock ’n Roll 66% 64% 64% 36%R&B 28% 72% 32% 68%Reggae 26% 74% 29% 71%Country 24% 76% 24% 76%Folk/Traditional 18% 82% 21% 79%Afrikaans 19% 81% 14% 86%Other, specify 7% 93% 8% 92%4.22 All time favourite artists/bands/performersRespondents indicated the following artists/bands/performers were their all timefavourite performers (Table 4.18): 23
    • Table 4.18: All time favourite artists/bands/performers JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN• Adele • 30 Seconds to mars• Bon Jovi • Bon Jovi• Coldplay • Celine Dion• Michael Jackson • Coldplay• Pink Floyd • John Mayer• Queen • Led Zeppelin• The Rolling Stones • Madonna• Roxette • Michael Buble• Sting • Pink• U2 • Pink Floyd • Queen • Sting KEY MANAGEMENT ASPECTSRespondents at the Sting concerts were asked to rate the importance of variousmanagement aspects that they consider to contribute to a memorable visitor experience.The management aspects were rated on a five-point Likert scale where 1 indicated not atall important and 5 indicated extremely important. The importance of thesemanagement aspects, referred to as key management aspects, can help management toimprove the aspects that visitors regard as important and therefore ensure a moresatisfying and memorable experience in the future. 24
    • 4.23 Key management aspects for a memorable visitor experienceTable 4.19 shows that attendees at the Sting concerts considered the following aspectsfor a quality visitor experience at these types of events as important to extremelyimportant: JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNASPECTS % %Good all round visibility and stage layout 98% 96%Good quality sound and lighting 98% 94%Good layout of venue and comfortable seating 96% 95%Effective traffic control to and from the venue 95% 98%Adequate, clean and hygienic facilities inside 94% 90%and outside the venueEffective regulated traffic flow after the 91% 88%concertAdequate parking at the concert 91% 88%Adequate security at parking areas 91% 86%Friendly and professional trained staff in and 85% 89%around the venue that are easily noticeableEffective ticket sales prior to the concert, for 88% 87%example online bookingsPunctuality of concert starting time 88% 82%Correct information given through marketing 84% 82%(e.g. date, time, venue, transport options)Affordable tickets 82% 79%Appropriate gate opening time prior to event 80% 78%Visibility of emergency and security staff in 79% 78%and around the venueAccessibility for the disabled 66% 70%Affordable food and beverages at venue 70% 59%Effective signage and directions to concert 70% 64%venue 25
    • Communication of the adequate safety 61% 65%measures/precautions in place during theconcert (e.g. evacuation plan & emergencyexits)User friendly & accessible information 63% 58%regarding the concerts, for example websites,radio advertisements and postersCommunication about parking & transport 63% 52%options prior to the eventAdequate and effective marketing prior to the 57% 54%eventAdequate information kiosks at concert venue 61% 52%Affordable, variety, good quality and easily 61% 44%accessible merchandiseAdequate ATM facilities 51% 51%The opportunity to meet the artist after the 53% 48%show for e.g. photos, autographsVariety of food and beverages (e.g. Halaal, 55% 43%vegetarian, wines, soft drinks)Variety of marketing media used, e.g. 49% 46%magazines, radio and postersAdequate pre-concert performances or pre- 49% 37%show entertainmentFreebies from sponsors 41% 32% 26
    • Table 4.19: Key management aspects for a memorable visitor experience CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGKEY MANAGEMENT ASPECTS Not at all Slightly Important Very Extremely Not at all Slightly Important Very Extremely important important Important important important important important importantAdequate, clean and hygienic 1% - 5% 25% 69% 1% 2% 7% 33% 57%ablution facilities inside & outsidethe venueEffective traffic control to and 1% - 4% 28% 67% 1% 1% 9% 32% 57%from the venueFriendly and professional trained - 2% 13% 38% 47% 1% 2% 12% 39% 46%staff in and around the venue thatare easily noticeableAppropriate gate opening time 1% 2% 17% 36% 44% 1% 3% 18% 38% 40%prior to eventVisibility of emergency and 1% 2% 18% 31% 48% 1% 4% 16% 34% 44%security staff in and around thevenueCommunication of the adequate 1% 3% 25% 21% 40% 3% 8% 24% 29% 36%safety measures/precautions inplace during the concert in case ofan emergency (e.g. evacuationplan/emergency exits)Adequate pre-concert 8% 13% 30% 28% 21% 13% 18% 32% 22% 15%performances or pre-showentertainmentAdequate & effective marketing 3% 11% 29% 30% 27% 6% 9% 31% 32% 22%prior to the eventVariety of marketing media used, 4% 15% 32% 25% 24% 8% 13% 33% 27% 19%e.g. magazines, radio and postersCommunication about parking & 2% 7% 28% 33% 30% 5% 10% 33% 30% 22%transport options prior to theevent 27
    • User friendly & accessible 2% 5% 30% 30% 33% 3% 9% 30% 30% 28%information regarding theconcerts, for example websites,radio advertisements and postersCorrect information given 1% 2% 13% 30% 54% 2% 2% 14% 34% 48%through marketing (e.g. date,time, venue, transport options)Good quality sound and lighting - 1% 1% 9% 89% 1% 1% 4% 8% 86%Good all-round visibility and stage - 1% 1% 9% 89% 1% 1% 2% 12% 84%layoutGood layout of venue and 1% 1% 2% 16% 80% 1% 1% 3% 18% 77%comfortable seatingPunctuality of concert starting 1% 1% 10% 26% 62% 1% 2% 15% 28% 54%timeAffordable, variety, good quality 7% 13% 19% 25% 36% 9% 15% 32% 21% 23%and easily accessible merchandiseFreebies from sponsors 21% 16% 22% 17% 24% 23% 21% 24% 12% 20%Effective signage and directions to 1% 5% 24% 30% 40% 3% 5% 28% 33% 31%concert venueAdequate parking at the concert 1% 1% 7% 26% 65% 1% 1% 10% 33% 55%venueAdequate security at parking - 1% 8% 23% 68% 1% 2% 11% 33% 53%areasAdequate information kiosks at 2% 7% 30% 31% 30% 3% 9% 36% 28% 24%concert venueVariety of food and beverages (e.g. 5% 9% 31% 29% 26% 8% 20% 29% 23% 20%Halaal, vegetarian, wines, softdrinks)Effective ticket sales prior to the 1% 1% 10% 37% 51% 1% 3% 10% 34% 53%concert for example onlinebookings 28
    • Affordable food and beverages at 2% 5% 23% 35% 35% 5% 9% 27% 29% 30%venueAccessibility for the disabled 5% 6% 23% 25% 41% 4% 6% 19% 25% 45%Effective regulated traffic flow - 1% 8% 25% 66% 1% 2% 9% 31% 57%after the concertAffordable tickets 1% 2% 15% 28% 54% 1% 2% 18% 32% 47%The opportunity to meet the artist 11% 15% 21% 21% 32% 11% 17% 24% 19% 29%after the show e.g. for photos,autographsAdequate ATM facilities 9% 12% 28% 25% 26% 8% 13% 28% 26% 25% 29
    • 5. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE STING CONCERTSThe economic value of any event is dependent on a number of factors, of which the mostimportant are:• The spending by attendees and organisers.• The number of attendees.• The distribution of the money spent through the economy.The spending of attendees was determined by the survey, while the numbers ofattendees is based on ticket sales figures obtained from the organisers. Since the eventsare funded from the ticket sales, no additional spending for organising the events isadded. However, ticket income is appropriated to different spending categories basedon budget allocations obtained from the organiser. To determine how the money isdistributed throughout the economy, a number of methods can be employed. Thecurrent research makes use of the Social Accounting Matrices (SAM) of the WesternCape and Gauteng to determine this multiplying effect of spending.The multiplier concept is applied using economy-wide consistent data on a particular(regional/provincial) economy as is normally contained in a Social Accounting Matrix(SAM). SAMs extend the basic input-output concept from production to incomedistribution and include both social and economic data for an economy. A SAM consistsof data from input-output tables, national income statistics, and household income andexpenditure statistics. In the present case, the authors used a SAM for the WesternCape Province, which was developed by Conningarth Consultants. The SAM (based on2006 prices) used in these analyses distinguishes between 55 sectors, 12 householdtypes and four ethnic groups. The Gauteng SAM distinguishes between 37 sectors, 12household types and four ethnic groups. 30
    • 5.1 Total spending of attendeesThe survey responses were compiled for both the Cape Town and Johannesburg eventsand are reported together with the total for both events. The average spending byattendees for each of the concerts was determined based on the survey data (see Table4.10) and ticket sales, and are shown in Table 5.1.Table 5.1: Total spending of concert attendees Johannesburg Cape Town TotalTickets 9,910,450.00 4,827,025.00 14,737,475.00Accommodation 1,105,875.24 1,472,240.96 2,578,116.20Food 1,394,663.90 1,367,829.76 2,762,493.66Beverages 840,992.53 468,286.37 1,309,278.90Transport 1,060,619.61 1,453,758.29 2,514,377.89Souvenirs 404,270.99 515,762.34 920,033.32Parking 108,476.23 97,034.06 205,510.29Other 228,219.02 411,398.94 639,617.96Total 15,053,567.50 10,613,335.72 25,666,903.22It is evident that total spending in Johannesburg exceeded spending in Cape Town andthe size of the venue definitely influenced this result. However, if one excludes spendingon tickets from the spending per venue, spending in Cape Town exceed that of spendingin Gauteng, with spending in Cape Town reaching R5.786 million compared to spendingof R5.143 million by attendees in Johannesburg (see Table 5.2).Organiser spending stems from the income received from ticket sales (R14.438 million).Artist fees represent a substantial leakage from the South African economy, and aresubtracted from organiser spending to reflect the true value of the event. Table 5.2indicates the spending per venue as well as total spending and represents the total directimpact of the event. 31
    • Table 5.2 Total direct spending due to the event Johannesburg Cape Town TotalATTENDEE SPENDING 5,143,118 5,786,311 10,929,428ORGANISER SPENDING 4,955,451 2,716,253 7,671,704TOTAL 10,098,569 8,502,563 18,601,132From Table 5.2 it is evident that the money spent in the South African economy due tothe Sting concerts, amounts to R18.6 million (i.e. the direct impact of the events). Allspending stems from consumers, since spending by organisers (R7.672 million) isfunded from ticket sales. However, even when one excludes spending on tickets, thedirect impact of attendees exceeds that of the organisers (R10.929 million).5.2 Economic value based on SAM calculationsAttendee spending is converted to the associated increase in production and income inthe regions of Gauteng and the Western Cape using economic multipliers from a SAMfor the Gauteng and Western Cape Province. The classical SAM multiplier approachemploys distinct multipliers for each expenditure-related sector. The multipliers convertexpenditure into the associated increase in output and income and estimate secondaryeffects as the participant/spectator spending circulates through the regional economy.Provincial Social Accounting Matrices 1 (SAM) were used to estimate the regionalmultiplier (direct and indirect) impact for each of the provinces which hosted Stingconcerts.Attendee expenditureThe quantification of the direct and indirect impact of the attendees expenditure at theevent in the region is summarised in Table 5.3. As this expenditure is partially appliedby the attendees of the event in the purchase of goods and services in the region, thisrepresents an inflow of money into the region, mobilising economic activity, generatingemployment and generating additional revenues for the province.1 Social Accounting Matrices are an extended form of the basic Input-Output model. 32
    • The total effect on the provincial economy is determined through multipliers, which canbe used to determine the total effect on output (gross additional economic output) andGross Value Added (GVA) 2. These multiplier measures are intrinsically linked, relatingan initial direct stimulus to the final ‘multiplied’ impact generated. Output multipliersgenerally overestimate the impact of an event, due to double counting, while this is notthe case when GVA is used. GVA only takes into account the value added by eachindustry due to the increase in demand in one industry. Value added in production(GVA) is measured by factor incomes in terms of the compensation of employees andthe operating surpluses of firms, and can therefore be thought of as the increase inincome of factors of production in the regional economy.Table 5.3 reflects the effects on output and income caused by the attendees expenditureresulting from the event. It is evident that the R5.789 million spent by attendees atCape Town creates output in the province valued at R7.377 million, while income (asmeasured through GVA) increases by R3.165 million. The R5.143 million spending byattendees of Sting in Johannesburg results in output in the province to the value ofR8.147 million, while it translates into income worth R3.519 million.2 GVA (at basic prices) is a measure of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) which accounts for the impact of taxes andsubsidies. This GVA is obtained by subtracting indirect taxes from GDP and then adding subsidies. The GVA at basicprices corresponds to the value of incomes paid to the factors of production – the compensation of employees and thegross operating surpluses of firms. GVA or GDP can be used as multiplier measures, depending on the preferredtreatment of taxes and subsidies, on condition that the measure used is clearly identified. 33
    • Table 5.3: Impact through output and GVA multipliers (ZAR, 2006 prices) – attendees JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN Direct Total Total Direct Total Total impact output GVA impact output GVA impact impact impact impactAccommodation 1,105,875 1,457,177 497,880 1,472,241 2,041,443 681,323Food 1,394,664 2,410,149 1,100,180 1,367,830 1,855,428 906,235Beverages 840,993 1,453,337 663,417 468,286 635,219 310,256Transport & Parking 1,169,096 1,905,584 789,282 1,550,792 1,814,301 737,004Souvenirs & Other 632,490 1,020,408 468,367 927,161 1,030,806 529,964Total (in ZAR) 5,143,118 8,246,655 3,519,125 5,786,311 7,377,197 3,164,782In terms of the analysis of the expenditure by attendees of Sting concerts, the firstconclusion is that the effect on output in Gauteng Province is more than in the WesternCape Province (R8.427 million compared to R7.377 million) even if the direct spendingin the Western Cape exceeded that in Gauteng. The reasons for this can be found inmore linkages between industries in Gauteng than in the Western Cape, causingleakages from the province to be less. The second conclusion is that the income thatresulted from attendee spending due to the event also surpassed R3 million in eachprovince, with Gauteng again benefitting slightly more than the Western Cape (R3.5million compared to R3.2 million). The total impact on output resulting fromexpenditure by attendees surpassed R15.5 million, while total income received is morethan R6.5 million.Organiser expenditureTo estimate the economic impact of the expenditure made by the organisers of theevent, an approach similar to that for the expenditure by event attendees was followed.All expenses incurred by the organisers at each venue were allocated into one of theSAM categories (excluding VAT from Computicket sales and artist fees). Thesecategories are summarised in the main national accounts sectors, as reflected in Table 34
    • 5.4. The effects on output for each of the venues resulting from the spending of theevent organisers are also shown.Table 5.4: Impact on output (ZAR, 2006 prices) – event organisers JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNSECTOR DIRECT TOTAL DIRECT TOTAL OUTPUT IMPACT OUTPUT IMPACT IMPACT IMPACTAgriculture 0 11,915 0 13,284Mining 0 31,561 0 998Manufacturing 57,874 1,722,439 7,174 171,856Electricity & water 25,364 68,087 0 14,322Construction 0 82,058 0 24,249Trade & accommodation 1,140,985 1,278,950 673,233 654,807Transport & communication 358,880 725,147 271,781 343,028Financial & business services 3,337,611 2,351,745 1,746,015 1,350,441Community services 34,738 27,955 18,049 21,377Total (in ZAR) 4,955,451 6,299,859 2,716,253 2,594,363Table 5.4 illustrates that the largest direct impacts due to organiser spending are infinancial and business services, trade and accommodation, and transport andcommunication. Spending in Johannesburg is almost double that in Cape Town, mainlydue to the different venues requiring different types of spending by organisers inpreparation for the concerts.Through the ‘backward linkages’, large indirect impacts are experienced inmanufacturing in Gauteng, with this sector also benefiting in the Western Cape provincealbeit not to the same extent. It is evident that the total impact in the Western Cape isless than the direct spending. This is due to substantial leakages in the manufacturingand trade as well as business services industries. It implies that, although the spendingtakes place in the Western Cape Province, the benefit for firms occurs in anotherprovince (probably Gauteng). 35
    • Based on the data analysis, it is estimated that total impact of expenditure by organisersin the regions is more than R9 million in terms of output generated. The results of thestudy suggest that the sectors that benefited most from expenditure in hosting theevents are, in order of importance, financial and business services, trade andaccommodation, and manufacturing.In terms of GVA, the income generated due to organising the event translates intoR1.622 million in the Western Cape and R3.314 million in Gauteng. Again, it is evidentthat the benefit is distributed unevenly between the two provinces, with factors ofproduction in Gauteng benefitting twice as much as those in the Western Cape.Overall impactThis section represents the overall spending in the local economy that can be attributedto the event by all attendees (locals and visitors from abroad and from the rest of SouthAfrica) and organisers. Given the estimation of the economic impact presented above, itshould be kept in mind that, by definition, the calculation of the economic impactshould only include the expenditure that would not have occurred in the absence of theevent. Therefore, the inclusion of local spending in the calculations is a debateable area.Although the locals do not bring money into the community from outside regions asvisitors do, it is valuable to include their spending as it has the effect of initiatingeconomic activity within the local economy. Examined in this way, an event’scontribution to a local economy is comparable to a local business that both draws moneyfrom, and contributes to, its community. To consider only the tourist rand in terms ofeconomic impact would greatly underestimate the complete financial benefits of theevent and other similar events. In addition, this study recognises that, without suchevents, a significant amount of money would leave the area due to locals seeking analternative event for participation in other regions.The usefulness of the overall impact is that it allows one to measure the amount ofmoney that the event circulates through the local economy from every source from 36
    • which the event draws financial impact. The sum of the impacts gives us an estimate ofthe total impact of the event in the region. This is shown in Table 5.5.The analysis of the results indicates that the total direct economic impact of the event isR18.601 million, which translated into output worth R24.518 million. That is equivalentto an aggregated output multiplier in the order of 1.32. Therefore, for each rand spentdue to the event, 32 cents is generated additionally in terms of indirect expenditure. Theaggregated output multiplier is obtained by dividing the total output impact by thedirect impact.Table 5.5: Total impact on regional output and gross value added (R million) JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN TOTAL Direct Output GVA Direct Output GVA Direct Output GVAAttendee 5.143 8.247 3.519 5.786 7.377 3.165 10.929 15.624 6.684Organiser 4.955 6.300 3.314 2.716 2.594 1.622 7.672 8.894 4.936Total 10.099 14.547 6.833 8.503 9.971 4.787 18.601 24.518 11.620In terms of value added, it is evident that the R18.601 million direct spending due to theevent led to gross value added of R11.620 million, indicating the income that factors ofproduction earn due to the spending. This is equivalent to a GVA or income multiplierof 0.63. Therefore, for every rand spent due to the event, someone in the regions earns63 cents in income.One of the elements of the additional value added that will result from the event isremuneration of employees that, in turn, affects household income. In particular, theimpact on low-income households can be highlighted, and this can be used as anindicator of the extent to which the event contributes to poverty alleviation throughoutthe provincial economies. This is summarised in Table 5.6. 37
    • Table 5.6: Total impact on regional income (R million) JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWN TOTAL Low Other Total Low Other Total Low Other Total income income income income income income income income incomeAttendee 0.408 3.111 3.519 0.583 2.582 3.165 0.991 5.693 6.684Organiser 0.280 3.034 3.314 0.197 1.425 1.622 0.476 4.459 4.935Total 0.688 6.145 6.833 0.780 4.007 4.787 1.467 10.152 11.619In terms of GVA, the contribution of the event to income for low-income householdstotals almost R1.5 million. In total, the income of households that can be attributed tohosting the event in Gauteng is R6.833 million, while in the Western Cape it is R4.787million. Low income households in the Gauteng Province benefit slightly less than theircounterparts in Western Cape from hosting the Sting concerts. 38
    • 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS6.1 Profile of the Sting concert attendeeTable 6.1: Profile of the Sting concert attendeeDEMOGRAPHIC JOHANNESBURG CAPE TOWNPROFILEGender Male (42%); Female (58%) Male (40%); Female (60%)Age Average age: 39 years Average age: 40 yearsMarital Status Married (60%) Married (62%)Home Language English (64%); Afrikaans English (71%); Afrikaans (32%) (28%)Province of residence Gauteng (88%) Western Cape (90%)Country of residence outside • BelgiumRSA borders • Botswana • Canada • England • France • Italy • Mozambique • Netherlands • Swaziland • Zambia • United KingdomLevel of education Diploma/Degree (37%) Diploma/Degree (39%)Occupation Professional (59%) Professional (51%)ECONOMICINFORMATIONNumber of people in Average of 3.01 people Average of 2.6 peopletravelling group 39
    • Number of people paid for Average of 1.94 people Average of 1.66 peopleLocal residents Local residents (71%) Local residents (80%)Length of stay in area Average of 0.78 nights Average of 4.09 nightsNumber of tickets purchased Average of 2.23 tickets Average of 1.91 tickets purchased purchasedExpenditure per group R1442.17 R1730.15CONSUMERBEHAVIOURInitiator of attendance Self (45%) Self (52%)Decision to attend When it was announced When it was announced (57%) (65%)Motivation to attend • To enjoy the music • To see my favourite artist perform • It is a unique, once in a lifetime experience • Sting is well-known international act • I always wanted to see Sting perform liveMUSICAL INTERESTMusic events/festivals Average of 1.94 events Average of 2.15 eventsattended in 2011Preferred artist to • Adeleperform in South Africa • Bon Jovi • Bruce Springsteen • Dave Matthews • Eric Clapton • Foo Fighters • John Mayer • Madonna • Pearl Jam • Pink • U2 40
    • Attendance at other Yes (84%) Yes (82%)music events in 2011Heard about Sting Computicket’s website Word-of-mouth (55%) (67%)Preferred type of music • Pop • Rock ’n Roll • Classical • JazzAll time favourite • Bon Joviartist/band/performer • Coldplay • John Mayer • Pink Floyd • Queen • Sting6.2 ConclusionsThe following conclusions can be drawn from the study:• Attendees at the Sting concerts were mainly female and English speaking.• The province of residence for the Johannesburg concert was mainly from Gauteng and for the Cape Town shows mainly Western Cape.• Foreign visitors were mainly from Belgium, Botswana, Canada, England, France, Italy, Mozambique, Netherlands, Swaziland, Zambia and the United Kingdom.• The respondents to the Sting concerts were mainly married, had a professional career and were between 39 and 40 years of age.• Attendees travelled in groups three people, were financially responsible for two people and were mainly local residents in Cape Town or Johannesburg where the concerts were held.• In Cape Town, respondents spent an average of four nights in the area where an average of one night was spent in the Johannesburg area. 41
    • • Respondents spent respectively an average of R1 442.17 to R1 730.15 at the various shows with attendees at the Cape Town concert having the highest average spending of the two locations.• Respondents at both the Cape Town and Johannesburg concerts purchased an average of two tickets.• The decision to attend the Sting concerts was made when the concerts were announced by Big Concerts and the attendance at the various concerts was initiated by the respondents themselves.• Respondents at the Sting concerts indicated that an average of two events were attended by both Cape Town and Johannesburg respondents in 2011.• The majority of respondents indicated that they prefer to listen to pop, rock ’n roll, classical and jazz music and various artists were indicated as their all time favourite artists/bands/performers which include: Bon Jovi, Coldplay, John Meyer, Pink Floyd, Queen and Sting6.3 Economic ImpactThe objective of the study was to conduct an economic impact assessment of the Stingconcerts.• Results indicate that the shows generated a total economic impact of R18.6 million which translates into output worth R24.5 million.• The economic impact is mainly influenced by the numbers of visitors from outside the area, average spent per person, number of visitations or attendees and leakages in the regional economy.6.4 RecommendationsThe following recommendations are made by the respondents at each Sting Concert: 42
    • JOHANNESBURG• With regard to marketing, respondents recommended that management should advertise more by means of using radio stations.• Tickets to attend these concerts are very expensive and it is therefore recommended that the price of concert tickets be reduced in the future.• The seating should be improved with regard to not tying the chairs together, allowing more leg space for concert attendees, no plastic chairs and seating should be more comfortable.• Merchandise should be improved at concerts in the future and management should make items more affordable.• Respondents also recommended that the caps of the bottles should not be removed when individuals buy drinks.• With regard to the venue staff, respondents felt that the staff were unfriendly at the entrances and the staff that were supposed to help attendees were not very helpful.• Respondents regarded the music prior to the concert as not being very entertaining and recommended improvement of the choice of music or management should consider a pre-concert act as a form of entertainment.CAPE TOWN• Respondents at the Cape Town concert also recommended management should improve marketing prior to the concert by means of using radio stations, billboards and television advertisements.• Ticket prices were considered to be very expensive and respondents felt that management should look at ways of making ticket prices more affordable. 43
    • • Respondents indicated that there were problems with the online booking system when individuals wanted to purchase their tickets from Computicket. Respondents therefore recommend that management should improve the online booking system to insure an effective booking process in the future.• Management should improve the sound at Grand West Casino• Respondents also recommended that the seating should be improved with regard to leg space. 44