Skip Navigation

2008 Travel Trends

Travel Forums System Talk 2008 Travel Trends

Page

Last Post

11. Posted by Peter (Admin 5807 posts) 7y

Quoting Hien

Quoting Peter

Update.. you can now also break it down by nationality. So these were the most popular cities for US travellers.

You're quick! At this rate, I think I'm seeing the countries stats coming up in the next few minutes.

By the way, if it's not a hassle, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland can be grouped together with the UK to provide a more accurate data.

Unfortunately, I think probably is a hassle.. too late for me to try now in any case. Maybe tomorrow :) It would definitely help. Actually, it would be semi-interesting to also break it down by region, so where do people from Asia travel to? More data to work with then too.

12. Posted by Hien (Moderator 3906 posts) 7y

I think the main percentage of increase/decrease is not the right one used. Currently, it's calculated based on the rate of increase/decrease of percentage of total trips over the last year. I think it should instead be the percentage of increase/decrease of the number of trips made over the last year to the same destination. Say, if there were 3 trips made last year, and this year there were 6 trips, the increase is 100%.

Yes, I'm equally over-analysing too.

[ Edit: Edited on Dec 19, 2008, at 8:13 AM by Hien ]

13. Posted by Sander (Moderator 4834 posts) 7y

Quoting Hien

I think the main percentage of increase/decrease is not the right one used. Currently, it's calculated based on the rate of increase/decrease of percentage of total trips over the last year. I think it should instead be the percentage of increase/decrease of the number of trips made over the last year to the same destination. Say, if there were 3 trips made last year, and this year there were 6 trips, the increase is 100%.

That'd only be useful if the total number of trips registered within a year could be said to be representative of the total taken. That's very likely not to be the case, for one because people are still busy registering trips within the system (for both 2008 and 2007).
So, with the changes in absolute numbers established to be indicative of pretty much nothing, and us also not being able to assume that the total number of trips taken within a year is constant, what remains is to see how the popularity of individual destinations has fluctuated within the registered dataset. That's what this page does.

[ Edit: Edited on Dec 19, 2008, at 8:43 AM by Sander ]

14. Posted by Peter (Admin 5807 posts) 7y

Quoting Hien

Quoting Peter

Update.. you can now also break it down by nationality. So these were the most popular cities for US travellers.

You're quick! At this rate, I think I'm seeing the countries stats coming up in the next few minutes.

By the way, if it's not a hassle, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland can be grouped together with the UK to provide a more accurate data.

Ok, I've done this now. Some differences in the stats as a result.

15. Posted by Peter (Admin 5807 posts) 7y

Quoting Sander

Quoting Hien

I think the main percentage of increase/decrease is not the right one used. Currently, it's calculated based on the rate of increase/decrease of percentage of total trips over the last year. I think it should instead be the percentage of increase/decrease of the number of trips made over the last year to the same destination. Say, if there were 3 trips made last year, and this year there were 6 trips, the increase is 100%.

That'd only be useful if the total number of trips registered within a year could be said to be representative of the total taken. That's very likely not to be the case, for one because people are still busy registering trips within the system (for both 2008 and 2007).
So, with the changes in absolute numbers established to be indicative of pretty much nothing, and us also not being able to assume that the total number of trips taken within a year is constant, what remains is to see how the popularity of individual destinations has fluctuated within the registered dataset. That's what this page does.

Yeah, this was pretty much the reason for going for the numbers used. But I do somewhat agree that they are not quite what you assume they would be.

I wonder if a better stat to show would be how their position has changed since last year (ie, this one rose 2 spots or this one dropped 5). And then supplement that with the percentage increase that we are currently showing.

16. Posted by Sander (Moderator 4834 posts) 7y

Quoting Peter

I wonder if a better stat to show would be how their position has changed since last year (ie, this one rose 2 spots or this one dropped 5). And then supplement that with the percentage increase that we are currently showing.

That'd probably be a good idea - the implied accuracy of the percentages is a bit misleading anyway, while the relative rankings are really the most interesting bit of information that is revealed.

17. Posted by beerman (Respected Member 1631 posts) 7y

Ahem, I see you've conveniently left Isa Manor off the top 50 list........

18. Posted by james (Travel Guru 4136 posts) 7y

Auckland? Whatever takes your fancy I guess.

19. Posted by tway (Travel Guru 7273 posts) 7y

Quoting james

Auckland? Whatever takes your fancy I guess.

I was thinking the same thing about Toronto. ;)

20. Posted by Utrecht (Moderator 5596 posts) 7y

Quoting tway

Quoting james

Auckland? Whatever takes your fancy I guess.

I was thinking the same thing about Toronto. ;)

Yeah, it's a bit of a not so useful list regarding some cities, if you are thinking of popular places, as especially cities like Auckland or Toronto might just be the city to fly in first when visiting Canada or New Zealand, therefore theoratically on the tripmap. People might just have rented a car on the airport and drove further as fast as posssible