[Closed - new thread started] Will Hawaii Open by [OCTOBER???] [Please use this thread for all Hawaii Coronavirus discussions]

[Tamaradarann]

That seems pretty fantastical and wishful thinking. How do you tell businesses, when they are allowed to open up, that they need to move their prices up? It is called free Market. Sure maybe an airport can add a tax or the gov make the VAT tax higher but I would imagine the Hotel industry would push back or even sue. We know back in during the Recession that the ridiculous Maui Mayor put an unreasonable property tax on Timeshares, specifically Westin, which has been reversed and is winding it's way through the appeal process I believe.
If I own a little surf shop or a restaurant and I want to give reasonable prices then how is someone in the Maui Gov going to tell me what I need to charge? Everybody can't be Merriman's or Mama's. Also, locals go to restaurants and stores so you are taking a certain population of locals who may not make a ton of money and price them out of some businesses. It is really sad that you think it is a good idea that families couldn't save up for the trip of a lifetime. Nobody has any idea if that family is spending $500 a day vs say a Timeshare owner or VRBO renter who just sits on the beach and hits Costco and consumes very little in terms of restaurant or activities and shopping. I own 2 weeks in Hawaii and the Gov of Maui hasn't a clue what I spend.

I agree with alot of the thinking here on the high end tourist. Timeshare owners are NOT high spending tourists. Since their accomdations are already paid for with maintenance and have kitchens in the units they usually eat many of their meals in the timeshare and save a considerable amount on restaurants for food as well as alcohol, I know we do. I believe that a great deal of the first tourists to Hawaii will be timeshare owners. VRBO renters are also low spending but at least they are paying something per night, although lower than hotels, for their accommodations.

The tourist to Maui may be somewhat higher income than the other islands so that increasing the cost to go there may be able to fly successfully. I know that Hawaii news usually says that the room rate in Maui is higher than the other islands.

Hotel rooms are certainly one of the major costs of travel to Hawaii so that raising taxes on those could attract a higher spending tourist and additional income/tourist. However, in addition to the timeshare and VRBO lower spender we know a good deal of seniors who rent apartments in Hawaii at a very low cost/night. Those people will continue to be low spender tourists.

Another thought is that many of the high end tourists, particularly in Honolulu are Japanese. Is travel to Hawaii going to be opened up internationally?

 

[Tamaradarann]

I was surprised how much I saw for New Years. It was awesome.

We were there on New Year's Eve and the fireworks at the Duke's Statue were great. It was great before social distancing came into effect otherwise they would have had to arrest most of Waikiki and 1/2 of Honolulu.

 

[csodjd]

Hotel rooms are certainly one of the major costs of travel to Hawaii so that raising taxes on those could attract a higher spending tourist and additional income/tourist. However, in addition to the timeshare and VRBO lower spender we know a good deal of seniors who rent apartments in Hawaii at a very low cost/night. Those people will continue to be low spender tourists.

Again (and again), they don't need to eliminate low spend tourists to achieve their goal, they only need to shift the numbers so that they have MORE higher spending and FEWER low spending tourists. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition. Hawaii has a LOT of tourists at any given time. Just creating a pressure that leads to 5% more high spenders and 5% fewer low spenders, changes the dynamics. Add in that every spender must spend a bit more -- very easily done with an airport tax -- and the Hawaii government can affect a very significant change in the tourism socioeconomic demographics.

I think the easier way to understand is just a change in the mentality of the Hawaiian government toward tourists. In the past they didn't want to construct barriers to tourism out of fear it would reduce the number of tourists and hurt the economy. Instead they may decide they are okay with reducing the number of tourists if they can at least maintain their revenue goals from tourism. Again, just a landing tax would do that.

If any of you fly much to Europe you will appreciate the efforts often made to avoid London in order to not have to pay the airport tax at Heathrow. I have four flights, all business class, scheduled to Europe, two where my destination is London. None go to London, however. I saved several thousand dollars -- all in taxes imposed at Heathrow -- by flying to Paris, then taking a commuter to London.

 

[csodjd]

I agree with you that is why I stated in this forum before that a date should have been set for the ending of the 14 day quarantine for the tourists.

Agree. At least a target, and then updating it as time passes and confidence goes up, or down, that the target will be met. However, I suspect that the 14-day quarantine will not go away, possibly until there is a vaccine -- they will just create exceptions to it or ways to avoid it, such as satisfactory proof you are not infected.

 

[1Kflyerguy]

Things are moving on the testing prior to flight idea. I saw on the news last night that the Federal Government is considering have the TSA check check temperatures before all flights. In addition it looks like Hawaii has at least some level of approval from the White House to require a negative test prior to travel.

How to restart tourism? Lawmakers push the idea of requiring negative COVID-19 tests

There is broad consensus that pre-flight testing is the only way to revive Hawaii’s tourism industry while keeping the virus out.

www.hawaiinewsnow.com

I like the both ideas. Air travel is considered risky by many, so performing some type of testing for all flights not just Hawaii would potentially slow the spread, and would certainly help improve the public confidence. I traveled around Asia during the SARs outbreak and remember having to go though thermal screening to exit the plane in Singapore, as well as when entering some of my suppliers factory.

 

[slip]

Again (and again), they don't need to eliminate low spend tourists to achieve their goal, they only need to shift the numbers so that they have MORE higher spending and FEWER low spending tourists. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition. Hawaii has a LOT of tourists at any given time. Just creating a pressure that leads to 5% more high spenders and 5% fewer low spenders, changes the dynamics. Add in that every spender must spend a bit more -- very easily done with an airport tax -- and the Hawaii government can affect a very significant change in the tourism socioeconomic demographics.

I think the easier way to understand is just a change in the mentality of the Hawaiian government toward tourists. In the past they didn't want to construct barriers to tourism out of fear it would reduce the number of tourists and hurt the economy. Instead they may decide they are okay with reducing the number of tourists if they can at least maintain their revenue goals from tourism. Again, just a landing tax would do that.

If any of you fly much to Europe you will appreciate the efforts often made to avoid London in order to not have to pay the airport tax at Heathrow. I have four flights, all business class, scheduled to Europe, two where my destination is London. None go to London, however. I saved several thousand dollars -- all in taxes imposed at Heathrow -- by flying to Paris, then taking a commuter to London.

If a person pays the airport tax that is no guarantee that they are higher spenders.

Also, You had mentioned before the Maui mayor was talking a 50% reduction in rental cars. The 5 to 10% shift you are talking about will not cover that.

 

[amy241]

[Please note - this is just Bob McDermott's proposal - it hasn't be approved by the Gov. or state legislature. DeniseM]

I received an email from Go Visit Hawaii today that stated:

Proposed process for reopening Hawaii’s tourism
In a 23-page document, Making Hawaii Safe For Travel, presented by Representative Bob Mcdermott, the following proposed framework outlines the process. Note we’ve bolded some of the text that we feel is most relevant for Hawaii tourists:

1) Governor David Ige must petition the Federal Government to require all Hawaii bound passengers be tested within 72 hours prior to arrival. Until then we will implement the following steps.

2) Request ALL travelers be tested up to 72 hours prior to their departure to Hawaii. Travelers can get a rapid test and have the negative results electronically transmitted to the airline with an identifying record number. Travelers that test positive shall receive a full refund of airfare and not travel to Hawaii.

3) All travelers receive a temperature screen and board the airplane with negative COVID-19 test results bound for Hawaii.

4) While we cannot legally mandate testing nor infringe one’s right to travel, we can ensure travelers are aware of the consequences of not being tested prior to arrival. We shall inform travelers they have a final chance to obtain a COVID-19 test at the airport or they will quarantine for 14 days. Testing at the airport will be cumbersome and could take up to 12 hours. If the traveler tests positive, they will be quarantined.

5) The first preference is for travelers to be tested prior to departing for Hawaii but back up airport testing will be available for those who arrive without being tested. The National Guard shall oversee this effort. We suggest they use Abbott Rapid test machines. A sufficient quantity (100 Machines @ 4 tests per hour/ 400 *24 = 9600 per day capacity) should be available within 30 to 60 days to meet the residual demand of arrivals who are not already tested.

6) National Guard shall assist in the enforcement of the quarantine of ALL non-tested or positive testing arrivals. Quarantine must be strict as outlined in our letters to the Governor (attached) and must include returning Hawaii residents. The state shall designate a safe location for the quarantine. We suggest that this be run by MG Hara and the National Guard. Gov. Ige said the 14 Day-Quarantine was a huge success. It was a success in the sense of keeping visitors away, but in tracking visitors and returning residents, it has proven unenforceable and ultimately useless.

7) In addition to predeparture testing, the airline shall ensure travel declaration forms are submitted, accurate and verified. This is critical in case contact tracing is required. The Department of Health (DOH) shall oversee the contact tracing efforts when needed.

8) Visitors shall be tested every seven calendar days by a local testing facility approved by the DOH during their stay.

9) To ensure the safety of airport, airline and travel-related employees all departures require testing.

10) All visitor industry employees shall be tested once a week. Testing shall be free to employees and coordinated by the employer and respective labor groups.

Once again, please note that this is in proposal form at the moment.

What’s next?
From a legislative standpoint, we aren’t privy to those details, but it’s clear that Governor Ige and other Hawaii lawmakers will need to approve such measures. The Governor has indicated that he wants a screening process.

Obviously, many logistics will need to be ironed out before these recommendations can be implemented. Not the least of these issues is the current lack of available testing. Some have suggested that travelers can simply go to their local CVS or Walgreens and obtain a rapid test. Those tests aren’t easily procured at the moment. COVID testing at Walgreens is only available in 16 states, while CVS COVID testing is available in just eight states. So, the capacity for testing will really need to ramp up. Also, the qualifications for testing will need to be expanded so that travelers to Hawaii can have access to them.

It’s not a perfect plan
Clearly, this plan is not without flaws. For example, getting a negative test 72 or even 48 hours before flying to Hawaii does not insure that you won’t get the virus.

This proposed plan is also not an ideal situation, but it could possibly be the solution to allow tourism while providing a level of protection to Hawaii’s citizens.

 

[amy241]

#8 requiring a tourist to be tested every 7 days while in Hawaii seems a little extreme. Are they requiring their own residents to be tested every 7 days?

 

[amy241]

The problem with rapid testing at both Walgreens and CVS (besides the fact that it is unavailable in many states) is that it requires prescreening for symptoms in order to test. That makes it unlikely that the average healthy tourist could even get tested at either pharmacy. Both pharmacies offer testing in Florida where I live - because I checked their websites - but it is limited to those presenting symptoms.

 

[csodjd]

The problem with rapid testing at both Walgreens and CVS (besides the fact that it is unavailable in many states) is that it requires prescreening for symptoms in order to test. That makes it unlikely that the average healthy tourist could even get tested at either pharmacy. Both pharmacies offer testing in Florida where I live - because I checked their websites - but it is limited to those presenting symptoms.

That varies by region. In Los Angeles anyone can get a test, no prescreening required. As testing becomes more available I'd expect many or most places to allow anyone to get tested.

 

[csodjd]

#8 requiring a tourist to be tested every 7 days while in Hawaii seems a little extreme. Are they requiring their own residents to be tested every 7 days?

Agree. That's the one that jumped out at me as difficult to make happen. That, and testing on departure. That seems unnecessary and could create massive delays. If it takes up to 12 hours to get tested and results on arrival one might guess the same could happen leaving.

But the concept of tested before you fly and if you don't, wait at the airport on arrival to get tested, or have a required quarantine at a sight managed by the state, is a workable solution. Combined with a temperature and symptoms screen, you will filter out most infection.

 

[csodjd]

If a person pays the airport tax that is no guarantee that they are higher spenders.

Also, You had mentioned before the Maui mayor was talking a 50% reduction in rental cars. The 5 to 10% shift you are talking about will not cover that.

As to the first point, of course it isn't a guarantee. It is a pressure gradient, not a filter. There's no guarantee a person walking into Nordstrum's is a big spender or has lots of money. The person could be virtually broke. But, if you're choosing whose inheritance you want, you'd probably choose the Nordstrum's shopper over TJ Maxx. As the cost goes up, you gradually change who will/can pay it. Again, and again, it's not an all-or-nothing. But someone willing and able to spend $1000 for a coach fare is MORE LIKELY to be a spender than someone only willing or able to spend $400.

As to the second, that's an even easier one. If they limit the licensing of cars they will simply force tourists into other modes of transportation. Shuttle service, etc.

 

[1Kflyerguy]

I am glad to finally see a proposed plan. This does however seem pretty ambitious to me.

From what i hear it not that easy to get tested in all states. While the country offers free testing in my area, i imagine tests for travel won't be offered for free, and in fact will require you to visit a a commercial lab.

The idea that the labs would then transmit the data electronically to the airline will require new software connections for the labs and airlines.

Also while its nice to get your airfare refunded, lots of times the car rental, and accommodations may incur a substantial penalty or loss if you cancel at the last minute...

 

[slip]

As to the first point, of course it isn't a guarantee. It is a pressure gradient, not a filter. There's no guarantee a person walking into Nordstrum's is a big spender or has lots of money. The person could be virtually broke. But, if you're choosing whose inheritance you want, you'd probably choose the Nordstrum's shopper over TJ Maxx. As the cost goes up, you gradually change who will/can pay it. Again, and again, it's not an all-or-nothing. But someone willing and able to spend $1000 for a coach fare is MORE LIKELY to be a spender than someone only willing or able to spend $400.

As to the second, that's an even easier one. If they limit the licensing of cars they will simply force tourists into other modes of transportation. Shuttle service, etc.

Just don’t see any of that working. It would take forever to fine tune what you are describing.

We’ll just see how things play out.

 

[csodjd]

Story this morning. They appear to emphasize that pre-flight testing is the key and that the White House has approved that, but not much additional detail.

How to restart tourism? Lawmakers push the idea of requiring negative COVID-19 tests

There is broad consensus that pre-flight testing is the only way to revive Hawaii’s tourism industry while keeping the virus out.

www.hawaiinewsnow.com

 

[Tamaradarann]

Again (and again), they don't need to eliminate low spend tourists to achieve their goal, they only need to shift the numbers so that they have MORE higher spending and FEWER low spending tourists. It's not an all-or-nothing proposition. Hawaii has a LOT of tourists at any given time. Just creating a pressure that leads to 5% more high spenders and 5% fewer low spenders, changes the dynamics. Add in that every spender must spend a bit more -- very easily done with an airport tax -- and the Hawaii government can affect a very significant change in the tourism socioeconomic demographics.

I think the easier way to understand is just a change in the mentality of the Hawaiian government toward tourists. In the past they didn't want to construct barriers to tourism out of fear it would reduce the number of tourists and hurt the economy. Instead they may decide they are okay with reducing the number of tourists if they can at least maintain their revenue goals from tourism. Again, just a landing tax would do that.

If any of you fly much to Europe you will appreciate the efforts often made to avoid London in order to not have to pay the airport tax at Heathrow. I have four flights, all business class, scheduled to Europe, two where my destination is London. None go to London, however. I saved several thousand dollars -- all in taxes imposed at Heathrow -- by flying to Paris, then taking a commuter to London.

I thought I heard that the Maui Mayor wanted to cut the number of tourists by 50% and increase the spending of the remaining tourists to make up the difference. That is a fantasy. You get the big income dollars from lots of tourists. Particularly now when some people have been burdened with lower income and I believe all of us have had extra expenditures and/or spent extra dollars for the same items due to this virus this is the wrong time to make any move to reduce tourists. In the for seeable future Hawaii needs all the tourists who spend as much as they can until they get back to a pre-coronavirus state.

 

[csodjd]

I thought I heard that the Maui Mayor wanted to cut the number of tourists by 50% and increase the spending of the remaining tourists to make up the difference. That is a fantasy. You get the big income dollars from lots of tourists. Particularly now when some people have been burdened with lower income and I believe all of us have had extra expenditures and/or spent extra dollars for the same items due to this virus this is the wrong time to make any move to reduce tourists. In the for seeable future Hawaii needs all the tourists who spend as much as they can until they get back to a pre-coronavirus state.

I don't recall 50% except in a mention of reducing rental cars. I do recall many mentions of trying to reduce the number of tourists and increase the amount spent, sometimes referred to as reducing quantity and increasing quality.

 

[Tamaradarann]

I don't recall 50% except in a mention of reducing rental cars. I do recall many mentions of trying to reduce the number of tourists and increase the amount spent, sometimes referred to as reducing quantity and increasing quality.

The usual number of tourist comiing to Hawaii is about 30,000/day. Right now it is less than 1,000/day. If Hawaii does not increase the number of tourists by a very large number they will continue to be in a bad economic situation. That should be their focus; while trying to keep the number of coronavirus cases very low. Putting obstacles other than limiting the spread of the virus in tourists coming is the worst thing they could do now.

In addition to the Maui Mayor's fallacy of keeping the income up while reducing the number of tourists, reducing the rental cars on Maui will reduce the number of tourists and also reduce the income since the rental car is a significant expenditure of tourists and almost everyone that goes to Maui uses a car to get around. It is not Honolulu.

As I mentioned before the Maui Mayor's liking the timeshare people is contrary to his efforts to boost tourist expenditures while reducing the number of tourist since Timeshare people eat many meals in their unit since they have a kitchen so they save monty on resturants. That is another reason that you need a rental car to shop for food for your kitchen.

One last thought on the coronavirus social distancing and tourist expenditures. We spend a couple of thousand dollars everytime we go to Hawaii on Theatres. Small live performances at the Diamond Head, Manoa Valley, Brad Powell Theatre, Arts at Marks Garage, Kumu Kahua Theatre, Blue Note, One King Arts Theatre, as well as the Doris Duke Theatre and the Blaisdale Concert Hall for Symphonies and other performances. If social distancing is still the order of the day they would not be able to survice with every third seat being full. That will be a few thousand less that we will spend in Hawaii when we are there.

 

[csodjd]

The usual number of tourist comiing to Hawaii is about 30,000/day. Right now it is less than 1,000/day. If Hawaii does not increase the number of tourists by a very large number they will continue to be in a bad economic situation. That should be their focus; while trying to keep the number of coronavirus cases very low. Putting obstacles other than limiting the spread of the virus in tourists coming is the worst thing they could do now.

In addition to the Maui Mayor's fallacy of keeping the income up while reducing the number of tourists, reducing the rental cars on Maui will reduce the number of tourists and also reduce the income since the rental car is a significant expenditure of tourists and almost everyone that goes to Maui uses a car to get around. It is not Honolulu.

As I mentioned before the Maui Mayor's liking the timeshare people is contrary to his efforts to boost tourist expenditures while reducing the number of tourist since Timeshare people eat many meals in their unit since they have a kitchen so they save monty on resturants. That is another reason that you need a rental car to shop for food for your kitchen.

One last thought on the coronavirus social distancing and tourist expenditures. We spend a couple of thousand dollars everytime we go to Hawaii on Theatres. Small live performances at the Diamond Head, Manoa Valley, Brad Powell Theatre, Arts at Marks Garage, Kumu Kahua Theatre, Blue Note, One King Arts Theatre, as well as the Doris Duke Theatre and the Blaisdale Concert Hall for Symphonies and other performances. If social distancing is still the order of the day they would not be able to survice with every third seat being full. That will be a few thousand less that we will spend in Hawaii when we are there.

Like many others, they have a lot of work and figuring out to do when it comes to things like going to the theater.

I know there is a perception that the TS owner spends less because they have the benefits of the kitchen. And I'm sure that's true to an extent. But, it sure doesn't feel that way. I seem to spend PLENTY of money on food (and the frequent mai tai). To some extent it may be at Costco or the market instead of a restaurant, but the TS owners are more like residents in those respects and spend money at local places that the honeymoon couple doesn't visit.

Your comments about the car in Maui made me laugh, because I JUST, immediately before coming on here, reserved a car for a week in Maui in November. Great price though... $381 all in for a Mustang convertible. Now I just hope we'll be going.

 

[Tamaradarann]

Like many others, they have a lot of work and figuring out to do when it comes to things like going to the theater.

I know there is a perception that the TS owner spends less because they have the benefits of the kitchen. And I'm sure that's true to an extent. But, it sure doesn't feel that way. I seem to spend PLENTY of money on food (and the frequent mai tai). To some extent it may be at Costco or the market instead of a restaurant, but the TS owners are more like residents in those respects and spend money at local places that the honeymoon couple doesn't visit.

Your comments about the car in Maui made me laugh, because I JUST, immediately before coming on here, reserved a car for a week in Maui in November. Great price though... $381 all in for a Mustang convertible. Now I just hope we'll be going.

Since we have been timeshare travelling we save a great deal of money eating all of our breakfasts, lunches, and about 1/2 our dinners in the unit. When we do go out to dinner we eat salad in the room and usually have a couple of drinks before going to out to dinner if we are going to drink. We don't drink and drive that is why we love to be in Honolulu since we walk or take the bus to dinner. That saves about 1/2 the cost of a dinner out. Seniors ride for $1 with a Medicare Card but we don't pay at all since we get a senior monthly or annual bus pass). Our one weakness is not the frequent mai tai it is the microbrews at breweries. We do partake of those about once a week. You can't beat a strong 10% alcohol IPA or Coconut Stout on tap.

As far a shopping you have it right to go to Costco. Since we don't have a car in Honolulu we walk to Sam's. Our weekly trip with our duffle bags is to Target, Walmart, and Sam's all in or right next to the Ala Moana Mall to fill up on groceries. The prices are great. You need to stay away from the supermarkets as much as possible since their prices are about double the Continental United States prices. We do walk to Food Pantry on Hobron for a tomato or two and a head of lettuce if we run out during the week.

 

[csodjd]

Since we have been timeshare travelling we save a great deal of money eating all of our breakfasts, lunches, and about 1/2 our dinners in the unit.

We are similar, perhaps somewhat less than that, but being undisciplined as we are, largely view those savings as freeing up money to spend on something else. I'm also a rather avid golfer and always spend one to two thousand on golf when I'm there.

 

[1Kflyerguy]

As I mentioned before the Maui Mayor's liking the timeshare people is contrary to his efforts to boost tourist expenditures while reducing the number of tourist since Timeshare people eat many meals in their unit since they have a kitchen so they save money on restaurants. That is another reason that you need a rental car to shop for food for your kitchen.

I don't think the Mayor said timeshare people necessarily spend more money. He said that timeshare people tend to be repeat visitors and typically show respect for islands and the local culture. Since they visit frequently many consider the islands a second home.

My take away from this interview and some of the other comments by public officials is that Hawaii would like to attract a higher quality visitor. Their is more to being a quality visitor than how much you spend. I think it also your attitude and the way you behave while there.

 

[HeidingOut]

[Deleted: Political/Socially contentious posts are not permitted on TUG.]

Avoid posting about politics, religion, or contentious social issues Unless directly related to timesharing, such discussions are prohibited in these forums, including TUG Lounge. We've been down that road before, it was ugly, and we are not going there again.

 

[Tamaradarann]

We are similar, perhaps somewhat less than that, but being undisciplined as we are, largely view those savings as freeing up money to spend on something else. I'm also a rather avid golfer and always spend one to two thousand on golf when I'm there.

Well my husband and I don't budget we get what we want and do what we want within limits for the best price or least cost. We have stayed in Hawaii from 3-4 months since we retired in 2009. Without timeshares we couldn't have afforded to do that. We also couldn't have afforded to do that if we rented a car, shopped at the grocery stores, took Taxis or Ubers, ate out more than a few times a week.

My husband also golfed quite a bit when he was younger. He always raves about when he was a kid how he played the Black Course at Bethpage State Park on Long Island which has held the US Open for $2. He hasn't played in Hawaii.

 

[bnoble]

I'm not trying to stir trouble here.

If you have to say this as your lead sentence, chances are that sentence is wrong.