Next to rising taxes and the state of the country’s roads, there appears to be nothing more that Romanians like to complain about right now than the fate of the country’s tourism industry. Worrying over the number of foreigners that visit Romania each year has become a national obsession. The country’s Minister of Tourism and Regional Development Elena Udrea gets more press coverage than any other member of the government except the prime minister, and her every utterance is reported, analysed and dissected for meaning and import.
(Including, we happily admit, by ourselves).
There is not a person in Romania who did not have a generally ignorant opinion on the launch of the country’s latest tourism brand, a subject whose importance was taken to whole new levels of exaggeration.
Which is fair enough; if that’s what Romanians want to spend their time fussing over, that’s entirely their business.
Yet we can’t leave them to get on with their fussing without pointing out that almost everything that they think they know about Romanian tourism is wrong.
The idea that Romanian tourism is an unmitigated disaster is wrong. The idea that Romania is avoided by foreign tourists is wrong. The idea that the number of foreign visitors to Romania is in terminal decline is wrong.
Likewise, however…
The idea that a decent tourism brand is all that stands between Romania and unlimited wealth from millions of free spending tourists is total lunacy.
(By the way, months after its launch, here is the first reasoned, objective and well written take on Romania: Explore the Carpathian Garden we’ve read).
Anyway, what about this idea that Romanian tourism is in terminal decline?
Our gut feeling says it isn’t. We’ve been to Brasov enough times recently to know that foreigners are not avoiding Romania, and the number of Bucharest In Your Pockets we get through every two months is also a sign that things are healthier than the headlines suggest. Anyway, gut feeling often counts for nothing, and is certainly not scientific, so we looked at the numbers.
Here are the total numbers of foreign tourists in Romania for the period 2000-2009*:
These figures suggest that things are not quite as bad on the Romanian tourism front as is often thought. Though numbers fell from 8.86 million in 2008 to 7.75 million in 2009, this was to be expected given the state of the world economy. Even France, the world’s most visited country, saw a massive drop in tourist numbers for the same period: from 79 million visitors in 2008 down to 73 million in 2009.
Part of the problem with how Romanians view tourism is the inability of the country’s capital-obsessed media to see beyond Bucharest. Groups of tourists may still be a rare sight in Bucharest (but they do exist, for we have seen them), but in other parts of the country they are not.
Visit Brasov, Sibiu or Sighisoara on any summer weekend and you will see more foreigners than locals in the main squares of the respective cities.
Another – more delicate – issue is that Romanians tend to overstate the country’s attractions (before quickly heading off themselves to Bulgaria and Turkey) and overestimate the numbers of people who want to flock to see them.
There is no question that Romania has some great, and unique sights. The monasteries of Bucovina, Maramures, the fortified churches of Transylvania. But these are not generalist attractions fit for mass tourism. Strange as it may seem to some, not everyone wants to spend their holiday traipsing around monasteries. Sorry, but ’tis true.
Besides, there are serious capacity issues. We do not know what the number is, but there is clearly going to be a limit on how many people can visit the monasteries in one day. There is likewise a limit on how many people can stay in the villages of Maramures each night.
Much of Romania’s transport infrastructure – crucial for tourism – is already at or even beyond capacity. Look at the road from Bucharest to Brasov. It’s already blocked for much of the weekend; add in thousands of foreigners every Saturday coming in on ski packages and you have serious problems.
Of course, there will not be thousands of skiers heading into the Prahova Valley anytime soon; Sinaia, which has such great potential (who has not sat on the world’s slowest chairlift in the Valea Dorului and looked around, wondering what could be?) cannot at present provide a map of the mountain’s pistes and working mountain transport. As we understand it, three different, competing companies operate Sinaia’s cable cars, gondola and chairlifts. It’s a mess, and it will not be appearing in Britain’s ski brochures anytime soon.
But we digress. The point to remember is that Romania is already attracting decent numbers of foreign tourists. Yes, Bulgaria attracts more mass tourism (a major contributor to the national anguish over tourism) but it has always attracted more. Mass tourism generally means beach or ski tourism, and Romania is ill equipped on this front. The Bulgarian coast is longer than Romania’s, has better beaches, far better weather and a season that runs from May to September. It has been a staple of British and German holiday brochures since the 1970s. The Romanian coast cannot and should not try to compete.
For it does not need to. Given its size, the number of attractions it offers, accessibility and the state of its infrastructure, Romania does fairly well on the tourism front: far better than many people believe. No, there is little mass tourism, but then in the absence of decent beach and ski resorts we fail to see where there could be.
Romania could attract more visitors of course – many, many more – and well-targeted advertising could help here. But Romania is simply ill-prepared for the kind of mass tourism that the more hysterical parts of the media appear to be demanding and expecting.
They need to get real, and lower those expectations a little.
—
*Source: Romanian National Institute of Statistics
{ 23 comments… read them below or add one }
I think it is an interesting article.. But there are a couple of things which have not been said correctly… For example, the romanian food is absolutely delicious, it is very fresh and not frozen( like the ready meals english feed on). The landscapes and places to visit are good, but i think the prices can be a bit ridicoulous sometimes.. Personally i think reason why tourists would avoi romania is because is very expensive. If you look on prices for a 4,5 * hotel it can be a bit shocking. I spent a weekend in a 5* hotel in turkey and it was £30 a night.. In romania with £30 you could stay maybe in a 2-3* hotel where the service wouldn’t be nowhere as close. And another thing is in Romania everything spreads around money, if you leave a good tip to the waitress she will treat you like a king, if you don’t they won’t look at you. It is all about the wrong menthality and doing the wrong things. Romanian people can be very friendly and honest, they are very expressive and family orientated. Romania has many things to be proud for, but many times its image has been spoiled by gypsies and corruption.
No matter what, i strongly believe romania can have many chances to become better.
Can you believe that yesterday when I ordered two salads from a home delivery restaurant, the delivery driver actually ASKED me for a tip???
Where the hell is this going to, urgent measures need to be taken!
I’m not in love with the States (to say the least), but in the States – if you’d ASK the client to give you a tip, the next day you’d probably be looking for a job!
I like the way foreigners see Romania, I find it very accurate and sincere. Romanians tend to complain, exaggerate or to be deeply patriots.
I work in tourism and not mass tourism (never Black Sea or ski). 90% of the clients I have are coming by recommendation and not by website hits, that means they leave happy and spoke about it! So, Romania attracts some tourists, not as many as the state wants. I am tired anyway of waiting anything from the state, so I have to continue the way I can. Changes has to be done starting with the people (mentality, education, etc).
In deed, the infrastructure is the worst and how can we change that? The way things go, I will get the retairement before having good roads in Romania. Meanwhile I continue spend money to the car services! You should be mad to have a BMW on Romanian roads (when I personally do up to 7000 km on a summer month!)
Craig, it was a plesure to read your article and the comments. And I totally agree with Andy H and Davin.
Thanks. Will be writing more on this subject soon (see the post that has just gone up). Romania does OK for what it has to offer. Its best bits (so not the seaside or the ski resorts) are simply not geared up for mass tourism, and the numbers of tourists will never be as high as in the country to the south until the infrastructure improves. The best thing people in Romania could do for tourism is to stop worrying about tourists and worry about themselves. What is good for them will be good for tourists too.
I am currently working on an assignment on Hotel Market Performance on Bucharest.
Kindly advise where to source out information on the following:
1. Hotel supply in Bucharest (per category – i.e. for 5-star, 4-star and 3-star hotels)
2. Hotel occupancy in Bucharest (per category – i.e. for 5-star, 4-star and 3-star hotels)
3. Average room rate for Yr 2010, 1009, 2008 and 2007 (for 5-star and 4-star hotels)
4. Future Hotel Supply (i.e. New Hotels entering the market in Bucharest as from Yr 2010 onwards).
Thanks…
It’s true, romania is a beautiful country like you all say, you should visit Transfagarasan(buy the way it’s open only 3 months a year because it’s dangerous:>) it’s amazing. BUT : romanians should be more open minded,sometimes people can be really rude . I live in romania and i always have , my problem is not about what we don’t have, it’s about what we have and how we don’t know how to use it. You really should visit romania, taste the delicious food, visit the mountains, lay in the sun at the beach (mamaia is the best) but in the end you should be happy to go home and dont have anything to do with are political situation and our corrupt president
What delicious food Eva? Romanian cuisine is the pits! I’m sorry but it is. Visit the mountains eh? Yeah and count how many locals drop their litter in front of your very own eyes! Yeah I like to visit the beach, but only in Greece or Italy. I’m not too keen on locals driving their 4×4′s along the beach or the local beach bars blasting out crap music all day and night!
The reason I moved to Bucharest was to escape mass tourism and globalization, so it does not worry me in the least that Romania suffers a bit compared to other European countries. I was just in Bulgaria and I am now in Poland this week and there are a few things I would suggest that Romanians do if they want more tourists:
1. Change their basic mentality. In Bulgaria last week the waitress at the cafe on the sea smiled so much and WANTED to serve me.
2. Get rid of the dogs. I hit the Hungarian border the other night after Oradea and it was amazing to see the dogs suddenly disappear.
3. Put in smooth roads. It was amazing to see how the road changed suddenly after Oradea and I could average 110 kph instead of an average of 50 kph.
After a few days here in Poland I can say that Romania is a unique place a sort of Turkey meets Italy. There really is nowhere quite like it. In Poland things are just much more normal, no top of the range BMWs and Mercedes on every street, no chaos.
I have chosen to live in Romania for the chaos and general backwardness though. There are very few places left in Europe where genuine adventure can still be had.
It means that Poland is a top contributor to the economic crisis.
Because people have more money than in Romania and still they don’t buy BMWs so they interrupt the regular circuit of money.
I don’t understand what’s wrong in having BMWs… everyone should have them and people who don’t have them should watch the ones who do and become more motivated. Even a second-hand BMW is fine because it makes money to move.
What do westerners use money for if they don’t buy BMWs?! Do they think it’s any fun in diying without getting to spend a 1.000.000$ account?! Money is meant to be spent, if one can afford a BMW but still drives a Fiat or a Renault it means he’s not thinking straight!
Parmalat,
There is nothing wrong with owning a BMW. I always mention BMWs as an indicator of the extremes present in Romania. On the one hand you see top of the range BMWs but then the next moment you see a horse cart. In Western Europe or America you are much more likely most of the time to see average cars and of course never any horse carts. There is a real middle class in the West, not only the rich and the poor. Romania is a funny place in that there are such extremes. One would think it would be a priority of each new president to try to begin leveling the playing field out so everyone would have more of a chance at making a decent wage.
There is a particular obsession with showing off intrinsic to Romanian culture. In the West people see it smarter to save money as opposed to owning the top cars. Life in the West simply costs more than in Romania. A metro ride in Bucharest is less than 1/3rd of a Euro, in London it is 10 times that.
I don’t spend my money on expensive cars, I don’t see the point because the roads here are so bad. No, instead I spend my money on bespoke garments. ps. If I personally knew anyone considering buying a BMW I would shoot them at once!
Look at the grahph:
- in 2002 Adrian Nastase managed to stabilize the economy
- in 2005 the liberal reforms of Prime-Minister Tariceanu started the constant string of 7% growth year over year
- in 2009 Emil Boc came to power
I agree entirely with the points made by Andy H. Romania does have many attractions spread around the country but getting there from Bucharest (for many the logical point of arrival) is difficult on a good day. The standard of the roads is generally poor, and is unfortunately matched by the general standard of the drivers. I have spoken to people that spent time touring the country and their comments about the drivers are not for the faint hearted.
Romania has vast areas of relatively unspoiled countryside but this is a case of catch it while it lasts. Forest areas are starting to develop visible bald patches as intensive (and possibly illegal…) logging takes place, with the ongoing weakening of the area around them. No matter far from the beaten track you venture, you invariably find that someone has been there before you and kindly left a surprise welcome package of garbage.
Elana Udrea may be a gifted self publicist but her campaign will turn out to be a lot of noise with limited results unless the politicians actually direct investments into the infrastructure and not their cronies / families etc.
Romania and potential tourists deserve better than they are currently getting from the governing bodies. Until real accountability arrives, this sorry state of affairs will continue.
I could not in good faith recommend anyone to tour Romania. I often see foreigners in certain areas and towns, but more often than not it turns out that someone in their group is working in Bucharest and like me they are on a weekend outing. Romania is isolated, once in the country it isn’t easy to make it to other countries, and quite rightly the infrastructure is so poor that even inter-country travel is a severe pain. Hotels have popped up like mushrooms (many now near bankruptcy) but they often don’t fit their environment, they are eye-sores.
But, yes, there is a lot of potential. I see the beauty in the mountains, if only locales wouldn’t treat them like a garbage dump, and rural villages. It’s more a place for the adventurer with low expectations in comfort. I really hope that in 10 years or so the Romanian people import lessons from the Alps and the likes.
The truth is that the more you go to the east, the less civilized conditions you encounter.
From here on it depends on each person’s tolerance and spirit of adventure:
- if you hate adventure, just go to Berlin or Vienna
- if you want to only get a taste of the unknown without getting involved too much, come to Romania [if you're tired of dirt roads there's always Radisson and Bamboo to confort you]
- if you want total adventure go on the roads of Mongolia, not even GSM signal is to be found over there
My opinion is that Romania has its place well established on the touristic map of the world and there will always be people (lots of them) who would love to have a vacation with only 15% of adventure.
From here on it’s a matter of option – do we want to target other audience or would we prefer to keep our existing audience? Both answers are correct in my opinion.
The problem is that Romania needs to focus on what the real attractions of the country are, and not what it (read: the Bucharest politicians and media) thinks are the attractions.
That is: Incredible mountains, forests, lakes, rivers etc. Some (but by now means all) of its cities (such as, as you suggest, Sibiu, Brasov, Sighisoara, possibly Cluj, Targu Mures, Iasi, Timisoara). Its rural villages – Maramures, the Saxon areas, Székelyföld, Bucovina, etc. The wildlife (bears, wolves, deer, etc of the Carpathians; birds of the Danube Delta). And the few genuinely amazing “world heritage sites” – the Bucovina monasteries, the Saxon churches.
That isn’t: Bucharest (which I’m sure has a thriving nightlife, but in comparison to other European capitals is uninspiring for tourists). The coast (which is an appalling mess). Bran castle etc etc.
But it will be the infrastructure that makes or breaks the country as a tourist destination, and at the moment until that is fixed, tourism is likely to remain as a minority interest for highly motivated foreigners.
Exactly: it does about as well as can be expected right now. Until infrastructure improves it is simply not realistic to expect too many more tourists beyond those highly motivated people you identify.
Infrastructure is the key, I agree. Time may not be an issue for me, but with most people’s entry point being Bucharest, 3hrs to Brasov or 5.5 hrs to Sighisoara on the train is ridiculous.
Three hours to Brasov? You should be so lucky.
Well, okay, that’s best case scenario, and the last time I went to Sighisoara it was more like 7hrs. But my point stands, it should take 1.5 hrs to Brasov and 2.5 hrs to Sighisoara. I was about to say 3hrs, but the train really does crawl over what is very flat country.
I understand your try to say that everything is fine but unortunately it is not.
Do you really believe the stats issued by the “Romanian National Institute of Statistics”???
Come on open yr eyes and you will see that Romania is avoided by the turists. And for the right reasons.
No, I am not trying to say that all is well. Merely that it is not as bad as is made out, and given the lack of infrastructure etc. it does about as well as could be expected right now.
The Romanian National Institute of Statistics are very professional and experienced.
Heavily understaffed though, however they have managed to keep up the pace through the contribution of well experienced workers who have been working in the branch for more than 10 years.
You can believe 100% what they say, their data collection process was organized in the times of Ceausescu so as to cover all sectors and was maintained until today. I would say you can get past the Police in this country but it’s hard to get past the National Institute of Statistics.
Not to mention that the institution is being ran by the country’s most eminent statisticians, there is no political interference in their work, they benefit from European programs of development etc…
I know that because I have completed an internship with them in February this year. Actually I needed some GDP and Inflation numbers before their release because I’m a trader of currencies and it was the best way to find them, otherwise I would have had to bribe Mugur Isarescu
…
So personally I believe more in the figures presented by the Romanian National Institute of Statistics about Romania than in the figures presented by the French Institute of Statistics about France for example…
{ 1 trackback }