Venice now charging ‚hit and run‘ tourists

… charming description, meant are those that just visit for the day, perhaps from their cruise ship, but don‘t dine/ sleep, leaving little money otherwise.

For now, it’s a modest €5 fee, to be paid online.

3 Likes

I did a 7-day cruise from Venice back in 2011 at the depths of the financial crisis when everything was cheap. It cost less than $500 and included 2 nights in Venice. I don’t know what a hotel room in Venice with the amenities of a modern cruise ship would cost, but I’m pretty sure it’s more than $500/night.

Of course, they’re no longer allowing the large cruise ships to dock in Venice, so those days are gone.

https://www.travelweekly.com/Cruise-Travel/NCL-removes-Venice-from-itineraries

There’s a big difference between stepping off a ship docked within 500 ft of Piazzale Roma, and tendering ashore from who knows where.

intercst

3 Likes

There are attractors and detractors. Taxes fall in the second category. Venice used to be a smart merchant city state. :rofl:

The Captain

3 Likes

They are still smart, because they are now charging for something they used to give away for free.

1 Like

And they are charging people who can’t vote in local elections, so no downside to gouging the daylights out of them.

Steve

But they are not even doing that. The fee is a trivial €5. No one is going to balk at paying an extra €5 to see Venice after they have already paid for their cruise and their ship is already in port.

You don’t become a rich mercantile country by leaving easy money on the table.

2 Likes

I noticed that in both Switzerland and all Nordic countries. They gouge the hell out of tourists. When I visited Geneva, I stayed at a hotel on the French side of the border at 1/3 the cost of anything available 2 miles away.

intercst

They are gouging the locals as well; same picture for e.g. supermarkets, hairdressers etc. Truth is Swiss salaries are a lot higher than French. Then again, a hotel stay downtown near the lake is more pleasant than in most of the neighboring French agglomeration.

1 Like

One would think so, but there are still protests.

1 Like

The problem of destruction of the basic livability and valued structures of culturally amazing locations by destructive swarms of faddish ignorant tourists is real and increasing. I think charging for entry to Venice should have begun back in the 70’s, and I am lobbying my current location in Spain, where I was a resident for 12 years, and my current home in Mexico, to begin doing the same.

d fb

3 Likes

That is a short term and short sighted policy. We did that in Venezuela. Most of the Caribbean islands and nations, Trinidad excepted, are low in industry. Mostly because of oil Venezuela and Trinidad are much more industrialized. BTW, during WWII Trinidad was an important naval base for the USA. The giant hangars are still in place and now they are used to paint boats. Trinidad has a paint problem, the red dust kicked up in the Sahara Desert which travels all the way across the Atlantic Ocean. They can’t do quality paint jobs in the open.

Because of Venezuela’s high industrial base and low labor costs it used to be a preferred destination for yacht maintenance. BTW, any boat sailing from the South Atlantic to the Panama Canal will more that likely sail between Trinidad and Venezuela.

Puerto la Cruz, at the left of the map, houses Venezuela’s main eastern refineries and sea port, the industrial complex that yachts depend on for stuff like hot dip galvanizing of anchors and chains.

Trinidad’s industrial complex centers on Chaguaramas Bay west of the capital Port of Spain at the north west of the island, that’s where the WWII naval base used to be.

Back to taxes. Venezuela had a similar situation to Venice…

Sorry to digress once more, When the Spanish arrived at Lake Maracaibo they found houses built on stilts near the lake shores, they were reminded of Venice so they called the place “Little Venice” Venezuela!

Back to taxes. When there was a national budget shortfall the government decided to tax the rich yachts and their crew and passenger. Yachts took their business to Chaguaramas Bay. The yacht maintenance industry, out of work, set up shop in Chaguaramas Bay. The professionals left. The tourists no longer came. Venezuela’s tourism and hospitality industries suffered. The government didn’t collect much in taxes.

But Trinidad was more than happy!

The Captain

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

Back in the late '60s a developer, architect, and fellow sailor was working on a giant tourist development next to Puerto la Cruz. I asked him, “Why Puerto la Cruz, why not Margarita?”

“Because Puerto la Cruz is the natural anchor of the Windward Islands.”

3 Likes

It would seem these two statements are in conflict. If the fee is to discourage tourism, but the fee is so trivial it won’t discourage tourism, then ???

Appears to be more of a cash grab than what they’re saying, no?

1 Like

And not even a great one. Venice could easily charge €20 or more and not see any diminution of its tourists.

Just a museum pass alone in Venice is multiples of €5:

Pete

3 Likes

NYC is doing the same. I believe the rate is higher in NYC.

1 Like

In the late 90s, virus pattern updates from Norton were free for the life of the program. Then a pattern update subscription was $4/year. Now, 25 years later, a one year pattern update subscription is $65 for a basic Norton a/v package. Anytime management wants to make more profit, they simply raise the subscription price. Why do you think automakers want to get in on the “subscription” gravy train, making you pay in perpetuity, to use features in the car you already paid for?

Steve

3 Likes

The authorities themselves say they need to collect experience with the fee and that the scheme will be reviewed. My best guess is that reconsideration will find that the deterrence effect was unfortunately not large enough, however the additional cash came in handy, so the conclusion will be inescapable. The best interest of Venice the historic site is probably not in the forefront of the TPTB’s mind - else, large cruise ships who did enormous damage to the historic buildings would have been banned from the centre decades ago, not a few years back, and only upon strong pressure by UNESCO…

Question in my mind is whether we’ll see a broader Disneylandisation of Europe as time marches on…

2 Likes

And in Quebec…

Once paid, tourists would receive a QR code to be scanned before departure or face a penalty of up to $1,000. The Magdalen Islands expects this could bring in a $1 million this year alone.

DB2

2 Likes

Venice isn’t fungible. There is only one St. Mark’s Basilica, one Rialto bridge, one Bridge of Sighs, one Doge’s Palace, one Fenice, one Campanile, and one Grand Canal. If you want to see those things, but want to avoid the €5 fee, you can’t to go Naples instead. €5 isn’t enough to be a deterrent. It is a cash grab.

I didn’t know that!

3 Likes

Even better; just google them - some great photography and interesting videos and often views that you wouldn’t get by being there. Of course, if you want to ‘experience’ them; walk in the footsteps of history, explore the alley ways and meet the locals; well then, 5 euros seems cheap.

JimA

3 Likes

Tendering ashore is a big pain and wastes a bunch of time. And, if the seas are rough, they simple cancel that port of call due to the heightened danger (and I suspect, not only danger, but they just don’t want the passengers exposed to rough seas on a small vessel such as a tender). Also, some large cruise ships use their own lifeboats as tenders, and dropping a lifeboat in rough seas isn’t particularly fun for anyone. I had a Cayman Islands port cancelled due to rough seas (didn’t look all that rough to me, but I’m not an expert).