This comment by Bianca is in response to the article Parliament revisits tourism dual pricing.
As a European who has lived in South Africa for many years, works in tourism and also organises trips to South Africa, I think the discussion about dual pricing needs to be handled very carefully.
One of the biggest mistakes would be to assume that all international visitors are just wealthy. Many Europeans are average earners who save carefully for a long-haul trip. Flights, car rental, accommodation, insurance, fuel, food, activities and entrance fees all add up quickly.
Of course, there are very wealthy visitors but they are not the entire international market. Those travelling business or first class and staying in high-end lodges or accommodation already move in a very different price segment. It would be wrong to design broad pricing assumptions around them and apply those assumptions to every overseas visitor.
To overlook the average European earner would be a serious mistake.
It is just as flawed as calling the Garden Route the best road trip in the world when only the driving conditions have been evaluated while other important parameters are ignored such as scenery, safety, signage, clean and working facilities, maintained viewpoints, transparent pricing, value for money, local experiences, accessibility, environmental care, service quality, bed nights generated and local spend along the route etc.
Differentiated pricing can be understood when it is fair, transparent and clearly linked to conservation, maintenance or improved infrastructure. But international visitors should not be treated as if they have unlimited money to spend.
South Africa is an incredible destination but it competes globally. If pricing feels excessive or unjustified, visitors will make different choices – they may visit fewer sites, skip certain attractions, shorten routes or choose other destinations.
