To the editor:
It is difficult to imagine what went through the minds of councillors as they recently heard testimony from tourism manager Paul Pepe.
He explained to council, somewhat cavalierly, how city administration anticipates the failure of existing hotels as additional ones come on stream.
Mr. Pepe is probably correct, but his honesty belies city administration’s longstanding refrain of the critical need for additional capacity.
This argument was integral to the taxpayer-funded $60-million hook at Prince Arthur’s Landing, and some contend the $100-million event centre, to lure a waterfront hotel.
Why does city administration foresee hotel failure? Though 10 per cent above the average of all Canadian hotels, Thunder Bay’s occupancy rate is actually comparable to other major urban markets.
As in those markets, it is more difficult to find rooms at peak, but this offsets poor capacity during tough periods.
This remarkable performance is due to Thunder Bay hoteliers’ aggressive pricing – a revenue cutting policy that gives them significant competitive advantage when bidding on cost sensitive sport and convention business.
In December, occupancy rates and revenue declined, something you didn’t see in either Toronto or central Ontario.
Thunder Bay’s robust occupancy rates and strong sport and convention business is attributed to cost cutting hoteliers. Our hotels are successful because they price themselves aggressively.
The rules of the game have changed. Now, our hoteliers must compete against vast new capacity, and a hotel advantaged in perpetuity by a taxpayer-subsidized event centre and park, amid what is looking more and more like a “rob Peter to pay Paul” planning policy.
The hotels on West Arthur are additionally challenged. Located near the junction of Arthur Street and the Thunder Bay Expressway, a once strategic entrance to the city, they find now that entrance has been eclipsed.
Two hotels are presently being constructed on the new route. A hotel more convenient to the airport is also considered. One of the Arthur Street hotels’ principal strategic assets, location, has largely been defeated.
Residents of the Fort William neighbourhood have reason to be concerned. They are sensitive to the withering of important arteries within the community. City of Thunder Bay planners blocked Syndicate and Victoria Avenues resulting in the failed vision of Victoriaville, and the subsequent blight of east Victoria Avenue. No city council has demonstrated the courage to resolve the problem. Anecdotally, we hear of city policy to keep, for convenience sake, troublemakers and window breakers isolated on that end of town so they can be monitored. This is the depth of despair our Fort William neighbours live with.
The new hotels in the shopping district are the normal response to the present highway configuration. It is hard to imagine a hotel being courted more aggressively than the one at the waterfront with the biggest credit card in the city – the city. Hoteliers can compete with honest competition, but they can’t compete with a rob Peter to pay Paul planning policy where administration pulls a jack from the back of the deck and says: “You lose again.” Enough.
William Olesky,
Thunder?Bay
