US Outbound Market Research

US Outbound Travel in 2016
Forecasts, Consumer Profiles, Spending Patterns and Key Segments

CONTENTS
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. The US Consumer in 2016: An Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.1 The US Economy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.1.1 Gross Domestic Product (GDP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.1.2 Unemployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.1.3 Interest and Exchange Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.2 The US Household . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.2.1 Consumer Confidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.2.2 Household Wealth and Discretionary Spending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2. What Kind of Americans Travel Abroad? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.1 Overview: International Travel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2 Market Sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3 How Many Americans Are Travelling Abroad? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.4 When and Where Do They Go? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.4.1 Key Travel Months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.4.2 Travel Destinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.5 American Travellers by Income and Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.5.1 Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.5.2 Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3. Key US Outbound Consumer Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.1 Group Y2 – Consuming on Credit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.1.1 Segment Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.1.2 Demographic and Income Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.1.3 Travel Behaviors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.2 Group F2 – Secure in Suburbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.3 Group M2 - Affluent Empty Nests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 2

3.4 Group Y1 – City Slickers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.5 Group F1 – Flush Families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.6 Group M1 – Golden Globetrotters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4. Marketing Effectively to US Outbound Travellers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.1 Technology Usage and Media Consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.1.1 Device Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.1.2 Media consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.1.3 Advertising Attitudes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4.1.4 Maximizing User Generated Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
4.2 Is Loyalty Dead? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
4.3 Ancillary Revenue Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.4 Combining the Data Picture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.4.1 Case Study: WESTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
5. The US Outbound Consumer Beyond 2016. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.1 A Trend for More Travel? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.1.1 Consumer Attitudes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5.1.2 Forecast Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
6. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
About IXI Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

LIST OF FIGURES
List of Figures
Figure 1: US Historical GDP Growth 2011-2015 and Forecast Range for 2016. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Figure 2: US Unemployment 2010 to May 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Figure 3: Trade Weighted U.S. Dollar Value Against Major Currencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Figure 4: US and OECD Consumer Confidence January 2014-May 2016. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Figure 5: University of Michigan Index of Consumer Sentiment January 2008-May 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Figure 6: US Median Household Income 1990-2014. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Figure 7: Wealth Map of the US . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Figure 8: US Median Household Estimated Income by Age of Head of Household . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Figure 9: Average Vacation Days Taken. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Figure 10: Valid Passports in Circulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Figure 11: US Outbound Journeys Year-over-Year Percentage Change Between 2009-2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Figure 12: Key International Travel Periods by Month (Percentage Share of Average from 2011-2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Figure 13: Market Share of US Outbound Travel by Region 2011-2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Figure 14: Change in US Outbound Journeys by Region, 2011-2015. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Figure 15: US Outbound Travel - Top 10 Countries Visited in Last Three Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Figure 16: Number of Journeys Outside the Contiguous United States in the Last Three Years by
Percentage of Income Group Taking Journeys. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Figure 17: Correlation of Income by IXI Economic Cohorts Segment to Outbound Travel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Figure 18: Average Number of Journeys Outside the Contiguous United States in the Last Three Years by
Percentage of Age Group Taking Journeys. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Figure 19: Average Length of International Journey, in Days, by Age Group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Figure 20: Propensity to Travel Outside the US Across IXI Economic Cohorts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Figure 20 Continued: Propensity to Travel Outside the US Across IXI Economic Cohorts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Figure 21: Top Destinations for Group Y2 – Consuming on Credit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Figure 22: Booking Lead Times for Key US Segments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Figure 23: Top Destinations for Group F2 – Secure in Suburbia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Figure 24: Top Destinations for Group M2 – Affluent Empty Nests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Figure 25: Top Destinations for Group Y1 – City Slickers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Figure 26: Top Destinations for Group F1 – Flush Families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Figure 27: Top Destinations in Last Three Years for Group M1 – Golden Globetrotters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Figure 28: US Device Ownership by Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Figure 29: US Device Ownership by Household Income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Figure 30: US Device Ownership by Educational Attainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Figure 31: Internet Access Through Smartphones Reported by Key US Outbound Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Figure 32: Percentage of Segment Reporting Non-use of Internet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

LIST OF FIGURES & TABLES
Figure 33: Media Trusted the Most – TV and Internet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Figure 34: Percentage of Segment Reporting Non-use of TV and Correlation with YouTube Viewing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Figure 35: Mobile Attitudes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Figure 36: Interest in Mobile Advertising. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Figure 37: Social Media Channels Accessed in the Last 30 Days. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Figure 38: Social Networking Attitudes and Interests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Figure 39: US Outbound Segments’ Propensity to Share and Connect with Brands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Figure 40: Agreed with statement: “When I learn about a great vacation, I typically recommend it to people
I know”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Figure 41: Influential Consumers amongst US Outbound Consumers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Figure 42: Membership of a Hotel Rewards Program Plotted Against Frequency of International Travel. . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Figure 43: Membership of a Frequent Flyer Program Plotted Against Frequency of International Travel. . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Figure 44: Percentage Change in Real Consumption Expenditures by Category 2011-2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
List of Tables
Table 1: US GDP Growth Forecasts 2016. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Table 3: US Outbound Journeys Made from 2008-2015. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Table 5: Summary Table of Key US Outbound Consumer Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Table 6: Vital Statistics for Group Y2 – Consuming on Credit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Table 7: Top Destinations in Last Three Years for Group Y2 – Consuming on Credit by Percentage of Segment
Travelling and Highest Indexing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Table 8: Vital Statistics for Group F2 – Secure in Suburbia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Table 9: Top Destinations for Group F2 – Secure in Suburbia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Table 10: Vital Statistics for Group M2 – Affluent Empty Nests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Table 11: Top Destinations for Group M2 – Affluent Empty Nests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Table 12: Vital Statistics for Group Y1 – City Slickers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Table 13: Top Destinations for Group Y1 – City Slickers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Table 14: Top Destinations for Group F1 – Flush Families. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Table 15: Vital Statistics for Group F1 – Flush Families. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Table 16: Top Destinations in Last Three Years for Group M1 – Golden Globetrotters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Table 17: Vital Statistics for Group M1 – Golden Globetrotters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Table 18: Popularity of Travel-Related Websites by SimilarWeb (US only) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Table 19: OTA and Metasearch Sites Advising US Travellers by Index Score. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Table 20: Mobile Attitudes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Table 21: Interest in Mobile Advertising. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Table 23: Social Networking Attitudes and Interests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Table 24: Table 24: Percentage Change in Real Consumption Expenditures by Category 2011-2014. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

INTRODUCTION
1
Introduction
The US economy is looking strong overall in 2016. GDP

growth looks solid if unspectacular, which will help
drive an already strong labor market, wage growth,
and discretionary spending levels. Although negative
sentiment crept into markets at the start of 2016, the US
should continue to be one of the stronger pieces in a
global economy that has lost momentum since 2015.
Critically, we are seeing a greater propensity for

outbound travel from US consumers, which looks
like it is becoming a noticeable trend. The number of
journeys outside the contiguous US has grown steadily
alongside a very strong upward trend in the number of
valid passports. In 2016, we are likely to see continued
strong growth as the dollar maintains purchasing power
against a number of major currencies, unemployment
remains low, US discretionary spending increases, and
international flights increase in supply and fall in price.
This white paper will address not only the overall

outlook for the US outbound consumer but analyze
the US outbound traveller at a detailed level. By joining
forces with IXITM Services, a division of Equifax®, which
has a vast amount of proprietary data offering insight
on more than 120 million US households, we will
be assessing the core groups of regular US outbound
consumers. This data allows us to drill down not only
into their travel behaviors but also into provides an
understanding of purchase history, location and lifestyle
habits. If you want to improve your customer identifica-
tion, relevancy and segmentation to reach frequent US
travellers then this is a business-critical white paper.

OVERVIEW
THE US CONSUMER IN 2016: AN
1
The US Consumer in 2016: An Overview
1.1 The US Economy of 1.4% Morgan Stanley was at the lower end of the
forecast scale (Morgan Stanley 2016). The World Bank
1.1.1 Gross Domestic Product (GDP) with an estimate of 2.8% was the highest (World Bank,
Since the Great Recession hit in 2008 the US economy 2016). This gives a consensus forecast of just over 2%
has been one of the fastest- growing developed econo- GDP growth in 2016. Overall, this would be a continua-
mies. On average, the US economy has grown 0.5% tion of annual growth rates over the last four years and
faster than the IMF’s grouping of advanced economies would see the US continue to outperform the majority
from 2011 to 2014 and it has broadly continued its of developed economies on current forecasts.
strong performance into 2015 (IMF, 2016). Although
there were some signs of weakness towards the end of Taking everything into account, opinion regarding
2015, 2016 is forecast to see continued growth. growth and economic stability has been more pessi-
mistic at the start of 2016 than in 2015, reflecting a
GDP growth in 2016 is expected to be solid, if unspec- higher risk environment. US business confidence survey
tacular. As detailed in Figure 1, with a growth estimate results have trended downwards throughout 2015 and
Figure 1: US Historical GDP Growth 2011-2015 and Forecast Range for 2016
3%
2.50%
2%
1.50%
1%
0.50%
0%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 (F)
Sources: IMF, 2016; Barclays, 2016; Deutsche Bank, 2016; EIU, 2016; Morgan Stanley 2016; World Bank 2016; OECD 2016a
Note: Bottom forecast is Morgan Stanley (1.4%), middle (most likely) forecast (2.24%) is an average of the forecasts in Table 1, top forecast is World
Bank (2.8%)

The Transcreation Process
Table 1: US GDP Growth Forecasts 2016
Economist
Deutsche Morgan World
Barclays Intelligence IMF OECD Average
Bank Stanley Bank
Unit
1.90% 2.40% 1.40% 2% 2.70% 2.80% 2.50% 2.24%
Sources: IMF, 2016; Barclays, 2016; Deutsche Bank, 2016; EIU, 2016; Morgan Stanley, 2016; World Bank, 2016; OECD, 2016
Figure 2: US Unemployment 2010 to May 2016
11%
10%
9%
8%
7%
6%
5%
4%
Oct-11
Oct-14
Jul-11
Jul-14
Apr-11
Apr-14
Jan-11
Jan-14
Jul-12
Jul-13
Jul-15
Jul-10
Oct-12
Oct-13
Oct-15
Oct-10
Apr-12
Apr-13
Apr-15
Apr-16
Apr-10
Jan-12
Jan-13
Jan-15
Jan-16
Jan-10
Source: United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016a
have shown little sign of improvement as of early 2016. tighter labor market, which will help drive wage growth
There are global risks emanating from Chinese debt and and therefore discretionary spending rates.
Eurozone stability issues, as well as domestic risk from
the forthcoming presidential election. However, the US 1.1.3 Interest and Exchange Rates
should continue on a path of growth throughout the The US has experienced an historically unprecedented
year, helping to increase US discretionary spending and period of low interest rates. After the recession,
outbound travel. rates were held within a range of 0% to 0.25%. Huge
anticipation preceded the US Federal Reserve decision
1.1.2 Unemployment to increase rates, which was consistently put off until
The US is currently enjoying the best jobs creation December 2015. Rates were increased by 0.25% to a
record of the last two decades. This has driven base rate of 0.25-0.5%. This did not appear to affect the
unemployment down. It has fallen from a high of 10% US economy negatively and in fact signalled confidence
in late 2009 to a current level of 4.7% (see Figure 2; from the Federal Reserve in the US economy’s health.
United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016a.) This It also led to a peak in the value of the dollar against a
level is beginning to approach some of the strongest basket of major currencies (see Figure 3).
periods of US economic performance in recent years,
with unemployment falling to levels slightly above The issue of further rate rises has become the subject of
those seen at the turn of the Millennium and the considerable conjecture. In 2015 the expectation was of
pre-recession period. The ultimate effect of this will multiple and consistent rises but confidence has been
likely be highly positive for outbound travel. Not only hit by volatility in the global economy. Nonetheless, the
does employment at the current level mean a higher Federal Reserve can take heart from the low unemploy-
number of potential travel consumers, but it creates a ment rates and growing paychecks in the US. The

OVERVIEW
Figure 3: Trade Weighted U.S. Dollar Value Against Major Currencies
100
95
90
85
80
75
2014-06-06
2014-07-06
2014-08-06
2014-09-06
2014-10-06
2014-11-06
2014-12-06
2015-01-06
2015-02-06
2015-03-06
2015-04-06
2015-05-06
2015-06-06
2015-07-06
2015-08-06
2015-09-06
2015-10-06
2015-11-06
2015-12-06
2016-01-06
2016-02-06
2016-03-06
Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis, 2016
Figure 4: US and OECD Consumer Confidence January 2014-May 2016
101.5
101
100.5
100
99.5
99
98.5
n OECD Average Consumer Confidence n US Consumer Confidence
98
2014-01
2014-11
2015-01
2015-11
2016-01
2014-03
2014-05
2014-07
2014-09
2015-03
2015-05
2015-07
2015-09
2016-03
2016-05
Source: OECD, 2016b

OVERVIEW
Figure 5: University of Michigan Index of Consumer Sentiment January 2008-May 2016
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
01/01/11
01/05/11
01/09/11
01/01/14
01/05/14
01/09/14
01/01/08
01/05/08
01/09/08
01/01/09
01/05/09
01/09/09
01/01/10
01/05/10
01/09/10
01/01/12
01/05/12
01/09/12
01/01/13
01/05/13
01/09/13
01/01/15
01/05/15
01/09/15
01/01/16
01/05/16
Source: University of Michigan, 2016
question is whether it can temper some of the caution average and above all points from the recession in 2008
it has shown thus far regarding the global economy until November 2014.
and push ahead. It would perhaps be beneficial for the
Federal Reserve to raise rates in order to give itself more This trend is supported by the University of Michigan
room to maneuver in the event of another downturn. Index of Consumer Sentiment. It saw a big uptick in the
May 2016 figures, which brings the index to just shy of
Increasing interest rates are important to the travel the highest points in 2015 and reverses the losses seen
industry not only for credit purposes but also for thus far in 2016. We can therefore expect a relatively
exchange rates. Expectations of an increase in interest robust consumer outlook in the near-term, which is
rates and the eventual act of raising them tend to critical to travel and leisure spending. Higher consumer
increase the value of a currency. As seen in Figure 3, the confidence indicates growth in personal consumption
dollar has fallen since a high point at the start of the expenditures. It is also worth noting that household
year as expectations of a rate increase have receded. spending is also the primary driver for current US
However, this decline should not go much further and economic growth.
the dollar should retain purchasing power. Weaknesses
remain in Britain, China, the Eurozone and Japan – and 1.2.2 Household Wealth and Discretionary
all three are experiencing weakening, or looking to Spending
weaken, their currencies in the remainder of 2016. US In real terms, US households have faced an extended
payroll data has continued to be strong, inflation is period of stagnating incomes. Major declines followed
rising and this is driving expectations of another rate 2007 as the recession broke and have yet to recover.
rise in the middle of this year. Indeed, US household income peaked in 1999 at just
under USD58,000 in 2014-dollar value terms. In 2014,
income stood at USD53,657 per household (Federal
1.2 The US Household Reserve Bank of St Louis, 2016). Although this represents
2% growth from the post-recession trough of 2012, it
1.2.1 Consumer Confidence does not present the strongest picture for the health
According to data from the Organization for Economic of the average US household and its growth in the
Co-operation and Development (OECD), US consumer near-term.
confidence has fallen from a high point in late
2014-early 2015 but it still remains within positive Furthermore, it is higher income groupings that have
territory, indicating growth in consumer spending. experienced the largest increases in both real and
Indeed, it continues to be higher than the OECD nominal income since 2008. According to the US

OVERVIEW
Figure 6: US Median Household Income 1990-2014
60000
58000
56000
54000
52000
50000
48000
n US median household income (USD)
46000
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis, 2016
Note: Dollar values in 2014 CPI-U-RS Adjusted Dollars
Figure 7: Wealth Map of the US
Average Total Assets

Data Vintage: June 2015
n Greater than $170k
n $120k to $170k
n $90k to $120k
n $60k to $90k
n Less than $60k
Source: WealthComplete, IXI Services, 2016

OVERVIEW
Census Bureau, income among the top fifth of US
households rose by 3.5% and the fifth below that
rose by 3.8% from 2012 to 2014 (United States Census
Bureau, 2016a). Similarly, it is only the very top fifth that
is close to surpassing the highest income point in real
terms, which occurred at the turn of the Millennium.
Fortunately, for the outbound travel picture, there is an
extremely strong correlation between higher income
brackets and outbound travel (see Section 2.5.1).
Overall this wealth tends to skew towards the

Generation X and the Baby Boomer generation. Those
in working years (ages 35 to 54) have the highest
estimated household income according to data from IXI
Services. Households where the head of the household
is aged 55 to 64 are the second highest, followed by
retirees (over 65s) and those under 35 at the bottom.
This pattern is also generally reflected in terms of
estimated disposable income.
Figure 8: US Median Household Estimated Income by Age of Head of Household
USD 120,000
USD 100,000
USD 80,000
USD 60,000
USD 40,000
USD 20,000
USD 0-
Young (Under 35) Working Years Pre-Retirement Retired (65+)
(35-54) (55-64)
Source: 2016 IXI Economic Cohorts / GfK MRI (2015 Doublebase Survey of the American Consumer)
Note: Median household income derived from IXI data are higher than US government data as it includes a variety of additional assets

ABROAD?
WHAT KIND OF AMERICANS TRAVEL
2
What Kind of Americans Travel Abroad?
■■ More likely to be married than the average US

2.1 Overview: International Travel
population
The typical profile of the US outbound traveller is: ■■ More likely to be employed in a full-time job, with
a higher-than-average rate of employment in
■■ Likely to be in older age brackets and most likely
management positions and professional services
above 40 years old
■■ More likely to have a bachelor’s degree or higher
■■ Much more likely to be a homeowner than the
US average ■■ Most likely to travel as a couple, and after that as
a nuclear family
■■ Have a significantly higher-than-average
median household income and therefore also a ■■ Most likely to take an international journey of 1
higher-than-average disposable income week or less (including business trips)
■■ Will probably live in a major metro area (Source: 2016 IXI Economic Cohorts / GfK MRI (2015 Doublebase
Survey of the American Consumer)
2.2 Market Sizing 2.3 How Many Americans Are Travelling

Abroad?
Using US government and IXI Services data, EyeforTravel
estimates that the total overall US outbound travel Americans are generally known for relatively low levels
market in 2015 was worth between USD200 billion of foreign travel. In comparison to other countries,
and USD210 billion. Of this, EyeforTravel estimates that: international travel remains quite low despite their high
disposable incomes and a developed economy based
■■ The majority of this spending was put towards
on consumer spending. However, the United States is
vacations – approximately 52%.
a large country with a large population and therefore
■■ Vacation spending was worth between USD105 high rates of domestic travel.
billion and USD110 billion in 2015.
KEY FIGURE: 23.3% - Percentage of
■■ USD55 billion to USD60 billion was spent on
US Households That Have Travelled
lodging and trip spending.
Internationally in the Last Three Years
■■ An estimated USD50 billion was spent on
international flights for leisure purposes. Source: 2016 IXI Economic Cohorts / GfK MRI (2015 Doublebase Survey
of the American Consumer)
Sources: ITA National Travel & Tourism Office, 2016; ITA National Travel
& Tourism Office, 2015; United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2015; Note: Total international travel for the US population and the
IXI Services, 2016 subsequent consumer groups is defined as outside the contiguous
United States and therefore includes Alaska and Hawaii.

ABROAD?
According to IXI Services and the GfK MRI Survey of the journeys both financially and legally (see Chapter 5).
American Consumer, just under a quarter of Americans In terms of the latter, the number of Americans with
have made a journey outside the contiguous US in passports has risen dramatically and consistently over
the last three years. This compares unfavourably with the entire period of available data. The number of valid
numerous other developed economies where inter- passports held now totals 126 million, which represents
national travel is much more prevalent. In the UK, the approximately 39% of the total US population in 2015
Association of British Travel Agents (ABTA) reported that (see Figure 10). This is equivalent to a 1600% increase
the average UK family takes 1.5 journeys outside the UK since 1989 (US Department of State, 2016).
per year (ABTA, 2015).
The growing number of passports issued in recent
Aside from the enormous variety of destinations within years may indicate a greater interest in international
the US and the necessity of long-haul flights to reach travel, but there is also further evidence of an increased
most other countries, part of the reason behind this is appetite to go abroad. According to the ITA National
the cultural and working environment. The US is the Travel & Tourism Office (NTTO), in 2014 a record
only OECD country not to have statutory paid vacation. number of external journeys was made by US citizens
In comparison, the vast majority of developed econo- and 2015 repeated this, setting a record once again.
mies offers more than 20 days of paid vacation per year. It would also appear that outbound travel growth is
Not only this but Americans tend to be notoriously increasing in recent years, although it is dependent on
poor at taking their vacation days. Study after study has economic performance and not yet sustained enough
found that Americans’ already meagre vacation allow- to definitively call this a long-term trend. In 2014, there
ances are rarely taken in full. A recent study by Expedia was a Year-over-Year (YoY) increase of 10.2% in the
found that the US ranked near the bottom across all number of journeys taken. This has been followed by
categories. Not only did the US have one of the lowest an approximately 7.6% increase in 2015 from 68.2 to
rates of offered vacation, but Americans chose not to 73.5 million international journeys (ITA National Travel &
take four of these days, leaving them well below other Tourism Office, 2016).
countries (Expedia, 2015).
Given that just under a quarter of Americans have
However, are we in the midst of a fundamental change? made journeys outside the contiguous US in the last
US outbound travel appears to be on a long-term three years and bearing in mind the current American
growth trend, with consumers more interested in
international destinations and more able to make these
Figure 9: Average Vacation Days Taken
35
n Vacation Days Taken n Vacation Days Offered
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
USA
South Korea
Malaysia
Thailand
Japan
Mexico
Singapore
Canada
Hong Kong
India
New Zealand
Australia
Ireland
Netherlands
Austria
Italy
Norway
Sweden
UK
Denmark
Brazil
Finland
France
Germany
Spain
UAE
Source: Expedia, 2015

Note: Where days taken and offered are the same, this indicates that all days offered were taken on average

ABROAD?
Figure 10: Valid Passports in Circulation
140,000,000
120,000,000
100,000,000
80,000,000
60,000,000
40,000,000
20,000,000
0
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Source: US Department of State, 2016
Figure 11: US Outbound Journeys Year-over-Year Percentage Change Between 2009-2015
12%
n YoY Percentage change
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
-2%
-4%
-6%
Source: ITA National Travel & Tourism Office, 2016

ABROAD?
Table 3: US Outbound Journeys Made from 2008-2015
Year Outbound departures (millions) YoY Percentage change
2008 63.6
2009 61.5 -3.3%
2010 60.3 -2.0%
2011 58.7 -2.7%
2012 60.7 3.4%
2013 61.9 2.0%
2014 68.2 10.2%
2015 73.5 7.7%
tendency to work hard at the expense of play, there is 2.4 When and Where Do They Go?
clearly still a great deal of untapped potential growth
for this market. 2.4.1 Key Travel Months
US international travel peaks strongly over the summer
We should see more of this potential materialize months, reaching its highest point in July. This month
throughout 2016. As mentioned in Chapter 1, the sees 75% more outbound journeys than the lowest
US economic conditions appear solid and the dollar month, February. Additional seasonal peaks can be
should retain strength. US consumers are becoming seen in March and December, which can be attributed
more inclined to international travel, even though to spring break and the holidays, encompassing
median income growth remains somewhat sluggish. Thanksgiving and Christmas (ITA National Travel &
Furthermore, a greater number of companies are Tourism Office, 2016). It would appear from this that
recognizing the importance of employee leave and Americans continue to travel in a structured and highly
hopefully this should go some way to rectifying the seasonal manner, which makes it easier for the travel
American stigma of taking vacation time. For more on industry to market to, and plan for, the US outbound
the future of the US consumer see Chapter 5. consumer.
Figure 12: Key International Travel Periods by Month (Percentage Share of Average from 2011-2015)
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

ABROAD?
Figure 13: Market Share of US Outbound Travel by Region 2011-2015
Canada Europe
18.3% 18.0%
Caribbean
10.5%
Asia
Mexico 6.9%
35.8% South America
2.7%
Central America
Oceania 3.9%
Africa Middle East 0.9%
0.6% 2.6%
Figure 14: Change in US Outbound Journeys by Region, 2011-2015
30,000,000
n Europe n Caribbean n Asia n South America n Central America
n Oceania n Middle East n Africa n Mexico n Canada
25,000,000
20,000,000
15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000
0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

ABROAD?
2.4.2 Travel Destinations (2016 IXI Economic Cohorts / GfK MRI (2015 Doublebase
Unsurprisingly, Mexico features heavily in US outbound Survey of the American Consumer). This appears to
travel. This trend is considerable and appears to be suggest that proximity and familiarity remain key for
growing. Since 2011, Mexico has accounted for 35% of US travellers when they are choosing their destination,
outbound journeys, which is nearly twice the amount alongside the perennial desire to head to destinations
of the next nearest competitor, Canada. Indeed, Europe with good weather.
as a whole accounts for just 18% and the Caribbean
follows with 10%. Since 2011, the number of Mexican It remains to be seen what effect terrorism might have
journeys has grown by just over 40%, second only to on US interests in travelling to Europe. There is limited
the Middle East, where travel has grown by 52% across evidence of a negative follow-on effect from recent
the period (ITA National Travel & Tourism Office, 2016). attacks but these should be relatively minor, with
pricing and availability factors being more important.
This data is supported by consumer surveys. Mexico One winner may be the UK, which may be perceived as
and Canada come out on top in terms of number of a somewhat safer destination than France and be able
visits, followed by Caribbean and European destinations to make some gains in market share, particularly now
in IXI’s data. Among the top 10 destinations measured with the collapse in the value of the pound.
by IXI, there are four Caribbean destinations, and seven
amongst the top 20 (including Puerto Rico). Traditional
Western European destinations continue to dominate
amongst European countries, with France coming top
Figure 15: US Outbound Travel - Top 10 Countries Visited in Last Three Years
5%
4.5%
4%
3.5%
3%
2.5%
2%
1.5%
1%
0.5%
0%
a
a
ce
ic
ico
y
ly
d
as
ds
d
aic
an
an
bl
Ita
an
na
m
an
ex
pu
rm
m
gl
ha
Fr
Ca
Isl
M
Ja
En
Re
Ge
Ba
an
n
be
ica
rib
in
m
Ca
Do
r
he
Ot

ABROAD?
2.5 American Travellers by Income and This relationship between wealth and foreign travel
Age is expressed in Figure 17. The graph takes household
segments from IXI’s Economic Cohorts syndicated
2.5.1 Income segmentation data and plots their median estimated
Median household income is the clearest marker for household income against their incidence of foreign
predicting the frequency of outbound travel. There is travel in the last three years. There is a clear relationship
a direct relationship between increasing household between income and international travel, with the
income and the frequency of travel as can be seen in higher income groupings disproportionately travelling
Figures 16 and 17. abroad. This appears to have an exponential function,
as demonstrated by the trend line, with growth in
In Figure 16, we can see that households defined outbound travel accelerating as income accrues.
as having an ‘Elite’ income (more than estimated
USD200,000) are more likely to have taken an outbound 2.5.2 Age
journey in the last three years by a considerable margin In terms of segmentation by age group, the relationship
than all groups of a lower income. Those in the top is far less clear, although there is further positive news
income bracket are nearly four times more likely to have for the travel industry. Once again, we can see that the
taken a journey outside the US compared to those at primary groups for outbound travel are the middle
the bottom, with nearly 50% of ‘Elite’ income house- age groups still in their working years or Baby Boomers
holds taking a journey outside the US in the last three who may be coming to the end of their careers. This is
years. Furthermore, they are more likely to have taken reflective of the wealth distribution in the US, with these
multiple trips, with the ratio of difference between the age groups the wealthiest on average, having reached
different income groups increasing for every additional peak earning potential and benefited from a variety of
journey up to four or more trips (2016 IXI Economic advantages in their working lives, such as high educa-
Cohorts / GfK MRI (2015 Doublebase Survey of the tional attainment and substantial investment portfolios.
American Consumer).
Figure 16: Number of Journeys Outside the Contiguous United States in the Last Three Years by Percentage of Income
Group Taking Journeys
25%
n Low (Under $50k) n Moderate ($50k - $100k) n High ($100k - $200k) n Elite ($200k+)
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
1 2 3 4 5+
Number of Journeys

ABROAD?
Figure 17: Correlation of Income by IXI Economic Cohorts Segment to Outbound Travel
600
Higher income,
high foreign travel
HIGH
500
400
Median Income (IXI)
300
Moderate income,
200 high foreign travel
Lower income,
low foreign travel
LOW
100
Size of bubble = size of international travel market by segment

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
LOW Travel taken outside US in past three years HIGH
Note: Y- and x-axis scales are based on a relative index score
The good news for travel is the strength of Millennials This bodes well as it suggests that Millennials are
within this market despite lower household income and engaged with travel and interested in heading to inter-
wealth levels. We can see that those aged under 35 have national destinations to a greater degree than previous
a remarkably strong performance in both the number generations. What is holding them back is their current
of journeys and length of journey. In the number of limited earning power. In terms of the overall number
journeys taken in the last three years, Millennials have of journeys taken abroad in the last three years, they
the highest percentage of respondents who have taken are still travelling at rates similar to, or above, older age
one journey in the last three years, and second highest groups. As they come into their prime earning years it is
in those undertaking four journeys. They also rate highly likely that they will increase their quantity and length of
in terms of length of journey, leading in the categories journeys (for more see Chapter 5).
one to two day trips and those over 30 days, while also
coming second for three to seven day visits.

ABROAD?
Figure 18: Average Number of Journeys Outside the Contiguous United States in the Last Three Years by Percentage of
Age Group Taking Journeys
16%
n Young (Under 35) n Working Years (35-54) n Pre-Retirement (55-64) n Retired (65+)
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
1 2 3 4 5+
Number of Journeys
Figure 19: Average Length of International Journey, in Days, by Age Group
16%
n Young (Under 35) n Working Years (35-54) n Pre-Retirement (55-64) n Retired (65+)
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
1 to 2 days 3 to 7 days 8 to 14 days 30+ days

SEGMENTS
KEY US OUTBOUND CONSUMER
3
Key US Outbound Consumer Segments
The broader trends we have explored thus far give These core groupings can then provide a more rounded
an overview of the US outbound consumer in 2016. picture of the different types of US international travel-
However, marketers need to be able to identify and ling consumers in 2016. In this chapter we will focus
address consumers at a much more specific level in the on demographic, income and location information for
digital age. IXI Services and EyeforTravel have therefore these groups alongside their travel preferences. It is this
worked together to create and analyze core groupings data we have used to group consumers together into
of US travellers that vacation abroad at, or above, the these segments.
average.
They are presented from the group that travels with
The groups are drawn from the 71 segments in IXI’s lesser frequency to destinations outside the contiguous
Economic Cohorts household types which have been US to the most frequent segment of travellers. This is
appended to the GfK MRI Doublebase Survey of the derived from the percentage of the segment that has
American Consumer. The segments are created using reported foreign travel in the last three years.
a variety of consumer demographic and economic
data to organize and classify all US consumers. When IXI Services also classifies its segments through indexing
appended to the GfK MRI survey, the marketer can to more accurately represent their behaviors. This is done
analyze incidence or usage rates by segment. One part by taking the category in question and comparing it
of this is foreign travel, which is shown across all the to the US average. An index score above 100 indicates
Economic Cohorts segments in Figure 20. The bar chart that the group engages more than the US average. For
shows a wide variance for international travel in the past example, 4.7% of all respondents have visited Mexico
three years from a low of only 7% in segment D18 to a in the past 3 years. However, 8.4% (Percent) of F1: Flush
high of 57% in segment P71 as compared to the overall Families had done so, a rate that is 1.77 (Index) times
average of 24% for all survey respondents. greater than the national norm, producing a score of 177.
As you might imagine, 71 segments may be too many

for most target marketing purposes but the segments
can then be grouped together into target or ‘treatment’
groups based on their performance (i.e., index for
international travel) as well as their market size and
demographic ‘fit’ with one another. Using this approach,
IXI Services and EyeforTravel crafted eight treatment
groups — three with very high propensity for inter-
national travel, three that are nearer the average, and
two ‘off-target’ groups that are well-below average and
therefore not explored further as part of the paper (see
Table 5 for a summary).

SEGMENTS
Figure 20: Propensity to Travel Outside the US Across IXI Economic Cohorts
N67 Executive Spenders: Suburban Couples

N66 Executive Spenders: Suburban Families
J53 Suburban Success: Upscale Families
I47 Material World: Urban Families
J51 Prudent Professionals: Suburban Families
I45 Confident Futures: Young City Families
F32 Suburban Stability: Families
J49 House of Cards: Suburban Families
K56 Planners and Savers: Suburban Families
E26 Getting Ahead: Young City Families
F30 Credit Rules: Urban Families
I43 Charge-It Champs: Young Suburban Families
P71 Diamonds and Pearls: Wealthiest Retirees
P70 Flush Funds: Wealthy Urban Seniors
O69 Champagne Tastes: Executive Empty Nests
O68 Corner Offices: Executive Urbanites
K59 Country Club Climbers: Suburban Empty Nests
L63 Established Wealth: Suburban Retirees
K58 Planners and Savers: City Couples
L61 Rewarding Retirement: Affluent Suburbanites
K55 Living for Today: Couples
L60 Comfortable with Credit: Upscale Retirees
K57 Planners and Savers: Small Town Couples
H42 Comfortable Retirement: Suburban Couples
G38 Solid Foundation: Suburban Empty Nests
L62 Affluent Elders: Older Upscale Suburbanites
M64 Big Shots: Young Upmarket Urbanites
N65 Careers First: Urbanites
I48 Material World: Urban Singles
J54 Suburban Success: Upscale Singles and Couples
I46 Confident Futures: Young City Singles
E27 Getting Ahead: Young City Singles
J52 Prudent Professionals: Suburban Singles and Couples
I44 Charge-It Champs: Young Suburban Singles and Couples
E23 Credit City: Young Singles
F33 Suburban Stability: Singles and Couples
n Flush Families
J50 House of Cards: Suburban Singles and Couples n Secure in Suburbia
F31 Credit Rules: Urban Singles n Golden Globetrotters
E22 Credit City: Young Families n Affluent Empty Nests
E25 Midscale Mainstream: Small-Town Singles and Couples n City Slickers
A06 Living on Loans: Young Urban Singles n Consuming on Credit
n Developmental
H39 Retired on Credit: City Singles and Couples
n Off-target
A04 Starting Small: Small-Town Singles
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200

SEGMENTS
Figure 20 Continued: Propensity to Travel Outside the US Across IXI Economic Cohorts
G35 Striving for Balance: Urban Pre-Retirement Singles

D21 Modest Means: Urban Retirees
G37 Conservative Consumers: Suburban Families
G34 Committed to Credit: Small-Town Couples
H41 Nest Egg Elders: Older Retirees
G36 Conservative Consumers: Small-Town Empty Nests
H40 Safety Net Seniors: Small-Town Retired Couples
C14 Burdened by Debt: Singles
C15 Sensible Spenders: Families
B12 Credit Crunched: City Singles
B11 Credit Crunched: City Families
B08 Mid-Life Strugglers: Singles
B09 Getting By: Small-Town Families
F29 Living Simply: Small-Town Singles and Couples
F28 Living Simply: Small-Town Families
C17 Sensible Spenders: Urban Pre-Retirement Singles
E24 Midscale Mainstream: Small-Town Families
C16 Sensible Spenders: Small-Town Empty Nests
D19 Rough Retirement: Small-Town and Rural Seniors
A02 Tough Start: Young Singles
A05 Living on Loans: Young Urban Single Parents
A01 Tough Start: Young Single Parents n Flush Families
n Secure in Suburbia
B07 Mid-Life Strugglers: Families
n Golden Globetrotters
A03 Starting Small: Small-Town Families n Affluent Empty Nests
C13 Retiring on Empty: Singles n City Slickers
B10 Getting By: Small-Town Singles and Couples n Consuming on Credit
D20 Struggling Elders: Singles n Developmental
D18 Relying On Aid: Retired Singles n Off-target
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200

SEGMENTS
Table 5: Summary Table of Key US Outbound Consumer Groups
Age ranges and Percentage of household living with children aged 0-17
Number Discretionary Home

Int’l Travel
Treatment of spending as a ownership
taken in last 3 Lifestage Affluence & Income
Group segments percentage of (percentage
years
in group income of group)
(M=Mature, Percen Index Age ranges Percentage Income range Median
F=Family, tage of of house- income
Y=Young) group holds
living with
children
aged 0-17
M1 Golden 7 40.2% 172 Pre-Retirement 6% Elite ($200k+), $187,547 59% 92%
Globetrotters (55-64), Retired High ($100k
(65+) - $200k)
M2 Affluent 7 26.8% 115 Retired (65+), 2% High ($100k $108,954 41% 85%
Empty Nests Pre-Retirement - $200k),
(55-64) Moderate
($50k - $100k)
F1 Flush 5 39.0% 167 Working Years 99% High ($100k $182,723 55% 91%
Families (35-54), Young - $200k), Elite
(Under 35) ($200k+)
F2 Secure in 7 27.4% 118 Working Years 100% High ($100k $99,966 45% 80%
Suburbia (35-54), Young - $200k),
(Under 35) Moderate
($50k - $100k)
Y1 City 8 39.0% 167 Young (Under 2% High ($100k $143,547 56% 67%
Slickers 35), Working - $200k), Elite
Years (35-54) ($200k+)
Y2 7 24.7% 106 Young (Under 15% Moderate $75,903 48% 51%
Consuming 35), Working ($50k - $100k),
on Credit Years (35-54) High ($100k
- $200k)
Z1 Develop 13 15.4% 66 Mixed Mixed Moderate n/a n/a n/a
mental ($50k - $100k),
Low (Under
$50k)
ZZ Off Target 17 12.8% 55 Mixed Mixed Low (Under n/a n/a n/a
$50k),
Moderate
($50k - $100k)
Total for IXI 71 23.3% 100
Economic
Cohorts

SEGMENTS
3.1 Group Y2 – Consuming on Credit spending are higher than the median for the US as
a whole. Indeed, just under half (48%) of their total
3.1.1 Segment Overview income is available for discretionary spending, which
Among the six ‘on-target’ groups, this group is lower in is a high rate among the segments considered in this
terms of estimated household income and propensity white paper coming second only to the wealthiest
to travel abroad, although still above the US average. segment.
They are young, largely unmarried and without children.
As the name suggests they tend to have a high credit Notably, this segment has a low rate of home owner-
utilization rate. Indeed, it is the highest among the ship, which has a high correlation with overall income
groups we are examining and singles them out. They and wealth. This is indicative of it being a young
have the lowest rate of passport ownership among our segment and one that, in general, is yet to marry and/
key groups and unsurprisingly, take quite a low number or have children. They are the most likely to be living
of international trips and are relatively low spenders outside the United States’ major metro centers and
when compared to our other core groups. in smaller towns of all the frequent traveller groups
studied.
24.9% - Percentage of Consuming on Credit
households that have travelled outside the As noted in the name, Consuming on Credit travelers
contiguous US in the last three years have high credit usage, which helps to boost spending
above their incomes and puts them above the average
3.1.2 Demographic and Income Data in terms of outbound travel. It is also indicative of their
Consuming on Credit has the lowest wealth among spending habits. This group appears more prone to
the core groups we are examining in this white paper. impulsive buying which presents important advertising
Nonetheless, household income and discretionary opportunities.
Table 6: Vital Statistics for Group Y2 – Consuming on Credit
Demographic data Income and wealth data

Predominant age (largest % of Age 20-34 (52%) Predominant income (largest % of $35k-$100k (54%)
population): households):
Defining generation (largest % of 60% Millennials Median household income: $75,900
population): Age 18+
(b.1977-1996)
Percent of households living 15% Median discretionary spending per $36,170
with children aged 0-17 household:
(US average - 35%):
Percentage of households 35% Percentage of home ownership 48%
living as married couples (US average 64%):
(US average - 48%):
Household size (largest % of 1-2 (72%) Predominant home value (largest $75k-$250k+
households) % of Households): (33%)
Percent living in major metros (top 47% Predominant Net Worth (largest % $0k-$150k (55%)
25 CBSAs, 40% of US population): of households):
Percent living in small city 11% Employment rate of respondents 79%
(micropolitan CBSAs, 17% of US (US average 58%):
population):

SEGMENTS
Figure 21: Top Destinations for Group Y2 – Consuming on Credit
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
Mexico
Bahamas
Other Caribbean Islands
Canada
Jamaica
Dominican Republic
France
England
Central America
Cayman Islands
3.1.3 Travel Behaviors Consuming on Credit travellers have plenty of ambition

Table 7: Top Destinations in Last Three Years for Group when it comes to travel destinations, but they are
Y2 – Consuming on Credit by Percentage of Segment restricted by their income levels. Despite reporting
Travelling and Highest Indexing Countries relatively high intentions to travel to destinations
outside the contiguous United States, they rank towards
Mexico 5.8% the bottom in the groups created for international trips
taken. This is not just in the number of journeys taken
Bahamas 2.5% in the last three years but in destinations. For example,
17% said that travelling to Europe in the next 12 months
was somewhat or very likely – the second highest of all
Other Caribbean Islands 2.4%
groups. In reality, both in terms of their index scores and
the proportion travelling, European destinations index
Canada 2.3%
lower compared to easier to reach countries in the
Caribbean, and Mexico in particular.
Jamaica 2.0%
Furthermore, they were the most likely to agree that
Dominican Republic 2.0% when they find a destination they like, they will go back
to it as often as possible (72.8%). Remember, this is a
France 1.7% younger traveling group, so trips to Mexico and the
warmer climes south of the US are far more aligned
England 1.6% with the typical travel propensity.
Central America 1.4% Although there is a degree of repeat behavior, one

of the key buying habits that should be noted in this
Cayman Islands 1.3% group is their impulsivity. They are less likely to research
their vacation extensively and more likely to make a
Source: 2016 IXI Economic Cohorts / GfK MRI (2015 Doublebase Survey purchase based on a desire or feeling. This leads them
of the American Consumer) to a clearly-identifiable outlook and set of behaviors.

SEGMENTS
Figure 22: Booking Lead Times for Key US Segments
n 1 week or less before traveling n Less than 3 months, but more than 1 week before traveling
n 3-6 months before traveling n More than 6 months before traveling
Y2: Consuming on Credit
M2: Affluent Empty Nests
F2: Secure in Suburbia
M1: Golden Globetrotters
Y1: City Slickers
F1: Flush Families
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Consuming on Credit members book later than other valuable than the US average and located in the
segments, particularly for last minute bookings. Of suburbs. However, they remain very price-conscious
those who reported their lead times, 5.3% booked their and tend towards less adventurous vacation behaviors.
trip with a week or less to go (see Figure 22). When This segment can be reached online and is responsive
they are making these bookings, they are not detail or to price-oriented marketing.
research-oriented. They do not rank particularly highly
for travel research, and they had the highest percentage 27% - Percentage of Secure in Suburbia
agreeing with the statement “packaged deals are great, households that have travelled outside the
because I don’t have to plan out the details too much” contiguous US in the last three years
(68.1%). They are aware of their pattern and have the
highest proportion agreeing that they tend to make 3.2.2 Demographic and Income Data
impulse purchases (44.7%). This type of behavior leads While this group is not the wealthiest, they manage
them to have the highest proportion who could be their finances carefully and they tend to have a secure
classified as “Swayable Shopaholics” (34.4%). As they are lifestyle. Three quarters of this group are married and all
also open to digital advertising (see Chapter 4), they live as families with their children. Secure in Suburbia
are, therefore, a great segment to reach with time-and households are the least likely to live in a major metro
context-sensitive advertising. area out of our groups, with a third choosing the
traditional American family retreat of exurbia (suburbs
As noted before, this segment has the lowest median beyond the suburbs) and small towns. Aside from our
income and is constrained by this. They are the least two older groups, with their high proportions of retirees,
likely to want to pay more for high-quality items (36.9% this group has the lowest rate of employment, with
disagreed with the idea of paying more for a quality nearly a quarter of household members not working.
item). Therefore, travel brands should orient advertising This is likely to be reflective of the burden of childcare,
around enticing offers, particularly strong packaged and lessens their potential disposable income.
offers in destinations near the US.
Secure in Suburbia households are prudent with their
finances, putting a lower proportion of their overall
3.2 Group F2 – Secure in Suburbia income(s) towards discretionary spending than any
other group apart from Group M2: Affluent Empty
3.2.1 Segment Overview Nests. They tend to be more focused on savings than
Group F2, Secure in Suburbia households are estab- other comparable groups. They are also more likely to
lished, middle-aged with families and they are relatively be motivated by deals and actively try to seek value
conservative in behavior. They live a comfortable from their spending.
existence, largely owning homes, which are more

SEGMENTS
Table 8: Vital Statistics for Group F2 – Secure in Suburbia
Predominant age Age 30-49 (67%) Predominant income $60k-$200k (62%)

(largest % of population): (largest % of households):
Defining generation 50% Millennials Median household income: $99,970

(largest % of population): Age 18+
(b.1977-1996)
Percent of households living with 100% Median discretionary spending per $45,090
children aged 0-17 household:
(US average - 35%):
Percentage of households living as 73% Percentage of home ownership 69%

married couples (US average 64%):
(US average - 48%):
Household size 3-6 (87%) Predominant home value $100k-$400k+

(largest % of households) (largest % of Households): (56%)
Percent living in major metros (top 50% Predominant Net Worth $150k-$500k
25 CBSAs, 40% of US population): (largest % of households): (54%)

population):

SEGMENTS
Figure 23: Top Destinations for Group F2 – Secure in Suburbia
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
Mexico
Canada
Bahamas
Jamaica
Dominican Republic
Italy
England
Puerto Rico
Central America
3.2.3 Travel Behaviors In terms of destination preferences Secure in Suburbia

Table 9: Top Destinations for Group F2 – Secure in travelers are very close to the Consuming on Credit
Suburbia demographic. Mexico and Caribbean destinations
predominate their journeys over the last three years,
Mexico 6.0% and the group has the highest index score for travel to
Mexico. This segment prefers the security of knowing
their destinations and of having it close to home, part
Canada 3.0%
of which can be put down to their comparatively lower
wealth and also their careful spending habits. This has
Other Caribbean Islands 2.3% made them the most likely to spend less than USD1,000
on their holidays and over two-thirds of those reporting
Bahamas 2.2% their travel spend allocate less than USD3,000. They also
index at a high rate for their preference for package
Jamaica 2.1% vacations (68% agree), another behavior shared with
Consuming on Credit.
Dominican Republic 1.7%
This destination behavior matches well with preferences
elsewhere. They are the most likely group to travel
Italy 1.4% abroad using an automobile. They are the most likely to
agree that price was more important than convenience
England 1.4% to them when making travel plans. They are also the
second most likely to favor going back to a destination
Puerto Rico 1.4% they like (70.6%), behind Consuming on Credit.
Central America 1.4%

Source: 2016 IXI Economic Cohorts / GfK MRI (2015 Doublebase Survey

SEGMENTS
3.3 Group M2 - Affluent Empty Nests 27.5% - Percentage of Affluent Empty Nest
households that have travelled outside the
3.3.1 Segment Overview contiguous US in the last three years
This group benefits from the prosperity afforded
to the Baby Boomer generation. They are mostly 3.3.2 Demographic and Income Data
homeowners with household incomes considerably Households within the Affluent Empty Nests group
above the national median. These homes are mostly are largely in retirement or rapidly approaching it.
located in suburban locations and this demographic They have acquired strong savings, giving them a
has the highest proportion living in small towns or comfortable retirement in their own homes, which tend
rural locations. This group is the most conservative in to be worth more than the US average. These are also
their outlooks and habits of all the segments. They are less likely to be situated in major cities compared to the
least likely to be engaged in the online environment other frequent traveller groups.
and most likely to prefer traditional media and booking
methods. This is also reflected in their international They have the lowest ratio of discretionary spending to
holiday preferences, with the segment sticking to what income among our target groups, suggesting that they
they are comfortable with in terms of countries visited are prudent with their finances. This may be because
and vacation activities. they put some of these finances aside to support their
Table 10: Vital Statistics for Group M2 – Affluent Empty Nests
Predominant age Age 60+ (73%) Predominant income $40k-$150k (66%)

(largest % of population): (largest % of households):
Defining generation 57% Boomers (b. Median household income: $108,950

(largest % of population): 1946-1964)

(US average - 35%):

(US average - 48%):

Percent living in major metros (top 43% Predominant Net Worth $250k-$1MM

population):

SEGMENTS
Figure 24: Top Destinations for Group M2 – Affluent Empty Nests
5%
4.5%
4%
3.5%
3%
2.5%
2%
1.5%
1%
0.5%
0%
Mexico
Canada
Italy
France
Bahamas
England
Spain/Portugal
Germany
Jamaica
extended families. Most of their children have left home As noted above this group is traditional in its outlook.
and had children of their own, with 61% of respondents This crosses over into their shopping and travel
reporting that they were a grandparent or great behaviors. Also Section 3.3.2 notes that this group is
grandparent of a child under 18. Although the marriage careful with its income and is more predisposed to
rate seems low given the generation and situation of save. However, this should not be mistaken for a lack
this segment, a large part of this can be attributed to of income or unwillingness to spend it with regards to
the fact that 17% of respondents are widowed. travel. The group indexes highly for spending on foreign
vacations, coming behind our two richest groups. It
3.3.3 Travel Behaviors is noticeable that they index highly for spending on
Table 11: Top Destinations for Group M2 – Affluent Empty foreign vacations of USD8,000 or more, the highest
Nests option available in the survey. They could be said to be
punching above their weight, considering their relative
Mexico 4.5% disposable income and propensity to spend carefully.
This trend also sees them travelling at an above average
Canada 3.7% rate to Europe, normally quite an expensive destination
for US consumers.
In terms of what they want in a vacation, Affluent Empty
Italy 2.8% Nests are looking for relatively low energy vacations,
both in terms of the booking process and when
France 2.5% travelling. They were easily the least likely to agree with
the statement “I frequently choose active vacations with
Bahamas 2.1%
lots to do” (47.4%) and index at the bottom for activities
England 2.1% engaged in when on vacation. They also agreed least to
the statement “traveling to foreign places is a great way
Spain/Portugal 1.8% for me to learn about other cultures” (70.4% agreed with
the statement vs. 80.3% for the highest group).
Germany 1.8%
They are the most likely to favor group travel, reporting
Jamaica 1.7% the highest percentage agreeing that “group tours
are fun and a good way to meet people” (51.9%), the
Source: 2016 IXI Economic Cohorts / GfK MRI (2015 Doublebase Survey
SEGMENTS
most likely to report a preference for guided tours over points below Y1, City Slickers. Conversely, 29.7% fell in
traveling independently (38.8%), and are the largest the category “take me away please”, the highest of all
group fitting into the GfK MRI vacation classification of segments.
“Tour Groupies” (31%).
This, alongside their distrust of online sources of 3.4 Group Y1 – City Slickers
information and booking, leads them to favor booking
through people rather than digital routes. They comfort- 3.4.1 Segment Overview
ably index at the bottom for being advised about Group Y1, or City Slickers, are urbane, connected and
their travel plans by an Online Travel Agent (OTA) and endowed with a high disposable income. They are in
price comparison (metasearch) sites and at the top for many ways the archetype of the Millennial generation,
“traditional” media (TV, newspapers, radio, etc.). Similarly, being adventurous, active and engaged digitally.
when asked about the logistics of travel planning They are interested in taking vacations to destinations
they were the least likely to agree that they were their beyond those chosen by the typical American traveller.
“own travel agent” at 28.9%, nearly 21 percentage Indeed, it could be argued that this group would travel
Table 12: Vital Statistics for Group Y1 – City Slickers
Predominant age Age 21-34 (58%) Predominant income $75k-$250k+

(largest % of population): (largest % of households): (56%)
Defining generation 65% Millennials Median household income: $143,550

(largest % of population): Age 18+
(b.1977-1996)

(US average - 35%):

(US average - 48%):

Percent living in major metros (top 60% Predominant Net Worth $150k-$750k

population):

SEGMENTS
more but they are highly connected to their careers, 3.4.3 Travel Behaviors
being the most likely to report that they consider their Table 13: Top Destinations for Group Y1 – City Slickers
work to be a career, not just a job.
Mexico 7.3%
36.8% - Percentage of City Slicker households
Canada 4.4%
that have travelled outside the contiguous US
in the last three years Bahamas 3.8%
3.4.2 Demographic and Income Data Other Caribbean Islands 3.8%

Out of all of our groups, City Slickers have the highest
Italy 3.4%
rate of employment. These are likely to be in white
collar jobs. They have the highest percentage of workers France 3.0%
in digital and Information Technology (IT) professions.
Overall they have a high disposable income, which can Jamaica 2.8%
be attributed partially to a lack of outgoing expendi-
Germany 2.6%
tures on a family. The majority of this segment has yet to
marry (36%) or have children (2%). England 2.6%
Consequently, they tend to live in small households Central America 2.5%

within the center of major urban metro areas. Although
the rate of home ownership is below the US average Source: 2016 IXI Economic Cohorts / GfK MRI (2015 Doublebase Survey
(57% vs. 64%) it is high compared to the average for of the American Consumer)
under-35s across the US and reflective of the success
this group is enjoying in their careers. As one would expect from a young demographic, City
Slickers’ travel behavior is best defined by their adven-
turous, optimistic, and digital-led approach. In terms
of destinations, City Slickers embody this by indexing
very highly for several unconventional destinations,
such as South East Asia (238) and South America (208).
Figure 25: Top Destinations for Group Y1 – City Slickers
8%
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
Mexico
Canada
Bahamas
Italy
France
Jamaica
Germany
England
Central America

SEGMENTS
In contrast, they index towards the bottom end for 38.3% - Percentage of Flush Families house-
vacations within the contiguous US. They also agreed holds that have travelled outside the contig-
the least with the statement “I’d rather travel in the U.S. uous US in the last three years
than to a foreign location” (51.8%).
3.5.2 Demographic and Income Data
Across all international destinations City Slickers index Flush Families’ consumption is driven by their high
highly for their expectations of travel in the next year median income, which is just shy of the top group. This
across all destination options surveyed. They have high income is driven by their top-tier educational attain-
the highest percentage of respondents rating travel ment levels. Among all the treatment groups created,
to Mexico and Caribbean as being likely or very likely they are the most likely to have a household member
within 12 months. who has achieved a bachelor’s degree or a post-graduate
qualification. This makes them more suited to senior
This carries across into other travel behaviors. They were positions, with the group being the most likely to have a
the group that reported being the least likely to be put household member employed in a managerial position.
off travelling by security concerns. They also agreed the
most with the following statements: 3.5.3 Travel Behaviors
Table 14: Top Destinations for Group F1 – Flush Families
■■ “On my vacations, I prefer traveling to places I’ve
never been” (80.15%). Mexico 8.4%
■■ “I love doing research on a location before I go on Canada 4.4%
vacation” (78.9%).
Bahamas 4.0%
■■ “I frequently choose active vacations with lots to do”
(63.1%). Other Caribbean Islands 3.8%
France 3.2%
They are digitally savvy, and typically they are their
“own travel agent”, rather than relying on others to plan Italy 2.8%
their vacation (49.6%). They came second in terms of England 2.7%
using online sources – including Online Travel Agencies
(OTAs) and metasearch sites – to research travel, behind Jamaica 2.6%
F1, Flush Families (a group with which they share many Germany 2.5%
behaviors).
Dominican Republic 2.4%
This makes them strong targets for alternative and Source: 2016 IXI Economic Cohorts / GfK MRI (2015 Doublebase Survey
adventure vacations. As we can see from their interest of the American Consumer)
in researching their vacations they are engaged in this
part of the process, presenting strong opportunities, As digitally savvy, independent travellers, Flush
particularly as they are amenable to being marketed to Families rely on, and have a high confidence in, online
via the internet (for more see Chapter 4). information sources, meaning they are big spenders
through digital means. The group reported the highest
percentage spending more than USD200 (59.3%),
3.5 Group F1 – Flush Families USD500 (43.1%), and USD800 (32%) on internet and
catalog shopping and index second highest for
3.5.1 Segment Overview spending on foreign vacations.
Group F1, Flush Families, is a key demographic for those
targeting outbound travel in general, but particularly As this group is in large part defined by their families,
for those selling inventory online. They report very they have by far the highest rate of journeys made with
high engagement rates for online research and are big children under 18 years old and the second highest rate
spenders on digital platforms. They would typically be of travel with their spouse or partner.
classified as independent travellers. Their tendency
to research and book online means that they are also In terms of where segments sought advice about their
discerning customers, likely to pick out high-end travel, Flush Families had the highest average rate of
options that suit their particular needs. use for online sites. They used these more than twice

SEGMENTS
Table 15: Vital Statistics for Group F1 – Flush Families
Predominant age Predominant income $100k-$250k+

Age 35-50 (71%)
Defining generation 57% GenXers

Median household income: $182,720
(largest % of population): (b.1965-1976)
Percent of households living with
Median discretionary spending per
children aged 0-17 99% $100,250
household:
(US average - 35%):
Percentage of households living as
Percentage of home ownership
married couples 84% 86%
(US average 64%):
(US average - 48%):
Household size Predominant home value $250k-$750k+
3-5 (85%)
Percent living in major metros (top Predominant Net Worth $350k-$1MM+

60%
Percent living in small city
Employment rate of respondents
(micropolitan CBSAs, 17% of US 2% 81%
(US average 58%):
population):
Figure 26: Top Destinations for Group F1 – Flush Families
9%
8%
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
Mexico
Canada
Bahamas
France
Italy
England
Jamaica
Germany
Dominican Republic

SEGMENTS
as often as the Affluent Empty Nests segment. This was This has helped them to reach a comfortable phase in
repeated in the use of OTAs and metasearch, where the their lives. They are very likely to be homeowners, with
difference was even more pronounced between the these homes easily of the highest value across all the
two groups. groups. These homes are overwhelmingly likely to be
in a major urban metro area, which is in contrast to the
This is because they are confident in their digital abilities other older age group, the Affluent Empty Nests. In the
and have the highest trust in the internet of all of our cities themselves Golden Globetrotters are likely to live
groups. They had the highest percentage of travellers within wealthier suburbs just outside the city center.
defined as “Active Adventurers” (34.6%) and the second
highest saying that they are their “own travel agent” 3.6.3 Travel Behaviors
(49.4%). They also came top when asked to agree with Table 16: Top Destinations in Last Three Years for Group
the statement, “I’d rather book a trip over the Internet M1 – Golden Globetrotters
than meet with a travel agent”, where 77.5% agreed.
They thought the least of group travel, with 60.3% Mexico 7.3%
disagreeing that group tours were “a fun and good
Italy 5.8%
way to meet people”. In this regard, they are closest
to City Slickers in terms of outlook and behaviors. This Canada 5.8%
leads them to index highly for several unconventional
destinations in Asia and Africa, such as India. France 5.6%

3.6 Group M1 – Golden Globetrotters England 4.6%
3.6.1 Segment Overview Spain/Portugal 3.5%

We have given this segment the moniker ‘golden’ as
Germany 3.3%
they are the biggest travel spenders among all of our
groupings and the most likely to take a trip abroad. They South America 3.1%
are willing to splash the cash, with their behaviors and
purchase habits showing that they enjoy luxury and Bahamas 3.0%
convenience. Furthermore, while they do have some
behaviors that we would expect in an older age group, Source: 2016 IXI Economic Cohorts / GfK MRI (2015 Doublebase Survey
such as favouring physical sales channels to a greater of the American Consumer)
degree than other groups, they are actually extremely
comfortable with spending - and spending big - online. As befits their income and social status, Golden
Globetrotters enjoy the finer things in life, including
42.9% - Percentage of Golden Globetrotter their vacations. They are the most likely group to travel
households that have travelled outside the to Europe, with the majority vacationing in traditional
contiguous US in the last three years tourist destinations in Western Europe. However, they
also index extremely highly for more unconventional
3.6.2 Demographic and Income Data European destinations, such as Scandinavia, the
Golden Globetrotters are retired or are on the cusp Netherlands, Eastern Europe and Russia. They are also
of retirement. During their careers they have worked the most likely group to report that they are considering
their way into senior positions allowing them to accrue travelling to Europe in the next 12 months. Their rate of
considerable wealth. Those members that continue 20.8% reporting it likely or very likely to travel to Europe
to work are most likely to be employed in professional was double that of the Secure in Suburbia – the lowest
careers and to be in management positions. Also, in group. They are the most likely group to have visited a
pre-retirement households, both members of the restaurant classified as ‘fine dining’ in the last six months
household are likely to work, increasing their already by a considerable margin (30%). It is a similar story with
considerable income. Given their professional lives, they regard to attending art galleries or shows, museums,
are likely to be very well-educated. More than half hold classical music performances and live theatre, where
a bachelor’s degree or higher, and this segment has the Golden Globetrotters came top across the board (where
highest proportion with post-graduate degrees. 16%, 23.9%, 9.3%, and 27.6% have participated in the

SEGMENTS
Table 17: Vital Statistics for Group M1 – Golden Globetrotters
Predominant age Predominant income $100k-$250k+

Age 55-75 (76%)
Defining generation 69% Boomers (b.

Median household income: $187,550
(largest % of population): 1946-1964)
Percent of households living with
Median discretionary spending per
children aged 0-17 6% $110,560
household:
(US average - 35%):
Percentage of households living as
Percentage of home ownership
married couples 66% 93%
(US average 64%):
(US average - 48%):
Household size Predominant home value $300k-$750k+
1-3 (92%)
Percent living in major metros (top Predominant Net Worth $500k-$1MM+

70%
Percent living in small city
Employment rate of respondents
(micropolitan CBSAs, 17% of US 2% 55%
(US average 58%):
population):
Figure 27: Top Destinations in Last Three Years for Group M1 – Golden Globetrotters
8%
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
Mexico
Italy
Canada
France
England
Spain/Portugal
Germany
South America
Bahamas

SEGMENTS
last year, respectively). It is no surprise then that the
cultural and fine dining bastions of Italy and France
feature so prominently in Golden Globetrotter travel.
This contrasts with levels of travel to the Caribbean

and Mexico. These destinations are far less popular
relative to total travel for the group when compared
to others studied in this paper. The bottom five
indexing countries for Golden Globetrotters include the
Bahamas, Dominican Republic, the Cayman Islands,
and Jamaica. Mexico has an index score of 154, which
means just over 50% more travel by the group than the
US average, compared to 309 for France and 325 for
Italy.
They are the group most likely to disagree with the

statement, “in general, price is more important to me
than convenience when making travel plans”. Indeed,
they are the only group where a majority (51.4%)
disagreed with the statement, emphasizing the impor-
tance they place on convenience. This plays in to their
travel booking behaviors, where they are the most likely
group to have gone on a vacation through an all-inclu-
sive package (9.1%), as well as the most likely to have
used a traditional travel agent (15.4%). They are also the
group taking the most number of cruise journeys. Some
16% report that they have taken a cruise journey of
more than one day in the last three years. These could
also be classified as behaviors in keeping with their age
band. However, this should not be mistaken for a lack of
interest or trust in online shopping. As opposed to the
Affluent Empty Nests, Golden Globetrotters spend large
amounts online and refer to online travel sites relatively
regularly.
Naturally this comes with a considerable price tag. This

segment has the biggest spenders. This group indexes
far beyond even the next biggest spenders, Flush
Families, with an extremely high proportion spending
more than USD6,000 on foreign vacations.
Therefore, there are enormous opportunities for travel

brands that are positioned in luxury and high-end
markets to target this group. They will appreciate
curated and pre-screened choices that match their
expectations and are happy to seek advice from
physical agents. Potentially, there is an opportunity to
reach these consumers with the right offers through
rewards and loyalty programs. This group is the most
likely to be both members of frequent flyer (40.8%) and
hotel rewards programs (30%).

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
MARKETING EFFECTIVELY TO US
4
Marketing Effectively to US Outbound

Travellers
As we can see above, there is a huge amount of insight part of this can be put down to generational differ-
that can be gained from segmenting consumers and ences, although considering this only from that angle
looking into their travel habits. However, the power of would not take into account many important variations.
data extends beyond this. Segmentation can give us A more nuanced picture is important to consider when
insight into further behavioral patterns through which trying to create effective marketing strategies. The
marketing can be targeted. Media consumption, device rising cost of acquisition makes accurate targeting that
usage, vacation research channels, shopping habits, improves the chances of a booking critical. A key part
leisure activities, and advertising preferences can all of this is the devices consumers use and the media that
be obtained and analysed to help improve marketing they visit.
effectiveness. In this chapter we discuss these topics
and beyond to find out how to better reach and sell to 4.1.1 Device Usage
the US outbound consumer. EyeforTravel was further Device usage is largely driven by generational bounda-
helped by expert opinion from IXI and a case study ries but it is also closely related to wealth and education,
from WESTA who have used data insights to help create although all these factors do relate to each other. To
uplifts in their revenue. paraphrase, the most likely members of the US popula-
tion to own devices are young, college-educated,
wealthy individuals, who are also the most engaged
4.1 Technology Usage and Media with the possibility of international travel.
Consumption
Overall the most popular devices continue to be
The US consumer is not a single entity, and there are desktops or laptops. 73% of US adults currently
wide variations in their media-viewing patterns and the own one according to a 2015 Pew Research poll.
devices they use to access information. A significant Smartphones are close behind, at 68%, and given
Figure 28: US Device Ownership by Age

100%
n Smartphone ownership n Desktop/laptop ownership n Tablet ownership
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
18-29 30-49 50-64 65+
Age Group
Source: Pew Research Center, 2016

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
Figure 29: US Device Ownership by Household Income
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
<USD30,000 USD30-49,999 USD50-74,999 USD75,000+
Figure 30: US Device Ownership by Educational Attainment
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Less than high school High school Some college College and above
their popularity among younger age groups should Given the demonstrable link between education and
soon overtake desktops/laptops. Tablets had a strong income, Figures 29 and 30 match each other extremely
showing in the survey, with 45% of US adults owning a closely. Naturally, device ownership falls across all
device (Pew Research Center, 2016). types as income and education levels decline. It is
nonetheless remarkable in an age when internet access
Breaking this down further, we can see that smart- is so critical that for laptop/desktop ownership there is a
phone usage declines throughout age groups. Tablet huge 61 percentage points between holders of at least
ownership, on the other hand, peaks in the 30-49 age a college education and those lacking a high school
bracket. This may be a potential sign of future usage diploma. There is a market saturation point after around
patterns, as it could indicate that tablet ownership has 90% ownership in the population, as can be seen by
peaked as younger demographics stick to usage of their the similarity between desktop/laptop ownership in the
smartphones and phablets. highest income brackets (Pew Research Center, 2016).

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
Figure 31: Internet Access Through Smartphones Reported by Key US Outbound Segments
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
F1: Flush Y1: City F2: Secure in Y2: M1: Golden M2: Affluent
Families Slickers Suburbia Consuming Globetrotters Empty Nests
on Credit
The importance of age as a more important variable relative incomes. Indeed, Consuming on Credit also had
than wealth for smartphone usage is further reinforced the highest rate of respondents reporting that they did
by results from IXI Services and GfK MRI regarding our not own a TV as well (see Figure 32), marking them out
segments. As we can see in Figure 31 the number of as an unusual group. This indicates how the behaviors
respondents reporting that they access the internet of a segment can be more complex than those
through smartphones remains fairly consistent in identified by considering of a single data point, like age
younger and middle-aged segments. It falls slightly for or generation.
Secure in Suburbia and Consuming on Credit due to
lower household income, before a more substantial fall When it comes to consumption of television, we see the
for our oldest two segments, down to a low point of pattern exactly reverse. Our two oldest groups consume
42% for Affluent Empty Nests. the most television, followed by Consuming on Credit.
Groups with high online engagement then become
4.1.2 Media consumption more likely to not have or use a TV, nor to trust it. They
In terms of media consumption, the dynamics of are also less likely to be heavy watchers of TV. There
income and age continue to define patterns between is a -0.93 (inverse) correlation between heavy users of
our groups. There is high variation between the television and heavy users of internet services. Similarly,
different groups, meaning that marketing approaches lower internet use matches relatively closely to higher
should be tailored accordingly. use of magazines and newspapers.
As can be expected the highest rates of non-internet This demonstrates the division of leisure times and
users are among Affluent Empty Nests. More than a how people are substituting these traditional media
quarter of this group reported that they do not use the sources directly for internet services. However, this is
internet at all. All other groups report a significantly likely to mean they are using similar services offering
higher rate of usage than this but usage continues to consumable media, either in video or text format, but
be affected by age and income. Golden Globetrotters through digital means rather than using completely
are the next most likely to be non-users of the internet different services. If we then plot non-use of television
followed by Consuming on Credit and Secure in against YouTube we can see that there is a correlation
Suburbia. Despite both of these latter two groups (Figure 34). As more respondents do not use television,
having high overall online engagement in areas like the percentage of the group reporting that they had
shopping and social media, 9.8% and 8.3% report a visited YouTube increases. While this is concerning news
lack of internet access, respectively. We can credit the for television executives, it does mean an expansion of
performance of these latter two groups to their lower digital advertising possibilities for marketers, which can

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
Figure 32: Percentage of Segment Reporting Non-use of Internet
n Non-user of Internet n Heavy TV users

Y1: City Slickers
F1: Flush Families
US Average
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Figure 33: Media Trusted the Most – TV and Internet
n Y1: City Slickers n F2: Secure in Suburbia n F1: Flush Families n Y2: Consuming on Credit
n M1: Golden Globetrotters n M2: Affluent Empty Nests n US average
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Internet TV
be more focused and targeted, not to mention cheaper,

than traditional TV advertising.
So we know which groups to target. However, what

are the key digital domains Americans are using when
planning travel?
According to SimilarWeb, which measures web traffic,

the top travel websites in the US by the number of visits
were TripAdvisor, Airbnb and Expedia, in that order.
Rounding out the top 10 were the largest US airlines
and Priceline and its subsidiaries, Booking.com and
Kayak. Unfortunately for hotel brands there was not a
single entrant in the top 10, with Marriott the highest
performer at 12 (see Table 18).

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
Figure 34: Percentage of Segment Reporting Non-use of TV and Correlation with YouTube Viewing
n Non-user of TV n YouTube
Y1: City Slickers
F1: Flush Families
US Average
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Table 18: Popularity of Travel-Related Websites by by respondents to the Doublebase survey as the most
SimilarWeb (US only) popular web domain for vacation research and advice.
Once we consider all of Expedia’s subsidiaries the
1 Tripadvisor.com brand’s strength is reinforced and explains its aggressive
acquisition of competitors, giving it a dominant position
2 within the US market. Travelocity, Orbitz, and Hotels.
Airbnb.com
com are all Expedia properties. Priceline comes out
less well in SimilarWeb’s rankings than Expedia, but it
3 Expedia.com still remains respectably represented with Kayak and
Priceline.com sitting in positions 6 and 9.
4 Southwest.com
What we see is that TripAdvisor has a much lower rating
5 Aa.com than in the SimilarWeb rankings, with approximately
just under half as many respondents reporting that
6 Kayak.com they were advised by TripAdvisor than Expedia across
the groups and the wider US population. However, if
7 Delta.com we dig a little deeper, then the difference between
these two datasets seems easier to understand. Going
8 United.com into SimilarWeb’s data, Expedia has a noticeably
lower estimated bounce rate and time on site when
9 Priceline.com compared to TripAdvisor. Expedia has a bounce rate
of 35% and a time on site of 11 minutes 11 seconds
10 versus 53% and 3 minutes 42 seconds for TripAdvisor
Booking.com
(SimilarWeb, 2016). Therefore, in terms of US consumer
Source: SimilarWeb, 2016 behavior this is likely to mean that users are briefly
checking TripAdvisor to check properties they have
already selected, and they are less likely to use
TripAdvisor as a direct booking route. They are conse-
In our data there was a similar pattern for Online quently less likely to remember it and report it to the
Travel Agencies and metasearch companies but subtle survey as advising their vacation choices.
differences in some other results. As can be seen in
Table 19, the dominance of the Expedia and Priceline There is broadly analogous behavior across the
web domains continues. Expedia was easily identified different sites in terms of the proportion of usage for

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
Table 19: OTA and Metasearch Sites Advising US Travellers by Index Score
F1: Flush F2: Secure in M1: Golden M2: Affluent Y2: Consuming
Y1: City Slickers
Families Suburbia Globetrotters Empty Nests on Credit
Expedia.com 210 147 163 87 185 122
Hotels.com 209 147 147 73 182 136
Hotwire.com 196 133 149 76 190 139
Kayak.com 184 129 200 80 229 129
Orbitz.com 203 132 183 95 177 126
Priceline.com 188 133 141 90 196 133
Travelocity.com 201 124 173 106 154 118
Travelzoo.com: 191 129 169 111 178 100
TripAdvisor.com 232 130 210 85 200 119
Yahoo! Travel 138 117 161 111 128 127
each segment. Expedia and its domains have a near specific campaigns, the marketer could even re-group
stranglehold on the US market, so travel brands need the segments to examine international travel and online
to work with it to sell inventory, although Priceline also booking preference, with a greater focus on the latter
remains important. However, there are chances to tailor when crafting new treatment groups. In this regard
inventory and marketing spend to the different web syndicated segmentation, like IXI’s Economic Cohorts,
domains. Using an index scoring system to allocate can provide flexibility.
frequency of behavior it is possible to see where
marketing programs may want to focus (see Table 19). 4.1.3 Advertising Attitudes
For example, the two biggest spending segments (Flush Within the broad groups outlined in this white paper we
Families and Golden Globetrotters) index highly for their can already see some critical fault lines developing. This
use of TripAdvisor, reflecting their interest in booking continues into their attitudes to advertising, in particular
high-quality accommodations. Affluent Empty Nests mobile advertising. While one segment may be very
on the other hand have a unique profile that is much open to being actively reached via mobile advertising,
more likely to use Travelocity, Travelzoo or Yahoo! Travel. others may quickly assume a negative opinion of a
It is therefore worth creating specific marketing plans brand if they are reached in this way, particularly if
and budgets depending on the group or groups. For unsolicited.
Figure 35: Mobile Attitudes
n Disconnected n Mobile If I Must n Mobile Minimalists

n Mobile App-Happy n Mobile Ad & App-Happy
Y1: City Slickers
F1: Flush Families

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
Table 20: Mobile Attitudes
Mobile
Mobile Attitudes Mobile Mobile If I Mobile
Disconnected Ad &
Segments App-Happy Must Minimalists
App-Happy
M2: Affluent Empty Nests 9.3% 9.4% 14.2% 38.8% 28.2%
M1: Golden Globetrotters 4.3% 10.6% 18.4% 32.3% 34.4%
F1: Flush Families 0.8% 20.4% 29.4% 12.5% 36.9%
Y1: City Slickers 1.1% 23.5% 31.4% 12.7% 31.2%
F2: Secure in Suburbia 2.5% 24.9% 29.1% 13.0% 30.4%
Y2: Consuming on Credit 2.5% 27.8% 29.2% 13.1% 27.4%
Fortunately, there is a clear pattern amongst our groups across a multichannel environment. Lena Bourgeois, IXI
that can be seen in Figures 35 and 36 and used for Services’ vice president, consumer market group, gives
more accurate targeting. The leaders in their preference the example of a travel brand working primarily in hospi-
for mobile advertising are Consuming on Credit and tality: “Traditionally they operated exclusively in direct
Secure in Suburbia segments, with City Slickers not far mail with call centers. The response rates were reason-
behind. Flush Families prefer to undertake independent able but not that great, and they spent a lot of money
research and so rank further down but still above the on direct mail. Then they decided to redo their webpage
two oldest groups, who are the least engaged by so that instead of calling a person could visit to learn
mobile advertising. about the products and then be able to call for more
support or service. Eventually consumers would be able
All four of these groups are relatively open to receiving to buy a vacation package online. Then they decided to
location-based coupons to their mobiles at around 40% proceed in a more multi-channel manner. Consumers
of the population in all. With regard to their interest would be sent a piece in the mail to get their attention.
in less targeted information about deals and new They would then be reminded of the direct mail with
products or services interest is lower across the board an email redirecting them to the website. The response
and more varied. Nearly a quarter of Secure in Suburbia rates went up significantly from pure direct mail to an
consumers are interested in both of these compared to email and direct mail combo. The cost of the email
around 1 in 6 Flush Families. This falls to a low of 1 in 10 campaign was a fraction of the direct mail campaign, so
Golden Globetrotters (Figure 36). the incremental spend to get that significant increase
was small compared to return on investment. Multi-
The pattern is largely the same in Figure 35, although channel programs can be really effective.”
in this case Consuming on Credit moves into the top
spot just ahead of Secure in Suburbia households. In terms of digital marketing, clearly the top performing
Here 28% and 25%, respectively, operate within apps Secure in Suburbia and Consuming on Credit groups
and are happy to be reached by mobile advertising. should be prioritized for mobile advertising. They are the
For both groups, as well as City Slickers, more than most engaged with apps, so in-app push notifications
50% of respondents are classified as being ‘app-happy’. should be employed. These are also likely to perform best
This falls away in the remaining groups to a low of if they are relevant to the user’s location. The messaging
76% of Affluent Empty Nests less interested in mobile however should be altered between the groups. We
interaction. know that Secure in Suburbia consumers are focused
on bargains and deals, so aggressive offers are likely to
Combining this data allows brands to better tailor their perform better as will new product launches, especially
marketing communications to help optimize results if they offer an exclusive discount. Consuming on Credit

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
Figure 36: Interest in Mobile Advertising
n Agree with the statement: “I like to receive coupons on my cell phone that are based on my location”
n Agree with the statement: ”Advertising on mobile phones provides me with useful information about bargains”
n Agree with the statement: “Advertising on mobile phones provides me with useful information about new
products and services”
F1: Flush Families
Y1: City Slickers

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Table 21: Interest in Mobile Advertising
Agree with statement:

Agree with statement: Agree with statement:
“Advertising on mobile
“I like to receive “Advertising on mobile
phones provides me
coupons on my cell phones provides me
with useful information
phone that are based with useful information
about new products
on my location” about bargains”
and services”
F2: Secure in Suburbia 41.6% 23.2% 23.3%
Y2: Consuming on Credit 40.7% 21.8% 21.8%
Y1: City Slickers 39.8% 18.4% 19.2%
F1: Flush Families 38.6% 17.7% 15.9%
M1: Golden Globetrotters 23.4% 11.5% 11.6%
M2: Affluent Empty Nests 19.5% 12.2% 12.2%
on the other hand often makes impulse purchases, with marketing to which they have actively chosen to sign
less planning and books closer to the vacation. An ideal up and it may be better to focus on mobile web efforts
mobile marketing campaign for them would push an rather than apps for these segments. The mature groups
attractively-priced last minute, all-inclusive package to are unlikely to respond to mobile marketing. Here the
the Caribbean, for example. focus for any online marketing should be in desktop
formats as the majority of these households still do use
For other segments, City Slickers and Flush Families, desktops or laptops, even if they are less engaged.
they are less engaged but still interested. As tech-savvy
groups, they are more likely to respond to mobile

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
4.1.4 Maximizing User Generated Content across all segments surveyed, usually with twice as
User Generated Content (UGC) has increased in many or more respondents reporting access than the
importance to the travel industry over the last decade. next nearest competitor. The bad news for Twitter
Nowadays, user reviews can make or break a property, continues according to this data, with it languishing in
and users demand to have their complaints responded the middle of the pack.
to through social media channels. Not only this, but it
is a rising advertising channel both in terms of paid-for For the groups themselves, the most engaged were
placements and also as a free channel via users’ vacation City Slickers who had the highest percentage accessing
pictures, videos, posts and comments. Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, as well as comparably
high rates of access across all other social media
Therefore, it is important for travel brands to consider: channels. They were followed by Flush Families for
overall social media consumption. Flush Families had a
■■ What networks are important and to whom?
high usage of LinkedIn (29.4%) – more than double that
■■ What kind of content works well on social media? of Secure in Suburbia (13.9%) – which is driven by their
high-powered professional lives. They also came out
■■ Who are the most influential consumers and what is
on top in terms of Pinterest usage (25.3%), which had
their behavior on social media?
a surprisingly good showing in the results. As in many
We will consider this in the context of the groups we technology and digital media areas, our two oldest
have identified and therefore how best to reach the US groups lagged behind the pack but still approximately
outbound consumer. between a half and a third reported visiting Facebook or
YouTube in the last 30 days.
In terms of channels accessed by US outbound
consumers, Facebook and YouTube are the clear
winners in terms of regular access. They come top
Figure 37: Social Media Channels Accessed in the Last 30 Days
n Facebook.com n YouTube.com n LinkedIn.com n Pinterest

n Twitter.com n Google + (Google Plus)
F1: Flush Families
Y1: City Slickers
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
Figure 38: Social Networking Attitudes and Interests
n Y2: Consuming on Credit n Y1: City Slickers n F2: Secure in Suburbia

n F1: Flush Families n M1: Golden Globetrotters n Affluent Empty Nests
Social Networking: Rated showing support for my

favorite companies or brands important or very
important
Social Networking: Rated receiving exclusive offers,

coupons or other discounts important or very
important
Social Networking: Rated finding out about

products and services important or very important
Social Networking: Rated finding local information

important or very important
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
Table 23: Social Networking Attitudes and Interests
Social Social
Social
Social Networking: Networking:
Networking:
Networking: Rated receiving Rated showing
Rated finding out
Rated finding exclusive offers, support for my
about products
local information coupons or favorite compa-
and services
important or very other discounts nies or brands
important or very
important important or very important or very
important
important important
Y2: Consuming on
42.6% 28.4% 26.8% 22.9%
Credit
Y1: City Slickers 41.8% 26.7% 25.2% 20.6%
F2: Secure in
41.4% 26.3% 27.2% 20.9%
Suburbia
F1: Flush Families 41.1% 23.3% 23.4% 17.8%
M1: Golden
33.6% 20.8% 17.7% 12.1%
Globetrotters
M2: Affluent Empty
28.9% 17.3% 14.7% 10.6%
Nests

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
So what can travel brands do to make the most out of make the most out their stay. More overt brand social
this? Across all groups, the clear leader was using social media marketing does not perform to the same degree
media to find local information. It came above more but, where it is used, it should be targeted at younger
directly commercial aims such as finding out about and more-value conscious segments, which performed
products and services, receiving offers, or becoming best when given exclusive offers.
fans of brands, which were largely rated in that order.
Who are the advocates?
In terms of direct brand engagement through social Influencers are increasingly important for online
media, the leading group was Consuming on Credit. marketing. These are users who are disproportionately
Only when considering receiving exclusive offers, active and listened to in the online environment. As
coupons or other discounts did another group – Secure we covered in our UGC report, brand advocates are
in Suburbia – rate this as more important to them than more trusted, post more content, spend more with
City Slickers. Overall, Consuming on Credit, Secure in their favorite brands and are much more likely to share
Suburbia and City Slickers were broadly similar in their information on brands and products.
level of social media interest. This begins to taper off
with Flush Families, Golden Globetrotters and then Therefore, identifying and targeting influencers is now
Affluent Empty Nests. highly beneficial to brands. We found that 57% of
travel brands currently reach out to them. This can be a
Brands should therefore make sure that they present time-consuming exercise, especially when being done
localized content across their social media presence. at scale. It is important to reward advocates and make
As we noted in our Utilizing User Generated Content them feel valued, which naturally comes with a cost.
(UGC) report, localized pages have a much higher rate This means that brands need to maximise the possibility
of interaction than global equivalents, up to a factor of of successful identification and outreach. Once again
more than three times. Fan pages should be tailored to segmentation can help here.
fit this need - offering destination-appropriate content
that helps tourists to navigate their destination and
Figure 39: US Outbound Segments’ Propensity to Share and Connect with Brands
n Agreed with statement: “I like to connect with brands through social-networking sites”
n Agreed with statement: ”I like to share my opinions about products and services by posting reviews and
ratings online”
F1: Flush Families
Y1: City Slickers

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
In Section 4.1.3 we noted that Consuming on Credit and not appear to be the most influential consumer groups.
Secure in Suburbia groups were most comfortable with
direct brand interactions over social media. In Figure 39, As we can see in Figure 40, City Slicker and Flush
we can see this replicated and that these groups are the Families are the most likely to share their experiences of
most likely to actively share their opinions through the a great vacation. Three quarters of each segment agree
mediums of ratings and reviews. that they would recommend a vacation and a quarter
‘agree completely’. A look at how influential these
However, this does not necessarily mean that different segments are with regards to being sought for
Consuming on Credit and Secure in Suburbia may be vacation advice, revealed that Flush Families were the
the best brand advocates to target. Although their rate most influential. They had both the highest amount of
of sharing is comparatively high and they are easier to influential consumers and ‘Super Influential’ consumers
reach on social media from a brand perspective, they do (Figure 41). This is based on the frequency and spread of
Figure 40: Agreed with statement: “When I learn about a great vacation, I typically recommend it to people I know”
78%
76%
74%
72%
70%
68%
66%
64%
62%
60%
58%
F1: Flush Y1: City F2: Secure in Y2: Consuming M1: Golden M2: Affluent
Families Slickers Suburbia on Credit Globetrotters Empty Nests
Figure 41: Influential Consumers amongst US Outbound Consumers
n Category Influential Consumers n Super Influential Consumers
Y1: City Slickers
F1: Flush Families
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%


OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
their recommendations to both people the groups do However, is this conventional wisdom entirely true?
and don’t know. Flush Families were followed by Golden Certainly the older definition of ‘true’ loyalty has been
Globetrotters and City Slickers. City Slickers were also eroded with a traveller’s booking based on a complex
most likely to agree with the statement, “I often take matrix of decisions. Customers are extremely unlikely
the opportunity to discuss my knowledge of vacation to be absolutely loyal and prioritize a loyalty program
options with others.” in the initial decision-making phase. However, this
definition was always somewhat suspect and does not
So, although City Slickers and Flush Families are harder necessarily mean that loyalty programs are either dead
to reach and convince to become brand ambassadors, or no longer worth making an investment in.
it is worth investing the time in customer service and
brand outreach to do so. There is a higher probability EyeforTravel and IXI data finds that not only are plenty
that they will be the most effective when promulgating of Americans still members of frequent traveller groups,
their vacation experiences to their social circle. This is but there is also an incredibly strong correlation
amplified by the fact that these groups will likely have between the rate of foreign travel and membership
social circles of similar income and outlook. Therefore, in these programs. Furthermore, this correlation is far
the consumers reached by the City Slickers and Flush stronger than membership based on age, where the
Families groups are more likely to travel abroad and correlation is small enough to be rendered irrelevant.
spend more while doing so, further strengthening their For airline frequent flyer programs the correlation is
importance as brand ambassadors. 0.97, which is just shy of a perfect correlation.
Therefore, travel brands should not lose heart regarding

4.2 Is Loyalty Dead? their reward and loyalty programs. Membership is a
positive indicator and likely to indicate propensity
Much has been written about the “death of loyalty in to travel, which in itself can lead to better marketing
the digital era”, with the finger of blame often pointed at opportunities. When you combine this with the tracking
Millennials. It has been claimed by many media outlets and data opportunities of a rewards program, there
that customers are now almost totally disinterested in is already a great deal of value in these programs.
loyalty programs and they have no effect on the end Indeed, during the bankruptcy proceedings for Caesars
booking decision. Entertainment the most coveted asset was the Total
Rewards Program, which was valued at over USD1
Figure 42: Membership of a Hotel Rewards Program Plotted Against Frequency of International Travel
60% l IXI cohort
Percentage of cohort belonging to a
50%
hotel rewards program
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
Rate of foreign travel in last three years
Note: Each bubble represents a segment from the IXI Economic Cohorts database

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
Figure 43: Membership of a Frequent Flyer Program Plotted Against Frequency of International Travel
60%
Percentage of cohort belonging to a
l IXI cohort
50%
frequent flyer programme
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Rate of foreign travel in last three years
Note: Each bubble represents a segment from the IXI Economic Cohorts database
billion (EyeforTravel, 2015). Similarly, Marriott CEO Arne help to engender membership as well as give people
Sorenson, upon tying up a merger between his group the aforementioned nudge towards purchasing their
and Starwood said: “[The cost saving from the merger] product. In summary the loyalty program is not dead.
doesn’t even get to what we can do on the revenue
side with stronger loyalty programs by combining these
with a broader distribution …. I think the most impor- 4.3 Ancillary Revenue Opportunities
tant thing for us to succeed at is the loyalty program
(CNBC, 2016).” And to come full circle, Starwood allows One of the key areas for revenue growth for major travel
members of its loyalty program to earn and spend brands in the next few years will be ancillary revenues.
points at Caesars hotels and casinos. Both airlines and hotels are under intense price
pressure from the symmetry of information provided
If correctly applied and well managed, reward programs by major online booking sources and metasearch sites.
can also work according to their original intention, Consumers can see and compare prices with greater
helping to nudge the customer to choose the brand ease than ever before and as a result downward price
with which they have an account. It is unlikely to be pressure on headline rates has increased.
the only deciding factor but may well help when
consumers are faced with closely matched products. Ancillary sales offer a potential counter to this effect for
travel suppliers. They offer one of the strongest oppor-
In addition, segmentation frameworks like the one tunities to make the most out of growing consumer
used within this white paper can be easily appended travel budgets, while not damaging the relationship
to loyalty program members. They can then enable the with the customer or reducing the probability of
marketer to connect to third party data – like the GfK securing a booking. Alternatively, travel suppliers can
MRI survey used here – to find look-alike segments so throw in ancillaries to win the war to grab the initial
a travel company can increase its reach and marketing booking. By offering add-ons as incentives, they
effectiveness (see Section 4.4). can also keep pricing agreements in place while still
leveraging ancillaries to increase own-brand bookings.
Although there is some general dissatisfaction within
the public regarding reward and loyalty programs, Like booking and travel preferences, segmentation can
travel brands should work hard to make their offerings be used to help maximize this effect and consequently
practical, worthwhile and convenient to counter this revenue. Ancillaries should be built into targeting
and to boost their Return on Investment (ROI). This will opportunities both in the research and booking phases

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
and also during the trip. The possibilities are extremely 4.4 Combining the Data Picture
varied, but here are some potential examples:
Although the segments and grouping thereof provided
■■ Flush Families are by far the most active in terms of
in this white paper are quite broad to help provide an
sports and outdoor pursuits. Playing up the advan-
impression of the US international traveller, there are
tages of a gym in a property or physical activities
some clear narratives that can be formed to help travel
in the surrounding area should provide uplifts in
brands maximize their digital spend:
bookings. Considering that they are families is also
important because around a third said that they ■■ Flush Families and City Slickers have many similari-
had visited a theme park, and a third again said that ties in their behavior and outlook. These tend to be
they planned to visit one in the next 12 months, the influential consumers who enjoy active vacations
highest of all groups. They are also the most likely to to a wide variety of destinations. They are confident
fly first class, representing an upsell opportunity. in their abilities meaning they are independent
travellers. They use the internet extensively as a
■■ Although Consuming on Credit travellers have less
research tool to do this because they are comfort-
disposable income, they tend to be impulse buyers.
able with, and trust, online sources, leading them
Therefore, given their propensity to engage with
to have a high internet spend. Indeed, they largely
social and mobile media and advertising delivered
favor using online sources to “look and book” over
through these means, they could be targeted
physical interactions.
through these channels with an upgrade to their
package, such as an all-inclusive drinks package. ■■ Secure in Suburbia and Consuming on Credit
groups also share many behaviors. They are
■■ Golden Globetrotters are all about the finer things
somewhat set in their ways, preferring to travel
in life and they are willing to pay for a convenient
to destinations closer to the United States and
experience. Although they are an older group and
repeating travel to destinations they have been
therefore slightly less engaged online, they still
to before, although a substantial part of this is
research and spend online. It makes sense to try to
attributable to their lower income. This also drives
sell them transport from the airport, fine dining, and
their preference for seeking value in their vacation
high-end cultural experiences.
choices through offers, deals and packages. They are
■■ Affluent Empty Nests enjoy guided and group engaged online but their preference for conveni-
tours on their vacations but they tend to be harder ence is demonstrated in their high preference for
to reach online and prefer more relaxed vacation package vacations.
experiences. It may therefore be worth informing
■■ Golden Globetrotters are big spenders enjoying the
the front desk to try and upsell this segment with
finer things in life. They are comfortable in their lives
tours and excursions that maximize convenience,
and themselves. They tend to be seen as authorities
particularly with regards to travelling to and from
on vacations, being very well travelled and also in
the excursion or activity.
professional positions of power. They are happy to
spend money to make their lives easier, regularly
The quality and variety of add-ons takes on a further
booking through travel agents and having high
dimension with the spread of user generated content,
membership of travel loyalty programs. Although
the most critical of which is reviews. Amenities have
they trust and use the internet less than the groups
been found to have an effect on review scores. For
above, they are comfortable in its use for research
example, a 2011 study found that offering free Wi-Fi
and shopping purposes.
in a hotel property improved the ratings posted by
customers online by up to 8% (Bulchand-Gidumal, ■■ Affluent Empty Nests prefer comfort and
Melian-Gonzalez & Lopez-Valcarcel, 2011). Given the security. They like to stick to tried and trusted
demonstrable link between review scores and a proper- destinations, booking methods and sources of
ty’s rates, hospitality companies should seek to maximize media. Nonetheless they enjoy travel and they are
the possibilities of their facilities, not just because they spending on it in their retirement. They prefer to
may be a standalone revenue opportunity but because book and travel through traditional means, such as
they may have an effect on revenue generation through group travel and when on vacation they like to have
headline hotel rates. Consequently, it is important to try a relaxed approach.
and use ancillaries to help heighten the guest experi-
ence and then to encourage review posts.

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
Narratives are important for delving into the mind of
your consumer and informing the creative, to reach 4.4.1 Case Study: WESTA
them in the most effective way, and to help maximize WESTA (The Western Association of Travel Agents)
their travel experience. IXI’s Lena Bourgeois pointed out is a marketing cooperative that helps its members
airlines as an example of where this could be effective: by acting as a consolidated buying agent for travel
“The main way airlines compete is by lowering their products and also providing business support
prices and we know that in any other vertical it is the activities. Crucially, they help their members to pool
sign of death. Southwest has been able to raise its their data and resources to fight for better market
price year-over-year and still remain profitable and gain share and more effective advertising strategies.
market share. This is not because of the price. This is
because they know their audience.” A key challenge for WESTA is combining data into
a coherent picture that can be used to attract
“Educate your entire organization about who your additional marketing investment from suppliers of
customers are, why they are customers and what really travel products – such as cruise lines and tours –
matters to them. Each segment can have a profile that and ultimately expand the marketing footprint for it
we call a persona and that goes in a storyboard that the member agencies.
entire organization identifies with. Your entire organiza-
tion should be working to make sure these consumer “You are not talking about one giant monolithic
segments are happy and they are growing. Put yourself agency on the retail side that can mandate
in the customer’s shoes. When you interact with this database structure across the entire organization,”
airline, they know who you are and everything they do said Mike Estill, COO of WESTA. “You are talking
is to serve you. They think about you from marketing about more of a service provider model where all
and branding to their customer service on the phone of these agency groups, and frankly the vendors
to the check-in staff and flight attendants on the plane. themselves, are getting these databases in various
What happens now is that you have a brand that states of organization from hundreds or possibly
customers identify with and you can become extremely thousands of agencies and they need to put some
sticky on a level similar to a Google or a Facebook. It can common structure to it.”
be priceless and that’s what Southwest does.”
WESTA were able to improve their performance
Travel brands therefore should consider their own and for both their members and the travel vendors
third-party data together in order to better understand who distribute products through them by using
their own customer base and ‘link it in’ to create third party data and segmentation. They worked
segmentation for the wider population. Ultimately, the to combine their members’ data in a cloud system
greater their dataset, the more likely they are going to and then used IXI Services to add a layer on top to
be able to do this effectively. Michael Mancini, Senior classify the data and segment consumers.
Director, Product Marketing at IXI Services, points out
“segmentation is an overarching framework into which Estill pointed out that “a luxury cruise line that
more powerful data can be brought to customize it.” wants to send out marketing pieces doesn’t really
want to send out marketing pieces to someone
No matter the data, the aim must be to be maximize that in our assessment is not really a viable
the consumer experience and match their expectations candidate for their product. It’s not effective, it’s not
at each point of contact. This requires considering targeted. Our products, particularly the higher-end
operational elements of a business and all the points ones, need a precise approach.”
of contact the customer has with the brand, in
conjunction with external data sources. Segmentation In order to get to this stage, it is important to
is a means to overlay a common consumer view on all combine multiple data sources and different
of this individual data and use it to craft a prioritized consumer characteristics. “I know some rich people
number of treatment groups and implementation that won’t spend on travel,” said Estill. “Conversely, I
strategies. Yes, as consumers we are all unique, but know some people that don’t have a ton of money
as a marketer one cannot create millions of unique but still value travel and will spend and therein lies
campaigns. Part of the art is crafting messaging and the problem. Looking at just gross income doesn’t
offers that seem unique, but can be utilized in a more really do it.
pragmatic and scalable fashion.

OUTBOUND TRAVELLERS
“Number and age of kids is important, for example.
If we put a 50-year-old couple on a Disney cruise,
then they will hate the experience and if we put a
family on a Crystal Cruise then the kids will be really
bored.”
Therefore, categorizing and combining data has

become a crucial part of WESTA’s operations
on both the B2B and B2C sides that allows the
business to compete more effectively. As they do
not have the marketing budgets of major players,
segmentation is one of the only ways that WESTA
can get in front of the right eyeballs. “Without
this data overlay process, I couldn’t do what we
do,” noted Estill. “At this point in time we are now
expanding our market share in the premium and
luxury market about five times what inflation
would indicate. In fact, we are having some of our
best financial years ever.”

BEYOND 2016
THE US OUTBOUND CONSUMER
5
The US Outbound Consumer Beyond 2016
In 2016, the US traveller appears to be in good health, While it may be too early to call such a trend, there does
with a consistent period of growth now leaving the indeed appear to be evidence of greater allocation of
sluggish post-recession years behind. Outbound spending towards travel and tourism, although any call
journey numbers are up by 25.6% over their 2011 on ‘peak stuff’ is probably premature. FFigure 44 uses
low point (ITA National Travel & Tourism Office, 2016). US government data to plot the percentage changes in
Furthermore, as noted in Chapter 1, there are some very spending of the US consumer with 2011 as a constant
strong signs for 2016. However, are we experiencing a base point. Overall household spending rose by just
broader attitude change to outbound travel? Are we under 6% across the period. As can be seen in the
going to see sustained growth? How will technology graph, spending on international travel outpaced all
and consumer information change the landscape? other major categories, growing by 21.13% in the four
years (although it should be noted other sub-categories
rose by a higher amount). Similarly, spending on
5.1 A Trend for More Travel? recreation categories grew by 16.25%. This is in stark
contrast to spending on clothing, which fell behind
As seen in Chapter 1, Americans are not generally the overall rate of spending growth at 3.8% (US Bureau
known for taking vacation time, nor for travelling abroad of Economic Analysis, 2016a). Overall, the US Tourism
when compared to people in many developed econo- Satellite account also records that spending on tourism
mies. However, there is a growing body of evidence goods and services by US consumers is 15.79% higher
that we are seeing a change in their attitudes about than in 2011 (US Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2016b),
international destinations. As already noted, passport demonstrating strong growth overall, but particularly
numbers have increased dramatically in the last thirty in international travel. This appears to support the
years to include nearly half the population and a record hypothesis that US consumers are moving towards
number of outbound journeys are now being made. allocating more discretionary spending on experiences
Nonetheless, it took until 2014 for international travel and travel in particular.
to recover and exceed pre-recession levels. So, is there
a genuine appetite for travel or are we just seeing a What is also notable is that this rate of growth in
post-recession rebound? In this section we will examine spending on tourism comes during a time of low to
the data behind outbound travel growth and forecast no growth in real incomes over the same period (see
the medium-term outlook for US outbound journeys. Section 1.2.2). This suggests that consumers are willing
to put aside more disposable income on travel spending
5.1.1 Consumer Attitudes as a proportion of their overall income – pointing to a
Much has been written about the movement towards greater interest and engagement with travel.
greater ‘experiential’ spending and the possibility of
developed economies reaching ‘peak stuff’ (where Furthermore, as can be seen by our key travel groups,
consumers reduce spending on physical goods). Travel younger people have a high presence despite their
would be one of, if not the core, beneficiary of such a household wealth being lower than other age groups.
change in spending patterns. However, is there any data This suggests that as these segments move towards
to corroborate these claims? their peak earning potential, they will travel more, and
further afield, than their parents and grandparents. In

BEYOND 2016
Figure 44: Percentage Change in Real Consumption Expenditures by Category 2011-2014
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
-5%
n
n
h
n
e
e
s
s
els
ts
ns
tio
ice
tio
io
alt
ice
ise
nc
re
in
tio
en
io
at
fu
ut
itu
He
ra
ea
ta
em
ica
rv
rv
at
sid
uc
ro
su
nd
or
nd
se
se
cr
od
un
pr
Ed
re
sp
in
nd
Re
,a
pe
ed
m
ff-
m
an
.S.
an
d
ies
t, a
ex
lat
ro
m
an
yU
Tr
ds
ilit
co
en
Co
re
fo
n
es
lb
oo
io
ut
ac
pm
nd
ed
vic
pt
ve
rg
g,
nd
r, a
as
um
ui
er
in
tra
he
ch
sa
eq
ls
ea
us
ns
Ot
n
cia
ur
ice
Ho
w
ld
ig
co
sp
ot
an
ho
re
rv
, fo
d
Fo
se
ge
Fin
se
ol
ng
ra
ou
od
eh
ve
hi
us
,h
Fo
be
ot
Ho
gs
Cl
in
d
an
ish
od
rn
Fu
Fo
Source: United States Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2016a

Note: Values calculated from 2009 chained dollars
Table 24: Percentage Change in Real Consumption Expenditures by Category 2011-2014
Percentage change
2011 2012 2013 2014
2011-2014
Household consumption expenditures 9987.9 10119.3 10291 10570.3 5.83%
Foreign travel by U.S. residents 102.7 111.8 115.3 124.4 21.13%
Recreation 964.9 1022 1069.2 1121.7 16.25%
Furnishings, household equipment, and 451.4 467.9 489.7 516.1 14.33%
routine household maintenance
Communication 257.9 269.4 276.1 293.6 13.84%
Transportation 880.5 905.1 933.3 967.8 9.91%
Food services and accommodations 625.3 641.5 651.5 671.1 7.32%
Health 2078.5 2120.7 2155.4 2229.2 7.25%
Other goods and services 694.2 702.6 708.4 721.1 3.87%
Clothing, footwear, and related services 350.2 353.6 358.1 363.5 3.80%
Housing, utilities, and fuels 1946.5 1944.6 1955.5 1978.6 1.65%
Food and beverages purchased for 795.1 795.7 803.4 807.5 1.56%
off-premises consumption
Financial services and insurance 747.2 706.4 713.9 722.9 -3.25%
Education 233.7 228.9 225.7 225.1 -3.68%
United States Census Bureau, 2016b; United States Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2016; Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis, 2016
Note: All Figures are constant in 2009 chained dollars and percentage increases use 2011 as a constant

BEYOND 2016
This has fallen to an average of 2.1% in the first four
terms of surveyed travel intentions, our two youngest
months of 2016. This is due to growing inflation
groups, City Slickers and Consuming on Credit, both
rather than lowering nominal wage increases, which
indexed higher than the average rate when reporting
have remained the same. Inflation in April 2016 was
their intentions to travel in the next 12 months.
running at an annualized rate 1.1% per annum – the
Indeed, they came in higher than all groups aside from
highest rate for three years.
the very top income and wealth group, the Golden
Globetrotters. They were also interested in travel to less We assume that across 2016:
traditional destinations, such as South America which is
■■ US GDP grows at 2.2%.
favoured by Consuming on Credit.
■■ Unemployment continues to be marginally below
5.1.2 Forecast Growth 5% for the remainder of 2016.
According to our analysis, outbound travel is affected by
■■ Inflation for the year remains low but above recent
consumer confidence, employment rates, the value of
years to a level in the 1-1.5% range.
the dollar, and real incomes, both in terms of wages and
disposable incomes. Or another way of expressing this ■■ Nominal wages will continue to increase in 2016,
is the rate of travel is affected by how secure American but below the rate of growth seen in 2015. We
consumers feel and their purchasing power. There is assume that nominal median wage growth will
some lag in these relationships as we can see in Figure average in the range of 2.5-3.2%. The higher inflation
22, with the core US outbound segments tending to rate and slightly lower nominal increases will cut
book three months or more before they departed. real wage growth to the range of 1-2.2%, with a
most likely range of 1.7-2.0%.
As such, the first part of 2016 appears extremely strong, ■■ Disposable income will grow at 2-3%, compared to
as all of the above measures were trending in a positive 3.4% in 2015.
motion for consumer spending at the end of 2015. This
can be seen in the first figures released by the US NTTO, ■■ The value of the US dollar against major currencies
showing that travel in January and February outbound remains at a similar level to 2015, bolstered by the
travel from the US had risen by 10.2% compared to the the strength of the US economy and weakness in
same two months in 2015. the Eurozone.
■■ Consumer confidence continues marginally below
Reviewing the data, we can see that in late 2015 to early 2015 levels.
2016 the following conditions are prevalent:
This means that there is a slightly weaker environment
■■ Unemployment: One of the strongest trends of
for outbound travel growth compared to 2015. It
the post-recession period is consistent jobs creation.
nonetheless remains highly conducive to expansion in
Average unemployment reached 5.3% in 2015 and
demand.
has since fallen to a low of 4.7% in May 2016 (United
States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016a.). The IMF
predicts that unemployment will average 4.85%,
marking the best performance since 2007 (IMF,
EyeforTravel forecasts that in 2016 the
2016).
number of outbound journeys will increase
■■ Consumer confidence: Consumer confidence by:
reached its highest point since 2006-7 in 2015
■■ A lower forecast of 3-4% growth
according to a variety of consumer confidence
measures. In 2016 this has fallen back slightly in Q1, ■■ A most likely scenario of 5-6% growth
but the University of Michigan noted a significant (projection of 77.6 million outbound
uptick in May of this year to near the previous peak journeys)
(Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis, 2016)
■■ An upper forecast of 8-9% growth
■■ Real wages: Throughout 2015 inflation remained
extremely low. This created a strong real median
wage growth, averaging a 3% increase in 2015.

Conclusion
6
Conclusion
US consumers may not be known for international Empty Nests and Golden Globetrotters – share many
travel but its sheer size leaves it as the second largest similarities on the surface. They are both wealthy and
outbound tourism market in the world, after China. In in or nearing retirement. However, considering them
2016, it looks like this position will be strengthened. as a whole would be a mistake as their journey to a
Despite stagnating median incomes, which is of course booking and their vacation preferences are distinct.
a concern, Americans are travelling more and spending Golden Globetrotters are much more likely to research
more while doing so. Indeed, if patterns illustrated in and book online. They want culturally enriching
this paper continue and the US is able to avoid reces- vacations spent in well-appointed accommodation.
sion, then travel spending should continue to grow Affluent Empty Nests are more comfortable being
substantially above other types of consumer spending reached through analog means. They have relatively
over the next few years. low faith in the internet and like low-activity vacations,
often travelling in tour groups, and staying in cheaper
While this spending power as yet remains concentrated hotels. Using these nuances, they can be reached far
in the hands of older generations, as Millennials and more effectively with advertising in the right place
younger generations progress to more comfortable that displays the right product at the best point in the
career positions and incomes, it is likely they will travel purchase cycle. “Ideally you want to be reaching the
more and further afield than preceding age cohorts. consumer group with the same message, the same
offer, the same attributes across multiple channels,”
A key question will be whether the US, alongside emphasizes IXI’s Mancini, “so that they see it in the
other developed economies, can work to solve the newspaper, they see it on the billboards, they see it on
productivity and median income crisis that is holding TV channels and digital channels.” Failing to recognize
back further growth in the consumer profile and their the importance of segmentation would mean misspent
spending capacity. However, for the coming year wage advertising budgets and sales lost, not to mention
growth appears solid, as does job creation, which will miscommunication of messages.
help bolster confidence and the expansion of travel and
leisure spending. Although we have looked at broad patterns of behavior
that cannot account for everyone, better under-
In terms of reaching this strong and thriving market, standing consumer behavior dramatically increases
there is an over-abundance of data to help travel brands the probability of securing a booking and continuing
reach consumers and ride this wave. What we have that relationship into further ancillary revenue, good
presented here is merely the broad picture of the US feedback or return bookings. What EyeforTravel and our
outbound consumer. Each of the consumer groups partner on this paper, IXI Services, have presented is just
presented in this white paper consists of up to eight one potential data layer using aggregated consumer
further segments, all of which can be re-configured economics and credit insights. In total, there are a host
based on market need, brand and campaign. Just how of possible data streams, including:
detailed a travel brand wants to be is limited only by
1. Proprietary customer data
their data horizons and creativity.
2. Loyalty program data
This detail is critical to effective operations for a travel
3. Sales funnel and consumer browser data
brand. For example, our two oldest groups – Affluent

Conclusion
4. Social media data
5. Third party data
In order to maximize marketing program effectiveness

travel brands need to be able to combine all of these
data streams into immediately accessible databases
that can dynamically offer the consumer personalized
service accurately and reliably.

Methodology
Methodology
IXI Services, a division of Equifax, offers marketing EyeforTravel has worked with IXI Services to analyze this
solutions modelled from multiple sources, including a data. This was done by taking the data at an aggregated
proprietary database of over $14 trillion in anonymous, level across the 71 Economic Cohorts segments and
direct-measured™ consumer investable assets provided also by creating groups consisting of multiple cohorts.
from a network of leading banks, credit unions, The cohorts in each grouping were put together due
securities, and insurance firms. to similarities in their economic, demographic, and
location data. The six core groupings analyzed in this
IXI Services combines this foundation of measured report consisted of the following Economic Cohorts
wealth, comprising over 45% of all U.S. invested segments:
assets, with additional proprietary financial measures
of estimated income, spending, aggregated credit, IXI Services appends Economic Cohorts segments to
demographics and more to give a more comprehensive the Gfk MRI 2015 Doublebase Survey of the American
picture of the household wallet. Consumer to develop profiles for thousands of
consumer behaviors. The fielded surveys for these
These insights are applied in scoring and segmentation profile data was collected across four waves of the GfK
tools, digital measurement and targeting options, MRI survey fielding covering time periods from March
and real-time online analysis. IXI Services marketing 2013 through May 2015.
solutions can be used for marketing purposes only and
not for a firm offer of credit (non-FCRA applications).
I47 Material World: Urban Families
J51 Prudent Professionals: Suburban Families

Group F1 – Flush
J53 Suburban Success: Upscale Families
Families
N66 Executive Spenders: Suburban Families
N67 Executive Spenders: Suburban Couples
E26 Getting Ahead: Young City Families
F30 Credit Rules: Urban Families
F32 Suburban Stability: Families

Group F2 – Secure in
I43 Charge-It Champs: Young Suburban Families
Suburbia
I45 Confident Futures: Young City Families
J49 House of Cards: Suburban Families
K56 Planners and Savers: Suburban Families

Methodology
K58 Planners and Savers: City Couples
K59 Country Club Climbers: Suburban Empty Nesters
L63 Established Wealth: Suburban Retirees

Group M1 – Golden
O68 Corner Offices: Executive Urbanites
Globetrotters
O69 Champagne Tastes: Executive Empty Nesters
P70 Flush Funds: Wealthy Urban Seniors
P71 Diamonds and Pearls: Wealthiest Retirees
G38 Solid Foundation: Suburban Empty Nesters
H42 Comfortable Retirement: Suburban Couples
K55 Living for Today: Couples

Group M2 – Affluent
K57 Planners and Savers: Small Town Couples
Empty Nests
L60 Comfortable with Credit: Upscale Retirees
L61 Rewarding Retirement: Affluent Suburbanites
L62 Affluent Elders: Older Upscale Suburbanites
M64 Big Shots: Young Upmarket Urbanites
I46 Confident Futures: Young City Singles
I48 Material World: Urban Singles
J54 Suburban Success: Upscale Singles and Couples

Group Y1 – City Slickers
N65 Careers First: Urbanites
E27 Getting Ahead: Young City Singles
I44 Charge-It Champs: Young Suburban Singles and Couples
J52 Prudent Professionals: Suburban Singles and Couples
E23 Credit City: Young Singles
J50 House of Cards: Suburban Singles and Couples
F33 Suburban Stability: Singles and Couples

Group Y2 – Consuming
on Credit E25 Midscale Mainstream: Small-Town Singles and Couples
A6 Living on Loans: Young Urban Singles
F31 Credit Rules: Urban Singles
E22 Credit City: Young Families

About IXI Services
About IXI Services
IXI Services, a division of Equifax, enables its clients to

differentiate and segment consumer households and
preferred markets based on proprietary measures of
estimated wealth, income, spending capacity, credit,
share-of-wallet, and share-of-market.
Offering multi-dimensional insights including a founda-

tion of direct-measured assets and leading edge online
platforms, IXI helps financial services and consumer
marketing firms accelerate decision-making in order to
achieve their business goals, such as better identifying
customers with the greatest opportunity or making
smarter resource allocations and marketing decisions
based on the growth potential and product preferences
within target markets.
As a division of Equifax, IXI Services integrates with

Equifax’s suite of differentiated data and solutions,
offering our clients deep consumer insights to address
their business challenges.

References
References
ABTA, 2015. Travel Trends 2016 [Online]. Available at: https://c0e31a7ad92e875f8eaa-5facf23e658215b1771a91c2d-

f41e9fe.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/general/ABTA_Travel_Trends_2016_210116.pdf. Accessed 23 May, 2016.
Barclays, 2016. Barclays Cuts US GDP Forecast to 1.9% After Retail Sales Drop [Online]. Available at: www.market-
pulse.com/20160315/barclays-cuts-us-gdp-forecast-to-1-9-after-retail-sales-drop/. Accessed 30 March 2016.
Bulchand-Gidumal, Melian-Gonzalez & Lopez-Valcarcel, 2011. Improving hotel ratings by offering free Wi‐Fi [Online].
Available at: www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/17579881111173776. Accessed on 16 May 2016.
CNBC, 2016. First on CNBC: CNBC Transcript: Marriott International CEO Arne Sorenson Speaks with CNBC’s “Squawk
Box” Today [Online]. Available at: www.cnbc.com/2016/04/01/first-on-cnbc-cnbc-transcript-marriott-international-
ceo-arne-sorenson-speaks-with-cnbcs-squawk-box-today.html. Accessed 18 May, 2016.
Deutsche Bank, 2016. Deutsche Bank cuts U.S. GDP forecasts [Online]. Available at: www.reuters.com/article/
us-usa-economy-deutsche-bank-idUSKBN0UJ1YL20160105. Accessed 30 March, 2016.
EIU, 2016. United States [Online]. Available at: http://country.eiu.com/united-states. Accessed 30 March, 2016.
Expedia, 2015. Expedia’s 2015 Vacation Deprivation Study: Europe Leads World in Paid Vacation Time While
Americans and Asians Lag [Online]. Available at: https://viewfinder.expedia.com/news/expedia-s-2015-vacation-
deprivation-study-europe-leads-world-in-paid-vacation-time-while-americans-and-asians-lag/. Accessed 13 April,
2016.
EyeforTravel, 2015. Feeding the machine: lessons in loyalty from Caesars Palace [Online]. Available at: www.eyefor-
travel.com/revenue-and-data-management/feeding-machine-lessons-loyalty-caesars-palace. Accessed 18 May,
2016.
Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis, 2016. FRED® Economic Data [Online]. Available at: https://research.stlouisfed.org/
fred2/. Accessed 23 May, 2016.
IMF, 2016. World Economic Outlook (WEO) Update: Subdued Demand, Diminished Prospects [Online]. Available at:
www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2016/update/01/. Accessed on 30 March 2016.
ITA National Travel & Tourism Office, 2015. 2014 Outbound Analysis [Online]. Available at: http://travel.trade.gov/
outreachpages/download_data_table/2014_Outbound_Analysis.pdf. Accessed 23 May, 2016.
ITA National Travel & Tourism Office, 2016. Monthly Tourism Statistics [Online]. Available at: http://travel.trade.gov/
research/monthly/index.asp. Accessed 23 May, 2016.

References
Morgan Stanley, 2016. Setting the Stage for Steady Growth [Online]. Available at: www.morganstanley.com/ideas/
us-2016-outlook-setting-stage-for-steady-growth. Accessed 30 March, 2016.
OECD, 2016a. Economic outlook, analysis and forecasts [Online]. Available at: www.oecd.org/eco/outlook/. Accessed
30 March, 2016.
OECD, 2016b. Leading indicators, Consumer confidence index (CCI) [Online]. Available at: https://data.oecd.org/
leadind/consumer-confidence-index-cci.htm. Accessed 30 March, 2016.
Pew Research Center, 2016. The Demographics of Device Ownership [Online]. Available at: www.pewinternet.
org/2015/10/29/the-demographics-of-device-ownership/. Accessed 23 May, 2016.
SimilarWeb, 2016. Website Ranking - Top 50 sites in United States for Travel [Online]. Available at: www.similarweb.
com/country_category/united_states/travel. Accessed 18 May, 2016.
United States Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2016a. Table 2.5.6. Real Personal Consumption Expenditures by
Function, Chained Dollars [Online]. Available at: http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=9&step=1#reqid=9&-
step=3&isuri=1&903=75. Accessed 7 July 2016.
United States Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2016b. Travel and Tourism Spending Decelerated in the Fourth Quarter
of 2015 [Online]. Available at: www.bea.gov/newsreleases/industry/tourism/2016/tour415.htm. Accessed 23 May,
2016.
United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2015. Travel expenditures, 2005–2013: domestic and international
patterns in recession and recovery [Online]. Available at: www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2015/article/travel-expendi-
tures-2005-2013-domestic-and-international-patterns-in-recession-and-recovery.htm. Accessed 23 May, 2016.
United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016a. Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey [Online].
Available at: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000. Accessed 23 May, 2016.
United States Census Bureau, 2016b. Income Data by Topic [Online]. Available at: www.census.gov/householdes/
www/income/data/index.html. Accessed 6 April, 2016.
United States Census Bureau, 2016b. U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services (FT900) [Online]. Available at:
www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release/current_press_release/index.html. Accessed 20 April, 2016
University of Michigan, 2016. Index of Consumer Sentiment [Online]. Available at: www.sca.isr.umich.edu/charts.
html. Accessed 23 May, 2016.
US Department of State, 2016. Passport Statistics - Valid Passports in Circulation (1989-Present) [Online]. Available at:
https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/passports/statistics.html. Accessed 23 May, 2016
World Bank, 2016. Global Economic Prospects 2016 [Online]. Available at: www.worldbank.org/en/publication/
global-economic-prospects. Accessed 30 March. 2016.
Equifax and Economic Cohorts are registered trademarks and IXI and Direct-measured are trademarks of Equifax Inc.
All other trademarks, logos, and company, product and trade names that appear in this white paper are the
properties of their respective owners. Please see our terms of use for more.

References

References

US Outbound Market Research

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

US Outbound Market Research

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

US Outbound Travel in 2016

Forecasts, Consumer Profiles, Spending Patterns and Key Segments

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 2

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 3

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 4

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 5

The US economy is looking strong overall in 2016. GDP

Critically, we are seeing a greater propensity for

This white paper will address not only the overall

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 6

The US Consumer in 2016: An Overview

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 7

1.90% 2.40% 1.40% 2% 2.70% 2.80% 2.50% 2.24%

Figure 2: US Unemployment 2010 to May 2016

Source: United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016a

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 8

Figure 4: US and OECD Consumer Confidence January 2014-May 2016

Source: OECD, 2016b

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 9

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 10

Figure 7: Wealth Map of the US

Average Total Assets

Source: WealthComplete, IXI Services, 2016

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 11

Overall this wealth tends to skew towards the

Figure 8: US Median Household Estimated Income by Age of Head of Household

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 12

What Kind of Americans Travel Abroad?

■■ More likely to be married than the average US

2.2 Market Sizing 2.3 How Many Americans Are Travelling

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 13

Figure 9: Average Vacation Days Taken

Source: Expedia, 2015

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 14

Source: US Department of State, 2016

Figure 11: US Outbound Journeys Year-over-Year Percentage Change Between 2009-2015

Source: ITA National Travel & Tourism Office, 2016

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 15

Year Outbound departures (millions) YoY Percentage change

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 16

Source: ITA National Travel & Tourism Office, 2016

Figure 14: Change in US Outbound Journeys by Region, 2011-2015

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 17

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 18

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 19

Size of bubble = size of international travel market by segment

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 20

Figure 19: Average Length of International Journey, in Days, by Age Group

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 21

Key US Outbound Consumer Segments

As you might imagine, 71 segments may be too many

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 22

N67 Executive Spenders: Suburban Couples

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 23

G35 Striving for Balance: Urban Pre-Retirement Singles

-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 24

Number Discretionary Home

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 25

Table 6: Vital Statistics for Group Y2 – Consuming on Credit

Demographic data Income and wealth data

www.eyefortravel.com US OUTBOUND TRAVEL IN 2016 | 26

Other Caribbean Islands

3.1.3 Travel Behaviors Consuming on Credit travellers have plenty of ambition