With the French supposedly "unfriendly" and with their alleged hygiene problems, how do you France bashers explain France's overwhelming victory in getting tourist dollars, handily defeating the supposedly friendly and santitary US. <BR><BR>World's Top 10 Tourism Destinations, 2000 (p) <BR>Based On Number of Arrivals (in Millions) <BR>France 75.5 <BR>United States 50.9 <BR>Spain 48.2 <BR>Italy 41.2 <BR>China 31.2 <BR>United Kingdom 25.3 <BR>Russian Federation 21.2 <BR>Mexico 20.6 <BR>Canada 20.4 <BR>Germany 19.0 <BR> <BR>Note: 2000 data are preliminary<BR>Source: World Tourism Organization (WTO) <BR><BR> <BR><BR>

Wow--I am surprzed how well France does, it really licked US butt!. I am not surprized that UK and Germany fared so poorly--overall they are boring cultures!

geee, it wouldn't have anything to do with the close proximity of other coutries? I bet if they made the comparison more "fair" and calculated the number of people in the US who visit other regions of the US the numbers would much different.

Cynic-This survey is travel to countries, not parts of countries. You are suggesting that it more fair to compare apples to oranges. Should the statistics be changed so as to treat each state as a country? Now that makes alot of sense! Anyway, such a survey would be much more seriously flawed, now wouldn't it? To be fair, we would need to count each province in each of those other countries, right? And countries with many states/provinces and that are easily traveled to because they are in one large geographic region would have an ufair advantage, right? Note also that although Germany, Spain, and the UK are just as easy to get to from France, they did not fare so well. So easy access alone does not explan it. It is good to be cynical, but think before you open your mouth and get sarcastic. Thank you

Yeah Cynic--if it had to do with proximity to other European countries alone--then why were Germany and UK at the bottom? Your point don't make no sense. Don't forget also China and other big countries have alot of provinces. Oh and it would not be possible to count trips between US states since there are no check points. I guess France is a favorite, hands down!

This is amazing. I wonder how they calculate the numbers?

well, cynic DOES make a valid point.<BR><BR>the US is so vast, and really so far out of the way for anyone who isn't Canadian or Mexican... so the fact that we are that high on the list... anyone who comes here has to go through much more effort to get here.<BR><BR>for someone who is calling this apples and oranges - you are using specious reasoning. just because Germany/UK is so far below - has nothing to do with the US's attractiveness as a tourist destination. It may have everything to do with their UNattractiveness as a tourist destination in their own right (although re: UK I don't understand - it seems quite popular, but it is an island after all - so less easy than France for many).<BR><BR>long and short: to get to France is very easy for anyone in Western Europe. it's quite close to several borders - as close as any state in the US is, to another state (and actually quite closer as heck, Alaska to Maine - fuhgeddaboutit!!). truly, many countries in Europe are the size of American states. state/state is same as country/country, size wise anyway.<BR><BR>AND<BR><BR>remember, not everyone has piles of money. to be poor and in Germany, but go to France, is a short road trip. To get to the US for anyone - you gotta have some money behind you. (not a lot, just, some).<BR><BR>my .02<BR><BR

What I don't understand is how these figures define tourism. It seems they are based on a number of arrivals -- is there a separation of those for business from those for tourism?

As the original post said, those numbers are for arrivals. That would include people who are going on to another country after arriving at a French airport.<BR><BR>If you measure in "International Tourism Receipts (US$Billion), that same source lists the US first with US$85.2 billion, Spain at 31 and France at 29.9.<BR><BR>The top tourism *spenders* were US with $65 billion, Germany $48 billion, UK 37, Japan 32, and France 17.<BR><BR>http://www.world-tourism.org/market_...pdatedengl.pdf

Devil--you are missing the point--those countries are also divided into provinces that are equivelent to states. But the survey is not measuring that! So why should it measure subparts of the US? <BR><BR>If want to look at size, it can work both ways. If we measure vistors to each state separately, then I can assure you that France would beat aNY US state hands down. After all, that much smaller country appears to have beat all the States COMBINED!! <BR><BR>You miss the point about the low numbers in UK and Germany. I said those low numbers indicate that proximity ALONE does not expain why France is so high. <BR><BR>You say US is farther away and isolated---well Europe is also far away from US and many other countries of the world. You point also suggests that an overwhelming number of the visitors to France are from other Europeran countries--but I have not seen any evidence of that, Can you point to any? You are making a big assumption--it may explain some of the huge amount, but probably not most of it (or again, the numbers of other European countries would probably be higher, unless everyone in Europe just wants to go to France but not other EU countries). RE UK, it is now very easy to get there from the continent. Anyway, if your explanation of difficulty getting there holds true, then it contradicts your assertion about travel to France-at least as it pertains to travellers from UK to France. So much for your theory regarding easy access to France from all other European countries. On a personal note, when meeting people from Europe, I have been surprized that many of them have not visited other European countries that were so close. <BR><BR>Als let us not forget if we want to consider difficulty in getting somewhere, I would think China an Russia are doing very well. They are destinations that are expensive to get to and difficult to get to also. It is pretty cheap to get to the US these days, especially from Europe. I tink it is far more exoenseive to get to Asia from Europe and I know it is from US. <BR><BR>So you see Devil, your arguments also have serious flaws.

Hey I thought Americans played by the rules. Here we have people like Cynical and Devil--who do not like the results and so they start claiming we should compare US states to countries. Sore losers. Anyway, those European countries all have theor own states (provinces) and so do places like China. Where will it ever end?

Anyone and Craig:<BR><BR>You must be French, so I'll explain this real slow:<BR>None of the numbers count internal tourism. Most Americans (who are the biggest spenders on tourism) take internal vacations. The beach, Disney world, mountains, all that fun stuff. If this could be factored in (which it can't) there is no doubt the US would be the biggest tourist destination in the world. <BR><BR>These numbers count the British family taking a week on the beach in Spain or the German couple spending a weekend in Paris, but not the Bostonians spending a week in Florida. <BR><BR>

Hello ignorant--Glad you admit you problem. Let me repeat--none of the numbers count internal tourism between parts of France (provinces), or between parts of other countries either. So what that Americans want to visit other pats of their own country. That is not relavent. Are you a daft thick-headed Ameriacan or just a dumb American?

You forgot some other things the French are #1 in, like bad breath.

Ellen--yes the people may be changing planes in France --but they may be changing planes in US also! So what.

Surprised:<BR><BR>It just gets worse with you. See if you can read this without having to move your lips:<BR><BR>1. There are a lot more Americans than frenchies<BR>2. Americans spend a lot more on tourism than any other country<BR>3. Americans overwhelmingly travel within their own country.<BR><BR>Do you see how it is idiotic to claim that France is a more popular tourist destination than the US? This is a useful study for comparing Euro countries against each other, but it's not really relevant in comparison to the country which both generates the biggest single block of tourists and serves as their primary destination.<BR><BR>If you need this in poorly-pronounced, degraded provincial latin, I'll have someone translate it into French.<BR>

Jim --you sound like a jelous american loser with a small mind and even smaller genitals! Are you jelous of the sexy french men with their handsome faces, lean bodies and very large pieces? I think so!

<BR>It's a lot easier for a Brit or German to travel to France than the US. So, of course, the French numbers are inflated.<BR><BR>I would be more interested in knowing how many overseas visitors are received by each country.

Olivier,<BR>Oh yes, I am very jealous. I wish I was unemployed so I could smoke cigarettes all day with some cows with hairy armpits.

Again ignorant one--you fail to address the main point --we are not counting inter-country travel with this study. You probably do not realize (though I have said it twice) that France and other countries have areas that are equivelent to states-they are called provinces-the study does not count travel between such subparts either). I think you have (finally) realized this and have no rationale response. So you have tried to shift the subjct to money spent and population. (perhaps if we focus on population travel within a country, china might win!) Those factors have nothing to do with most poular tourist destinations. <BR><BR>Again, you are assuming the high numbers are the result of travel between European countries--but you have offered nothing to back it up. Just your guess. <BR><BR>BTW, the EU has far more people than the US. <BR><BR>Even if we were to count in the bogus way you suggest, then we should calculate travel to each US state independently, right? In that case, I would bet my money on France still beating any single US state (NYC is the most popular tourist destination--Cal is second). You lose ignorant one, but carry on in your bliss if you wish!