4 ms·

The C.A.A are covering all costs to hotels. Mainly through the ATOL fund. The CAA have already reached out to those hotels who have been kicking people out. So

The C.A.A are covering all costs to hotels. Mainly through the ATOL fund. The CAA have already reached out to those hotels who have been kicking people out. So no, it’simply not true that any Greek hotel will be left out of pocket from this.

usr1106 7y ago
It's not so easy. Reportedly TC has not being paying (some?) hotel bills since June. Even if a fund (Britain), insurances (Germany) and whoever might be responsible in various countries pays the outstanding bills, how will their hotel business continue? If there were 600,000 TC tourists out in the beginning of this week, there is capacity for 600,000 tourists in 3 weeks, in 6 weeks and so on. Winter might always be a bit less busy, but it's obvious that economies in the holiday countries will lose a lot for many months to come. Much more than Britain or any of those companies where the tourists come from.
- ineedasername 7y ago
  Yes. Let's calculate on the conservative side and say they would have spent about an average of $800 on hotel, food, local attractions, souvenirs, etc. That's about half a billion to the local economies. Not all of that is a loss for the 600,000 out right now, and some future vacationers might re-book, but plenty of them won't have the money to pay again or decide not to spend it, and simply wait until next year for their next vacation. I wouldn't be surprised if the losses went to a full billion or so. I'm not sure what the long term costs of "moral hazard" would be, but I've also never bought it as the bogey man some make it out to be. I simply don't think that many executives would steer their company in a direction that is more likely to lead to insolvency just because it might get bailed out. Not when it also means they lose their job in disgrace along with a lot less in compensation than they would have made if the company stayed solvent.

usr1106 7y ago

It's not so easy. Reportedly TC has not being paying (some?) hotel bills since June. Even if a fund (Britain), insurances (Germany) and whoever might be responsible in various countries pays the outstanding bills, how will their hotel business continue? If there were 600,000 TC tourists out in the beginning of this week, there is capacity for 600,000 tourists in 3 weeks, in 6 weeks and so on. Winter might always be a bit less busy, but it's obvious that economies in the holiday countries will lose a lot for many months to come. Much more than Britain or any of those companies where the tourists come from.

ineedasername 7y ago
Yes. Let's calculate on the conservative side and say they would have spent about an average of $800 on hotel, food, local attractions, souvenirs, etc. That's about half a billion to the local economies. Not all of that is a loss for the 600,000 out right now, and some future vacationers might re-book, but plenty of them won't have the money to pay again or decide not to spend it, and simply wait until next year for their next vacation. I wouldn't be surprised if the losses went to a full billion or so. I'm not sure what the long term costs of "moral hazard" would be, but I've also never bought it as the bogey man some make it out to be. I simply don't think that many executives would steer their company in a direction that is more likely to lead to insolvency just because it might get bailed out. Not when it also means they lose their job in disgrace along with a lot less in compensation than they would have made if the company stayed solvent.