Statewide Results
The charts below illustrate statewide averages for occupancy and average
daily rates.
Figure 1
Figure 2

Table1 illustrates the changes in occupancy and average daily rates over the last four years. Note that comparisons are made with the Quarters of past years. Comparisons also reflect a change in Economic Development Regions as of January 1997. Seasonal properties that were closed during these months are not included in the calculations.
Table 1. Comparison of Statewide Occupancy and Average Daily Rates, 1995-1998
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Jan OCC |
|
|
|
|
|
| Jan ADR |
|
|
|
|
|
| Feb OCC |
|
|
|
||
| Feb ADR |
|
|
|
||
| Mar OCC |
|
|
|||
| Mar ADR |
|
|
|||
| Apr OCC |
|
|
|
|
|
| Apr ADR |
|
|
|
|
|
| May OCC |
|
|
|
||
| May ADR |
|
|
|
||
| Jun OCC |
|
|
|
||
| Jun ADR |
|
|
|
||
| Jul OCC |
|
|
|
|
|
| Jul ADR |
|
|
|
|
|
| Aug OCC |
|
|
|
||
| Aug ADR |
|
|
|
||
| Sep OCC |
|
|
|
||
| Sep ADR |
|
|
|
||
| Oct OCC |
|
|
|
|
|
| Oct ADR |
|
|
|
|
|
| Nov OCC |
|
|
|
||
| Nov ADR |
|
|
|
||
| Dec OCC |
|
|
|
||
| Dec ADR |
|
|
|
Regional Results
The rest of this report presents the results of the monthly accommodations survey for June-January 1998. The 7 economic development regions as defined by the North Carolina Travel and Tourism Division are used.
Table 2 Occupancy and Average Daily Rates by Economic Development Region
March, April, and May 1997
|
|
Mar OCC | Mar ADR | Apr OCC | Apr ADR | May Occ | May ADR |
|
|
25.25%
|
$57.52
|
32.38%
|
$62.36
|
39.07%
|
$67.77
|
|
|
55.97%
|
$42.11
|
70.73%
|
$32.85
|
56.74%
|
$41.81
|
|
|
68.81%
|
$47.77
|
79.32%
|
$52.48
|
69.24%
|
$49.70
|
|
|
60.47%
|
$49.33
|
73.44%
|
$73.77
|
66.98%
|
$65.25
|
|
|
46.48%
|
$55.63
|
51.88%
|
$63.06
|
59.62%
|
$65.56
|
|
|
74.13%
|
$41.44
|
60.19%
|
$45.31
|
63.63%
|
$51.93
|
|
|
34.66%
|
$48.78
|
40.99%
|
$49.58
|
55.88%
|
$55.10
|
|
|
52.25%
|
$48.94
|
58.42%
|
$54.20
|
58.74%
|
$56.73
|
Table 3 Occupancy and Average Daily Rates by Economic Development Region
June, July, and August 1997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49.87%
|
$74.24
|
62.55%
|
$73.12
|
61.81%
|
$71.10
|
|
|
57.38%
|
$45.60
|
61.96%
|
$45.21
|
59.18%
|
$45.41
|
|
|
55.97%
|
$56.04
|
66.05%
|
$47.42
|
59.06%
|
$57.21
|
|
|
71.29%
|
$66.88
|
66.81%
|
$64.26
|
67.70%
|
$65.52
|
|
|
61.14%
|
$69.37
|
64.27%
|
$69.73
|
74.37%
|
$75.45
|
|
|
55.22%
|
$49.61
|
68.71%
|
$54.10
|
67.71%
|
$57.10
|
|
|
59.16%
|
$65.39
|
67.57%
|
$69.52
|
74.37%
|
$75.45
|
| Statewide |
58.57%
|
$61.02
|
65.42%
|
$60.48
|
66.32%
|
$63.89
|
Table 4 Occupancy and Average Daily Rates by Economic Development Region Sept, Oct, and November 1997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40.05%
|
$72.47
|
62.91%
|
$74.77
|
34.39%
|
$85.02
|
|
|
54.23%
|
$44.11
|
61.76%
|
$45.57
|
49.58%
|
$45.22
|
|
|
57.20%
|
$55.61
|
68.90%
|
$57.68
|
50.88%
|
$57.69
|
|
|
68.92%
|
$70.23
|
74.00%
|
$74.30
|
66.05%
|
$72.03
|
|
|
46.58%
|
$84.04
|
44.02%
|
$46.37
|
25.43%
|
$55.35
|
|
|
49.39%
|
$49.57
|
49.49%
|
$43.69
|
45.50%
|
$38.91
|
|
|
46.30%
|
$87.48
|
43.52%
|
$46.61
|
23.75%
|
$56.72
|
| Statewide |
51.81%
|
$66.22
|
57.80%
|
$55.57
|
42.23%
|
$58.70
|
Table 5 Occupancy and Average Daily Rates by Economic Development Region December 1997 - February 1998
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33.97%
|
$60.11
|
23.12%
|
$73.48
|
24.74%
|
$68.96
|
|
|
42.49%
|
$38.77
|
48.36%
|
$39.99
|
50.50%
|
$38.13
|
|
|
46.32%
|
$61.20
|
46.86%
|
$51.54
|
55.65%
|
$50.01
|
|
|
52.30%
|
$63.44
|
55.58%
|
$70.65
|
67.57%
|
$70.31
|
|
|
25.07%
|
$50.88
|
21.61%
|
$44.94
|
29.91%
|
$54.97
|
|
|
45.40%
|
$36.34
|
37.55%
|
$33.98
|
52.54%
|
$36.97
|
|
|
22.53%
|
$52.70
|
20.28%
|
$45.85
|
27.86%
|
$56.60
|
| Statewide |
38.30%
|
$51.92
|
36.19%
|
$51.49
|
44.11%
|
$53.71
|
Results by Lodging Classification
In addition to stratifying by region, a breakdown of accommodations by lodging classification lends a helpful perspective to visitation trends. The Office of Park and Tourism Research asked accommodations to classify their properties in one of the following categories: full-service, limited service hotel/motel with restaurant facilities nearby, limited service hotel/ motel without restaurant nearby, and bed & breakfast. Below are the occupancy and average daily rates data according to these classifications.
Note these tables report only those properties that responded to the classification question. Many convention and visitor bureaus report an aggregated occupancy and average daily rate for their area. In these cases, a breakdown is not available. The maximum numbers of properties included in each classification are small: B&B = 18, Full Service = 11, Limited Service with Nearby Restaurant Facilities = 7, Limited Service without Nearby Restaurant Facilities = 36
Table 6 Occupancy and Average Daily Rates by Lodging Classification
March, April, and May 1997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 7 Occupancy and Average Daily Rates by Lodging Classification
June, July, and August, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 8 Occupancy and Average Daily Rates by Lodging Classification
September, October, and November, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 9 Occupancy and Average Daily Rates by Lodging Classification
December, January, and February 1997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Participating and Non-participating Counties
If one or more properties responded during the most recent reporting month, that county is counted as participating. Counties shown as not participating are those in which no properties returned the survey instrument. Some counties do not have properties selected for participation in the sample survey. The table reflects responses received for February, 1998.
Table 10. Participating and Non-participating Counties by Region
|
|
|
|
|
|
Avery, Buncombe, Cherokee, Haywood, Henderson, Jackson, Macon, Madison, Polk, Swain, Watauga | Alleghany, Ashe,
Clay, Cleveland, Graham, McDowell, Mitchell, Transylvania, Wilkes, Yancey |
|
|
Burke, Caldwell, Iredell, Mecklenberg, Stanley, | Alexander, Anson, Cabarrus, Catawba, Gaston, Lincoln, Rowan, Union, |
|
|
Alamance, Davie, Randolph, Rockingham, | Caswell, Davidson, Forsyth, Guilford, Stokes, Surry, Yadkin |
|
|
Durham, Moore, Orange, Wake | Chatham, Franklin, Granville, Harnett, Johnston, Lee, Person, Warren |
|
|
Carteret, Craven, Pitt, Onslow | Duplin, Edgcombe, Greene, Jones, Lenoir, Nash, Pamlico, Wayne, Wilson |
|
|
Brunswick, Cumberland, Richmond | Bladen, Columbus, Hoke, New Hanover, Pender, Robeson, Sampson, Scotland |
|
|
Beaufort, Currituk, Dare, Halifax, Hertford, Hyde, Washington | Bertie, Camden, Chowan, Gates, Perquimans, Martin, Northampton, Pasquotank, Tyrell, Washington |
We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of all the lodging properties that have participated in our data collection efforts in such a timely manner. If you have questions concerning the accommodations survey, please contact Dr. Gene Brothers (919-515-3699) or Samantha Mitchell (919-515-9571).