Dorine Linestein
Africa is more familiar.
The global hotel giants have expanded across the continent, even moving into safari territory. Marriott plans to add more than 50 facilities and more than 9,000 rooms by 2027. This includes six East African safari properties and the 2026 Kruger National Park Lodge. Hilton triples its African footprint to over 160 hotels. It's exciting news that shows Africa's confidence in tourism, but does this risk putting Africa on a map for mainstream travelers or making it a real, special?
“The Marriott brand and its expanding companion to Africa are double-edged swords,” said the managing partner at Empark Beyond, a New York-based travel agency (No. 47 of the Travel Weekly Power List). “On the other hand, there is an incredible brand equity that moves the anxiety of future guests remotely. However, there is a problem with the lodge (number of rooms) and the relative size of that particular location.”
Huff explained that the environment operated by Safari Camp and Lodges is extremely vulnerable, as well as being very far away. He said “part of the appeal of African safari is ownership of Hyperlocal Lodges,” warning that large-scale brand sales procedures can lead to staff who appear to be “a little rehearsed robots” compared to the authentic warmth of independent properties.
But that doesn't have to be everything, according to Guy Sthlik, CEO of Bon Hotels. “I don't think this new wave of international investment will destroy credibility. If there is, we tend to specialize in what is already there,” he said. “I strongly believe that professionalism and authenticity can coexist as long as the local stories, culture and people are respected.”
Karim Cheltout, senior vice president of development for the Middle East and Africa at Marriott International, agreed to Sterik. He said authentic hospitality comes from people, places and purposes, and Marriott “hires and trains local talent, partners with local artisans and suppliers to celebrate culinary and cultural heritage.”
Impact on the local community
Conservation and community impact is another concern with the expansion of larger hotel groups to the continent. “Small family-owned lodges have direct revenue sharing agreements with the community (approximately 5% to 10% of total revenue),” Huff explained. “These create real ownership and pride among our staff, which is much more difficult for a larger brand.”
Tourism expert Anna Spencery suggested that the impact would depend heavily on the behavior of these hotels. “If they are a group that is advocated for sustainability and is accredited by an independent certification body to reputable standards, then it needs to integrate local procurement and employment integrated into the business,” Spenceley said.
• Related: Jumeirah expands to Africa
One area where these global chains may be expected to have distinct advantages is their loyalty programs. However, African reality is more complicated.
“For our gorgeous clients, Bonboy is not a different maker,” Eckirk's Huff said clearly. “Africa's mainstream loyalty programme is extremely problematic as it applies to hotel-only bookings. Africa is operationally very complicated and the company's reservation team lacks the experience and know-how to connect dots with all the other remote locations guests want to experience when going on a safari.”
Craig Erasmus, CEO of Mantis, who recently partnered with Accor, reflects this sentiment from his experience.
The role of a travel advisor
This complexity is exactly why travel transactions remain so important for travel in Africa. As Erasmus explained, booking Africa directly is not easy due to the complexity of land arrangements in various countries.
“To be honest, 80% of safari-related bookings are mainly provided through tour operators and agents in North America,” he said. “We need experts to tag Uganda or Kenya and help the moment we have a border crossing or flight.”
Based on several interviews, it appears that US travel advisors are still supporting local safari brands.
“We are honestly not enthusiastic about Marriott because we are involved in trade,” Huff said, referring to the company's property at its safari destination. “If I were in a sales situation where my client, Marriott or bust was perfectly solid, I would make it happen for them. But I would have already presented local alternatives and outlined the benefits of staying at Marriott.”
He added that Marriott offers excellent products and client experiences, but compares it to one of the local safari companies opening a palace hotel in Paris.
Houston-based travel expert Linda de Sosa reiterated Huff's statement, “For safari, I will continue to send my clients to Singita, Andbeyond and other specialized Safari camps.”
All are welcome
Meanwhile, Mantis Chief Erasmus says there is room for coexistence.
“I think there's a demand that you mostly need international people, in addition to domestic operators, in order for domestic operators to grow together to actually meet that demand,” he said. “If you look at a typical North American guest, they're coming between the seventh and tenth days. So they're not staying in one property. They may be staying at Marriott as an entry point because they're either loyal members or know the brand, but I'd like to visit Safari Lodge destinations.
“No matter what happens, you're always going to support some of the national and local brands along the way,” Erasmus added.
The key question is not whether these extensions will occur. They are already in progress. It's whether they will strengthen Africa's charm while maintaining what makes it special.
As Stehlik said, “These global brands need to work with local hotel groups that don't try to replace them.”
