A travel agent is quoted in 'Tourism turnaround?' (#262) as saying that "at least 30,000 go via Nepal" to Tibet. A quick check of the seasonal weekly schedule and plane size of Air China tells you that this figure is nonsense. A similar delirious figure was circulated months ago about Khumbu. Nepal's tourism statistics are rife with double and triple-counting. Go to Bhutan and Tibet via Kathmandu and, presto, you are three tourists. "In Nepal the violence is not random" is the best sales pitch ever-it feels much better when it is targeted. Nepali tourism pros are the Rip van Winkles of Shangri La. Since 40 years they offer the same product: trekking where they make you stay in lodges that are dumps. Not even one percent of worldwide tourists want or are able to go to Khumbu, yet Nepal markets it like crazy.

Tourism is in the dumps because of the Maoists, they say. Not true. Nepal's tourism decline started in the mid '90s when top tour operators started either reducing their commitment or pulling out completely (not only from Nepal but other Asian destinations) due to frequent customer complaints. I don't know of any quality travel agency that still features Nepal in its program, nor am I aware of any newsletter that promotes the country. Nepal is nowhere on the radar screen.

Still, for what it offers Nepal is way overpriced. Examples: a three-week trip with trek is more expensive than a four-week hike across the Alps where there is excellent accommodation plus food and a clean environment. Or you have a week in Malaysia including hotel, breakfast, rental car, or one week in a beach in Turkey with full board.

So Indian tourism looks promising? Hey, that's the biz you want to be in and with profit margins in the decimals. Finally the China illusion: the potential Chinese tourist sliding out of a 3-series Beamer glancing at a travel brochure from Nepal-the land where they read the Mao book backwards.

Hans B Nix,
Munich