Indoor Vs Outdoor. Can adventure be contained?
Raft America have a really interesting post on the recent trend of outdoor sports moving indoors. There seems to be a debate over which is better, whereas I agree that indoor adventure is complimentary to the outdoor industry. In fact, I’d go as far as saying that it’s a massively under-used asset.
More and more in the UK we’re seeing adventure hotspots popping up in urban areas. Snow slopes like Manchester’s Chillfactore, climbing walls and even artificial surf parks are seen as ways of satisfying a need for adventure in urban areas. Is this just appealing to existing snow, climbing and surf enthusiasts who live in the country’s cities? I think not.
The number of regular adventure participants in the UK is dwarfed by the number of occasional participants. These are people who try an activity once or twice but then fail to continue on a frequent basis. Some of these will be natural drop offs, those who have no interest in ever trying something again but not all of them.
I would suggest that the vast majority of these occasional participants just don’t get around to it again. Life, work and family gets in the way. For these people, adventure activities on their doorstep are a great opportunity to develop and maintain their skills and passion for outdoor sports. Better links between outdoor and indoor providers could vastly increase the uptake from occasional participants, turning them into weekend adventure junkies and explorers.
Making adventure activities more accessible is good news for everyone. Indoor versions may be contained and artificial but when they become mainstream, opportunity abounds.
What do you think?