The Finch Formerly Known As Gold

26 November 2006

A long-tail business with a tan

The travel business generates something like half a trillion dollars worldwide, so the $400 million or so spent on nude recreation each year is a drop in the bucket, and a small drop at that. One reason might be relative inaccessibility:

The incredible thing about the size of nudism, in my opinion, is that it manages to bring in that much cash despite the fact that significant barriers still remain which prevent any money at all from being spent on nudism. Nudist resorts still tend to exist in very rural, out of the way places, and are usually completely inaccessible by any form of public transportation. Basically, if you live in an urban or suburban area, you're not going to get to one without owning a car and making a several hours drive. Exceptions to this exist in Florida and certain parts of California — but for anyone who lives outside of those states, getting to one of those resorts represents a significant investment of both time and money. These resorts also tend to be more upscale and are priced accordingly, as well as necessitating flying to reach them, adding the cost of a plane ticket to your trip as well as planning to stay long enough to justify the travel time. Yet despite the fact that these resorts are expensive and hard to get to, the numbers show that there's still considerable demand for them.

And because they're expensive and hard to get to, it logically follows that there's a lot of latent demand that they're not meeting. The problem with these resorts being the only outlets for social nudism is that they're inaccessible to 90% of the population. We've taken advantage the internet by getting the information about the lifestyle out there; the barriers to learning about nudism are mostly gone, but the barriers to actually trying it out in a social setting are still significant. People can learn that our product exists, but there's no easy way for them to go from knowing about it to actually trying it out.

We need to get to the point where someone can try (social) nudism with an investment of only a few hours and a few dollars, rather than requiring several days and several thousands of dollars.

AANR (Southwest Region) lists exactly two facilities in Oklahoma, and they're decidedly off the beaten path.

And there's the matter of Arkansas, where it's illegal to advertise any such activities, let alone establish a facility where they can take place. (And you thought Oklahoma's tattoo ban was a trifle arbitrary.)

Before you ask: no, I haven't. The obvious reason: it takes a certain amount of time to work up the nerve. The not-so-obvious reason: barring a sudden change in status, I'd have to go alone, and you should not be surprised to hear that guys of the single persuasion aren't exactly highly-valued in this subculture. (Now that's a barrier.)

Still, I have to agree that the demand is there: even one percent of the travel business is a heck of a lot of business, and, you should pardon the expression, the end is not in sight.

Posted at 5:30 PM to Birthday Suitable


What? You mean those margin cartoons Sergio Aragones used to do for Mad Magazine were not an accurate depiction of reality, in which people going about their normal business could simply stumble on a nudist camp whose tall fence was prone to knotholes?

Posted by: McGehee at 7:30 AM on 27 November 2006

The only instance I can recall where this might actually have been close to reality was in Austin, Texas, where there used to be a small block of clothing-optional apartments on a busy eastside road. (I remember seeing a news clip from the complex. The manager was a large, cheerful woman; one tenant allowed that the primary advantage of living there was "We can get a pizza delivered here faster than any place else in town.")

There are such things as "non-landed" clubs, which tend to meet in members' back yards, but there aren't a lot of those on Main Street either.

Posted by: CGHill at 7:44 AM on 27 November 2006