More Aussies are using AI to plan holidays, from scoring deals to assembling itineraries
Can I afford to go? What would a realistic budget look like for a two-week holiday? How can I cut corners to save some cash?
I decide to do the 2025 equivalent of phoning a friend — I ask my buddy ChatGPT.
My initial prompt is too vague and it gives pricing in USD, which isn't particularly helpful. I refine my criteria, asking for a rough total in AUD for a fortnight in September, departing from Perth ('please', I add, because manners are still important when talking to a robot).
In the blink of an eye, Chat spits out a breakdown of average costs on everything from flights to accommodation, car rental, food and activities.
There are three tiers for backpacker, mid-range and luxury travel and an option to split components if I have a travelling companion.
It even offers suggestions for making my hard-earned coin stretch further, like buying groceries rather than eating out and opting to self-drive rather than joining a guided tour of the famous Golden Circle.
All in all, Chat reckons I'll need to save $8500-$9000 to make Iceland happen.
What would have taken me hours of research and a lot of math just to ascertain whether I can even consider the trip in the first place was reduced to mere minutes.
While I want to give myself a pat on the back for being so resourceful — there's a certain smugness that comes with finding a sneaky shortcut — I am hardly the first to use ChatGPT for travel tips.
In recent research conducted by Compare the Market, nearly a third of those surveyed admitted to using artificial intelligence to plan their holidays.
These Aussie respondents said they outsourced a range of tasks to AI, with the most common being destination recommendations, hunting for deals, seeking activities and finding accommodation.
Others reported they used AI to quickly create itineraries, scour flights or transport and understand currency conversion.
The data also gave insight into how different generations are embracing the technology — or not.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, gen Z and millennials are spearheading the adoption of AI when it comes to concocting their dream vacation, with 52 per cent and 44 per cent respectively utilising the tool to plan a holiday.
Meanwhile, 93 per cent of baby boomers and 76 per cent of gen X respondents said they were resistant to bringing AI into their trip arrangements.
Compare the Market's Chris Ford says the stats reflect how we engage with the ever-changing tech landscape.
'Our latest data highlights a shift in the way travellers are approaching their planning, with convenience, personalisation and speed driving the adoption of innovative AI tools,' he says.
'It's likely that travellers are using these tools in addition to chatting with travel agents, conducting desktop research or seeking ideas and inspiration from social media.
'AI is evolving at a rapid rate and as it becomes more accessible and intuitive, it's not surprising that travellers are relying on new technology to help shape their dream holidays.'
But the insurer warns against taking AI's word as gospel.
With nothing to validate the credibility of such recommendations, Ford says travellers need to practice due diligence.
'AI can be a great starting point when planning a holiday, but always ensure you're crossing your 't's and dotting your 'i's,' he says.
'Many of these tools and services are still in their infancy stage and may not be 100 per cent accurate, so do your own research to ensure you're equipped with the right tools and information for your trip.
'The last thing we want to see is anyone getting themselves into a potentially dangerous or unsafe situation based on the recommendations from AI.'
Ford makes a crucial point here about our relationship with platforms like ChatGPT.
Rather than approaching them as one-stop-shop to curate every element of our holiday, we should instead consider them as a starting point to kick off deeper research.
After all, isn't that part of the fun with travel — the anticipation in the lead-up, the process of discovering a destination before we have arrived and assembling a bucket list tailored to our specific taste?
By asking a computer to generate an itinerary based on what's popular, we are depriving ourselves of creativity, spontaneity and adventure.
We must also remember that what the AI bot spits out is dependent on the quality of our prompts.
The more we refine our request, the more likely we will receive helpful answers, but even then things can go wonky.
Take this from my colleague Belle: 'I asked ChatGPT to give me a child-friendly restaurant in Ubud. It sent me to a weird health food restaurant with a koi pond where you couldn't wear shoes. My feral children cleared the room within minutes. Disaster.'
Then there's the cognitive dissonance that comes with considering the environmental impact of AI versus the fear of being left behind if we don't get on board with this technology.
Like it or not, it is shaping and re-shaping the future at breakneck speed.
We all have to decide where our (virtual) line in the sand is: what is productive and 'mindful' use based on our needs and values.
For me, I'm OK with employing ChatGPT to whip up a quick budget so I can take the holiday to Iceland I've always dreamed of.
But when it asks if I want activity recommendations or a detailed itinerary next, I politely decline. I'd rather leave some room for mystery and exploration.
'Thanks', I farewell my cyber mate in my sign-off (because, manners).
Our collective of writers just so happens to represent the four age demographics mentioned in the research above. So what's the hot take?
Stephen Scourfield
— b
aby boomer
Trusting someone – or, in this case,
something
– to book a holiday (particularly a family holiday!) requires a lot of trust.
If some detail is missed in the booking process (a wrong date, a badly timed connection), it will be you standing there, somewhere, trying to fix it (possibly with the family 'on your case').
Would I trust AI yet?
No – not yet.
Of course, I think we all know that AI is good at doing grunt work and it is up to us to check details. So AI is already useful for the broad-brush, first sweep of mapping out a holiday.
But AI won't then back itself by booking it all. (That will be the game changer.)
So, at this stage, AI, for me, is still a basic tool of research – not a replacement for an experienced and knowledgeable travel agent.
Leyanne Baillie
—
gen X
Although my generation is confident when it comes to using tech (even if we're not digital natives), I think AI programs would be more effort than they're worth.
I know it could be a time-saver in terms of journey-planning brainstorming and getting a rough guide of options, but I'd still want to tailor my itinerary to cater to my personal taste.
I don't think I'm ready to hand over the reins completely to artificial intelligence just yet.
Jessie Stoelwinder — millennial
I love a good travel hack, and that's how I have been approaching my use of AI.
Anything that makes life a little easier and frees me up to investigate the fun stuff — where to eat, hike, shop, people-watch etc. — and I am on board.
I've used ChatGPT to quickly aggregate travel data for personal trips to assist with admin, logistics and practicalities, which I will then cross-check and verify to make sure the information works for me.
Recommendations, however? Word of mouth and insider intel from a human being will always win, in my opinion.
Megan French
— g
en Z
I would be open to the idea of utilising AI when planning my travels but I'd take everything it recommends with a grain of salt while still doing my own thorough research.
I think it's great for foundational information-based planning early in trip preparations, such as 'what holidays are on in India during July and how is best to navigate them?'
But when it comes to booking flights and accommodation, I'd go nowhere near AI …
yet
.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AU Financial Review
24 minutes ago
- AU Financial Review
ASX to open lower as weak US jobs data sparks jitters; $A rallies
The Australian sharemarket is set for a weak start to the week, with investors rattled by fresh signs of a slowdown in the US economy. A softer-than-expected July non-farm payrolls report spurred concerns about the health of the world's largest economy. Just 73,000 jobs were added in the month – well short of the 100,000 forecast by economists. Adding to the gloom, previous months' figures were revised sharply lower, with a combined 258,000 jobs stripped from the May and June tallies. That dragged the three-month average to 35,000 – the slowest pace of hiring outside the pandemic since 2010. ASX futures slipped 32 points, or 0.4 per cent, to 8710, tracking a steep decline on Wall Street, where the S&P 500 shed 1.6 per cent on Friday. The Australian dollar jumped 0.8 per cent to US64.7¢ as the weak data sent the greenback tumbling. Perpetual head of investment strategy Matthew Sherwood said the report confirmed that earlier signs of cooling demand were now showing up in the labour market. 'Domestic demand had already been slowing through the first half of the year, and now we're seeing that reflected in jobs,' Sherwood said. 'The revisions were the key story – they suggest the market's been overestimating the strength of the economy.' He warned that investors were beginning to question whether valuations could hold up as the cycle turns. 'We're sitting at valuation levels close to the highest in two decades,' he said. 'With the economy looking like it's approaching stall speed, that's bound to affect earnings expectations.' The US dollar slumped on the jobs report, fuelling gains in the Aussie, which was last up 0.6 per cent to US64.62¢ ahead of Monday's open. Locally, attention shifts to August earnings season, with a heavy slate of results due this week from names including REA Group, AMP, News Corp, Nick Scali, QBE Insurance and Block. Markets are also eyeing the Bank of England's upcoming interest rate decision, with economists tipping a 25 basis point cut that would lower the UK cash rate to 4 per cent.
Sky News AU
3 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Caleb Bond: Forcing EVs on Australia's 4,000km terrain is just impractical - much like ripping up roads so two men and a dog in a sidecar can use a bike lane
You won't believe it but Australian cities are apparently some of the worst in the world for the ease of owning an electric vehicle. What a rotten bit of luck. This is according to consumer comparison service Compare the Market, which assessed global cities against the number of chargers, EVs and sales per capita, government incentives and the cost of power. The top 10 cities are, surprise surprise, all in Europe save for Montreal and the top three are all in the Netherlands. What could it be that makes EVs so much more popular in Europe than Australia? Oh, that's right – our country is nearly 4,000km wide and our capital cities have significant urban sprawl. In fact, our cities rank amongst the largest urban sprawls in the world per head of population. That, of course, is because we live in a big country with plenty of space so most of us choose not to live on top of each other – unlike those tiny European countries where that's just how things are done. Who would have thought that smaller countries, which naturally mean you have less distance to travel on a regular basis, would be more conducive to owning an EV? It has become blindingly obvious that the reduction in Australian EV sales is simply the result of market forces. It's not that people have anything particularly against electric vehicles themselves, they just want cars that are practical in a big country like Australia. If you only drive around the city then sure, you might be fine. But a lot of people don't. And it's ridiculous to expect a charger to be available everywhere in this wide brown land. Australia is not built to be an EV country in the same way it's not built to be a cycling country. The government can try to force EVs upon us with subsidies or whatever else they can dream up but, at some point, practicalities have to enter the equation. Just as councils can try to force us to ride bikes instead of driving cars by continually ripping out perfectly good lanes of traffic to replace them with sheltered bike lanes used by two men and a dog in a sidecar. Despite building all these bike lanes, nearly all of them are empty most of the time. I wonder why that might be? Oh, yes – we have that massive urban sprawl which means most people live a fair way from the CBD and find it far more comfortable to travel to town by car or public transport. It is no coincidence that the country recognised to be one of the most cycling-friendly in the world – the Netherlands – is also ranked the best for EVs. You can't force a square peg into a round hole. We just need to admit it. But we also mustn't forget the other great barrier to Australian EV ownership – the trifling issue of having to fill it up with electricity which, as I'm sure you know, is quite expensive. We have some of the most expensive electricity in the world, in fact. If only Albo gave us that $275 he promised us off our power bills, maybe it'd be a different story. Caleb Bond is the Host of The Sunday Showdown, Sundays at 7.00pm and co-host of The Late Debate Monday – Thursday at 10.00pm as well as a Contributor. Bond also writes a weekly opinion column for The Advertiser
ABC News
4 hours ago
- ABC News
Negative gearing reform is back on the agenda, but younger voters now hold the power
It's time to put the 2019 election to bed, along with the messages we pretend were sent from voters from that disastrous campaign for Labor. It has been six years since Labor leader Bill Shorten took what were quite radical proposals to the voting public, including negative gearing reforms. Since that election, Australia has changed profoundly. We have endured a global pandemic with consequences we are only beginning to realise, and an acute housing crisis that has changed us. We have seen the biggest change to the demographics of the dominant voting bloc, with millennials and Gen Z now being the largest voting group in Australia, outnumbering boomers. By the next election, that shift will be even more profound. Voters younger than their mid-40s are consistently telling pollsters they believe the system is stacked against them. They have made it crystal clear they are hungry for change. The treasurer's productivity roundtable has now morphed into something much broader than simply delivering productivity reforms, and this is both worrying and exciting some stakeholders. Some in business circles believe it is increasingly being used to push for higher taxes. Those who want the tax conversation say it's about more effective taxes. Even fairer taxes. Remember fairness? Senior government sources strongly contest that this is an excuse to raise taxes. They say they are keen to cut taxes too, but need to pay for it somehow. That can't be from spending cuts alone. A reconfiguration of that tax system is the only answer. The Australian Council of Trade Unions yesterday declared they will use the productivity platform to call for bold reform to negative gearing and the capital gains tax at the government's productivity roundtable this month, proposing that the tax breaks be limited to one investment property. Sally McManus, the union's secretary, told Insiders the current arrangements should continue for five years, but after that date, "we've got to bite the bullet". "Otherwise, we're just saying 'too bad, young people, you're not going to be able to ever own a home,'" she said. "Since 2019, the problem has just gotten worse. It's going to continue to get worse unless the government is brave enough to do something about it." When it was in opposition, Labor took negative gearing reforms to the 2016 and 2019 federal elections, at which they were defeated. But they were defeated for a myriad of reasons. Their tax policies were only part of the story of that defeat. The ACTU's manifesto for reform will be resisted by some quarters, but their proposals achieve one important thing. They have restarted a conversation that Australians have said they want their leaders to be having. The tax burden is not being shared fairly, and governments that continue to ignore this reality risk losing the trust of younger voters who are hungry for reform. At the same time, the Productivity Commission has called for a 20 per cent tax rate on profits for companies with revenue of up to $1 billion. The commission also called for a new 5 per cent tax on net cashflow rather than profits, which could see some large companies pay a higher rate but would provide immediate tax relief for smaller companies seeking to build their capital. Already, this is being fiercely resisted by the big end of town. But it's time to involve a wider range of Australians from across the tax scale to have an input on what is fair and what is just. Perhaps the proposal won't work — who knows — but we should ventilate big and radical ideas, and we should applaud the Productivity Commission for thinking radically and creatively. Returning to the negative gearing conversation, you'll recall this was a scare campaign Peter Dutton unsuccessfully tried to inject into the May campaign. At the time, it forced Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Treasurer Jim Chalmers to deny that Labor was preparing to make changes to negative gearing. The issue re-emerged during the leaders' debate on the ABC, when Mr Albanese said he had not commissioned Treasury modelling on the potential economic impact of changes to the policy. His response prompted Opposition Leader Peter Dutton to laugh and accuse him of lying. Reports first emerged last year that the federal Treasury had investigated a potential overhaul of the tax concessions awarded to property owners. "It certainly wasn't commissioned by us to do so," the PM said when asked during the second debate about the Treasury modelling. But Treasurer Jim Chalmers had publicly stated back in September that he had asked Treasury for "advice" about the subject, leading Dutton to claim in the debate that Albanese had a "problem with the truth". Chalmers then tried to draw a difference between that advice and "modelling". "I've said on a number of occasions now that I sought a view," the treasurer said. "Now that's different to commissioning modelling. The prime minister was asked about commissioning modelling. I sought a view." Chalmers said it was "normal practice" to seek advice on such a matter and that the Treasury's view was a change to negative gearing "wouldn't get the sort of improvement that we desperately need to see in our economy when it comes to supply". One thing is clear: the treasurer wants this debate. Whether the PM would be willing to champion this change is another matter. We do, however, have one precedent worth remembering. The PM was deeply resistant to changing the stage 3 tax cuts until the case had been made with the public, and then suddenly, he was into it. I suspect the same thing would occur on some of the bigger reform ideas. Kos Samaras, director at the political consultancy firm Redbridge, said there are profound generational shifts between the 2019 and 2025 elections. In 2019, Millennials and Gen Z made up just 26 per cent of the electoral roll, whilst Baby Boomers and older Australians still held sway, culturally and politically. But that was the last election where the latter group's decades-long dominance would be felt. "By May 2025, Millennials and Gen Z accounted for 42 per cent of enrolled voters, a generational bloc shaped by vastly different life experiences," he tells this column. "This is the first cohort since the Great Depression to believe their quality of life is worse than that of their parents. "They've come of age amid a housing crisis, climate anxiety, a global pandemic, inflation shocks, and broken career promises. "At the next federal election, this generational tide will become even more pronounced. "Millennials and Gen Z will be the most dominant voting bloc in the country, while Baby Boomers and older Australians will comprise just 27 per cent of the roll. "Hence, the ACTU-proposed negative gearing changes will resonate with younger Australians, and it would be a brave politician to ignore such a proposal." Over to you. Patricia Karvelas is host of ABC News Afternoon Briefing at 4pm weekdays on ABC News Channel, co-host of the weekly Party Room podcast with Fran Kelly and host of politics and news podcast Politics Now.
