1. Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley
2013
Great Wine Capitals Global
Network Market Survey
“The Pillars Of Wine
Tourism Performance”
Executive Summary For Firenze
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley
2. 2013
This summary report highlights the wine tourism performance of Firenze, a
member of the GREAT WINE CAPITALS GLOBAL NETWORK (GWCGN).
We collected data from the GWCGN capitals during the summer of 2013.
The number of survey responses for Firenze was 34, which was an increase
of about 50% in the response rate as compared to the 2012 survey. Still, the
relatively small size of the sample does not permit broad generalizable
conclusions. Nevertheless, we present some of the key highlights below.
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley
3. Wine Tourism Revenues Breakup
Wine Tourism Revenues and Top
Sources of Profits
Wine Tourism
Revenues
Break−up
Wine sales 56 %
Accomadation 23 %
Food 7 %
Tastingfees 9 %
Merchandising 1 %
Hosting / Rest 4 %
For the 2013 survey, we find that
lowend and midprice wines
represent an equally important
source of profits in Firenze. In the
sample of responses, we find that
the next two top sources of profits
are Accommodations and Tasting
Fees.
Top Sources of Wine Tourism Profit
9 % Greater $ 25 each
Merchandising
Btwn $ 15 and $ 25 each
Tasting fees
Accommodation
Mixed wine
Food services
Cross selling
Hosting events
Wellbeing activities
Less $ 15 each
0 %
53 %
41 %
53 %
47 %
15 %
15 %
9 %
3 %
0 %
Top Sources of Profit
Among all capitals, Firenze has the
second largest percentage of
revenues that come from Accom
modations. Like most other wine
capitals, the number one source of
revenues remains Wine Sales. From
the standpoint of the Firenze wine
ries, offering Accommodations is
the second most major sources of
revenues and Food a distant third.
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley
4. Infrastructure is the top investment
category for the 20122013 period
in Firenze. The next top categories
are Cultural Entertainment and in
third position Market Positioning on
an equal footing with Improving
Services.
Investments in Wine Tourism
Wine Tourism Investments and
Marketing
Just like in the 2012 survey, we again find that
the top marketing tool used across the sample
of all great wine capitals is a winery’s Own
Website, which is the top category for Firenze.
For the specific sample of Firenze wineries the
next top two categories are Citations in tourism
guides and Tour Operators.
Top Marketing Tools Used
47 % Infrastructure
Imp services
Market positioning
Training emp
Cultural Entert.
None
Strategic partn.
32 %
32 %
15 %
15 %
35 %
15 %
Top Investments
8%Mentionedotherwebsites
Borchures
SocialNetworks
Spclzedmedia
TourOp.
Appelation
Tourismxhib
TravelAgencies
8%
14%
0%
8%
35%
3%
3%
7%
0%
8%
12%Sustainable
Citations
Referrals
AuthenticExperience
Mailing/Newsletter
CulturalFestivals
Winefairs
WineContests
Regionfame
Usemobileapps
38%
14%
8%
6%
6%
12%
17%
44%
3%
6%
Ownwebsite
TourismOff
TraditionalAd
TastingEvents
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley
5. In terms of Numbers of Visitors per
winery, Firenze is in the last place
among all great capitals. But it is
the highest in terms of Spending
per Visitor. In terms of origin, 76%
of tourists are internationals (top
percentage amongst all great wine
capitals), 57% are middleaged
people (highest percentage
amongst all great capitals) and
about 50% are women (second
highest percentage amongst all
great capitals).
Tourists Characteristics
Nationals 22 %
Internationals 76 %
Locals 2 %
36 to 55 57 %
Above 23 %
18 to 35 20 %
Tourists per Origin
Tourists per Age Categories
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley
6. In terms of External Factors per
ceived by wineries to help business
or not, Firenze wineries testify
that the Natural Beauty of the
region is a key positive factor
(even though there is some slight
disagreement among the wineries).
Consistent with the findings of the
2012 survey they report that
Public Infrastructures, Signage and
to a lesser extent Access and can
be factors that impede business.
There is an almost even split as to
whether or not Tourism Policy and
membership to a Chamber or
Business Association are positive
contributors to business.
Positive and Negative Factors for
Business
Totally negative
Somewhat negative
Neutral
Somewhat positive
Totally positive
Landmark Natural B Location Access OtherAct LocalFacilities CoopwBus MarkTO PublicInf Signage
50%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
60%
GWCmenber Association ChamberorBusA Tousism A TourOp CoopWineries Internet FameRegion TourismPolicy
50%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
60%
70%
External Factors − Part 1
External Factors − Part 2
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley
7. First, we isolate the candidate
factors that explain or at least
correlate with more tourist visits.
The Table below shows the most
impactful factors for the overall
sample. The variable we try to
explain here is the Number of
Tourists visiting a given winery.
The factors highly correlated with
increased number of tourists are
shown in the left hand side column.
These factors are ranked in
descending order of impact.
Because of the small number of
observations, we only show the
results for the categories that
were statistically significant.
In the category Investments in
Factors Correlated with Attracting
More Tourists
Wine Tourism, Training Employees is the only investment that
is positively associated with more tourists. In the category
Activities Offered, Entertainment and Lodging are two positive
activities that bring in more visitors. Onsite Shops are also a
plus. On the negative side, wineries that are more involved in
Hosting Weddings and Tasting Visits appear to have fewer
visitors at the margin. It is difficult to find a causal explanation
here.
Most Significant and
Impactful Factors
Training Employees 30 % 27 Investments in Wine tourism+ +
Entertainment + +
Hosting Weddings
Lodging + +
Tasting Visits
On Site Shops +
Effect Factor Categories
Table shows results from Quantile Regrassions. Corrected for size effect
Pseudo B and
Observations
2
Activities Offered
42 % 27
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley
8. The factors correlated with higher
Spending per Visitor are now analyzed.
Again, because of the small number of
observations, we only show the results
for the categories that are statisti
cally significant. Only one dimension
that of Activities Offered, is signifi
cant. Among these factors, Gastronomy
has the most positive impact. Wineries
that use more Onsite Shops, Lodging
and do more Entertainment as well as
Host Weddings seem to do worse in
terms of attracting more Spending per
Visitor at the margin.
Factors Correlated with Higher
Spending/Tourist
Most Significant and
Impactful Factors Effect Factor Categories
Table shows results from Quantile Regrassions. Corrected for size effect.
Pseudo B and
Observations
2
On Site Shops
Lodging
Gastronomy + +
Entertainment
Hosting Weddings
Activities Offered20 % 25
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley
9. The 2013 edition of the GWC
survey has produced some interes
ting findings for the wineries of
Firenze. Firenze attracts a large
percentage of middleaged and
international tourists and a large
percentage of women by compari
son with other great wine capitals.
Firenze wineries demonstrate a
commitment to invest in Infrastruc
tures. Although it is not one of the
top three investments in wine
tourism, the category of invest
ments that brings more visitors at
the margin is Training Employees.
While Accommodations is ranked as
one of the top profitable activities,
the key activity that brings in more
Copyright GWCGN. No part of the content of this document is to be reproduced in any media without the expressed consent of GWCGN For any further information: gwc@greatwinecapitals.com
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley
spending per visitor is Gastronomy.
The activities that marginally bring
in more visitors are Lodging, Onsite
Shops and Entertainment. Never
theless, the first two of the three
activities also bring in lower reve
nues at the margin.
Overall, Firenze wineries use fairly
classical promotional tools such as
Citations in tourism guides and
Tour Operators.
One must exercise caution when
trying to extend managerial impli
cations from a small sample of
wineries to the whole the region.
Nevertheless, it appears that
Firenze wineries may need to focus
more on strategies that emphasize
their strong suit (wine sales), by
investing into Training Employees
when appropriate, for example.
Managerial Implications and
Conclusion