Design and development of touristic products Main author: Gábor Michalkó Szilvia Boros, János Csapó, Éva Happ, Pál Horváth, Anikó Husz, Mónika Jónás-Beri, Katalin Lőrinc, Andrea Máté, Gábor Michalkó, Erzsébet Printz-Markó, Krisztina Priszinger, Tamara

Information signs of the Villány-Siklós Wine Route

Download 6.5 Mb.
Size6.5 Mb.
1   ...   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   ...   65
Information signs of the Villány-Siklós Wine Route

Tasks of the interactive information points

Signposts orienting to the wine route

Spread of information and propaganda materials

Signposts marking the wine route

Up-to-date information on the wine route services

Wine route information signposts

Bookings and sales of entrance tickets

Signs introducing the wine route

Sales of souvenirs typical of the wine route

Table 4. Elements of the information system of the Villány-Siklós Wine Route

These are the constant elements of the built-out and still expanding information system. They are complemented now by an internet website up to the requirements of these days and by topical web2 applications. The information network still serves as an example to follow for other wine routes, especially in its signpost system.

  • pictogram (Appendix 5)

  • photo (Appendix 6),

(SARKADI, E. – Szabó, G. – Urbán, A. 2000)

2.3. Related touristic suprastructure: catering facilities in Hungary

Gastronomy and wine culture reach guests by the mediation of different catering facilities. They are not only expected to offer high level services today; they must also monitor topical trends, local tourism development objectives, and they should also join in and adapt to the topics of product development, for example by offering the beverages produced by local wine route producers or by treating guests with menu including ethnic specialities in an environment where ethnic minorities live (Dávid, L. – Jancsik, A. – Rátz, T. 2007).

Catering facilities can provide both tourists and local inhabitants with catering services, so the statistical indices of restaurants and other facilities are not only the indices of tourism (Appendix 7). In Hungary there was a considerable growth in the number of catering units from 2001 to 2008. At the end of 2008 there were 56,612 commercial facilities and canteens in operation, although their number had decreased by 1% from the previous year. In 2008, 87.6% of all units operated as commercial catering facilities. Within this category, 23.5% were restaurants, 3.4% confectioneries, while 44.8% were registered as other, non hot kitchens, while 28.2% operated as bars, wine bars, pubs or music pubs. Of all catering facilities, 46% were operated by private entrepreneurs, 50% by businesses, 4% by non-for-profit and other organisations. As regards the breakdown of catering facilities by statistical regions in 2008, the biggest proportion of them could be seen in the Central Hungary Region, where 26.6% of all facilities operated, of which 10% could be found in Budapest and 16.6% in Pest county. The North Great Plain region was home to 14.2% of all units, the other Great Plain region, the South Great Plain to 12.9%. All other regions had 11-12% of all catering facilities. The sales of foods and non-alcoholic beverages increased between 2003 and 2008, while that of the alcoholic beverages, coffee and tobacco products decreased. The turnover of catering facilities continuously grew from 2001 to 2008. Catering industry received revenues in excess of HUF 684.6 billion in 2008, which was a 2.5% growth compared to the previous year. Of all revenues, 87% was realised at commercial facilities (Bodnár, L. 2005) (Appendix 7).

3. Characteristics of the demand

Few and relatively limited national surveys have been made so far, but the number and depth of examinations of the popularity and wine tourism demand of the Pannon Wine Region are satisfactory. The latter is used here as an example to introduce the characteristics of demand.

3.1. Popularity of the Hungarian wine producing areas

According the representative population surveys (MT Zrt. – M.Á.S.T. 2006), there are considerable differences as regards how well known the respective Hungarian wine producing areas are known. Whereas the proportion of those who know the names Tokaj, Eger, Badacsony or Villány ranges from almost 80% to approximately 50%, the least known wine producing areas – including a few high quality ones – are known by less than 5% of respondents (e.g. Lower Bükk, Ászár-Neszmély, Hajós-Baja).

The wine producing areas in the Pannon Wine Region are categorised by the Hungarian population into two separate groups of diverse characteristics. Stable members on the “House of Lords” include the Villány wine producing area – whose name is still frequently mentioned as Villány-Siklós wine producing area, i.e. the formerly used specification – and the Szekszárd wine producing area. The proportion of those in the survey sample who knew Villány was almost 50%, which made this wine producing area one of the best known ones in Hungary. Szekszárd was known by ¼ of the sample, as revealed by the responses, which was a high value in the survey, still put this wine producing area to the last position of the upper class.

The extent to which the Pécs wine producing area – featured in its old name, Lower Mecsek area in the survey – and the Tolna wine producing area are known is totally different. Among the 22 wine producing areas, the Pécs one is at the bottom of the middle class with the 9% frequency of mentions, followed by the Tolna wine producing area that is known by 6% of respondents.

A somewhat more subtle approach to how much wine producing areas are known is allowed by the figures of consumer demand. Figure 2 indicates that even the products of wine producing areas familiar to 2/3 or almost that big a proportion of respondents have much more subordinate positions on the shelves of the supermarkets. On the shelves of hyper- and supermarkets, in addition to Villány and Tokaj it is Eger that shows the best position, with proportions from 15 to 20%. The majority of the Hungarian wine producing areas have shares far below 10% from the supply of Hungarian wines on the market. The position of Szekszárd in 8% of the stores is a good position. In this competition, the wine producing areas of Pécs and Tolna have considerable lags; their products can hardly be found in supermarkets.

Figure 2. Products of the wine producing areas on the shelves of hyper- and supermarkets (Source: )

The Pécsi Borozó assigned the Szocio-Gráf Consumer Research and Survey Institute to carry out a national representative survey to detect how much the wine producing areas, the wineries and the grape sorts of the Pannon Wine Region are known and to demonstrate the segmentation of the market (Pécsi Borozó Vol. I. No. 3 pp. 58–59). The number of respondents mentioning the respective wine producing areas (Figure 3) follows the well-known pattern. Villány dominates the market, but the distance between it and Szekszárd is smaller than in the previous surveys. Although Pécs and Tolna lag behind the premier class, the proportion of respondents mentioning them – between 5% and 9% – reinforces the level of their popularity already revealed by previous national surveys.

Figure 3. Proportion of respondents mentioning wine producing areas of the Pannon Wine Region

The situation is somewhat different if we look at the extent to which wineries of the wine producing areas are known. This part of the survey underlines again the importance of Villány and of Szekszárd, although the latter lags far behind the former. The performance of the wine producing areas of Pécs and Tolna are even worse in this respect. Of all respondents, only 1.8% could name a wine producer or a winery from the Pécs area, while the same figure for the Tolna wine producing area was 0.7%. The dominant wineries shaping the image of the wine producing areas include the famous names of the “wine producer of the year” and the “winery of the year”. Another factor significantly promoting popularity is strong market presence, the large volume of bottled wines in shops. Good examples for this are the popularity of the Teleki Cellar and the Mőcsény wines of the Zwack Company.

            Consumers of the wine region can be broken down into segments, as the survey suggests. The main groups are:

·         predominantly men;

·         diploma holders;

·         with higher incomes;

·         Budapest citizens in a high proportion.

The findings of the research also provide information for the definition of consumer characteristics across the different wine producing areas. The fans of Pécs wines are from the middle aged generation, between 50-59 years, in larger numbers. The wines of Szekszárd and Tolna have a more diverse range of consumers, as regard age. The age groups consuming these wines range from young adults in their thirties to the middle aged generation up to 59 years. A favourable feature of the Villány wine producing area is the large proportion of young adults and the middle aged generation in their forties among the consumers.

3.2. Popularity of the Pannon Wine Region

On the assignment of the Pannon Wine Region, tourism experts and students of the Faculty of Natural Sciences of the University of Pécs made a survey on the selected locations of the event called Open Whitsun Cellars on 30 May, Saturday and 31 May, Sunday 2009. The questionnaire survey included the Cabbage Festival of Bóly on Saturday, on both Saturday and Sunday the Szekszárd Whitsun Festival and only on Sunday the visitors to the Mecseknádasd Rooster Stew Cooking Festival. According to the findings of the survey (Table 5), the wine route most known, after the Szekszárd and the Villány-Siklós Wine Route, was the Bóly-Mohács White Wine Route, followed by the Tolna Wine Route.  

Share with your friends:
1   ...   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   ...   65

The database is protected by copyright © 2020
send message

    Main page