Wine Tourist’s Profile: a Comparison between two Wine Routes in Veneto Region

Several studies have investigated the profile of tourists moved by wine. Segmentation according to different variables is the main outcome of these researches. However, according to a literature review, few studies attempt to define specific wine route-related profiles. Our work is intended to look at the specificities of tourists travelling along two Venetian Wine Routes. The former is the Soave Wine Route, located in Western Veneto, driving trough a mostly hilly area, not far from Verona City; the latter is the Vini del Piave Wine Route, located in Eastern Veneto, a completely flat land, crossed in the middle by the Piave riverbed. The survey is based on 565 interviews of tourists visiting cellars belonging to both the routes. The questionnaire included questions aimed at identifying the following groups of variables: a) socio-demographic, b) involvement and knowledge in wine and vine tourism c) attitudes, preferences and choices relating to wine and travelling. Data have been analyzed by a logistic regression model. In this way, we have been able to disclosure those features which more likely differentiate the tourist visiting the two routes. Results show that, although only one hundred kilometers separate the two routes from each other, their travelers consist in two quite distinct groups. The Vini del Piave route wine tourist, in comparison with the Soave route wine tourist, tends to be by one side: a) more foreign, b) older, c) more motivated to travel for business, visit relatives and friends, cultural reasons and vacations, d) more travelling together with friends, e) with a knowledge on the route which is more determined by the counsel of relatives and friend, television and chance, f) more lodging in agro-tourism and bed and breakfast facilities, g) more intentioned to practice sports and to have a meal in a local restaurant or agro-tourism, h) more acquiring locally produced wines, i) more likely to come back again to visit the areas along the route; by the other side: a) less experienced of wine routes, b) less incline to visit historical monuments and museums, c) less demanding in term of environmental improving, monument accessibility, cultural events, lodging and quality/price ratio. The model has performs quite well: Cox and Snell R2 is 0.696 and the percentage cases correctly classified is 96.3%. This means that the two routes have a specific wine tourist, easily defined by an appropriate group of variables commonly used for segmentation purpose. Our findings seem to be useful for improving the overall marketing strategies of the two routes, by either supplying services that meet the need of their prevalent tourists or developing new pull factors in order to catch additional tourists whose features are different from the current ones