original scientific article	UDC 338.48-44(262.3)
received: 2012-09-10
VISITOR STRUCTURE AS A BASIS FOR DESTINATION REPOSITIONING THE CASE OF A NORTH MEDITERRANEAN DESTINATION
Helena NEMEC RUDEŽ
University of Primorska, Faculty of Tourism Studies - Turistica, Obala 11a, 6320 Portorož, Slovenia
E-mail: helena.nemec@turistica.si
Gorazd SEDMAK
University of Primorska, Faculty of Tourism Studies - Turistica, Obala 11a, 6320 Portorož, Slovenia
E-mail: gorazd.sedmak@turistica.si
Ksenija VODEB
University of Primorska, Faculty of Tourism Studies - Turistica, Obala 11a, 6320 Portorož, Slovenia
E-mail: ksenija.vodeb@turistica.si
Štefan BOJNEC
University of Primorska, Faculty of Management, Cankarjeva 5, 6000 Koper, Slovenia E-mail: stefan.bojnec@siol.net; stefan.bojnec@fm-kp.si
ABSTRACT
In order to avoid the phase of decline, many North Mediterranean 3S destinations have been trying to reposition in the tourism market. However, the repositioning many times lacks sound market analysis. In this regard, the liaison between market repositioning strategy and push motivation-based market segments of visitors in summer season was studied for the case of the North Mediterranean 3S destination Portorož. In-depth quantitative survey on summer foreign leisure visitors was conducted for this purpose. The results show that repositioning efforts are not congruent with the structure of leisure visitors attracted to Portorož in summer season as they are still prevailingly motivated by 3S-based push motivations. Destination Portorož has actually not been repositioned in the market; it has only diversified its tourism products. In conclusion, possible implications of these findings for DMO's are suggested.
Keywords: 3S destinations, North Mediterranean destination, push motivations, summer season
struttura dei visitatori come base per il riposizionamento della destinazione - il caso della destinazione del nord mediterraneo
SINTEZI
Per evitare la fase di declino nella scelta di destinazioni del Nord Mediterraneo, molte destinazioni mare-spiag-gia-sole hanno cercato di riposizionarsi sul mercato del turismo. Tuttavia, molte volte il riposizionamento non e basato sull'analisi del mercato. A questo proposito e stata studiata durante la stagione estiva a Portorose (una desti-nazione mare-spiaggia-sole del Nord Mediterraneo) la correlazione tra la strategia di riposizionamento sul mercato e i segmenti basati sui fattori di spinta. Nell'ambito dello studio e stata condotta una ricerca quantitativa sui visitatori di piacere stranieri. I risultati mostrano che le attivitä di riposizionamento non sono congruenti con la struttura di visitatori di piacere stranieri a Portorose nella stagione estiva, dato il fattore di spinta prevalente: mare-spiaggia-sole. La ricerca svolta espone che la destinazione non e stata effettivamente riposizionata, ma ha solo diversificato pro-dotti turistici. L'analisi conclusiva offre possibili implementazioni di questi risultati per organizzazioni di marketing.
Parole chiave: destinazioni mare-spiaggia-sole, destinazione del Nord Mediterraneo, i fattori di spinta, la stagione
estiva
1. INTRODUCTION
Between the late 1970s and the 1990s many 3S (sun, sea, sand) destinations, defined as beach-based mass destinations focusing on the summer season, reached the mature stage of the life cycle and faced serious problems, such as aging resort amenities and environmental pressures (Chapman & Speake, 2011), decreased economic viability, due to declining profit margins, reduction of tourist arrivals and average spending per head. In addition, changes in holiday habits and underlying demographics occurred (Agarwal, 2002).
In order to recover and to adapt to the new conditions, Mediterranean 3S destinations had to improve their traditional littoral products (Apostolopoulos & Sönmez, 2000; Mir & Baidal, 2001), differentiate their offer and reposition (Chapman & Speake, 2011; Kozak & Martin, 2012; Priestley & Mundet, 1998). This has been achieved in two ways: firstly, by creating large-scale up-market products, such as golf courses, marinas, conference centres, casinos, and secondly, by creating small-scale tourism products for special interest tourism (SIT) including cultural, historical, and ecological products and nature (Agarwal, 2002; Bramwell, 2004). On the other hand, some destinations have successfully repositioned through development of wellness products with health services (Crabtree, 2007).
The understanding of motivations that visitors seek in a given destination gives important guidelines for its positioning. Haley (1968) stated that benefits sought by visitors predict consumer behaviour better than personality, demographic, geographic and other measures. Since then, a vast body of research on benefits sought by consumers and motivations1 to travel has been undertaken. Generally, 3S destinations tend to attract the so called "hard core sun-seekers" (Kozak & Martin, 2012). Their motivations are associated with "old tourism" (Poon, 1993), reflecting passive ways of spending time and standardized tourism products.
The aim of the current study is to investigate the present structure of summer foreign leisure visitors to Portorož, in order to find a solid basis for a sensible repositioning of the destination. More specifically, the study tries to find out whether the visitors are still prevailingly driven by motivations characterized by 3S destinations or whether their motives are related to a wide range of newly introduced tourism products satisfying needs of modern, demanding visitors.
Accordingly, the paper contributes to the body of literature in two directions. The first contribution is to fill the gap in the market segmentation literature of small Mediterranean seaside tourism destinations by empirical analysis of push motivations during the summer season. The second contribution is a practical implication for
tourism management and tourism marketing in Portorož during the main summer season. Destinations need accurate information on the structure of tourism demand in order to be able to develop coherent positioning strategy, innovative diversification and marketing mixes for specific segments, and reposition the destination successfully.
2. THE CASE OF PORTOROŽ
Portorož, a small seaside destination in Slovenia, located on the Adriatic coast of the Mediterranean, shared the fate of other mature North Mediterranean destinations. There was a strong decrease in tourism of Portorož after the disintegration of Yugoslavia in 1991 (Prasnikar et al., 2007). Portorož tried to reposition itself in the international tourism market according to the trends, investing in modern accommodation, wellness, spa and congress centres, and nautical tourism. However, this process has not been strategically coordinated and the repositioning was actually achieved on the company level only, while on the destination level the market position remained indistinct (Sedmak & Mihalič, 2008). While a part of hoteliers have changed or widened their focus towards wellness, gaming or/and MICE tourism, some of them still stick to the type of supply that was tailored for mass tourists. In order to achieve a coherent market position of the destination, a coordinated pre-concerted action based on solid information should take place.
3. LITERATURE REVIEW
Market positioning is a part of strategic planning which, unlike operational planning, is claimed to have an enduring effect on a company or destination. It has to be based upon thorough internal and external environment analysis. Depending on its specific mission, a destination can decide to pursue all, or just one, or several segments of tourists (Greenley, 1989). According to Hassan and Craft (2005), market positioning makes possible effective allocation of the marketing resources among intended market segments.
Market repositioning at the level of tourism destination is a very complex process, owing to the heterogeneity of the supply and variety of stakeholders (Crouch & Ritchie, 2004). Marketing activities are far more effective when they are directed towards visitors identified by the destination management as the main target segments. Sensible marketing must "convey appropriate cues to connect with particular groups of customers' values, in that the messages must position the destination in such a way as to make it attractive to specific target groups" (McCabe, 2009). According to Buhalis (2000), understanding the characteristics of a destination is cru-
1 Motivations to travel have been often identified as benefits sought by visitors. In fact, benefits sought by visitors and motivations of visitors are researched with the same measurement statements (Frochot & Morrison, 2000).
cial, too, since each destination can attract only certain types of visitors.
McCabe (2009) suggests an integrated segmentation, targeting and positioning (STP) approach that enables the destination to gain a sustainable competitive advantage through matching of its organizational capabilities to the needs of particular, well-defined target group of visitors. Segmentation should thus be performed within the integrated framework. It provides "guidelines for resource allocation not only among products but also among markets" (Ibid). The holistic segmentation process is compound by segmentation analysis, evaluation of segmentation directed towards the selection of target markets, implementation into strategy and resource allocation and, finally, control of segment stability and effectiveness of marketing strategies (Goller et al., 2002).
The need for in-depth analysis of the demand side of the market, based on segmentation analysis as the first phase of this process, seems to have been overlooked in the repositioning of many Mediterranean destinations. Indeed, if a destination wants to focus on the most receptive tourist segments), the first step is to learn about the needs of these tourists (Leisen, 2001). Just the information on nationality structure of visitors to a given destination and carbon-copying of polices from other destinations might not be enough (Ioannides & Holcomb, 2003). Benefit respectively motivation segmentation seems to lead to most effective predictions of consumer behaviour and buying decision-making process in tourism (Crompton, 1979; Fodness, 1994; Haley, 1968; Lun-dberg, 1971; Middleton et al., 2009).
The motivations to travel can be divided into pull motivational factors, which are external motivations, and referred to as destinations' attributes, and push motivational factors, which are internal motivations of people to travel, their individual desire and/or need (for instance, Klenosky, 2002; Kim et al., 2003; Syrakaya et al., 2003; Boo & Jones, 2009). According to Frochot and Morrison (2000) the design of tourism products and promotional messages should rely on push motivations of visitors in a destination. In the field of destination marketing, many studies of push motivations have been undertaken (for instance, Bieger & Laesser, 2002; Dolnicar & Leisch, 2003; Johns & Gyimonty, 2002; Sirakaya et al., 2003; Sarigollu & Huang, 2005; Frochot, 2005; Hu & Yu, 2006; Molera & Albaladejo, 2007; Park & Yoon, 2009; Rittichainuwat & Mair, 2012). Kozak (2002) identified four dimensions of push motivations of visitors in two Mediterranean seaside destinations, Mallorca and Turkey, in the summer season: culture, pleasure-seeking/ fantasy, relaxation and physical activity. Further, Yoon and Uysal (2005) identified eight dimensions underlying push motivations of visitors in Northern Cyprus. They were: excitement, knowledge/education, relaxation, achievement, family togetherness, escape, safety/ fun, getting away and sightseeing. However, so far, no a posteriori segmentation based on push motivations has
been carried out focusing on a North Mediterranean seaside destination in the summer season. Although there are several segmentation studies referring to the Mediterranean area (for instance, Juaneda & Sastre, 1999; Sirakaya et al., 2003; Diaz-Perez et al., 2005; Molera & Albajadero, 2007; Figini & Vici, 2011; Kozak & Martin, 2012; Nemec Rudež et al., 2013), there is a lack of segmentation studies based on push motivations in the summer season when typical 3S tourism offer takes place. Nemec Rudež et al. (2013) researched the segmentation in the spring season in Portorož using push motivational factors. They identified four distinct segments: friends-oriented visitors, well-being visitors, curious passive visitors and holiday enjoyers. Prašnikar et al. (2006) researched segments in the Northern Adriatic using pull motivation factors. They found five segments of tourists; families, highly demanding guests, gourmet fans, feeling good and fun fans.
After reviewing the body of literature regarding destination repositioning and motivations to travel, it is evident that there is a gap in the literature on the liaison between destination repositioning strategies and in-depth segmentation of visitors in the Mediterranean seaside resorts. It has been argued that repositioning of a destination should be directed in line with the target segments. The segmentation of visitors to Portorož would help to fill this gap and provide the understanding of segments of visitors based on push motivations. It would also develop the positioning strategy which would be most suitable to meet the push motivations of visitors.
Thus, the present research is focused on the following two research questions. Firstly, are the summer foreign leisure visitors to Portorož still prevailingly motivated by "3S push motivations"? Secondly, what are the practical implications for tourism management and tourism marketing of Portorož during the summer season?
The answers to these questions can improve knowledge and indicate whether the structure of visitors is harmonized with the new market position of the 3S destinations in the Mediterranean. Although the study is limited to only one destination in the North Mediterranean, it has to be stressed that Portorož is a typical North Mediterranean destination in terms of reaching the mature stage of the life cycle.
4. METHOD
The research performs a market segmentation analysis of visitors in the summer season. The questionnaire was designed based on the comprehensive review of benefit segmentation literature (Galloway, 2002; Dolnicar & Leisch, 2003; Frochot & Morrison, 2000; Frochot, 2005; Sarigollu & Huang, 2005; Beh & Bruyere, 2007; Park & Yoon, 2007) and modified considering the characteristics of Portorož as a tourism destination. It was already used in the study investigating benefits sought by visitors in Portorož in the spring season (Nemec Rudež
et al., 2013). The questionnaire consisted of three sections. The first section contained 17 items of push motivations of visitors on the five-point Likert-type scales. In the second section, respondents were asked about activities they undertake during their stay in Portorož. The total of 13 activities which can be undertaken by visitors to Portorož were chosen and included in the questionnaire in order to describe the activities which can be undertaken by visitors to Portorož. The third section of the questionnaire examined demographics and travel related characteristics of visitors.
The study is focused on foreign visitors. They represent 60.0 % of visitors in Portorož (SORS, 2011). Foreign market is much more volatile than domestic market, especially in high season (Ibid)). Seasonal structure shows that Portorož is perceived almost exclusively as a summer destination for foreign visitors while this is not true for domestic market. Moreover, summer domestic tourists in Portorož are, on contrary to foreign visitors, to a great extent repeat visitors. They represent 75 % of domestic visitors in Portorož (Sedmak et al., 2011). Thus, domestic and foreign markets should be investigated separately having different demand characteristics. The study is limited only to leisure visitors as they represent 99% of summer visitors in Portorož (Sedmak et al., 2011). As a rule, business visitors search for different benefits than leisure ones (Swarbrooke & Horner, 2007), thus inclusion of this market segment could distort the results.
The questionnaire started with a screening question asking whether the respondent is a foreign leisure visitor to Portorož in order to exclude residents, expatriates and domestic and business visitors to Portorož from the survey. The questionnaire was available in the English, German and Italian language in order to include in the study the most typical language groups of foreign leisure visitors to Portorož.
In order to represent the population structure of foreign visitors by their country of origin, proportional quota sampling of the population of foreign leisure tourists in destination was used. The base for the structure of foreign leisure visitors was used from statistical data of tourists' arrivals of the previous summer season. A face-to-face survey was carried out in various public locations in Portorož by three specially trained interviewers. A total of 404 usable questionnaires were collected between June 15 and August 31, 2010.
The collected data were analyzed employing the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 17.0. The Principal Component Analysis with Varimax rotation was used to reduce the number of variables of push motivations to fewer dimensions which underline the 17 push motivations of visitors to Portorož in the summer season. Factor scores were calculated using the regression method. Further, the cluster analysis was employed to group the visitors into appropriate segments.
^ posteriori or data driven method is used to define
segments after data on push motivations are acquired; on the contrary, for example, the demographic segmentation basis is known in advance (Yannopoulos & Rotenberg, 1999, 45). In sum, push motivation segmentation can improve the understanding of the market and the prediction of visitors' behaviour and, finally, it offers to DMOs and managers a solid basis for marketing mix formation.
The hierarchical clustering method was used for identification of outliers and K-means clustering method was undertaken for the final formation of segments. Analysis of variance ANOVA and subsequent Scheffe tests were conducted to identify significant differences between clusters with respect to each factor. Finally, chi-square tests were calculated to investigate significant differences between the clusters.
5. RESULTS 5.1 Characteristics of the sample
Regarding the sample profile, Tables 1 and 2 summarize demographics and travel related profiles of the respondents. Based on the 404 usable questionnaires, the largest group of the respondents were aged between 40 and 49 (106 or 26.2%). As regards the country of origin, there were 29.2% respondents from Italy, 21.0% from Austria, 14.4% from Germany and 35.4% from other countries. In terms of professional occupation, most of the respondents (208 or 51.5%) were employed.
Two thirds of respondents (66.6%) stayed at the hotel. The reported spending of the respondents shows that almost two thirds of them (61.6%) spent more than 60 Euros per person per day during their stay in Portorož. The sample included 8.9% respondents who travelled to Portorož in organized tour groups. Moreover, 41.8% of the respondents were in Portorož with children. 55.4% of the respondents were for the first time in Portorož. The Internet turned out to be the most important source of information for visitors to Portorož (46.8%).
5.2 Factor analysis
The first research objective was to examine underlying common dimensions of push motivations of the respondents. Principal Component Analysis with Varimax rotation was used. The five-factor Varimax rotation was selected as containing the best representation of the factors. Table 3 shows factor loadings, eigenvalues, explained variance and Cronbach's alpha of selected factors. Factor analysis resulted in five common factors with eigenvalue greater than 1. Cronbach's alpha was computed to test internal consistency of items within each factor.
The first common factor, Learning and seaside enjoyment, explains 17.19% of total variance with Cronbach's alpha of 0.812. Five items loaded on this common factor
with weighs greater than 0.5 are: to get new experience, to learn new things, to have fun, to enjoy the seaside, and to meet people. These benefits are concerned with active ways of spending time in destination; therefore, it can be derived that item to enjoy seaside reflects active ways to enjoy the seaside. The second common factor was labelled Relaxation and accounted for 12.44% of total variance with Cronbach's alpha of 0.761. It reflects four items; to release tensions, to relax physically, to get batteries recharged, and to get away from everyday life. The third common factor, physical activity and price convenience, explained 11.83% of total variance with a reliability coefficient Cronbach's alpha of 0.620. It comprised three items including to be engaged in physical activity, to get fit, and affordable price. Thus, this factor consists of rationally related benefits regarding health and price. The fourth common factor was labelled Passivity explaining 10.42% of total variance and had Cronbach's alpha of 0.568. It included three items: to enjoy comfort, to do nothing, and to enjoy tranquillity. The fifth common factor labelled Enjoy good company included two items, have good time with friends, and spend time away from family. The latter was reverse coded and negatively rewarded from have good time with family
because of the negative orientation of the factor. This factor had Cronbach's alpha of 0.305 and was excluded from the further analysis. The first four common factors cumulatively accounted for 54.92% of total variance. Each of the items had factor loadings greater than 0.5.
5.3 Cluster analysis
The second research objective was to identify the segments of visitors according to dimensions of push motivations. The hierarchical clustering method detected one outlier that was eliminated from the further analysis. Two-, four-, five- and six-cluster solutions were suggested. K-means was undertaken on these solutions. Cluster analysis is performed on the factor scores for the four factors. Four-cluster solution was chosen as the most appropriate. F-values obtained from ANOVA indicate that there are significant differences (p = 0.000) among the four clusters with respect to each of the four factors (Table 4). According to the post hoc Scheffe test, significant differences exist between the clusters (p < 0.05) with respect to each factor except between clusters 1 and 3 regarding the factor Relaxation, between clusters 3 and 4 regarding the factor Physical activity
Table 1: Sample's and clusters' demographic characteristics of visitors to Portorož (in a percentage)
	Sample* n = 404	Cluster 1 Holiday enjoyers n = 128 (31.8%)	Cluster 2 Indifferent visitors n = 83 (20.6%)	Cluster 3 Relaxers n = 108 (26.8%)	Cluster 4 Curious visitors n = 84 (20.8%)	Chi-square value**
Age 19	and below 20	to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 59 60 and over	4.2 15.3 19.8 26.2 19.1 15.3	5.5 7.8 14.4 25.8 25.8 21.1	6.0 12.0 14.5 25.3 20.5 21.7	0.9 15.7 27.8 29.6 17.6 8.3	3.6 29.8 23.8 23.8 9.5 9.5	46.4 (0.000)
Occupation Employed Self-employed Student Unemployed/ housewife Retired Other	51.5 20.3 7.7 2.5 15.3 2.7	47.4 18.0 7.8 3.9 20.3 2.4	48.2 18.1 7.2 1.2 21.7 3.6	51.9 28.7 6.5 0.9 6.5 5.6	59.5 15.5 8.3 4.8 11.9 0.0	30.0 (0.037)
Country of origin Italy Germany Austria Other	29.2 14.4 21.0 35.4	26.6 20.3 18.0 35.2	36.1 12.0 21.7 30.1	41.7 6.5 25.9 25.9	10.7 17.9 19.0 52.4	38.3 (0.000)
*Sample includes all 404 respondents, while columns representing clusters in sum include 403 respondents (the case of outlier is excluded) ** p-values are in parentheses
Table 2: Sample's and clusters' travel related characteristics of visitors to Portorož (in a percentage)
Sample* n = 404
Cluster Holiday enjoyers n = 128 (31.8%)
Cluster 2
Indifferent
visitors
n = 83 (20.6%)
Cluster 3
Relaxersn
108
(26.8%)
Cluster 4 Curious visitors n = 84 (20.8%)
Chi-square value**
Accommodation Hotel
Apartment Private room Farmhouse Campsite Friends and relatives
Stay in other destination Only in transit Other
66.6 13.9
3.5 0.7 4.2
2.7
5.7 1.7 1.0
68.0 17.2
3.9 0.0 2.3
2.3
4.7 1.6
0.0
73.5 8.4 3.6 0.0 2.4
1.2
8.4 2.4 0.0
72.2 14.8 1.9 1.9
3.7
1.9
0.9 0.0
2.8
51.2 13.1
4.8 1.2
9.5
4.8
10.7
3.6 1.2
40.4 (0.019)
Spending per person per day
Up to 30 Euros 31 to 60 Euros More than 60 Euros
11.9
26.5
61.6
7.0
34.4
58.6
12.0 20.5 67.5
7.4
18.5
74.1
25.0 31.0 44.0
35.3 (0.000)
Organization Tour group Not with tour group
8.9 91.1
13.3
86.7
9.6 90.4
2.8 97.2
9.5 90.5
8.1
(0.044)
Children Travel with children Travel without children
41.8 58.2
39.1 60.9
43.4 56.6
47.2 52.8
36.9 63.1
2.6
(0.456)
First visit to destination Yes No
55.4 44.6
53.9 46.1
61.4 38.6
35.2 64.8
76.2 23.8
33.8 (0.000)
Information source*** Brochures Mass media Guide books Internet Relatives and friends
Tourism office in Slovenia Tourism fair No need of information Other
22.7 4.5 17.6
46.8
31.2
3.7 0.7
14.9
3.5
28.1
4.7
23.4
49.2
35.2
3.1
0.0
14.1
2.3
27.7 3.6 15.7 36.1
26.5
3.6 2.4
20.5 3.41
18.5
6.5 8.3 47.2
27.8
6.5 0.9
13.9
2.8
15.5
2.4
22.6 53.6
34.5
1.2
0.0
11.9
5.9
*Sample includes all 404 respondents, while columns representing clusters in sum include 403 respondents (the case of outlier is excluded)
** p-values are in parentheses
*** Due to multiple responses the percentage sum can be more than 100%
Table 3: Factor analysis results of benefits sought by visitors (n = 404)
Factors and items	Eactor loading	Eigen-value	Variance (%)	Alpha
Factor 1: Learning and seaside enjoyment		4.469	17.194	0.812
To get new experience	0.831			
To learn new things	0.816			
To have fun	0.690			
To enjoy the seaside	0.648			
To meet new people	0.518			
Factor 2: Relaxation		2.509	12.438	0.761
To release tensions	0.766			
To relax physically	0.766			
To get batteries recharged	0.720			
To get away from everyday life	0.638			
Factor 3: Physical activity and price		1.394	11.828	0.620
convenience				
To be engaged in physical activity	0.760			
To get fit	0.712			
Affordable price	0.606			
Factor 4: Passivity		1.349	10.462	0.568
To enjoy comfort	0.717			
To do nothing	0.691			
To enjoy tranquility	0.557			
Factor 5: Enjoy good company		1.013	7.575	0.305
Have good time with friends	0.783			
Spend time away from family	0.666			
Note: KMO = 0.814, Bartlett's Test of Sphericity = 2151.352 at df = 136 with a significance of p = 0.000.
and price convenience, between clusters 1 and 2, between clusters 1 and 3 and between clusters 2 and 3 regarding the factor Passivity. Furthermore, comparing the clusters, significant differences were found for all demographic characteristics (Table 1), travel related characteristics except for the variable travelling with children (Table 2) and 7 out of 13 activities that visitors undertake (Table 5). Although there were three possible answers about the level of engagement of visitors in the given activities in Portorož (never, sometimes and often), only answers regarding often undertaken activities were decided to be further analyzed because only these undertaken activities by visitors to Portorož are supposed to be of vital relevance for the tourism supply of Portorož tourism destination.
Cluster 1, labelled holiday enjoyers, is characterized by positive scores on all the four factors showing a larger positive value on the factor physical activity and price convenience. Holiday enjoyers mainly stay at the hotel (68.0%). Regarding age, this cluster is quite similar to indifferent visitors having predominantly visitors aged 40 and above and somewhat older than relaxers
and curious visitors. Their countries of origin are rather equally distributed. Although only 13.3% of visitors in this cluster travel with the tour group to Portorož, it is the highest percentage of respondents travelling in the tour group among the four clusters. The Internet is, like in other clusters, the most important information source for holiday enjoyers. Regarding their engagement in various activities, they are engaged in activities connected with passive and active ways of spending time.
Cluster 2, labelled indifferent visitors, is characterized by positive but low scores on factors related to physical activity and price convenience and passivity. Almost three quarters of indifferent visitors (73.5%) stay at the hotel and 67.5% of them spend more than 60 Euros per person per day during their stay in Portorož. They are mostly first time visitors (61.4%). Indifferent visitors are, like holiday enjoyers, represented by retired people in more than one fifth of cases represented; it is much more than in the other two clusters. Indifferent visitors use the Internet as a source of information about Portorož much less (36.1%) than visitors who belong to the other three clusters. Indifferent visitors were en-
Table 4: Results of cluster analysis of visitors (n = 403)
	Factor: Learning and seaside enjoyment	Factor: Relaxation	Factor: Physical evidence and price convenience	Factor: Passivity
Cluster 1: Holiday enjoyers n = 128 (31.8%)	0.55861	0.50127	0.81816	0.22023
Cluster 2: Indifferent visitors n = 83 (26.8%)	-0.39972	-1.40973	0.12551	0.20018
Cluster 3: Relaxers n = 108 (20.6%)	-0.96562	0.64570	-0.48522	0.15280
Cluster 4: Curious visitors n = 84 (20.8%)	0.83233	-0.19905	-0.78274	-0.70208
F-value (sig.)	160.917 (0.000)	207.282 (0.000)	94.735 (0.000)	20.658 (0.000)
Scheffe test Mean difference (sig.)				
Cluster 1 - Cluster 2	0.96 (0.000)	1.91 (0.000)	0.69 (0.000)	0.02 (0.999)
Cluster 1 - Cluster 3	1.52 (0.000)	-0.14 (0.378)	1.30 (0.000)	0.06 (0.958)
Cluster 1 - Cluster 4	- 2.74 (0.000)	0.70 (0.000)	1.60 (0.000)	0.92 (0.000)
Cluster 2 - Cluster 3	0.57 (0.000)	-2.06 (0.000)	-0.69 (0.000)	0.04 (0.989)
Cluster 2 - Cluster 4	-1.23 (0.000)	-1.21 (0.000)	0.91 (0.000)	0.90 (0.000)
Cluster 3 - Cluster 4	-1.79 (0.000)	0.84 (0.000)	0.29 (0.066)	0.85 (0.000)
gaged in a variety of different activities, not showing any deviations from the other clusters.
Relaxers, forming cluster 3, are characterized by positive factor scores on two factors reflecting motives related largely with relaxation and mildly with passivity, which are motivations underlying typical 3S tourism. Relaxers mostly stay at the hotel (72.2%) and are mainly represented by regular Italian visitors. Compared to other clusters, relaxers tend to spend more than visitors who belong to other clusters. Relaxers prefer more than others lying on the beach, eating out, going to the spas and going out in the evening, confirming the preference to passivity and relaxation.
Curious visitors, forming cluster 4, are characterized by positive score just on the factor learning and seaside enjoyment. This cluster is dominated by young and middle-aged visitors having the lowest rate of visitors aged 50 and above. Understandingly, among curious visitors is a quite high percentage of first time visitors searching
to learn new things and getting new experience at the seaside. More than a half of curious visitors (52.4%) do not come from the three most important tourist generating markets of Portorož (Italy, Austria, and Germany), but from a variety of different countries, such as Hungary, the United States of America, the Czech Republic, the United Kingdom, and Switzerland. Curious visitors differ from visitors in other clusters, staying less at a hotel and more at campsite or visiting Portorož while staying in another destination during the vacation. As expected, cluster curious visitors has the lowest percentage of visitors who spend their time lying on the beach and eating out in the evening, and the highest percentage of visitors who visit historical and cultural sites during their visit to Portorož.
The review of engagement in activities confirms the distinctions among the segments. Relaxers are engaged more in passive ways of spending time which is in line with their motivations. Curious visitors engage less in so
Table 5: Activities often undertaken by the visitors in the sample and in the clusters
	Sample* n = 404	Cluster 1 Holiday enjoyers n = 128 (31.8%)	Cluster 2 Indif-ferent visitors n = 83 (20.6%)	Cluster 3 Relaxers n = 108 (26.8%)	Cluster 4 Curious visitors n = 84 (20.8%)	Chi-square value**
Lying on the beach	230 (56.9%)	76 (59.4%)	47 (56.6%)	74 (68.5%)	32 (38.1%)	25.1 (0.000)
Water sports	26 (6.4%)	11 (8.6%)	4 (4.8%)	4 (3.8%)	7 (8.3%)	3.2 (0.364)
Lying by the pool	64 (15.8%)	22 (17.2%)	18 (21.7%)	18 (16.7%)	6 (7.1%)	7.1 (0.069)
Eating out	175 (43.3%)	50 (39.1%)	34 (40.9%)	64 (59.3%)	27 (32.1%)	16.6 (0.001)
Going to spas	36 (8.9%)	12 (9.3%)	5 (6.0%)	16 (14.8%)	3 (3.6%)	8.5 (0.037)
Visit historical sites	107 (26.5%)	37 (28.9%)	16 (19.3%)	21 (19.4%)	33 (39.3%)	12.4 (0.006)
Visit cultural sites	88 (21.8%)	34 (26.6%)	13 (15.7%)	13 (12.0%)	28 (33.3%)	16.1 (0.001)
Visit events	24 (5.9%)	12 (9.4%)	2 (2.4%)	5 (4.6%)	5 (5.9%)	4.9 (0.181)
Going out in the evening	196 (48.5%)	47 (36.7%)	44 (53.0%)	71 (65.7%)	33 (39.3%)	23.5 (0.000)
Going for walks	251 (62.1%)	79 (61.7%)	46 (55.4%)	72 (66.7%)	54 (64.3%)	2.7 (0.439)
Gamble in casino	33 (8.2%)	10 (7.8%)	5 (6.0%)	16 (14.8%)	2 (2.4%)	10.6 (0.014)
Shopping	101 (25.0%)	37 (28.9%)	16 (19.3%)	28 (25.9%)	19 (22.6%)	2.8 (0.423)
Participate in excursions	17 (4.2%)	4 (3.1%)	4 (4.8%)	3 (2.8%)	6 (7.1%)	2.8 (0.426)
*Sample includes all 404 respondents, while columns representing clusters in ed). In the brackets are the percentages calculated as the number of answers the total number of respondents in each cluster. ** p-values are in parentheses
sum include 403 respondents (the case of outlier is exclud-in the total number of the respondents in the sample or in
called passive activities and more in activities related to learning, such as visiting cultural and historical sites. Moreover, holiday enjoyers and indifferent visitors are somewhere in the midst between passive and active ways of spending time, confirming their motivational orientation.
6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Although nowadays in the academic research, discussions and practice of tourism management and marketing a strong emphasis is put on so called "new tourism" and active holidays, the Mediterranean seaside destination Portorož is halfway to reaching the stage of a modern tourism destination from the demand-side standpoint. Indeed, through analyses of dimensions of
push motivations and segments of foreign leisure visitors it is clear that the demand for 3S tourism in the summer season is still important in Portorož.
Factor analysis reveals that foreign leisure visitors to Portorož are motivated by 3S summer tourism which is reflected in two underlying dimensions of push motivations: relaxation and passivity. The former was found also in other studies on push motivations in the Mediterranean seaside destinations (Kozak, 2002; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). The dimension passivity was not highlighted in the previous studies but it is clearly expressing the characteristics of 3S tourism through push motivations, such as enjoying comfort and tranquillity, and doing nothing. Underlying dimensions of push motivations learning and seaside enjoyment and physical activity and price convenience are representing the motivations for active
ways of spending time, learning and getting new experiences, away from impersonalized 3S tourism. Similar factors were also identified in studies of Kozak (2002) and Yoon and Uysal (2005). Thus, there is the diversity of push motivations related to so called "old tourism", expressed in Mediterranean seaside destinations as 3S tourism, and experience-based tourism.
Regarding the segments of visitors, there is the segment labelled relaxers who exhibit characteristics of old tourism, such as releasing tensions, relaxing physically, doing nothing, enjoying tranquillity, comfort and similar motivations. It seems that wellness and supply related to passive ways of spending time would be appropriate for this segment. Target marketing for this segment should be oriented towards the neighbouring Italian market. Repeat visitors represent an important share of this segment. Visitors included in the segment of curious visitors are expressing the push motivations related to so called "new tourists", interested mainly in active ways of spending time, learning and activities, such as visiting historical and cultural sites. Visitors belonging to holiday enjoyers are motivated by 3S tourism and modern active tourism representing in sum around one third of visitors during the summer season to Portorož. Finally, indifferent visitors seem to have weak motivations to visit Portorož and further analysis should be made to find out why this segment comes to Portorož and what competitive advantage attracts them to the given destination.
In regard to relaxers, their average spending in Portorož is higher than for the other three segments. Therefore, relaxers are being the most important segment in terms of spending. A question arises whether it is advisable to replace relaxers with other types of visitors. Obviously more research should be done in this regard in terms of profitability of segments as well as environmentally friendly behaviour of segments.
Efforts to attract holiday enjoyers and indifferent visitors, who are motivated by a mixture of 3S and "new" tourism, are suggested to be oriented towards different countries and older visitors who travel without children. A high percentage of the first time visitors inside these two segments (holiday enjoyers and indifferent visitors) suggest that there is a need to create awareness and raise interests about Portorož in foreign tourist-generating markets. The Internet, brochures and recommendations of friends and relatives as well as guide books are important sources of information for the both clusters, showing that media selection for geographically disperse touristgenerating markets of the two segments is suggested to focus on the social media and podcast enabling cost-effective target marketing.
Further, tourism products designed and promoted for curious visitors, related to getting experiences and learning, are suggested to be promoted towards geographically dispersed tourist-generating markets through social media, since the Internet and recommendations of rela-
tives and friends are two of the most used information sources for this segment. Moreover, the first time visitors to Portorož are mainly represented in the segment of curious visitors. They tend to spend less than visitors of the other segments. It is in line with the study of Perez and Sampol (2000) who also found that first-time visitors tend to spend less than repeat visitors.
Because of the absence of similar studies, no direct comparison of findings can be undertaken. Yet, the present research can serve as a reference on destination repositioning for any further research on push motivations in small seaside destinations in the Mediterranean. In contrast to the study of Prašnikar et al. (2006) who investigated pull motivations of visitors to Portorož, push motivations, undertaken in the present study, show different segments of visitors although some similarity can be found between relaxers and indifferent visitors in the present study and the segments families and feeling good in the study of Prašnikar et al. (2006). However, there is a lag of six year period of time between the studies undertaken in 2004 and in 2010 respectively.
To sum up empirical contribution and practical implications, Portorož attracts four diverse segments of visitors who are motivated by a complexity of so called "old" and "new" tourism. An aggregate view to the segments shows that there is a traditional segment called relaxers, a segment of experience oriented visitors called curious visitors and two segments of specific visitors -holiday enjoyers and indifferent visitors - wherein both types of push motivations are present. It can be derived that, answering the first research question, foreign leisure visitors to Portorož in the summer season are prevailingly motivated by 3S-based push motivations.
Although its product has been diversified, no liaison between the repositioning efforts and the change in visitor structure has been found. From the view of benefits sought by foreign leisure summer visitors, Portorož faces positioning imbalances among tourism suppliers because of not coordinated positioning efforts towards a modern summer destination. This suggests that tourism suppliers in Portorož should collaborate in a fully integrated way, possibly mediated by destination marketing organization, to properly reposition in the market.
From the managerial and tourism policy standpoints, the present study highlights three important implications answering the second research question. Firstly, the study shows that the seaside Mediterranean destination Portorož in the summer high season attracts different segments of foreign leisure visitors. From the view of different segments, development of traditional 3S tourism products as well as products related with education and heritage is important for Portorož tourism destination management and marketing. Secondly, the study helps to better understand the opportunities of tourism management and development of Portorož, and indicates the direction to develop segmentation positioning strategy and marketing mixes for distinct market segments of foreign
leisure visitors to Portorož to deliver innovative tourism products to the target segments efficiently in the summer season. Finally, the research gives the unique insight into the visitor segments and their characteristics in high season that are of managerial and tourism policy relevance. Considering this, but also in line with philosophy and resources of destination, tourism suppliers can develop products and promotion in order to more efficiently (re) position Portorož in the regional and global tourism market. However, considering the size and spending of segments, relaxers seem to remain an important segment for Portorož indicating potential to continue in the present direction. On the other hand, an innovative diversification towards new tourism products to attract "new tourists" should also be taken into consideration.
7. STUDY LIMITATIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH
The findings of the present study should be viewed in the light of its limitations. These limitations should be discussed to suggest further research. The research is limited to a specific market. The summer season, which is far the most important season for Portorož, is investigated. Further, population of the study comprises foreign leisure visitors to Portorož; thus, the findings are restricted to them. Further research can extend to include domestic market as well as business tourists. Application of profitability and compatibility of distinct segments would be welcome to produce valuable findings for practical implications. Moreover, among the issues worth of a broader research, it is suggested to direct towards tourists' perceptions on destination market position.
struktura obiskovalcev kot osnova za repozicioniranje destinacije -primer severno sredozemske destinacije
Helena NEMEC RUDEŽ
Univeza na Primorskem, Fakulteta za turistične študije - Turistica, Obala 11a, 6320 Portorož, Slovenija
E-mail: helena.nemec@turistica.si
Gorazd SEDMAK
Univeza na Primorskem, Fakulteta za turistične študije - Turistica, Obala 11a, 6320 Portorož, Slovenija
E-mail: gorazd.sedmak@turistica.si
Ksenija VODEB
Univeza na Primorskem, Fakulteta za turistične študije - Turistica, Obala 11a, 6320 Portorož, Slovenija
E-mail: ksenija.vodeb@turistica.si
Štefan BOJNEC
Univerza na Primorskem, Fakulteta za management, Cankarjeva 5, 6000 Koper, Slovenija E-mail: stefan.bojnec@siol.net; stefan.bojnec@fm-kp.si
POVZETEK
Veliko t. i. 3S destinacij (»morje-sonce-plaža«) je doseglo fazo zrelosti življenjskega cikla v obdobju med poznimi sedemdesetimi in devetdesetimi leti prejšnjega stoletja in se tako soočilo s problematiko zastarelih zmogljivosti in preobremenjenosti okolja. Tudi Portorož, majhna slovenska destinacija, je delil usodo mnogih severno sredozemskih destinacij. Razumevanje motivov obiskovalcev za obisk destinacije podaja pomembne usmeritve za njeno pozi-cioniranje, zato pričujoča študija ugotavlja, ali pri obiskovalcih destinacije še vedno pretežno prevladujejo motivi povezani s 3S destinacijami, ali pa so njihovi motivi povezani z novimi turističnimi proizvodi, ki jih iščejo sodobni in zahtevni obiskovalci destinacije. Pri repozicioniranju sredozemskih destinacij namreč pogosto niso bile opravljene poglobljene analize povpraševanja obiskovalcev, ki temeljijo na segmentiranju trga. Na to področje posegamo v pričujoči raziskavi, ki je bila izvedena med poletno sezono. S strani obiskovalcev smo pridobili podatke o motivatorjih potiska in uporabili a posteriori metodo opredelitve segmentov. S klastersko metodo smo identificirali posamezne segmente, z analizo variance pa značilne razlike med klastri v pogledu posameznih faktorjev. S hi-kvadrat testom smo nato raziskali značilne razlike med klastri pri udeležbi obiskovalcev pri posameznih aktivnostih. Analiza je odkrila, da so motivi tujih prostočasnih obiskovalcev Portoroža povezani s poletnim 3S turizmom, ki ga odsevata dve dimenziji motivatorjev potiska: oddih in pasivnost. Dimenziji motivatorjev potiska učenje in uživanje na obali in fizična aktivnost in cenovna ugodnost pa predstavljata motivacijo za aktivno preživljanje časa, učenje in pridobivanje novih izkušenj. V naslednji fazi raziskave so bili identificirani štirje segmenti obiskovalcev, ki odražajo kompleksnost tako imenovanega »starega« in »novega« turizma. Celovit pogled na strukturo obiskovalcev kaže naslednje segmente: tradicionalni segment obiskovalcev, ki išče sprostitev, segment obiskovalcev, ki išče izkušnje in jih lahko imenujemo radovedni obiskovalci, in dva specifična segmenta, kjer sta prisotni obe vrsti motivacije - uživalci počitnic in ravnodušni obiskovalci glede na motive. Študija pripomore k boljšemu razumevanju priložnosti za management turizma in razvoj Portoroža ter nakazuje smer oblikovanja strategije pozicioniranja in trženjskega spleta za obiskovalce Portoroža z namenom učinkovitega oblikovanja inovativnih turističnih proizvodov v poletni sezoni.
Ključne besede: "sonce-morje-plaža" destinacija, severno sredozemska destinacija, motivatorji potiska,
poletna sezona
REFERENCES
Agarwal, S. (2002): Restructuring seaside tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 29, 25-55.
Apostolopoulos, Y., & Sönmez, S. (2000): New directions in Mediterranean tourism. Restructuring and cooperative marketing in the era of globalization. Thun-derbird International Business Review, 43, 381-392.
Beh, A., & Bruyere, B. L. (2007): Segmentation by visitor motivation in three Kenyan national reserves. Tourism Management, 28, 1464-1471.
Bieger, T., & Laesser, C. (2002): Market segmentation by motivation: The case of Switzerland. Journal of Travel Research, 41, 68-76.
Boo, S., & Jones, D. L. (2009): Using a validation process to develop market segmentation based on travel motivation for major metropolitan areas. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 26, 60-79.
Bramwell, B. (2004): Mass tourism, diversification and sustainability in Southern Europe's coastal regions. In B. Bramwell (Ed.), Coastal mass tourism: Diversification and sustainable development in Southern Europe (pp. 1-31). Clevendon (UK): Channel View Publications.
Buhalis, D. (2000): Marketing the competitive destination of the future. Tourism Management, 21, 97-116.
Chapman, A., & Speake, J. (2011): Regeneration in a mass-tourism resort: The changing fortunes of Bugibba, Malta. Tourism Management, 32, 482-491.
Crabtree, A. (2007): Coastal/marine tourism trends in the Coral Triangle and strategies for sustainable development interventions. Retrieved from http://www. responsibletravel.org/ resources/documents/reports/ FINAL_REPORT_Alice_Crabtree_lan_08.pdf Accessed December 19, 2011.
Crouch, I. G., & Ritchie, J. R. B. (2004): Application of the audit concept for destination diagnosis. In S. Weber and R. Tomljenovic (Eds.) Reinventing a Tourism Destination (pp. 7-25). Zagreb: Institute for Tourism.
Crompton, J. L. (1979): Motivation of pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research, 6, 408-428.
Diaz-Perez, F. M., Bethencourt-Cejaz, M., & Alva-rez-Gonzales, J. A. (2005): The segmentation of Canary Islands tourism markets by expenditure: implications for tourism policy. Tourism Management, 26, 961-964.
Dolnicar, S., & Leisch, F. (2003): Winter tourist segments in Austria: Identifying stable vacation styles using bagged clustering techniques. Journal of Travel Research, 41, 281-292.
Figini, P., & Vici, L. (2011): Off-season tourists and the cultural offer of a mass-tourism destination: The case of Rimini. Tourism Management, doi: 10.1016/j'.tour-man.2011.09.005.
Frochot, I. (2005): A benefit segmentation of tourists in rural areas: a Scottish perspective. Tourism Management, 26, 335-346.
Frochot, I., & Morrison, A. M. (2000): Benefit segmentation: A review of its applications to travel and tourism research. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 9, 21-45.
Fodness, D. (1994): Measuring tourist motivation. Annals of Tourism Research, 21, 555-581.
Galloway, G. (2002): Psychographic segmentation of park visitor market: evidence for the utility of sensation seeking. Tourism Management, 23, 581-596.
Goller, S., Hogg, A., & Kalafatis, S. P. (2002): A new research agenda for business segmentation. European Journal of Marketing, 36, 252 - 271.
Greenley, G. E. (1989): An Understanding of Marketing Strategy. European Journal of Marketing, 23, 45-58.
Haley, R. (1968): Benefit segmentation: A decision-oriented research tool. Journal of Marketing, 32, 30-35.
Hassan, S. S., & Craft, S. H. (2005): Linking global market segmentation decisions with strategic positioning options, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22, 81 - 89.
Hu, B., & Yu, H. (2006): Segmentation by craft selection criteria and shopping involvement. Tourism Management, 28, 1079-1092.
loannides, D., & Holcomb, B. (2003): Misguided policy initiatives in small-island destinations: why do up-market tourism policies fail? Tourism Geographies, 5, 39-48.
Johns, N., & Gyimothy, S. (2002): Market segmentation and the prediction of tourist behaviour: The case of Bornholm, Denmark. Journal of Travel Research, 40, 316-327.
Juaneda, C., & Sastre, F. (1999): Balearic Islands tourism: a case study in demographic segmentation. Tourism Management, 20, 549-552.
Kim, S. S., Lee, C.-K., & Klenosky, D. B. (2003): The
influence of push and pull factors at Korean national parks. Tourism Management, 24, 169-180.
Klenosky, D. B. (2002): The "pull" of tourism destinations: A means-end investigation. Annals of Tourism Research, 40, 385-395.
Kozak, M. (2002): Comparative analysis of tourist motivations by nationality and destination. Tourism Management, 23,221-232.
Kozak, M., & Martin, D. (2012): Tourism life cycle and sustainability analysis: Profit-focused strategies for mature destinations. Tourism Management, 33, 188194.
Leisen, B. (2001): Image segmentation: the case of a tourism destination, Journal of Services Marketing, 15, 49-66.
Lundberg, D. E. (1971): Why tourists travel. Cornell HRA Quarterly, February, 75-81.
McCabe, S. (2009): Marketing communications in tourism and hospitality: concepts, strategies and cases. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Middleton, V., Fyall, A., & Morgan, M. (2009): Marketing in travel and tourism. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Mir, V. M. M., & Baidal, J. A. I. (2001): Towards a sustained competitiveness of Spanish tourism. In: Y. Apo-
stolopoulos, P. Loukissas & L. Loentidou (Eds.) Mediterranean Tourism (pp. 18-38). London: Routledge.
Molera, L., & Albaladejo, I. P. (2007): Profiling segments of tourists in rural areas of South-Eastern Spain. Tourism Management, 28, 757-767.
Municipality of Piran (2009): Strategija razvoja turizma v občini Piran 2009-2015 (Strategy of development of tourism in the Municipality of Piran, 2009-2015). Piran: Municipality of Piran.
Nemec Rudež, H., Sedmak, G., & Bojnec, Š. (2013): Benefit segmentation of seaside destination in the phase of market repositioning: the case of Portorož. International Journal of Tourism Research, 15, 138-151.
Park, D. B., & Yoon, Y.-S. (2009): Segmentation by motivation in rural tourism: A Korean case study. Tourism Management, 30, 99-108.
Perez, E. A., & Sampol, C. J. (2000): Tourist expenditure for mass tourism markets. Annals of Tourism Research, 27, 624-637.
Poon, A. (1993): Tourism, technology and competitive strategies. Wallingford: CAB International.
Prašnikar, J., Brenčič-Makovec, M., & Kneževic--Cvelbar, L. (2006): Exploring the challenges of destination management: comparison of the supply and demand characteristics in four destinations in North Adriatic and Gorica region. In J. Prašnikar (Ed.) Competitiveness, social responsibility and economic growth (pp. 247-270). New York: Nova Science Publishers.
Prasnikar, J., Zabkar, V., & Rajkovic, T. (2007): Should Italians, Croats and Slovene Work Together in Developing a Northern Adriatic Tourist Destination? South East European Journal of Economics and Business, 2, 57-68.
Priestley, G., & Mundet, L. (1998): The Post-stagnation Phase of the Resort Cycle. Annales of Tourism Research, 25, 85-111.
Rittichainuwat, B., & Mair, J. (2012): Visitor attendance motivations at consumer travel exhibitions. Tourism Management, 33, 1236-1244.
Sarigöllü, E., & Huang, R. (2005): Benefit segmentation of visitors to Latin America. Journal of Travel Research, 43, 277-293.
Sedmak, G., & Mihalič, T. (2008): Authenticity in Mature Seaside Resorts. Annals of Tourism Research, 35, 1007-1035.
Sedmak, G., Nemec Rudež, H., Podovšovnik, E., Za-bukovec Baruca, P., Kociper, T., & Gržinic, N. (2011):
Tržna raziskava o turistih v Portorožu, poletje 2011. Portorož: Fakulteta za turistične študije - Turistica.
Sirakaya, E., Usyal, M., & Yoshioka, C. F. (2003): Segmenting the Japanese tour market to Turkey. Journal of Travel Research, 41, 293-304.
SORS (2011): Statistical Office of Republic of Slovenia. Data Portal.
Swarbrooke, J., & Horner., S. (2007): Consumer Behaviour in Tourism. Oxford: Butterworth- Heinemann.
Yannopoulos, P., & Rotenberg, R. (1999): Benefit segmentation of the near-home tourism market: The case of Upper New York State. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 8, 41-55.
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005): An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on destination loyalty: a structural model. Tourism Management 26, 45-56.