Abstract of the Great Wine Capitals Global Network 2013 Wine Tourism Survey / Focus on the Bordeaux wine regions

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 Bordeaux
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 Bordeaux,
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 Bordeaux was 123, which was an
increase of about 25% compared to the 2012 survey.
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley

3. Among all great capitals, Bordeaux
has the largest percentage of
revenues coming from Wine Sales.
From the standpoint of Bordeaux
wineries' main activities,
Accommodations is the second
major source of revenues.
Wine Tourism Revenues Break­up
Wine Tourism Revenues and Top
Sources of Profits
Wine Tourism
Revenues
Break−up
Wine sales 79 %
Accomadation 12 %
Food 0 %
Tastingfees 2 %
Merchandising 2 %
Hosting / Rest 5 %
For the 2013 survey, we find that
low­end wines (price less than
$15/bottle) represent a top
source of profits in Bordeaux.
The following top two sources of
profits are mid­price wines (bottle
between 15 and 25 dollars) and
Accommodations.
Top Sources of Wine Tourism Profit
15 % 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
2 %
29 %
16 %
67 %
21 %
17 %
6 %
4 %
9 %
1 %
Top Sources of Profit
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley

4. Infrastructure is the top invest­
ment category for the 2012­2013
period in Bordeaux. The next top
categories are Market Positioning,
Cultural Entertainment and
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 Bordeaux.
For the specific sample of Bordeaux wineries the
top two categories closely behind are Tourism
Offices and Mailings/Newsletters.
Top Marketing Tools Used
39 % Infrastructure
Imp services
Market positioning
Training emp
Cultural Entert.
None
Strategic partn.
32 %
35 %
29 %
27 %
33 %
18 %
Top Investments
12%Mentionedotherwebsites
Borchures
SocialNetworks
Spclzedmedia
TourOp.
Appelation
Tourismxhib
TravelAgencies
14%
17%
3%
41%
4%
7%
9%
10%
3%
7%
7%Sustainable
Citations
Referrals
AuthenticExperience
Mailing/Newsletter
CulturalFestivals
Winefairs
WineContests
Regionfame
Usemobileapps
16%
3%
1%
3%
27%
4%
18%
42%
8%
16%
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, Bordeaux is in the middle of
the pack among all great capitals.
Nevertheless, it ranks as the second
highest capital in terms of Spending
per Visitor. In terms of origin, 45% of
tourists are nationals, almost 50% are
middle­aged people and about 45%
are women.
Tourists Characteristics
Nationals 45 %
Internationals 37 %
Locals 18 %
36 to 55 49 %
Above 56 %
18 to 35 20 %
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley

6. Regarding the External Factors
perceived to help wineries,
Bordeaux wineries testify that the
Natural Beauty and of the region is
a key positive factor, as well as
Internet use. Consistent with the
findings of the 2012 survey they
report that Signage, uneasy
Access, lack of Local Facilities and
Public Infrastructures can be
factors that impede business.
Positive and Negative Factors for
Business
Landmark Natural B Location Access OtherAct LocalFacilities CoopwBus MarkTO PublicInf Signage
Totally negative
Somewhat negative
Neutral
Somewhat positive
Totally positive
50%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
60%
GWCmenber Association ChamberorBusA Tousism A TourOp CoopWineries Internet FameRegion TourismPolicy
50%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
60%
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.
In the category Investments in
Wine Tourism, Improved Services is
the only significant factor. In the
category Activities Offered,
Factors Correlated with
Attracting More Tourists
For the 2013 survey, we find that
low­end wines (price less than
$15/bottle) represent a top
source of profits in Bordeaux.
The following top two sources of
profits are mid­price wines (bottle
between 15 and 25 dollars) and
Accommodations.
Most Significant and
Impactful Factors
Improved Services 2 % 71 Investments in Wine tourism+ +
Sports and Social + +
Gastronomy + +
Conferences +
Specialized Media + +
Sustainably Friendly ­ ­
Travel Agencies +
Tour Operators +
Landmark + +
Cooperation / other business ­ ­
GWC Menbership + +
Local Facilities +
Effect Factor Categories
TableshowsresultsfromQuantileRegrassions.Correctedforsizeeffect
Pseudo B and
Observations
2
3 %
78
4 %
76
2 %
67
Activities Offered
Promotional Tools
External Factors
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 tourist are now
analyzed. Amongst the category of
Investments in Wine Tourism,
Market Positioning has the
strongest positive impact. Within
the dimension of Activities Offered,
Lodging is the only factor having a
significant impact.
In the category of Promotional
Tools, wineries expressing that
they benefit more from Referrals
from wholesalers and perhaps
importers are also generating
higher revenues per visitor. Again,
promoting Sustainably Friendly
practices is correlated with les
spending per tourist.
Factors Correlated with Higher
Spending/Tourist
In the category of External Factors, Location is
the most impactful factor. Use of Internet,
easier Access and more Local Facilities are all
correlated with a better performance in terms
of revenues per visitor. Again, surprisingly,
wineries that highly rate Cooperation with Other
Businesses have also visitors that spend less.
Most Significant and
Impactful Factors
Market Positioning 6 % 83 Investments in Wine tourism+ +
Lodging Activities Offered+ +
Referrals from
Importers / Wholesalers
+ +
Festivals +
Brochures in Hotels +
Rely on AOC +
Wine Contests +
Tourism Exhibits +
Sustainably Friendly ­
Effect Factor Categories
TableshowsresultsfromQuantileRegrassions.Correctedforsizeeffectandusingcapitalsdummyvariables
Pseudo B and
Observations
2
Promotional Tools8 % 91
Lacation + +
Landmark ­­
Cooperation with other Business ­­
Internet +
Access +
Local Facilities +
External Factors14 % 79
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 interesting
findings for the wineries of
Bordeaux. Bordeaux attracts a
majority of older tourists and one
third of visitors are foreigners.
Bordeaux welcomes a smaller
percentage of women than other
great wine capitals.
Cultural investments remain a strong
suit and a specificity of Bordeaux
wineries. By comparison to 2012,
Bordeaux wineries have
demonstrated a continued commit­
ment to invest in Infrastructure. At
the margin, we find that investments
in Market Positioning bring in more
revenues per visitor and Improved
Services more visitors.
Activities that bring in more
tourists and spending are strongly
complementary to wine tasting and
while they seem to be fairly
standard in other wine capitals
(Gastronomy and Lodging) they may
indeed be rare enough in Bordeaux
to make a difference at the margin
for a number of wineries that use
them.
Overall, Bordeaux wineries use
fairly traditional promotional tools,
and the tools that make the most
impact in 2013 are promotional
tools with "special access", that is
"specialized media" and "referrals
from wholesalers". The latter
category is a bit of a surprise.
Managerial Implications and
Conclusion
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley

10. 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
One must exercise caution when
trying to extend managerial
implications from a small sample of
wineries to the whole the region.
Nevertheless, it appears that there
is perhaps room for Bordeaux
Wineries to adopt strategies that
bring in a younger clientele to the
Châteaux. The 2013 findings point
already to the success that
offering diverse social activities
has on increasing the number of
visitors.
Bordeaux wineries continue to rely
enormously on the fame of the
region, and testify that Location and
the presence of nearby Landmarks
can be tourist attractors. But the
latter may cannibalize sales linked
to wine tourism, as seen in the
performance analysis. Paradoxically,
wineries that are part of a network
of (tourism related) businesses seem
to bring in less tourists and
revenues per tourist. The latter
could be due to fixed (tourist)
budgets that get itemized amongst
the various trip related activities.
This could also be due to an inherent
size effect; that is, wineries of a
certain size tend to ally with other
businesses, to help with promoting
their wineries as part of a package.
Bordeaux Cape Town Firenze Mendoza PortoBilbao Rioja Christchurch Sousth Island Mainz Rheinhessen San Francisco Napa Valley Valparaiso Casablanca Valley