detailed report – wave 2 ( 4 th quarter of 2011 ) ad effectiveness campaign - germany prepared for...

Detailed report – Wave 2 (4th quarter of 2011)Ad Effectiveness campaign - Germany

Prepared for the Cyprus Tourism Organisation

Content

1. Background, Objectives, Methodology & Sample structure p. 3

2. Summary of Findings p. 8

3. Detailed Findings p. 17

1. Spontaneous mentions p. 18

2. Overall Measures p. 22

3. Ideal holiday destination & Image perceptions p. 30

4. Attitudinal Brand Equity p. 39

5. Prompted Ad awareness p. 50

6. CY Ad Evaluation p. 58

4. Conclusions & Implications p. 69

Background, Research Objectives, Methodology & Sample Structure

1a. Background, Research objectives & Methodology

Background

CTO’s new communication initiative in Germany was launched with a TV campaign during the 1st quarter of 2011, followed by an outdoor campaign during the 2nd quarter and with the second wave of airing (without TV campaign) in the 4th quarter of 2011. In line with CTO’s campaign evaluation protocol, its management initiated a marketing research program, in order to measure the impact of the campaign in shaping perceptions and generating interest to visit Cyprus, as well as to assess the communication materials on a series of Ad effectiveness dimensions.In view of that Venaque was commissioned to carry out this investigation to address the above and provide a detailed account of the findings, as well as to offer the necessary insights and guidelines (if any) for possible improvements of the communication campaign in the future!It should be noted that initially the aim was to capture perceptions before and after the launch of the campaign (i.e. In December of 2010 and May of 2011), however the timelines were revised, with both waves carried out after the communication campaign was aired; the 1st wave was conducted in June/July and the 2nd wave in December of 2011. The fielding of the 2nd wave was carried out between the 24th of November and the 12h of December.

Research objectives

The core research objectives and thus the info sought were the following: · Spontaneous country awareness & Ad awareness of holiday destinations· Countries visited in the past 5 years · Consideration of countries (Key countries) to visit in the next 3 years · Familiarity with holiday destinations (Key countries)


Research Objectives (cont.)

· Characteristics sough in the Ideal holiday destination (category/industry drivers)· Image perceptions towards holiday destinations (Key countries) · Overall opinions of holiday destinations (Key countries) and category involvement· Attitudinal brand (country) equity share and Attitudinal equity segments (Key countries)· Drivers of Cyprus Attitudinal equity share and Priority Improvement Matrix · Prompted Ad awareness, media Ad was seen and impact of Ad in generating interest to visit (for key countries)· Unbranded CY Ad campaign recognition · Evaluation of CY Ad campaign in terms of Likeability, Uniqueness, Credibility, Relevance, Interest and Engagement;

as well as determine the main message(s) communicated· Impact of Ad campaign on perceptions towards Cyprus· Ad effectiveness score & Ad Needs-Fit Score (coefficient)· Comparison of the results between Wave 2 with Wave 1

Research Methodology

This exercise was achieved by means of F2F interviews amongst people aged 20yo+ who live in households with a minimum net income of €3,500. The interview sessions took place in central locations which were located in the main

retail/commercial areas of each city, in attempt to capture as dispersed sample as possible (from a city district point of view). A screener determined the eligibility criteria, followed by an invitation to partake in the exercise once eligibility was established (with a participation rate close to 20% was achieved).


Research Methodology (cont.)

Recruitment was achieved through street intercepts, while the recruitment process followed a predefined rule – i.e. By screening every 15th person passing from a specified point! The recruitment and interviewing were conducted from Mon-Sat, between the hours of 10am-7pm As a minimum number of 100 CY considerers were needed to perform the anticipated analysis, the sample was originally split to “open & purposive” cells (with the first 700 interviews constituting the open sample, while the remaining, targeting

CY considerers until the desired sample is reached), however as it proved the activation of the purposive sample was never exercised, as the desired number of CY considerers was achieved prior of completing the interviews of initial open sample, thus all 802 interviews were completed through an open sample approach. Quotas were set at city level, with the minimum sample per city set at n=40 (again for analysis purpose), with the final results post-weighted (rim weighting) to the actual city population levels and national age .The interviewing length of this exercise ranged from 25 to 30 minutes, while the field agency in Germany was Forester & Thelen Teststudio GmbH.

1b. Sample structure

In total 802 interviews were completed.

55%31%

14%

Net HH income

¤3.500 - ¤4.499 ¤4.500 - ¤5.499 ¤5.500 +

17%

21%

25%

19%

18%

Age

20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+

51%49%

Gender

Male Female

32%

64%

4%Marital status

Single

Married/Living with partner

Seperated/Divirced

19%

45%

17%

12%

7%HH size

1 2 3 4 5+

4% 4%4%

4%

5%

5%

5%

6%

8%11%

15%

29%

Cities Dresden

Nuremburg

Leipzig

Hanover

Essen

Dusseldorf

Stuttgart

Frankfurt

Cologne

Munich

Hamburg

Berlin

2. Summary of Findings


Overall measuresCyprus’ acknowledgement as a holiday destination remained unchanged from wave 1 (at 9%), while countries which have reported notable gains appear to be those which are considered to have either warmer climate during the winter or countries which are well established as winter/ski destinations.

Past 5 years visit claims for Cyprus have dropped to 3.6%, while Germany’s high visit incidence even increased (55%), whereas Spain, Italy, France and Austria remained the most visited countries abroad.

Consideration to visit Cyprus in the next 3 years was reported at 20% (a drop of 3.1% from wave 1, probably

because CY is not considered a winter destination as strongly as other countries), while the number of respondents who wouldn’t visit the country even dropped slightly to 10% and ranked 4th overall behind only to Spain, Italy and Portugal.

Familiarity remains a key problem for Cyprus and although has achieved the same score as in W1, its ranking plunged to 10th (implying other countries increased their familiarity). CY considerers’ familiarity though was significantly higher, it was also true for all key markets!

Overall opinions towards Cyprus could be considered as positive, as CY was ranked 4 th overall behind Italy, Spain, and Portugal and once again better than well established holiday destinations such as Turkey, Greece and Egypt, while higher opinions were cited by those who have recalled CY’s Ad campaigns.


Characteristics of the Ideal holiday destination The incidence of a characteristic (an underlying need) in the Ideal holiday destination, denotes how important the characteristic/need is when considering to visit a holiday destination. Furthermore, the acknowledgment of a characteristic/need as part of the Ideal HD and its association with a country, indicates if a need is met (refer to as Need-Fit score or coefficient), thus the higher the N-F score the higher the probability of that country being visited in the future (assuming external factors don’t influence that choice).

The main characteristics sought in the Ideal HD, cover a range of contrasting needs, which include culture & natural beauties, hospitality & safety, comfort, beautiful beaches but also offered at a reasonable cost.

Nine of the ten most important characteristics sought in the Ideal HD were the same in both waves (the

exception of high quality service which dropped to 12th place), while similar sets of characteristics are sough by CY’s considerers.

The overall Needs-Fit score for CY was reported at 37.6%, (same as in wave 1) and once again was amongst the lowest of all key countries.

The N-F score for CY considerers though notably higher at 50.9% it was particularly lower than W1’s score, however in some of the attributes identified as key drivers of CY’s AE share the N-F score was improved; having said that considerers’ lower N-F score could be also attributed to CY’s lower Ad spending in the 2nd half of the year!


Image PerceptionsIn terms of attribute image associations, the total incidences reported for Cyprus’ could be considered as average (same picture as in wave 1), as CY received notably lower mentions from the majority of the key countries assessed – it was ranked 9th overall.

The attribute for which CY received the highest score was for having “natural beauties” (but still 6 other

countries were better associated with the attribute), while offering “comfort and pampering” was the attribute for which CY was better recognised relative to competition (only Thailand’s score was higher).

CY considerers’ perceptions are significantly higher in all domains, indicative of their more positive views, and thus justification for consideration.

The same patterns re-emerged at relative attribute performance level (i.e. how distinctive an attribute is for a

country in relation to all other countries) as in wave 1, with CY being somewhat more distinctive for “comfort & pampering” and for “beautiful beaches”, and not at all recognised for having “reasonable prices” or “vivid night life”, connoting that CY is more of a summer destination and aimed for those who seek relaxation, wellness and comfort - thus potentially appealing to more affluent and senior citizens!


Attitudinal Brand Equity Attitudinal brand Equity (refer to as share of mind or attitudinal equity share) is a reflection of what customers would like to do, while brand behaviour (refer to as share of wallet or market share) is what customers end up doing! In an “ideal” market environment equity share and market share should be equal, however specific market and/or personal customer factors ( i.e. price; past visit etc.) either decrease or increase a country’s chances of being visited. Attitudinal Equity (AE) share is a better predictor of consideration, thus better enables marketers to identify the unmet needs of those customers who are easier to persuade and thus increase the probability of a country being visited.

The AE share for CY dropped to 6.1 (from 7.2) and to the 10th place amongst the 12 key markets investigated. This drop could be attributed partly to the lower communication exposure (in wave 2) and/or to the fact that CY is not a prominent player in winter tourism! Spain & Italy dominate the AE shares (with 19 each), followed by Thailand, which further confirms its growing role in tourism with an AE share of 10.

As in wave 1, 26% of CY’s considerers belong in the High AE segment and contribute 61% of the country’s AE share, thus identifying what would increase the AE share of Considerers belonging to the Medium & Low AE segments could improve Cyprus chances of attracting more Tourists!

Drivers of Attitudinal Brand Equity (attributes which would force a bigger AE share increase)The core drivers of CY considerers’ AE share which emerged were: High quality service, having Clean & beautiful beaches and natural beauties, offering contrasting experiences including comfort & pampering, and for being a friendly & hospitable place.


Taking into consideration the competitive environment, as well as and the industry drivers ( i.e. what holiday

makers seek from holiday destinations) the analysis introduces a strategic road map of what should be improved to maximise Cyprus potential as it prioritises the efforts required and provides guidelines where improvements should be focused. Attributes for which CY is performing well in relation to competition and their impact (of CY & Industry) is relatively high are classified as Leverageable strengths thus should be maintained (especially those identified drivers of AE), whereas attributes for which CY is not performing well in relation to competition and their impact is relatively high they become Priority improvement areas, and should be aimed to improve first!

Leverageable strengths: Natural beauties, Clean & beautiful beaches, Luxury accommodation and Comfort & Pampering.

Priority Improvement areas: Vivid nightlife, Reasonable prices, High quality service, Sights to visit, Friendly & hospitable and Variety of recreational activities.

The above directions indicate the communication efforts which should be aimed to convey, so long the aim is to increase the number of visitors (any type); else efforts should concentrate on those areas where CTO’s strategy is aligned with!


CY’s Ad awareness Unaided Ad awareness for Cyprus was reported at 10% (slight increase from W1) and ranked 8th overall with only Turkey, Egypt and Germany reporting significantly higher scores from those achieved for CY.

CY’s aided Ad awareness incidence remained at similar levels as in wave 1, both at overall and CY considerers levels, with 24% and 34% respectively, while CY ads were seen on average 4-5 months ago and only 1 in 10 stating to have seen them a month ago (i.e. during the airing of the campaign).

The Ads were seen on average in 1.5 media channels, with the TV recall incidence reported at 50%, followed by print at 36% and then by Outdoor at 28% (again the highest reported of all countries); Internet, leaflet and WoM claims were all with significantly lower claims.

In terms of Ad likability, Cyprus’ Malaysia’s and Italy’s Ads received the highest scores (same average mean), however they were close to those reported for the majority of the other countries (the exceptions were

Bulgaria & Malta where their Ad likability scores were significantly lower).

CÝ’s Ad impact in initiating the desire to visit the country has increased significantly from wave 1 ( from 34%

to 49%) but still not as high as those reported for Italy, Spain or Malaysia.


Ad Evaluation of CY’s CampaignThough the unbranded Ad recognition for both Print and TV executions were low, they were higher from wave 1, with incidences at 22% and 31% respectively, and the executions were again mostly mistaken for being Ads of other Mediterranean countries, mainly those of Greece, Turkey and Egypt.

The branded communication materials (Print/TV) influenced positively respondents’ opinions towards Cyprus (the T2B score on “overall opinions” after the Ad exposure increased by 24%) and helped improved certain perceptions, thus the continuation of the campaign airing appears to help CY’s chances for attracting more visitors!

At a campaign level, the overall Ad effectiveness score (73 – similar to W1) achieved indicates again an “average” campaign, meaning the executions (print/TV) were neither bad nor very good – please note that we classify campaigns in 3 bands; below average, average and above average!

Ad Likeability & Ad Engagement once again received the highest scores, followed by the scores of Ad Credibility & Ad Interest, while Ad Relevance’s score was the only to report notable increase from W1. The only dimension which remained at a low level was Ad Uniqueness (meaning the campaign is lacking a distinct USP), thus a potential area which if improved could increase consideration & AE share.


Ad Evaluation of CY’s Campaign (continue)

The Needs-Fit analysis (another measure of Ad effectiveness), revealed a N-F score of 49.5 (slightly lower than W1), which again classifies the campaign as “average”; having said that the N-F score after the campaign was exposed increased from the score Pre Ad exposure (37.6).

The most notable N-F score increases were reported for some of the attributes considered as Leverageable strengths or areas of Primary improvement such as “clean & beautiful beaches”, “comfort & pampering”, “natural beauties” and for being “friendly & hospitable” place. The attribute though with the highest N-F score was “Mediterranean Cuisine” (71), while the attribute with the lowest N-F score was once again reported for “having reasonable prices” (20)!

2. Detailed Findings

1. Spontaneous mentions

2. Overall Measures

3. Ideal holiday destination & Image perceptions

4. Attitudinal Brand Equity

5. Prompted Ad awareness

6. CY Ad Evaluation

2.1 Spontaneous mentions

1. Holiday destinations that come to mind

2. Recalling an Ad of Holiday destinations in the P6Ms

3. Holiday destinations visited in P5Ys

2.1.1 Spontaneous mentions Holiday Destinations that come to mind (unprompted)

9%

10%

10%

10%

11%

11%

11%

11%

11%

11%

12%

14%

14%

14%

14%

Finland

Cuba

China

Ireland

UAE (AD)

Croatia

UAE (Dubai)

Mexico

Portugal

South Africa

Maldives

Switzerland

UK

Brazil

Sweden

Top 16-30

14%

15%

15%

16%

16%

19%

19%

20%

21%

25%

25%

26%

29%

32%

34%

Canada

Norway

Denmark

Thailand

New Zealand

Turkey

Greece

Austria

Egypt

France

Italy

Australia

Spain

Germany

USA

Top 1-15

4.6%

0.0%

-3.1%

6.2%

-5.5%

0.3%

-1.6%

2.4%

-2.1%

-3.1%

4.5%

2.8%

0.7%

0.2%

4.3%

Gap from wave 1

Gap from wave 1

1.2%

3.8%

2.5%

2.6%

1.3%

1.7%

0.6%

3.0%

-0.3%

1.0%

2.5%

1.1%

2.4%

1.1%

3.2%

Base: All interviewed n=802

The overall incidence was higher than wave 1 (mentioning on average 7.7 countries from 6.7 reported in wave 1) with the USA, Germany, Spain, Australia, Italy and France appear to be the most common holiday destinations coming to mind (with 25-35% claims), while Egypt, Austria, Greece and Turkey follow with incidences around 20%.

Cyprus comes 31st overall, down 4 places from wave 1, however with a similar incidence reported at 9%. Once again significantly higher mentions were cited by respondents in Dresden, and as expected amongst those who have visited CY in the past, have seen a CY Ad and those who consider visiting CY in the future.

When compared to the results of wave 1, countries which have reported notable gains appear to be those considered having warmer climate (during Germany’s winter period) such as Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, Mexico, Brazil , UAE etc., or countries which are well established as winter/ski destinations such as Austria, Switzerland, Sweden and Finland.

2.1.2 Spontaneous mentions Recalling an Ad of Holiday destinations in the P6Ms

4%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

6%

7%

7%

7%

7%

Norway

Denmark

South Africa

Israel

Maldives

India

Malta

Canada

New Zealand

Switzerland

UAE (Any)

Tunisia

Portugal

Italy

France

Top 16-30

7%

8%

8%

8%

8%

8%

9%

10%

10%

11%

12%

14%

17%

22%

26%

Brazil

Morocco

UAE (Abu Dhabi)

USA

Thailand

Croatia

Australia

Cyprus

Austria

Greece

UAE (Dubai)

Spain

Germany

Egypt

Turkey

Top 1-15

-1.0%

-2.1%

-0.2%

0.4%

4.3%

-0.7%

1.7%

0.2%

1.2%

-2.6%

1.9%

2.8%

0.3%

1.9%

4.3%

1.0%

-0.5%

4.0%

1.7%

0.8%

0.4%

2.6%

2.0%

1.4%

1.4%

1.3%

2.4%

-0.1%

-1.3%

0.0%

Gap from wave 1

Gap from wave 1


The highest unprompted Ad recall claims were reported for Turkey and Egypt, followed by Germany and Spain – all were the top 4 countries for which Ad was recalled in wave 1 as well. Dubai, Greece, Austria and Cyprus followed the claims.

Although Cyprus lost a place from last wave (from 7th to 8th) its’ Ad recall incidence appears to be unchanged – at 9.6%.

Only respondents in Stuttgart reported significantly higher Ad recall for CY, while larger families cited significantly lower claims.

Of the 12 key markets (those considered as CY’s main competitors), 10 have been in the top 30 countries in terms of Ad recall incidence, with 6 of them ranked in the top 10.

2.1.3 Spontaneous mentions Holiday destinations visited in P5Ys


8%

11%

13%

13%

15%

16%

16%

18%

19%

20%

28%

28%

29%

30%

55%

Belgium

Poland

Egypt

Netherlands

UK

Denmark

Greece

Switzerland

USA

Turkey

Austria

France

Italy

Spain

Germany

Top 1-15

4%

4%

4%

4%

5%

5%

6%

6%

7%

7%

7%

8%

8%

8%

8%

UAE (Dubai)

Canada

Brazil

Mexico

Bulgaria

Ireland

Thailand

Australia

Hungary

Croatia

Portugal

Tunisia

Czech

Norway

Sweden

Top 16-30

5.3%

1.1%

3.1%

2.5%

0.2%

1.0%

2.0%

2.2%

2.1%

-0.8%

2.3%

0.2%

-1.3%

4.0%

2.0%

0.5%

1.0%

-1.2%

0.5%

2.0%

-1.0%

1.7%

1.2%

0.7%

2.1%

2.3%

1.6%

1.1%

-0.1%

-1.3%

Gap from wave 1

Gap from wave 1 More than half of the respondents

reported to have spent vacations in Germany, while Spain, Austria, Italy and France have been holiday destinations for almost 1 in 3 Germans over the past 5 years – the same countries have also topped the list of countries visited in wave 1.

Cyprus has been visited by 3.6% of the respondents and it was ranked 35 down from the 29th place achieved in wave 1 (in W1 was visited by 4.2% of the sample)!

The countries which reported the biggest gains from wave 1 are Germany, Poland, Italy and France.

2.2 Overall measures

1. Familiarity with Key holiday destinations

2. Holiday destinations consider visiting in the next 3 years & HD definitely not consider visiting

3. Reasons for not considering to visit Cyprus

4. Profile of CY considerers

5. Cross consideration

6. Overall opinions

7. Overall opinions amongst considerers

2.2.1 Overall measuresFamiliarity

2

21 1910 9 7 5 6 6 3 3 2

10

34 32

20 18 17 14 14 8 11 9 6

17

21 25

2921 24

21 1917 15 14

12

20

12 12

18

20 19

19 2020

17 1816

16

6 6

813 13

14 14

13 1714

13

11

3 2

68 8

10 1115 12

16

16

22

3 38 11 11 16 15 20 22 23

31

2 1 1 1 2 2 3 3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 (Never heard of)

1 (Know it by name)

2

3

4

5

6

7 (Know it very well)

3.3 5.3 5.3 4.5 4.2 4.1 3.8 3.7 3.4 3.3 3.2 2.8

4.4 5.8 5.7 5.4 5.3 4.9 4.6 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.9 4.1Av. M. Considerers – W2

Av. M Total sample – W2

0.0 0.0 -0.1 0.0 -0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.4Gap of Av. M from W1

Ranking: 10th


Italy and Spain lead the familiarity scale with 75% of the respondents claiming fairly good knowledge (top 3 box scores) of these countries. Greece, Turkey and Portugal followed but with significantly lower scores – the same familiarity ranking order was observed in wave 1 as well.

Looking at improvements on familiarity from wave 1, only Malaysia has increased its score significantly!

Cyprus is ranked 10th overall (of the 12 key markets) dropping two places from wave 1, however it maintained its average score (implying others have improved their familiarity scores).

Amongst “considerers”, their familiarity scores are significantly higher (true for all markets); CY’s considerers are still ranked 10th overall!

2.2.2 Overall measures Holiday destinations consider visiting (N3Ys) vs non consider visiting

Spain and Italy once again lead the consideration list with claims to visit (as in wave 1) at 46% and 45% respectively, followed by Thailand, Greece, Portugal and Turkey (with claims just below 25%). Cyprus is ranked 7th overall on the “consideration scale” with 20% claims (down 3.1% from wave 1); of significance was CY’s low objections to visit, which was close to the scores of well know holiday destinations such as Spain, Italy & Portugal.

With the exception of Malaysia, Thailand and Egypt which reported higher consideration scores from wave 1, the majority of the key markets have seen their scores dropped from those achieved in wave 1. The aforementioned countries appear to be more relevant for those who seek sunny holidays during the winter, whereas countries such as Italy and Bulgaria which are known for both their summer and winter holiday offering reported the same consideration scores as in wave 1.

Greece on the other appears to be the biggest looser (lost 5% from wave 1) and this could be attributed (to a degree) to the ill filling of Germans towards Greece (since Germany is expected to pay the biggest share of Greece’s “bail out” bill)!

7%

12%

14%

20%

20%

21%

22%

23%

23%

24%

45%

46%

9%

Bulgaria

Malaysia

Malta

Croatia

Cyprus

Egypt

Turkey

Portugal

Greece

Thailand

Italy

Spain

None of these

Consider visiting - W2

30%

25%

15%

15%

10%

34%

28%

9%

20%

24%

6%

5%

Bulgaria

Malaysia

Malta

Croatia

Cyprus

Egypt

Turkey

Portugal

Greece

Thailand

Italy

Spain

None of these

Definitely not consider visiting - W2

1.4%-1.1%-0.2%1.5%-5.1%-1.4%-1.1%0.6%-3.1%-2.7%-2.0%2.8%

-0.1%

-0.2%

0.9%

-7.6%

2.3%

0.2%

3.0%

-0.1%

-0.7%

0.8%

1.3%

-9.2%

-2.8%

Gap from wave 1

Gap from wave 1


2.2.3 Overall measures Reasons for not considering to visit Cyprus

Similar to wave 1, the most prominent reason cited for not considering Cyprus as a tourist destination is ‘lack of awareness’ about the country – this wave’s score was 20% higher than wave 1.

The preference towards other countries’, and ‘CY similarity to other destinations’ followed in claims, while the Cyprus ‘political situation’ was also another major reason cited.

For some, CY’s unappealing culture and its limited & uninteresting offering were also key reasons for not considered visiting – it should be noted the incidence of these reasons was reduced considerably (by 15%) from wave 1.

Only 1 in 10 cited cost (too expensive) as a reason for not wanting to visit, while a similar number of respondents claim distance and safety to be also preventers of consideration.

Base: (n=84) All those who definitely wouldn’t consider visiting CY

1%1%

4%4%

2%3%

2%6%

8%11%

4%6%7%

3%5%

11%1%

12%13%

2%5%

28%10%

43%

OtherSuitable for families

Too hot/humidPersonal reasons

Dirty beaches/place/peopleScant/poor landscape

Bad serviceDislike the mentality/ behaviours

Safety/its dangerousToo/rather expensive

Limited offeringNot appealing cultureNot interesting place

Poor flight connectionsPrefer to visit places which can reach by car

Too far away/distanceOther on the political situation

The political situation between Greeks & TurksBecause of the regional troubles

Similar to destinations which I tend to preferThere are better places to visit / Can be …

Prefer other destinationsLack of awareness/no advertisementsDon t know enough about the country

Reasons cited25%-5%11%-3%-1%4%-1%-4%1%1%

-10%-2%-3%0%1%

-3%-6%-2%

-1%

Gap from wave 1

2.2.4 Overall measures Profile of CY considerers

The number of CY considerers in wave 2 dropped 15%; most likely this is attributed to CY’s seasonality effect – i.e. CY is not a dominant winter holiday destination!

The profile of people who consider visiting Cyprus follows to a great extend the norms of the total sample!

Having said that, some differences have surfaced, with the most notable appearing to be in Gender, Marital status and Age.

Married people/living with partner again demonstrated higher CY consideration than the overall average.

Although singles are the least likely to consider visiting Cyprus, they have increased significantly when compared to the results of wave 1.

It also appears that Cyprus as a HD appeals more to females and senior Germans!

ConsiderersGap from

wave 1


Base: 802 164

Total Sample

CY considerers

Age 20-39yo 38% 32%

40yo+ 62% 68%

Gen

der Male 51% 44%

Female 49% 56%

`

Net

HH

in

com

e €3.500 - €4.499 55% 53%

€4.500+ 45% 47%

Occ

upati

on

Housewife 4% 4%Student 5% 4%Unemployed; Temporarily not working; Retired 3% 3%Shop owner; Skilled worker; Clerical staff etc 32% 32%Academics & Professional (Doctor, Lawyer, etc.) 20% 22%Partners; Owner; Businessmen; Top management 14% 11%Low & Middle management 15% 15%Services (Police, Hospital, Fire-brigade, Hotels, etc.) 7% 8%

Mar

ital

stat

us

Single 31% 21%Married/Living with partner 64% 75%Separated/Divorced 4% 4%

-14.9%

-12.8%

12.8%

-5.6%

5.6%

-0.1%

0.1%

-1.2%

-1.0%

-3.1%

-2.0%

5.7%

-2.6%

2.2%

2.0%

7.7%

-7.8%

0.1%

2.2.5 Overall measuresCross consideration

CY considerers exhibit the desire to visit other markets (in fact 4-5 other destinations are considered), with Spain and Italy being the main benefactors. Greece, Turkey and Portugal followed CY considerers’ desire to visit and they are less likely to visit Malaysia or Bulgaria – similar results were reported in wave 1 as well.

Looking at considerers of other countries, almost half of those who are considering to visit Malta also consider visiting CY, followed by considerers of Turkey, Malaysia, Greece and Croatia. Having said that overall the incidence of considerers of other countries who also consider Cyprus, has dropped from wave 1 - possibly an indication of CY’s differentiating offering AND/OR other destinations being better value for money AND/OR other destinations being more appealing for a winter break!

9%

33%28%

38%

54%

19%

31%

31%

52%

30%

36%

28%34%

28%34%

25%

32%

45%

28%23% 26%

33%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Bulgaria Croatia Egypt Greece Italy Malaysia Malta Portugal Spain Thailand Turkey

W2 - Cosider visiting CY & also consider visiting other countriesW2 - Consider visting other countries & also consider visiting CYW1 - Cosider visiting CY & also consider visiting other countriesW1 - Consider visting other countries & also consider visiting CY

Base: All considering visiting the various countries

2.2.6 Overall measuresOverall Opinion (amongst all interviewed)

Similar to wave 1, Spain and Italy continue to enjoy the lead over other key markets by achieving the highest overall opinion scores, with Portugal following in 3rd place.

Cyprus comes 4th (in terms of Av. Mean scores), with similar score to those reported for Croatia and Malta. CY’s score was similar to that of wave 1.

Egypt’s OO score continues to be low (11th overall) and this could be attributed to the continuing social unrest and the concerns on safety cited! Similarly relatively low scores have been reported for Turkey (9th).

Though CY’s OO scores varied somewhat amongst demographics, they were not significant enough with the exception those who visited CY and those who recalled a CY Ad where significantly better scores were observed.

10

3225

16 13 9 11 14 11 8 9 4

24

3542

3224

2429 20 21

17 21

13

32

19 18

30

28 3124

23 2222

20

24

24

9 815

20 2317

1920

25 1824

6 4 4 59 8

1112 14 16

15 17

3 1 2 1 4 34 7 7 9

9 12

1 1 1 1 2 1 4 4 5 3 7 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1001 (very -ve)

2

3

4

5

6

7 (very +ve)

Av. M – W2

Gap from W1

Ranking: 4th

4.9 5.8 5.7 5.3 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.0

-0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2


2.2.87Overall measuresOverall Opinion (amongst all consider visiting the countries)

As expected the overall opinion scores of the core markets increase significantly amongst their respective “considerers”, with the differences between countries (at T2B and Av. Mean scores) diminishing notably.

Though CY’s overall ranking has drop to 6th, its high average mean score somehow minimises the signification of the actual rankings.

Having said that there is always a room for improvement especially at Top box level!

29

5241 41

3138

29 29 31 30 3119

43

3544

3650 40

45 43 38 38 35

40

20

11 1115 14 16 16 17 21 21 23 31

7 1 2 5 3 3 6 7 7 6 8 8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1001 (very -ve)

2

3

4

5

6

7 (very +ve)

Av. M – W2

Gap from W1

Ranking: 6th

Base: 164 361 372 191 181 160 186 113 179 169 95 54

5.9 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.0 6.0 5.9 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.6

-0.2 0.1 -0.1 -0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 -0.2 -0.4 0.0 -0.1 0.1

2.3 Ideal holiday destination and Image Perceptions

1. The characteristics of the Ideal holiday destination

2. Top 10 characteristics of Ideal holiday destination vs perceptions of key markets

3. Ideal holiday destination for CY considerers

4. Country attribute associations

5. Country attribute associations – Relative performance

6. Cyprus attribute associations

1. CY considerers vs overall sample

2. CY Ad recall vs overall sample

3. Comparisons with the results of wave 1

2.3.1 Ideal holiday destination and Image PerceptionsIdeal Holiday destination

The rational of determining the ideal holiday destination is twofold;

a. to identify the dimensions considered important when choosing a destination (stated needs) and

b. to be used as reference point for determining the “Needs-Fit” coefficient when testing communication executions – a powerful measure/score of a communication’s and thus a brand’s ability to deliver on actual customer needs .

The main requirements in an “ideal” holiday destination cover a range of contrasting needs, which include culture & natural beauties, Hospitality & safety clean & beautiful beaches comfort but at reasonable cost

thus giving a direction as to what holiday destinations ought to provide!

Almost identical needs have been reported by CY considerers – by also elevating “contrasting experiences” and “quality service”.

21

26

29

30

30

35

42

44

46

47

47

48

52

56

59

60

65

67

71

71Clean & beautiful beachesFriendly & hospitableSafe destinationNatural beautiesLot of sights to visitRich cultural identityReasonable pricesComfort and pamperingContrasting experiences ....Mnay recreational activitiesWell preserved antiquitiesHigh quality serviceEasily accessibleMediterranean cuisineVivid night lifeVariety sport activitiesAll year round destinationLuxury accommodationsFor people with special needsFamily-oriented

75

72

75

69

65

65

55

65

56

52

50

54

47

47

36

31

36

44

32

29

CY Considerers


2.3.2 Ideal holiday destination and Image PerceptionsIdeal Holiday destination vs perceptions of key markets

Looking at the 10 most important dimensions identified as key tourist needs, Spain and Italy justify their lead as mostly visited and mostly considered to visit destinations, as they are in the top 3 spots (in terms of perceptual incidence) in most dimensions.

Cyprus on the other hand figures prominently only in the area of comfort and pampering (was 2nd overall).

Greece is noted for its natural beauties, beaches and contrasting experiences on offer. and along with Egypt is recognised for its rich history & antiquities, while Turkey for its low prices and for being friendly & hospitable.

In terms of attribute/need importance, the top ones were almost the same in both waves. The attribute which significantly dropped in importance ( in wave 2) was “high quality service” and the ones which significantly gained were “rich cultural identity” and “vivid nigh life” - the latter though is still low on the importance scale!

Highest score2nd highest

score3rd highest

scoreClean & beautiful beaches Spain Italy GreeceFriendly & hospitable Spain Turkey ItalySafe destination Spain Italy PortugalNatural beauties Italy Spain GreeceLot of sights to visit Greece Egypt ItalyRich cultural identity Greece Egypt ItalyReasonable prices Turkey Bulgaria SpainComfort and pampering Thailand Cyprus ItalyContrasting experiences .... Italy Spain GreeceMnay recreational activities Spain Italy Turkey

Top 10 elements sought from the IDEAL holiday destination

Perceptions (Overall)


W2 W1

Clean & beautiful beaches 1 2

Friendly & hospitable 2 1

Safe destination 3 3

Natural beauties 4 4

Lot of sights to visit 5 6

Rich cultural identity 6 9

Reasonable prices 7 5

Comfort and pampering 8 7

Contrasting experiences .... 9 10

Variety of recreational activities 10 11

Well preserved antiquities 11 12

High quality service 12 8

Easily accessible 13 13

Mediterranean cuisine 14 14Vivid night life 15 19Variety sport activities 16 15All year round destination 17 16Luxury accommodations 18 17For people with special needs 19 20Family-oriented 20 18

ImportanceChange of attribute importance from wave 1

2.3.3 Ideal holiday destination and Image PerceptionsIdeal HD for CY considerers vs their perceptions towards CY

Perceptions towards Cyprus amongst CY considerers are notably closer to the key characteristics desired in their ideal holiday destination.

There is a close incidence match (on the important characteristics sought in the ideal HD) on attributes referring to CY’s comfort & pampering for offering contrasting experiences, as well as on the islands natural beauties.

Having said that there is still a room for improvement especially on the top 3 needs, namely clean/beautiful beaches, for being friendly & hospitable and for being a safe destination – areas for which communication should better address!

Again the area for which CY is not delivering is on pricing!

0

20

40

60

80

Clean & beautiful beachesSafe destination

Friendly & hospitable

Natural beauties

Comfort and pampering

Rich cultural identity

Lot of sights to visit

Contrasting experiences …

Reasonable prices

High quality serviceVariety of recreational …

Well preserved …

Easily accessible

Mediterranean cuisine

Luxury accommodations

Vivid night life

All year round destination

For people with special …

Variety sport activities

Family-oriented

CY Considerer's Ideal HD CY Considerers's perceptions towards CY

Base: CY Considerers n=164

2.3.4 Ideal holiday destination and Image Perceptions Brand associations – Key performing (at image level) countries and their attribute incidence ranking

% R % R % R % R % R % R % R % R % R

Comfort and pampering 39 2 38 4 39 3 37 5 31 10 46 1 33 7 27 11 32 8

Well preserved antiquities 36 7 37 6 61 3 77 1 49 4 38 5 21 10 73 2 23 8

Mediterranean cuisine 40 6 75 2 78 1 65 3 43 4 16 9 36 7 16 10 41 5

Contrasting experiences .... 38 6 59 2 59 1 51 3 50 4 36 8 48 5 27 9 37 7

Reasonable prices 18 11 43 3 35 5 32 7 53 1 35 6 41 4 26 8 25 9

Friendly & hospitable 32 8 55 1 52 3 52 4 53 2 47 5 43 6 31 9 39 7

Family-oriented 23 9 63 1 57 2 46 4 54 3 19 11 38 5 26 8 34 6

Safe destination 34 6 62 1 54 2 32 7 25 9 22 10 35 5 12 12 49 3

Variety sport activities 27 7 56 1 48 2 37 4 36 5 27 8 31 6 27 9 37 3

Vivid night life 17 11 72 1 48 2 30 7 42 4 43 3 33 5 20 10 28 8

Clean & beautiful beaches 39 5 51 1 45 2 43 3 32 8 42 4 37 7 27 10 38 6

Lot of sights to visit 35 7 48 6 67 3 74 1 52 5 57 4 30 9 72 2 31 8

Rich cultural identity 37 7 50 6 62 3 68 1 57 4 53 5 31 10 66 2 33 8

Recreational activities 33 9 73 1 62 2 49 4 52 3 42 6 42 5 41 7 41 8

Luxury accommodations 35 6 40 4 41 3 30 9 32 7 43 2 22 11 47 1 27 10

High quality service 25 9 42 2 44 1 31 5 31 4 40 3 28 7 25 10 30 6

All year round destination 29 9 44 3 41 4 32 7 38 5 49 1 22 11 46 2 30 8

Easily accessible 38 8 81 1 79 2 55 4 57 3 24 11 50 6 31 10 54 5

Natural beauties 47 7 60 2 63 1 55 3 40 8 50 6 53 4 27 12 50 5

For people with special needs 27 7 34 3 35 2 26 8 24 9 47 1 22 11 28 6 28 5Average mentions per respondent 6.4 11.0 10.5 9.2 8.9 7.1 7.0 6.8 6.7

Croatia Egypt PortugalCyprus Spain Italy Greece Turkey Thailand


2.3.5 Ideal holiday destination and Image PerceptionsBrand perceptions – Relative attribute performance (deviation from expected values)

Relative performance is aiming to indicate which attributes are more recognisable for a given country and the figure/score produced is the difference of the observed from the expected value (i.e. potentially what the attribute score for a given country could have been). The figure could be +ve or –ve, where +ve means the attribute is more positively recognised in relation to other countries and the opposite for the –ve score. The darker colours denote the strongest and weakest recognitions, whereas the magnitude (the actual score) indicates how distinctive the attribute is for a given country.

Cyprus is better recognised (against competition) for its comfort & pampering and its clean and beautiful beaches (for both not very distinctively though) and it is not recognised neither for its vivid night life nor for having reasonable prices!

Comfort and pamperingWell preserved antiquitiesMediterranean cuisineContrasting experiences ....Reasonable pricesFriendly & hospitableFamily-oriented Safe destinationVariety sport activitiesVivid night lifeClean & beautiful beachesLot of sights to visitRich cultural identityVariety of recreational activitiesLuxury accommodationsHigh quality serviceAll year round destinationEasily accessibleNatural beautiesFor people with special needs

Cyprus Spain Italy Greece Turkey Portugal Malta Thailand

2.3.6.1 Ideal holiday destination and Image Perceptions Brand associations – Overall CY vs CY considerers

Overall perceptions towards Cyprus are considered to be average, with a relatively high score (when compared to the score achieved by the competition) reported only for the attribute comfort and pampering.

For the majority of the attributes assessed, CY was ranked 6th-9th, while in terms of reasonable prices and vivid night life was ranked for both 11th of the 12 countries evaluated.

The attribute scores (in their entirety) of CY considerers are significantly higher than those achieved by the total sample, while for the attributes comfort & pampering, natural beauties, clean beaches, contrasting experiences and Mediterranean cuisine , CY scores were 60%+, which were amongst the highest reported for any country.

39

36

40

38

18

32

23

34

27

17

39

35

37

33

35

25

29

38

47

27

66

53

60

64

24

56

30

55

42

29

67

52

49

48

51

49

48

53

71

45

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90


Well preserved antiquities


Contrasting experiences ....

Reasonable prices


Family-oriented

Safe destination


Vivid night life

Clean & beautiful beaches



Variety of recreational activities


High quality service


Easily accessible

Natural beauties

For people with special needs

Overall CY

CY considerers

Base: All interviewed n=802 & CY Considerers (n=164)

2.3.6.2 Ideal holiday destination and Image Perceptions Brand associations – Overall CY vs those recalling a CY Ad (prompted)

It has been also evident that those recalling a CY Ad demonstrated higher attribute scores than those achieved by the total sample.

Higher differences were cited in those dimensions that exemplify CY’s heritage, history & culture, the islands natural beauties and clean beaches, the comfort and pampering offering and its Mediterranean gastronomy - most likely driven by the recent outdoor & print campaign.

3936

4038

1832

2334

2717

3935

3733

3525

2938

4727

5549

5451

2144

3044

3417

5547

514242

3637

4566

37

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Comfort and pamperingWell preserved antiquities

Mediterranean cuisineContrasting experiences ....

Reasonable pricesFriendly & hospitable

Family-oriented Safe destination

Variety sport activitiesVivid night life

Clean & beautiful beachesLot of sights to visit

Rich cultural identityVariety of recreational activities

Luxury accommodationsHigh quality service

All year round destinationEasily accessible

Natural beautiesFor people with special needs

Overall CY

Racalling CY Ad (prom

pted)

Base: All interviewed n=802 & All recalling CY Ads (prompted) (n=191)

2.3.6.3 Ideal holiday destination and Image Perceptions Brand associations – Comparison of Wave 1 & Wave 2

Looking at the results of the two waves , at overall level (i.e. total sample) no notable differences are observed – in fact the scores were almost the same.

Amongst CY considerers the majority of the image attributes scores are similar in both waves; with higher scores reported in (in wave 2) for the attributes referring to Cyprus’ rich history and antiquities.

3936

4038

1832

2334

2717

393537

3335

2529

3847

27

0 20 40 60 80 100O

verall CY -Wave 2

Overall CY -W

ave 1

2.4 Attitudinal Brand Equity

1. Introduction to Attitudinal Equity

2. Relation of Attitudinal Brand Equity & Consideration

3. Attitudinal brand equity Shares & Segments

4. Analysis of CY’s Attitudinal brand equity Segments

5. Drivers of CY’s Attitudinal Brand Equity share

6. Priority Improvement Matrix

2.4.1 Attitudinal Brand EquityIntroduction to Attitudinal Brand Equity

Attitudinal dispositions tend to precede brand behaviours (the likelihood of buying a brand or visiting a country), meaning one should first change customers’ attitudinal dispositions towards a country/holiday destination before they demonstrate the desire to visit it.

Attitudinal brand Equity (which we refer to as share of mind or equity share) is in fact a reflection of what customers would like to do, while brand behaviour (which we refer to as share of wallet or market share) is what customers end up doing!

In an “ideal” market environment equity share and market share should be equal, however specific market and/or personal customer factors (i.e. availability; price; past visit etc.) either decrease (prevent) or increase (enable) a country’s chances of being visited.

It should be noted that Venaque’s brand equity model produces a number which reflects brand business shares and not a usage incidence number or a standalone score dissociated from market realities; therefore it is a rather useful and relevant figure as it could estimate future purchase/usage/visit behaviour, all things being equal!

Venaque’s AE model

It considers brand (i.e. country) experiences but also the image relevance of brands to customers.

It can be linked to usage/visit motivations

It contemplates brand involvement but also considerations of alternative offerings.

It uses brand opinions in conjunction with the above as a measure of customers desire to use the brand/country but can also estimate how market realities shape final brand choices which could be higher or lower then the AE score/share for a given country! (the latter aspect of the model was not incorporated in this exercise as the project’s core objective was mainly to assess CTO Ad effectiveness)!

It is a respondent specific model, therefore it is not prone to the limitations of other techniques which are sample size sensitive. As the estimation of the (attitudinal) equity share is based on relative and not on absolute scores, it allows the equity shares estimated to be comparable across geographies or even across categories.

2.4.1 Attitudinal Brand EquityIntroduction to Attitudinal Brand Equity

Finally, VQ’s brand equity model is a predictive tool as any improvement on attitudinal brand equity share translates accordingly (based on the effect of external factors) to an increase of the brand’s (i.e. Country’s) market share!

The model produces a score (attitudinal brand equity share) for each brand/country and the sum of the AE scores of all brands/countries is equal to 100 – i.e. reflecting the total market share if all things being equal!

As the model is respondent specific, we can group individuals into attitudinal brand equity segments based on their brand equity shares; can ascertain their profile, their needs as well as the drivers of brand equity (at segment level), thus help devise relevant brand strategies. In our case for each country their considerers are classified into 3 equity segments based on the level of equity share achieved; therefore for a given country a respondent is classified/grouped in either the low, the medium or the high equity segment. It should be noted a respondent will be classified in each country’s attitudinal brand equity (and segments) he/she is considering to visit; i.e. could be classified in the low equity segment of country X and the high equity segment of country Y.

Customers which are classified in the high equity segment are usually the most likely believers of the brand, they tend to be less prone to brand/country price increases and usually are less receptive to competitive communication activities or promotions etc. They are strong advocates of the brand and in our case are usually the most likely future visitors of the country (assuming are not prevented from external factors to do so).

Within the medium equity segment considerers tend to be either attracted to more than one countries (thus their equity is split) or they don’t ponder the country as favourable as others! Customers will still pay attention to brand communication and promotional activities; however they have a lower probability visiting that country, with market or personal factors (i.e. Cost; the family wants to visit etc.) usually forcing that choice!

Customers belonging in the low equity segment, have either limited familiarity with the country and/or they are coerced to consider visiting (if they ever visit), thus brand bonding is trivial. They certainly view more favourable other destinations and are less likely to pay attention to the communications of that country!

2.4.2 Attitudinal Brand EquityRelation between Attitudinal brand equity & Consideration

Though the model fit (R²) in this chart is at an aggregated level, its almost perfect fit indicates that consideration could be better explained by the attitudinal brand equity shares (and segments) – the actual fit is even better than the results of wave 1!

Bulgaria

Croatia

Cyprus

EgyptGreece

Italy

Malaysia

Malta

Spain

Thailand

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

Atti

tudi

nal E

quit

y Sc

ore

Consider Visiting

y = 45.095x + 2.0956R² = 0.9729

Base: All Considerers of key markets (n=726)

2.4.3 Attitudinal Brand Equity Attitudinal brand equity Shares (amongst considerers - adjusted)

Cyprus Attitudinal equity share has dropped to 6.1 from the 7.2 achieved in wave 1, and it is ranked 10th of the 12 key markets. This drop could be attributed partly to the lower communication exposure in wave 2 and/or to the fact that CY is not a prominent player in winter tourism. This figure denotes the potential CY has to be visited (i.e. by 6.1% of the target audience, assuming the choice was restricted to the 12 key markets and external factors couldn’t influence that choice )!

How to read: CY’s High AE segment accounts for 61% (i.e. 3.7÷6.1) of CY’s AE share and is contributed from 26% of its considerers ( i.e. 4.6÷22.6). Similarly 28% of CY considerers (Medium AE segment) contribute 29% of CY’s AE share, while the Low AE segment contributes the remaining 11% (by 43% of CY considerers).

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

5

5

1

3

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

6

11

11

2.2

4.1

4.2

6.1

6.5

7.1

7.3

7.3

7.3

9.9

19.0

19.1

Bulgaria

Malaysia

Malta

Cyprus

Croatia

Turkey

Egypt

Portugal

Greece

Thailand

Spain

Italy

Attitudinal brand equity SHARE

3

5

7

9.8

7

10

9

9

10

7

9

11

2

4

6

8.2

9

8

8

10

11

9

22

18

2

4

3

4.6

6

6

7

6

5

10

20

21

7.4

13.1

15.5

22.6

22.1

24.7

23.3

24.9

25.6

26.3

51.3

49.8

Attitudinal brand equity INCIDENCE

Base: All Considerers of key markets (n=726)

-0.2

0.2

1.1

-0.7

0.8

0.8

-1.1

-1.1

-1.1

-0.5

1.1

0.5

Gap from wave 1

2.4.4 Attitudinal Brand Equity Analysis of CY’s Attitudinal brand equity Segments

The aim of the profiling is to determine on the one hand if demo differences are evident and on the other hand to highlight the signification of the attitudinal brand equity share and AE segments in identifying true intentions – in a way the segmentation acts as a filtering medium to determine (in our case) which of the considerers are more likely to visit CY.

At demographics level, age, gender and income appear to have the biggest variation between the segments – i.e. bigger proportion of the 50yo+, males and HH with net income over €5.5K are clustered in the High - this could be logical as older in age males are more likely to have higher income!

A strong indication of considerers’ belonging in the High AE segment more likely intentions to visit CY, is demonstrated by their cross consideration claims, where the number of countries considered visiting (other then CY) was just over 1 – thus they have a higher probability of visiting CY as they consider significantly less alternatives!

Base (n=164 or 23% of all considerers): 71 60 34

DemographicsLow AE Medium

AE High AE

20-49yo 63% 64% 48%50yo + 37% 36% 52%Male 48% 35% 53%Female 52% 65% 47%Net HH income €3,500 - €4,499 53% 54% 51%Net HH income €4,500 - €5,499 35% 33% 21%Net HH income €5,500+ 12% 13% 29%Spontaneous reactionsCY acknowledged as a holiday destination 18% 19% 45%CY Ad seen in past (unprompted) 24% 20% 39%CY visited in the P5Ys 6% 13% 21%Overall MeasuresCross Consideration (no. of countries other than CY) 5.4 2.8 1.3Overall opinion towards CY - TB score 53% 83% 94%Familiarity with CY - T2B score 13% 31% 43%

10 8 5 23


Considerers’ (in the High AE segment) stronger advocacy towards Cyprus is further confirmed with the higher scores reported for recalling a CY’s Ad – it further supports the theory on brand equity, where customers demonstrating a stronger bonding with a brand (i.e. reporting higher attitudinal brand equity share) tend to be less receptive to competitive communication efforts!

They also reported significantly higher incidence scores in all the attributes identified as key drivers of CY’s attitudinal brand equity share – basically they perceive more positively the country!


CY Ad recall (prompted)Low AE Medium

AE High AE

CY Ad seen in the past 37% 44% 53%CY Ad likability - T2B score 81% 96% 82%Impact of Ad - wanting to visit CY 96% 100% 100%

Perceptions (for most important attributes of CY's AE)

High quality service 40% 46% 73%Clean & beautiful beaches 63% 66% 76%Contrasting experiences .... 60% 61% 76%Natural beauties 64% 71% 88%Comfort and pampering 67% 57% 79%Friendly & hospitable 52% 53% 70%For people with special needs 36% 42% 70%

10 8 5 23


Similar patterns also emerge when looking at the Ad recognition results, where more High AE considerers (proportionally) recognized that the ads shown where in fact CY’s.

At Ad evaluation measure level (the components the Ad campaign was evaluated against), overall the respondents belonging to the High AE segment were more critical of the campaign, probably because they were expecting a campaign more relevant for the winter season!

Estimated potential Supposing external factors couldn’t influence choice for visiting any country and assuming the target audience represents

30% of Germany’s population (24.6 mil. of 82 mil.), and visiting the 12 key markets would represent 40% of the total holidays abroad, then based on the AE share of the segments computed, the total number of German visitors which could be potentially expected to visit Cyprus in the next 3 years is estimated to be 543,000 (this figure is lower than the calculated figure of wave 1; the average of the 2 results could probably indicate a more accurate figure as it takes in account seasonality as well i.e. 597,000).

Since though external factors (market or personal) do influence choice and assuming these would have influenced negatively CY’s potential (low familiarity; expensive destination, family members prefer other destinations etc.), with a negative impact of lets say 20%, then the estimated number of visitors in the next 3 years could be 435,000 (the average of the calculated results of both waves comes to 478,000).


Ad recognition (Unbranded)Low AE Medium

AE High AE

Print Ad 33% 27% 44%Print Ad - Correct association with CY 19% 29% 42%TV Ad 33% 43% 40%TV Ad - Correct association with CY 22% 33% 58%Ad Evaluation (Top 2 boxes)Ad likeability 80% 87% 91%Ad Uniqueness 56% 75% 66%Ad credibility 83% 87% 88%Ad Interest (at execution level) 84% 89% 85%Ad Relevance (meeting my needs) 68% 82% 73%Ad Engagement (to find out more) 81% 88% 88%

2.4.5 Attitudinal Brand Equity Driver Analysis of CY’s AE share

The driver analysis was carried out using CY’s attitudinal equity as the dependant variable and the imagery attributes (Q10) as the independent ones!

The driver analysis and importance coefficients estimated, provide the first step determining where strategic efforts should be channelled (in terms of changing perceptions).

How is read: If the imagery score on High quality service increases by 10% i.e. from 49.2% goes to 54.1%, then CY’s AE share could increase by 3.1% i.e. from 6.10 would go to 6.29 and so on!

Assuming external factors are more difficult to alleviate, increasing the AE share appears to be a credible mean to increase the number of visitors!

The attributes that would impact more CY’s AE share are:

High quality service Clean and beautiful beaches contrasting experiences Natural beauties Comfort & pampering Friendly and hospitable All year round destination

Comparing the drivers of CY’s AE share with wave 1, attributes natural beauties and an offering with contrasting experiences have increased in importance, while CY’s rich culture, history and antiquities have dramatically decreased!

.05

.09

.15

.16

.16

.17

.17

.18

.19

.20

.21

.22

.23

.24

.26

.26

.27

.28

.28

.31

Family-oriented

Reasonable prices


Well preserved antiquities

Easily accessible

Vivid night life


Variety of recreational activities




Safe destination


For people with special needs



Natural beauties

Contrasting experiences ....

Clean & beautiful beaches

High quality service

Importance Coefficient

Base: CY Considerers (n=164)

Ranking in W1

1

3

10

8

6

2

7

18

11

15

4

12

14

17

16

13

9

5

20

19

2.4.6 Attitudinal Brand Equity CY’s Priority Improvement Matrix

Leverageble strength Priority Improvement Secondary Improvement

Base: CY Considerers (n=164)

ATTRIBUTES

Attribute Incidence

(CY considerers)

Incindence Gap from

"Best performing

country"

Attribute Importance coefficient

(Derived)

"IDEAL" attribute

coefficients (Stated)

Comfort and pampering 66% -7% 0.26 0.65 17.7Well preserved antiquities 53% -31% 0.16 0.50 22.6Mediterranean cuisine 60% -27% 0.21 0.47 22.3Contrasting experiences .... 64% -6% 0.28 0.56 18.6Reasonable prices 24% -53% 0.09 0.55 30.0Friendly & hospitable 56% -17% 0.26 0.72 26.9Family-oriented offering 30% -39% 0.09 0.29 17.9A safe destination 55% -14% 0.22 0.75 23.5Variety of sport activities 42% -22% 0.17 0.31 20.4Vivid night life 29% -45% 0.17 0.36 30.4Clean & beautiful beaches 67% -2% 0.28 0.75 16.6Sights to visit 52% -29% 0.20 0.65 28.0Rich cultural identity 49% -28% 0.15 0.65 24.6Variety of recreational activities 48% -33% 0.18 0.52 26.8Luxury accommodations 51% -7% 0.19 0.44 17.0High quality service 49% -11% 0.31 0.54 29.4All year round destination 48% -14% 0.23 0.36 23.3Easily accessible 53% -33% 0.16 0.47 23.3Natural beauties 71% -4% 0.27 0.69 14.2Catering for people with special needs 45% -6% 0.24 0.32 23.1

PriorityImpr. Score

2.4.6 Attitudinal Brand Equity CY’s Priority Improvement Matrix

The Priority Improvement Matrix takes into account not only the attribute importance coefficients (i.e. what drives CY considerers’ Attitudinal Equity share), but also the attribute performance of competitors and the industry drivers (IDEAL holiday destination), thus introducing a strategic road map of prioritisation by identifying what should be improved to maximise Cyprus potential in a competitive environment.

The equation that estimates CY’s attribute improvement priority score it includes a) The attribute score achieved by CY’s considerers b) the gap between CY and the “best of Class”, c) CY’s derived attribute importance and d) the category’s stated attribute importance (as denoted from the Ideal HD),

The equation is quite straight forward: a X c (standardised) - b X d (standardised); with the actual resultant denoting if an attribute is a Leverageable Strength, Priority or Secondary Improvement area, based on certain cut off points – a score below 17 could be classified as a LS, 18-26 as a SI and a score over 26 as a PI areas – these cut off points can vary based on the range of the scores achieved.

The attributes identified as priority improvement areas were Vivid nightlife, Reasonable prices, High quality service, Sights to visit, Friendly & hospitable and Variety of recreational activities. Certainly the additional attributes (not bolded) identified as priority improvement areas would enable the capture of a wider audience of potential visitors if improved, and allow CY to compete with destinations in areas it finds currently hard to do so; having said that these areas should be viewed in line with CTO’s strategy and improve only if desired (i.e. does CY wants to promote a vivid night life and attract probably younger tourists etc.)

It should be noted other attributes which were identified as key drivers of CY’s AE are now leverageable strengths or secondary improvement areas mainly because their importance at a category level is rather low and/or their score in relation to competition is rather high!

2.5 Prompted Ad Awareness

1. Prompted vs Unprompted Ad Awareness

2. When Ad was seen

3. Media Ad was seen

4. What it was recalled

5. Main message communicated in the Cyprus Ad

6. Ad likability

7. Ad Impact

2.5.1 Prompted Ad AwarenessPrompted vs Unprompted Ad Awareness

The results of prompted awareness in wave 2 are very similar to those reported in wave 1 – Croatia’s dropped score was the only noticeable!

Turkey’s dominance in Ad recall claims again surfaced, followed by Egypt and Spain.

Cyprus’ prompted Ad awareness makes CTO’s campaign the 4th most recalled amongst the 12 key markets with a 24% recall claims! This figure was significantly higher amongst CY considerers (34%), while from a regional perspective, significantly higher Ad awareness was cited by respondents in Hamburg (similar to the scores reported in W1)!

24

42

3430

2320 18 18

1411 10 8

10

2622

1411 8 7 8 7 5 3 2

0

10

20

30

40

50

Prompted Ad Awareness - W2 Unprompted Ad Awareness - W2Prompted Ad Awareness - W1 Unprompted Ad Awareness - W1

Base: All interviewed (n=802)

2.5.2 Prompted Ad AwarenessWhen Ads were seen

On average the Ads were seen just over 4 months ago, which is almost a month longer than the results reported in wave 1 – the reason behind this could be the lower campaign activity/airing during the winter months!

Cyprus campaign was seen 4.3 months ago with only 1 in 10 claiming to have seen it in the last month. Significantly high “past month” recalls were cited by 40-60yo, but most importantly by residents in Nuremburg, Dusseldorf and Cologne.

Croatia, Malta and Bulgaria cited the most recent campaign viewings.

1 month ago 2-3 months ago 4-6 months ago Over 6 months Don’t RememberBase: Recall of country Ad (n=varied by country)

8

10

11

14

18

18

20

23

30

34

42

24

MalaysiaBulgaria

MaltaPortugalThailand

ItalyCroatia Greece

SpainEgypt

TurkeyCyprus

Prompted Ad Awareness

5

9

12

17

11

20

8

5

12

13

15

19

15

23

24

24

29

23

18

16

19

24

20

25

35

28

25

24

30

19

35

24

22

21

25

22

29

23

21

14

13

16

19

31

21

16

14

16

16

16

19

22

17

21

19

24

26

26

26

18

When Ad was seen

4.3

4.7

4.6

4.0

3.7

3.4

4.1

3.8

3.7

3.6

3.5

4.0

0.7

1.4

1.1

0.6

-0.1

0.5

1.2

0.5

0.6

0.2

0.6

0.6

Gap from wave 1

Av. No. of months an

Ad was seen

2.5.3 Prompted Ad AwarenessMedia Ads were seen

Overall, Print and TV are the most common media types advertisements are seen in, with reported claims for both at 42% ( the TV score though has dropped by 4% from W1); followed by Internet with 24% (+3% from W1), then by Leaflets with 19% (+3% from W1), outdoor (16%) and word of mouth reporting 13% (+3% from W1).

Cyprus’ Ads were seen on average in 1.5 media channels, with the TV recall incidence reported at 50% (-5% from W1), followed by print at 36% (though overall the score is similar to W1, the recall in periodicals was 7.5% higher in W2), then by Outdoor at 28% (again the highest reported of all countries - +2% from W1), Internet at 15%, leaflets at 12% and WoM at 6% (all with slightly lower scores than W1).

Considering CTO hasn’t air a TV campaign since March of 2011, the high claims seem to suggest that for some are probably driven by campaigns of other countries which have been mistaken for CY ads and/or images from both the new & old CY campaigns may still lingering in the peoples mind and/or CY ads seen on other medias (i.e. such as internet) may have been mistaken as having been seen on TV!

8

10

11

14

18

18

20

23

30

34

42

24

23

Malaysia

Bulgaria

Malta

Portugal

Thailand

Italy

Croatia

Greece

Spain

Egypt

Turkey

Cyprus - W2

Cyprus - W1


3

19

12

22

9

14

20

13

16

17

21

28

26

26

25

21

20

15

31

25

26

29

23

23

25

18

9

11

5

6

9

12

13

11

11

8

11

5

9

2

7

8

12

6

13

10

11

10

8

6

6

9

12

16

13

13

13

14

9

9

13

10

11

7

8

12

19

13

9

15

19

11

11

13

10

12

8

8

41

44

30

26

35

34

52

41

39

50

56

50

55

3

5

3

3

5

3

6

2

4

2

25

25

21

15

21

25

12

17

19

17

18

12

13

13

20

12

11

20

16

11

14

17

8

10

6

7

2

0

0

6

2

2

2

1

3

2

3

3

7

14

4

10

10

11

3

3

7

6

4

4

6

3

Media Ads were seen

Outdoor

Magazines

Newspapers

Supplements

Internet – Holiday sitesInternet – Operators

TV

Radio

Leaflet

Word of Mouth

Other

Don’t remember

Base: All Recalling specific country Ad (n=varied by country)

2.5.4 Prompted Ad AwarenessWhat is recalled from the Ads seen about CY

The majority of the comments were referring to Cyprus natural beauties (sites, sea, beach, landscapes etc.), followed by country & communication related mentions (slogans, the Ad in general, the name Cyprus etc.)

Lower incidences have been reported for people/hospitality, lifestyle and accommodation related comments (but at similar level to those reported in wave 1)

The incidence for food and cuisine comments increased notably from wave 1 – driven by the outdoor/print Ad.

16%

30%

2%

4%

4%

9%

1%

2%

8%

2%

2%

4%

11%

12%

5%

6%

16%

16%

35%

Don't Remember/Know

Various other comments

Sea activities/water sports related …

Lifestyle (partying/fun/relaxation …

Hotels/accomodation related …

Food/cuisine related comments

Hospitality related comments

Nice music/people dancing

People related comments

Other country specific comments

The name Cyprus

Images of Cyprus

Country slogans (Love CY; Visit CY; …

Ad of the country

Ancient/Historical/Religious sites; …

Picturesque houses/villages/towns …

Landscape/Mountains/Valleys …

Blue/Clear seas comments

Beach/Bay/Coast comments

Base: All recalling CY Ads (n=191)

2.5.5 Prompted Ad AwarenessMain message communicated in the Cyprus Ad

The message with the highest occurrence was the invitation to visit Cyprus.

A group of comments exemplifying the island’s natural beauties, history & cultural identity and type of holiday projected (lifestyle)

achieved a significant number of mentions

Comments praising CY’s versatility of offering also figured prominently in respondents’ minds, while Cypriots qualities/ traits and Food related comments were also plentiful.

1 in 5 though couldn’t remember the message communicated! Profusely

20%4%3%

3%3%

8%8%

4%14%

7%11%

2%8%

10%6%

14%3%4%

7%11%12%

15%

Don t remember

Other

Nice/luxury hotels

Offers/affortable prices

Undervalued/underestimated destination

Friendly/warm/nice/hospitable people

Good Cuisine / Culinary destination

Cultural/nature/family/Mediterranean …

Unforgettable/relaxing/ropular destination

Wide variety of Excursions

Versatility

Tranquillity

Partying/Fun

Relaxation

Ancient/historical sites

culture

Crystal / clean waters

Landscapes

Beauty of the country

Sun/sunshine

Beach/clean beaches

Visit Cyprus (inviting to visit etc.)

Main message communicated

Base: All recalling CY Ads (n=191)

2.5.6 Prompted Ad AwarenessAd likeability

Cyprus’s, Malaysia’s and Italy’s Ads were the most liked, both in top 2 box and average mean scores – Malaysia’s & Italy’s scores though have improved from wave 1 whereas CY score(s) remained unchanged!

Bulgaria’s score was significantly lower from most countries, and although Turkey enjoys the highest Ad recall, its’ campaigns do not appear to be particularly appealing, with an Ad (likeability) score notably lower than that of CY’s!

39 34 32 30 30 29 26 26 23 26 2315

25 32 3229 27 29 30 34 36 26

2124

27 25 27 3532 31 33 26 29

3240

41

6 5 2 24 5 5 8 6 9 9 13

0 0 11 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 43 4 6 3 6 4 5 4 5 4 5 3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100Don't remember

Disliked it a lot

Disliked it somewhat

Indifferent

Liked it somewhat

Liked it a lot

4.0 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.6 3.3Av. Mean – W2

Gap of Av. M from W1

Ranking: jointed 1st

0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.1 0.1 0.0 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1

Base: All Recalling specific country Ad (n=varied by country)

2.5.7 Prompted Ad AwarenessAd Impact

Though CÝ’s Ads received the highest likability score, the impact of the Ad in generating the desire to visit the country was not as high as Italy’s, Spain’s or Malaysia’s. Having said that, this score has increased significantly from wave 1 (+15 points), as 3 in 4 claimed the Ad intrigued them to visit Cyprus. This incidence was notably higher for HHs with Net income over €5,500+, those who visited CY in the past, and by CY considerers.

8

10

11

14

18

18

20

23

30

34

42

24

23

Malaysia

Bulgaria

Malta

Portugal

Thailand

Italy

Croatia

Greece

Spain

Egypt

Turkey

Cyprus - W2

Cyprus - W1


Net Impact W2

NI Gap from W1

49

18

25

66

38

43

70

31

48

42

1

56

15

-1

10

3

22

2

4

-10

-1

18

-8

55

Base: All Recalling specific country Ad & could assess the Ad (n=varied by country)

78

51

71

74

65

85

72

69

83

62

59

74

67

22

49

29

26

35

15

28

31

17

38

41

26

33

The Ad made me ....

Want to visit Don't want to visit

2.6 Ad evaluation

1. Print Ad recognition

2. TV Ad recognition

3. Impact of Ad on Overall opinions

4. Message communicated

5. Tag line recall

6. Ad measures & Ad Effectiveness score

7. Impact of the Ad on CY perceptions

8. Needs Fit analysis

2.6.1 Ad Evaluation Print Ad recognition (unbranded)

Though only 22% of the respondents stated to remember seeing the Print Ad, this incidence was 7% higher from the score of Wave 1. Similarly to wave 1, only 15% correctly associated it as being a CY Ad. Both figures were significantly higher amongst HH with net income over €5.5K, those who have seen a CY Ad, those who have visited CY and CY considerers.

The Ad was mainly mistaken for being an Ad for Greece (by 23%), while was mistaken for being an Ad for Egypt and Turkey by a smaller proportion (by 7-8%). The majority of associations were of a Mediterranean country.

Almost 1 in 5 couldn’t express a definite opinion of which country was endorsed by the print material shown!

22

78

Remember seeing the Ad

Yes

No

17

15

2

2

2

3

4

7

8

15

26

Don't know

Other mentions

Tunisia

Croatia

Italy

Malta

Spain

Turkey

Egypt

Cyprus

Greece

Countries associated withNI Gap from

W1

W1 (14%)

3.10.5-5.1-3.92.40.30.4

-0.25.5-3.1

Base: All Interviewed (n=802) Base: All recalling the Print Ads (n=179)

2.6.2 Ad Evaluation TV Ad recognition (unbranded)

Similar to the (unbranded) print Ad, the TV execution reported a significant increase of recognition claims from the wave 1 results – up 11% to 33%. Of those recognising the execution 22% correctly associated the execution with Cyprus (+6% from wave 1).

Once again the main countries the execution was associated with were Egypt (12%), Greece (11%) and Turkey (10%). A small proportion also thought the execution was a UAE Ad (Dubai/Abu Dhabi), probably because it conveyed elements of comfort & luxury!

20

13

1

1

3

3

4

10

11

12

22

DK / Don't …

Other mentions

Morocco

Malta

Tunisia

Spain

UAE (Overall)

Turkey

Greece

Egypt

Cyprus

Countries associated with

31

69

Remember seeing the Ad

Yes

No

NI Gap from W1

W1 (22%)

5.9

0.8

-1.6

-6.4

-1.2

1.3

0.6

-0.5

1.8

-0.2

Base: All Interviewed (n=802) Base: All recalling the TV Ad (n=246)

2.6.3 Ad Evaluation Overall opinion towards Cyprus (after Ad exposure - branded)

The communication appears to influence positively overall opinions towards Cyprus, with significant increases in the T2B scores (see Total

sample Before vs After Ad exposure) - the higher the opinions are, the higher the visit consideration and thus the higher the Attitudinal brand equity would be!The scores at an average mean level are similar to those achieved in wave 1 (i.e. the changes reported too small to be significant).

1017 22

24

3136

32

3023

24

17 136

3 411

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Total Sample Recalling CY Ad After Ad exposure (Branded)

1 - Very negative

2

3

4

5

6

7 - Very positive

4.9 5.4 5.5Av. Mean – W2

Gap of from W1 -0.1 0.1 0.0

Base: (n=802) (n-191) (n=802)

2.6.4 Ad Evaluation Message communicated

7%2%

1%3%3%3%

7%8%

1%3%

9%6%

8%2%

4%8%

7%9%9%

12%3%3%

4%9%

19%8%

12%24%

Don t know/Don't rememberOther comments

Dont visit/Weak message / Not uniqueEverything within proximity

Sport activities/variety of sportsVariety of recreational activities

Food / Cuisine commentsLuxurious/high standards

Friendly/Hospitable/Nice/Polite PeopleVisit/Inspiring/Experience Cyprus etc.

Inviting/Welcoming/HospitableHistorical sites/sight seeing

Cultural offeringBeautiful landscapes/mountains/nature

Sunny islandBeautiful/great beaches

Beautiful country/island/destinationGood/appealing/enjoyable holiday destination

Cyprus in your heartWorth visiting/travelling to

Wellness/Wellbeing/SpaExcitement/adrenaline/adventure

Pampering/IndulgencePartying/Fun/Nightlife

Relaxation/Calmness/TranquilityA country of many surprises/facets

Something for everyone/covers all needs etc.Diversity/Versatile in its offering

Ad message communicated

Base: All Interviewed (n=802)

Thematic commentsGap from

W1

Diversification of offering 44% 1%

Lifestyle (various) 38% 4%

Tag lines 21% 8%

Aspects as a holiday destination 16% -4%

Natural beauties (beaches/mountains etc.) 15% -3%

Cultural offering 14% 6%

CY's hospitality & its people 12% -5%

Various (food; proximity of places; other) 12% -4%

High standards of offering / Luxury 8% -2%

Sport/recreational activities 6% 1%

Negative comments 1% -2%

Don't Know/Remember 7% -3%

Total (dublicate) comments 194%

2.6.5 Ad Evaluation Tag line recalled

Message communicated Many comments were cited about the message(s) conveyed, and the dominant themes emerged were similar to those found in wave 1 such as diverse offering, the type of holiday to be experienced by visiting Cyprus, the island’s natural beauties, its people & hospitality and the historical/cultural offering.

Negative comments were minimum (only 1% cited such comments).

Tag line recalledThe main tag line recalled was “Cyprus in your heart” which was claimed by 40% of the respondents, while another 21% mentioned “in just one moment”.

The incidence scores of tag lines referring to Relaxation or Vacation by the sea or Versatility or Culinary treats increased significantly from wave 1 (all with incidences ranging from 8-10%).

13%

1%

1%

2%

2%

2%

2%

3%

4%

5%

5%

5%

7%

8%

9%

9%

10%

21%

40%

Don't remember/Din't Know

Great offers

Other

Friendly/Hospitable Cyprus

Affectionate/Warm/Welcoming …

Adrenaline & Relaxation/Happiness

From tradition to unforgettable …

Visit / Welcome Cyprus

General elements from the ad

Hi adrenaline/active vacation

Dive in the world of luxury (or …

Cyprus (just the name)

Culture (or anything about it)

Cyprus is versatile (or anything …

Cusine / Food (or anything about it)

Relaxation/pure relaxation

Vacation on the sea/with …

... in (just) one moment ...

Cyprus in your heart

Tag line recalled

Gap from W1

1%

3%

6%

6%

5%

2%

3%

4%

1%

0%

1%

1%

1%

1%

-3%

-7%


2.6.6 Ad Evaluation Ad measures & Ad Effectiveness score

Overall the Campaign was received positively and the effectiveness score indicates to be an average campaign – (Below 50 is poor, 50-64 below average; 65-79 average and 80+ above average)! This score is almost identical to the score achieved in wave 1 – basically this appears to be the best the campaign can achieve at present!

With the campaign’s relevance improving (slightly) from wave 1, only Ad uniqueness (possibly at creativity level) appear to be the weak link in CTO’s campaign!

The overall Ad effectiveness construct is comprised of the 6 Ad measures used to assess the various effectiveness dimensions of the communication campaign (in its entirety) –

Ad Likability, Ad Uniqueness, Ad Credibility, Ad Interest , Ad Relevance (to respondents’ needs)Ad engagement (to find out more about Cyprus).

The Ad effectiveness score 73.0 (the score in wave 1 was 72.4), is the conversion of the overall average mean of the 6 Ad measures to a 1-100 scale!

27

18

23

21

12

26

21

39

38

42

42

32

46

40

24

28

23

27

32

20

26

6

10

8

9

16

6

9

3

6

4

2

8

3

4

Engaging

Relevance

Interest

Credibility

Uniqueness

Likeability

Overall Ad …

5 - Very positive 4 3 2 1 - Very negative

3.6

3.9

3.2

3.7

3.7

3.5

3.8

73.0

0.0

-0.1

0.0

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.0

Gap from W1

Av. Mean W2

Overall Ad Score

2.6.6 Ad Evaluation Ad Score (73.0) – Gap from overall Ad score

At demographic level, the only notable Ad effectiveness difference (from the overall score achieved) was reported by singles (who happen to be younger in age)!

Such differences were identified at respondent sub group level, with those considering to visit Cyprus achieving a score of 80.3; even higher score was achieved by those recalling a CY Ad with a score of 82.2.

20-29yo30-39yo40-49yo50-59yo

60+yo

MaleFemale

Net HH income €3,500 - €4,499Net HH income €4,500 - €5,499

Net HH income €5,500+

SingleMarried/Living with partner

Separated

Cyprus comes to mind as a HDVisited Cyprus

Consider visiting Cyprus Recalling CY As (prompted)

Overall Opinion (T2B) for CyprusFamiliar (T2B) with Cyprus 6.2

2.1

9.2

7.3

7.5

-1.0

0.7

2.5

-5.0

2.4

-1.2

0.1

0.9

-0.9

0.6

1.9

1.2

-1.5

-2.6


2.6.7 Ad Evaluation Impact of the Ad on CY perceptions

Overall perceptions towards Cyprus improved when respondents were exposed to the communication, especially in some of the attributes as key drivers of CY’s attitudinal equity, such as offering comfort & pampering, for having clean and beautiful beaches and for being friendly & hospitable, but also for areas such as Mediterranean cuisine, the history and cultural offering and even its vivid nightlife.

The Pricey tag remained even after respondents’ exposure to the campaign, regardless even if the “luxury” tag remained at relatively low levels – this should be rather concerning, as CY could be in fact an expensive destination for what it offers!

39.4

35.7

39.8

38.2

17.6

32.1

23.1

33.9

27.4

17.3

39.0

35.2

37.1

32.9

34.7

25.2

28.9

37.5

47.3

27.4

53.1

46.5

61.2

42.2

17.5

50.2

25.3

35.1

24.2

32.3

58.3

45.2

46.4

36.4

38.5

31.3

27.3

27.8

51.7

23.9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Offering comfort and pampering

Having well preserved antiquities

Its Mediterranean cuisine

Offering contrasting experiences ....

Its reasonable prices

Being friendly & hospitable

Family-oriented offering /caters to kids’ …

Being a safe destination

Offering sport activities that meet one’s …

Its vivid night life

Having clean & beautiful beaches

Having a lot of sights to visit

Its rich cultural identity

Offering a wide variety of recreational …

Offering luxury accommodations

Offering very high quality service

Being an all year round destination

Being easily accessible

It has natural beauties / nature trails

Catering for people with special needs

Before Ad

Aft

er Ad

-2.72.03.1-2.2-1.7-7.30.3-3.6-4.71.2-6.95.6-0.21.5-8.4-7.3-0.3-3.1-1.2

-1.7

Gap from W1


2.6.8 Ad Evaluation Needs fit analysis (after Ad exposure)

0

20

40

60

80

KF

H

S

L

M

E

A

D

NB

P

R

C

J

I

Q

O

T

G

Ideal After Ad (total sample) Before Ad (total sample)

Gap from W 1

Needs Fit after Ad

Needs Fit before Ad

NF afterAd

NF before

AdA Comfort and pampering 65 45 -2 -6B Well preserved antiquities 58 41 0 -3C Mediterranean cuisine 71 44 0 3D Contrasting experiences .... 53 46 -3 7E Reasonable prices 20 20 -4 7F Friendly & hospitable 57 36 -6 -4G Family-oriented 45 30 4 3H Safe destination 38 35 -7 -6I Variety sport activities 38 32 -6 2J Vivid night life 44 24 0 2K Clean & beautiful beaches 63 41 -10 -5L Lot of sights to visit 54 39 3 -2

M Rich cultural identity 56 45 -2 -1N Variety of Recr. activities 46 35 1 -1O Luxury accommodations 54 40 -13 5P High quality service 44 30 -6 -2Q All year round destination 38 34 -3 -4R Easily accessible 36 42 -5 1S Natural beauties 61 54 -1 2T People with special needs 47 38 -4 3

Needs fit coefficient 49.5 37.6 -3.1 0.0

Perceptions


2.6.8 Ad Evaluation Needs fit analysis (after Ad exposure)

Introduction to Needs-Fit

A measure of importance of the characteristics an Ideal brand has, indirectly denotes a road map of customers’ needs and requirements sought by brands, thus the better the fit between the characteristics sought in an ideal brand and the characteristics recognised on a brand, the higher the probability is for the brand to be used.

The Needs-Fit analysis as a measure of Ad effectiveness uses this premise in identifying how closely communication materials meet such customer needs – the higher the fit the higher the Ad effectiveness score!

The incidence score of the characteristics in an Ideal brand (at an aggregated level) can be considered as category coefficients of stated importance – the higher the incidence the higher the need for the characteristic to be present in brands!

The Needs-Fit analysis is calculated at a respondent level for each attribute. The aggregated number per attribute shows the %age of respondents who have selected the attribute (need) for their ideal brand and have associated the attribute with the brand (in our case Cyprus). The maximum attribute score the Need-Fit can reach is 100% and the lowest 0%.

The Needs-Fit analysis revealed a significant increase after respondents were exposed to the Ad campaign – from 37.6 jumped to 49.5 (slightly lower though from W1). This indicates the impact of the communication and could be viewed as an Ad effectiveness coefficient which is potentially a better measure of ROI, as it is calculated by taking into consideration respondents’ needs! The N-F score for CY considerers before and after the campaign exposure remained unchanged at 51, which it implies that the communication overall has not changed their views towards CY; certainly their is room for improvement especially in those attributes identified as drivers of CY’s attitudinal equity share!

Again this N-F score is considered an average score, however the signification lies in the increase reported from the score prior of the Ad exposure. As specific perceptions (i.e. attribute associations) decay over time, sustenance could be ensured through correctly planned communication activity, however the reduced budgets could be a detriment!

The fit was higher in most attributes assessed, with notably higher coefficients reported for Mediterranean cuisine, Comfort & pampering, Clean & beautiful beaches, Natural beauties and Friendly & hospitable (ranked in the that order), but there is still a long way in to go to reach the scores achieved by Spain or Italy!

3. Conclusions & Implications

1. Conclusions & Implications

2. The 1 page Story

3.1 Conclusions & Implications

Cyprus appears to have retained its position as a credible holiday destination, and though CY’s consideration claims for future visit dropped from wave 1, are still at par with more traditional holiday destinations for Germans such as Turkey, Greece, Portugal and Egypt and even slightly higher than Croatia.

Familiarity for Cyprus is still low, probably due to the fact that not many Germans have visited the country to experience first hand its offering, but possibly also due to CY’s low share of voice in terms of communication airing when compared to competing destinations such as Turkey, Egypt and Spain.

Having said that the low familiarity has not prevented Cyprus enjoying relatively high considerations to visit, which could be attributed to the impact of CTO’s new campaign but possibly also to the troubles certain countries are facing such as Greece’s financial problems, the social/political instability that still exist in the countries of North Africa (Egypt in particular)!

Perceptions for Cyprus in terms of overall mentions are considered as average, while the areas for which Cyprus was better recognised (relative to competition – i.e. being more distinctive) is “comfort and pampering”, for having “clean and beautiful beaches” and to a lesser extend for its “natural beauties” and “Mediterranean cuisine”.

It was not recognised (at all) neither for having “reasonable prices” nor for its “vivid nightlife” (or even for “family oriented offering”), thus indirectly excluding younger in age and fun seeking tourists from considering to visit.

It appears that it had a stronger attraction among the more older and affluent customers who were seeking comfort and relaxation.

Since Attitudinal Equity share is a good predictor of future travel behaviour (and assuming external factors which influence behaviours can’t change in the short/medium term), improving Cyprus’ AE share should be central in CTO’s efforts to entice more visitors!

The attribute areas of perception improvement (for some at least) that would enable CY’s AE share to achieve more inflow of tourists are: High quality service, Clean & beautiful beaches, offering Contrasting experiences, blessed with Natural beauties, providing Comfort & pampering, for being friendly & hospitable but also for showing sensitivity and catering for people with special needs (implying a caring and concerning attitude), thus further supporting the profile of CY’s potential visitor i.e. · Older in age (i.e. 45yo+), possibly more affluent and rather sophisticate and demanding who seeks comfort,

relaxation and quality of service/pampering, but at the same time wants to explore the country’s natural & cultural offering etc.

Taking into account the competitive landscape by incorporating the industry’s drivers ( i.e. Introducing holiday makers’ needs in a competitive context), further areas appear to figure prominently in potential visitors minds, which at present appear to be key barriers for CY to be considered such as: Reasonable prices, Vivid nightlife, variety of Recreational activities and Sights to visit; thus we are looking at a different profile of holiday makers such as · Younger in age (single or couples), with specific budget in mind, who mainly seek fun, diversity and excitement.

The current campaign and CTO’s strategy (modern; culture & history; friendliness & hospitality; contrasting offering) tends to address the needs of the former group (older & affluent) of potential holiday makers better, and delivers to a certain degree on the areas identified as drivers for CY consideration, thus with minor changes in the campaign could yield higher AE share, thus potentially increase the number of visitors!


If the aim is to attract a wider audience with different sets of needs ( i.e. by also addressing younger audiences), then it would probably require a communication campaign which addresses distinct “offering routes” separately with a series of smaller executions where each tackling specific needs (fun & excitement; comfort & pampering; sun & relaxation, natural & cultural offering etc.). This would come with a central theme as a common communication denominator (i.e. quality service and/or friendly/hospitable etc.) which connects all the executions in a unified theme!

Having said that, such campaign should be cleverly developed to minimise the alienation effect (due to the dispersion of offering) that some of the current core CY considerers may experience!

At a campaign level, both techniques utilised to assess Ad effectiveness (a. using traditional Ad measures to construct an effectiveness score and b. using the Needs-Fit analysis) revealed an “average” campaign (note the majority of campaigns are classified as average in terms of their ability to generate incremental sales -ROI). The Ad effectiveness scores achieved (for both methods) were similar to those of wave 1, confirming the actual level of appeal and potential of the current campaign.

In saying that, the campaign’s ability to change perceptions is noted as the Needs-Fit score before and after the campaign exposure increased significantly, especially in some of the dimensions identified as core drivers of CY’s Attitudinal equity share, however it is still evident that there is a room for improvement in all key drivers (in some more than others).

An area in which the execution/campaign seems to fail to deliver is in terms of uniqueness /differentiation, thus re-examining the creative aspects of the TV campaign could prove conducive! Finally more sustainable campaign “exposure/airing” (i.e. bigger SoV) could potentially better strengthen the desired perceptual associations with CY’s offering!


Cyprus is seen as a credible destination by German holiday makers more, though by senior in age (40+, especially females), thus it is seen to be a destination offering comfort, luxury and high quality service, but also for having natural beauties, clean/beautiful beaches and for offering a combination of contrasting experiences. Having said that, this probably limits CY’s ability to entice younger Germans (20-40yo) who seek more excitement and at more reasonable prices!

It is mainly seen as a summer holiday destination, which invariably restricts its potential to an extend; indicative to this is the notable dropped in consideration (to visit CY in the next 3 years) from W1. The lack of any campaign airing promoting CY’s winter offering during the 2nd half of the year, could have attributed to that!

Though familiarity for CY was again amongst the lowest of the 12 key markets, the relatively high overall opinions and considerations (to visit) reported, could be attributed to the impact of CTO’s new campaign ( it seems that the campaign airing in the 1st half of the year is still lingering in peoples’ mind) and possibly partly to the acknowledged problems more traditional holiday destinations such as Greece (financial troubles) and Egypt (political unrest) are experiencing.

Though the new campaign was liked and has proved impactful in shaping specific opinions and perceptions (in reaching to a degree the desirable audience), its relative lack of clear differentiation from competitive campaigns, may have inhibited its ability to reach its full potential, i.e. to increase the level of attitudinal equity and considerations to visit – this is further supported when the campaign was tested unbranded, where it was mainly mistaken for being the Ad of other Mediterranean countries!

Finally, looking at the results of both waves, it seems to suggest that the continued airing of the campaign would help increase CY’s considerations (to visit), while communicating more effectively the dimensions identified as key drivers of CY’s attitudinal equity could increase the inflow of visitors.

3.2 The 1-page Story

Thank you.

detailed report – wave 2 ( 4 th quarter of 2011 ) ad effectiveness campaign - germany prepared for...

Documents

impact of ad campaign

communication campaign

media ad

ad awarenessp

tv campaign

research methodology

outdoor campaign

cy ad evaluationp