We noted earlier that segmentation is designed to serve the need of marketers. It is not surprising therefore, that writers like Middleton and Clarke (2001) believe that: ‘Market segmentation and product formulation, are mirror images if they are correctly matched.’ Indeed, segmentation is designed to help with all four Ps of the marketing mix, namely, Product, Price, Place and Promotion. This link is discussed in more detail in, so at this stage we simply need to make two brief points.
First, successful marketing is not based on one method of segmentation alone; instead it makes use of a blend of different techniques that will be different on every occasion. We might link personality with geographical place of residence, or we might focus on benefits sought in relation to different demographic factors.
A combination of socioeconomic geographical and demographic factors underpins the use of the ACORN residential neighborhood classification system in tourism marketing. Secondly, tourism organizations have to deal with, what Middleton and Clarke (2001) have called, ‘Multiple segments’. For example they say that hotels serve at least five segments, namely, corporate/business clients, group tours, independent vacationers, weekend/midweek package clients and conference delegates:
‘Most (tourism) businesses deal with not one but several segments’.
Conclusions While we have considered the so-called ‘academic typologies’ separately from segmentation techniques, there are clearly links between them. According to Horner and Swarbrooke (1996):
The typology of Plog (1977) is based firmly on the principles of psychographic segmentation in that it is based on the personality of the tourist . . . Concepts such as the ‘Post-Tourist’ are closely linked to another element of psychographic