Original Scientific Article An Investigation of the Tourism Distribution Channels in the VFR Segment Vicky Katsoni Athens Technological Educational Institute, Faculty of Management and Economics, Greece katsoniv@teiath.gr This study contributes to the understanding of the Visiting Friends and Relatives (vfr) travel segment, as it focuses on the use of tourism distribution channels as information sources for consumer travel behaviour in the vfr segment. Demographics and trip characteristics of the vfr travel segment were also analysed, according to trip organization (package holiday/self-guided holiday), time used to decide about the trip, type of accommodation, travel companion, and booking; the findings justify the significant and profitable role of vfr in commercial accommodation. The data are representative of the province of Arcadia, Greece, serving as the research field of a longitudinal study. The findings underscore the important role that vfr travel holds in commercial accommodation, confirming the 'hybrid' nature of vfr travel, and highlight the importance of social identity issues involved in vfr travel, as well as indicating an emerging role of the diasporas in their return visit(s) to the homeland. As such, the findings would seem to promote a marketing strategy of organized governance that takes into account identification and focuses on a 'sense of belonging' and community, tailored to the characteristics of this particular target market and aligned with the distribution channels they use, as evidenced in the research findings. Keywords: vfr travel, consumer behaviour, distribution channels, tourism marketing, tourism segmentation Introduction This study contributes to the understanding of vfr travellers' behaviour in a 'during the trip' context. The use of the term 'travel' was deliberately chosen, as according to Backer (2012): [...] a person travelling to a destination to: attend a wedding, assist a daughter to care for a newborn baby, or visit an ailing relative could not be included as a tourist - under Leiper's (2004, p. 35) definition of tourism as a search for leisure experiences from interactions with features or characteristics of places they choose to visit - but rather they would identify themselves as travelling for the purpose of visiting friends and relatives and fall under the official data as vfr travelers. It is clear that vfr travel may not always involve a leisure experience and vfr travel is motivated by a range of reasons according to which specific obligations are fulfilled through host-guest social interactions (Capistrano, 2013). The whole analysis is through a consumer behaviour framework, because consumer behaviour has been used to explain the decision-making processes of consumers facing several alternatives or choices, thus making consumer research on tourism the cor- Académica Turística, Year 9, No. 1, June 2016 | 19 VlCKY KATSONI An Investigation of the Tourism Distribution Channels nerstone of marketing strategy (Van Raaij, 1986; Kat-soni, Giaoutzi, & Nijkamp, 2013). Demographics and trip characteristics of the vfr travel segment were then analysed, according to trip organization (package holiday/self-guided holiday), time used to decide about the trip, type of accommodation, travel companion, and booking, where the findings highlight the differences between vfr travelers and other tourists and justify the important and profitable role of vfr in commercial accommodation. The study also focuses on the use of information sources for travel consumer behaviour, discussing the implications of tourism distribution channels. While the tourism literature evidences that several factors influence travelers' behavior in consuming tourism products (Lepp & Gibson, 2008; Hsu, Tsai, & Wu, 2009), to date, investigation into the determinants of tourism consumption remains inadequate in the literature; for example, the relative importance of the various information sources (ict sources included) used by travelers has not yet been systematically analysed (Katsoni et al., 2013). Distribution channels are the paths by which tourism organizations execute the communication and sale oftheir products and services and as Buhalis (2000, p. 113) argues: 'The primary distribution functions for tourism are information, combination and travel arrangement services.' To varying degrees, all tourism product suppliers depend on these channels for the distribution of their products. While the importance of understanding and managing the structure and behaviour of such channels has been clearly identified in many mainstream academic and trade publications, relatively little tourism research has focused on vfr travel. The data of this study are representative of the province of Arcadia, Greece, serving as the research field of a longitudinal study. The results of the research give the industry the possibility of improving information distribution systems and an understanding of vfr travellers'consumer behaviour in order to make adequate marketing decisions. Literature Review Visiting Friends and Relatives (vfr) Tourism Defined The Visiting Friends and Relatives (vfr) form of travel is recognized as a substantial form of tourism world- wide, and it is also likely to be the oldest form of travel (Backer, 2011) as travelling to visit friends and relatives has always been socially significant. vfr is defined as 'a form of travel that is about being co-present with significant "faces," being their guests, receiving their hospitality and perhaps enjoying their knowledge of local culture' (Larsen, Urry, and Axhausen (2007, p. 247). Moscardo, Pearce, Morrison, Green, and O'Leary (2000) provide five defining features of the vfr travel: sector (vfr as a major motive/trip type or as an activity); scope (international and/or domestic); effort (short- and/or long-haul); accommodation used (accommodated by friends/relatives, commercial accommodation, or a combination); and the focus of the visit. It is evident then that there is a definitional issue in vfr travel, as recognized by Backer (2010), who highlighted an inconsistency in tourism literature: vfr is commonly categorized by the purpose of visit (Yuan, Fridgen, Hsieh, & O'Leary, 1995; McKercher, 1995), but it can also be categorized by accommodation type (Boyne, 2001; King, 1994; Kotler, Bowen, & Makens, 2006; Boyne, Carswell, & Hall, 2002). Backer (2012) then developed a definitional model of vfr travel as a form of travel involving a visit whereby either (or both) the purpose of the trip or the type of accommodation involves visiting friends and/or relatives. Thus, in tourism literature, vfr travel is recognized as having a multifaceted nature and might be a kind of hybrid travel, i.e. travel which comprises a mix of pleasure, business and vfr travel experiences. As a consequence, difficulties arise in synthesizing existing research on vfr travel and many authors argue that a basic step in formulating a typology of vfr travel is distinguishing vfr as the prime travel motivation or trip type from vfr as one activity among several in which the travellers participate (Morrison, Hsieh, & O'Leary, 1995; King 1996). However, the purpose of visit definitions may capture different people than accommodation definitions will. Nor do all vfr travellers who stay with friends and relatives state a vfr travel purpose (Jackson, 1990; 2003), and neither do all people who travel for vfr purposes stay with friends and relatives (Backer, 2010). Therefore, a more inclusive definition is that 'vfr travel is a form 20 | Académica Turística, Year 9, No. 1, June 2016 VlCKY KATSONI An Investigation of the Tourism Distribution Channels of travel involving a visit whereby either (or both) the purpose of the trip or the type of accommodation involves visiting friends and/or relatives' (Backer, 2007, p. 369). This misconception about the vfr market in general, based on its assumed non-commercial accommodation usage and assumed within-group homogeneity, has led to the notion that vfr travel is underestimated (Backer, 2012; Griffin, 2013) and that official data fail to measure it appropriately, as many people who are vfr travellers may not actually identify themselves as such and simply state that they are on holiday. Some empirical research on this topic shows that while vfr travellers are commonly considered to spend less than other types of tourists, more detailed comparative analysis indicates that this market should not be disregarded, as they find that vfr travellers tend to participate in a wide variety of local and regional leisure activities (Moscardo et al., 2000) and have a significant economic impact on commercial tourism operations, such as travel services and retail (Backer, 2012; Griffin, 2013; Lee, Morrison, Lheto, Webb, & Reid, 2005; Seaton & Palmer, 1997). Another strong indication that vfr can be a lucrative market for destinations is the link between repeat visits and vfr travel (Tiefenbacher, Day, & Walton, 2000), as the segment ofrepeat visitors appears to include a high rate of vfrs and vfr travel is less susceptible to sea-sonality, as tourist arrivals tend to be dispersed more evenly throughout the year (Hu & Morrison, 2002; Seaton & Palmer, 1997). Moreover, vfr travel was found to be distributed more equally throughout the destination, benefiting areas beyond typical tourism hubs (Asiedu, 2008; Jackson, 1990). Asiedu (2008) mentioned other reasons for the attractiveness of the vfr market segment, such as the fact that vfrs are less influenced by image and political instability concerns. vfr was also found to be one of the primary motivations for both domestic and international traveling (Paci, 1994; Pennington-Gray, 2003; Yuan et al., 1995), and to have close association with immigration patterns (Bywater, 1995; Jackson, 1990), which generate two-way movements of 'ethnic' tourism: emigrants who return to their homeland out of senses of belonging and identification with its way of life, and their friends and families who travel to visit them in their current country (King, 1994). For all the reasons mentioned above, vfr travel is now considered to be a legitimate market segment with significant relevance to the tourism-related economy as well as to the hospitality industry (Lehto, Morrison, &O'Leary, 2001). The contribution of vfr travel to the tourism benefits for the development of the tourism destination of Arcadia, Greece, made this research relevant. Tourism Distribution Channels, Information Sources, and Tourist Segmentation Travel products are mostly intangible personal service products, involving personal interactions between customers and service providers (Lovelock & Wright, 1999; Normann, 1996; Teare, 1992) and the consumption and production of tourism products always coincide, creating high personal involvement (Bieger & Laesser, 2002). According to the economics of information, these characteristics often lead to great personal investments of time, effort, and financial resources for customer decision making (Lambert, 1998). With increasing frequency, tourists have been directly segmented based on their search behaviour (Katsoni et al., 2013; Bieger & Laesser, 2004). Market segmentation is a technique used to subdivide a heterogeneous market into homogeneous subgroups that can be distinguished by different variables, such as consumer needs, characteristics, or behaviour (Kotler, 1998; Middleton, 1994). Because people have individualized needs, tastes, and attitudes, as well as different life stages and lifestyles, no single variable can be used to segment travel markets (Andereck & Caldwell, 1994), and the use of 'multistage segmentation' (Middleton, 1994; Havitz and Dimanche, 1990; Morrison, 1996) or a 'combination' (Kotler et al., 2006) of multiple variables rather than just one has been recommended. A review of the literature indicates that there is no one correct way to segment a market. Although information seeking is often coupled with a cultural (and therefore regionally different) background resulting in different patterns of behavior (Dawar, 1993), a number of common travel-specific denominators regarding information collection have 20 | Académica Turística, Year 9, No. 1, June 2016 VlCKY KATSONI An Investigation of the Tourism Distribution Channels been identified, such as length of trip, previous experience and/or visits to the destination, and travel party characteristics, e.g. composition of the vacation group, the presence of family and friends at the destination (Bieger & Laesser, 2002, 2004; Fodness & Murray, 1997). Understanding how customers acquire information is necessary for marketing management decisions (Katsoni et al., 2013; Moutinho, 1987). The 'purpose of trip' is recognized as one of the non-traditional segmentation bases closely associated with travel motivation, and has been approached from different perspectives. Examples of such studies include the interaction of trip purposes with activities (Hsieh, O'Leary, & Morrison, 1992; Jeffrey & Xie, 1995; Morrison, Hsieh, & O'Leary, 1994; Moscardo, Morrison, Pearce, Lang, & O'Leary, 1996), interest (Sorensen, 1993; Wight, 1996), motivation (Cha, Mc-Cleary and Uysal, 1995; Wight, 1996), opinion (Cohen & Richardson, 1995), and value (Madrigal & Kahle, 1994). In using trip type as a key variable to segment the travel market, the inclusion of more trip-related characteristics in the analysis is highly recommended for the comprehensive understanding of the target segment from a consumer behaviour perspective, such as length of stay and size of the travel party (Sung, Morrison, Hong, & O'Leary, 2001). Information search behavior and tourism distribution channels usage are closely related; the Internet has also intensified the complexity of the travel decision-making process, and it has become an important channel for travellers' information search (Gretzel, Fes-enmaier, & O'Leary, 2006; Gursoy & McLeary, 2003; Pan & Fesenmaier, 2003; Xiang, Weber, & Fesenmaier, 2008; Jun, Vogt, & Mackay, 2007), creating an environment whereby online information providers, such as tourist boards, hotel and resort websites, travel agents, bloggers, and magazines, actively compete for attention to attract searchers and, ultimately, bookers. The application of ict in the tourism sector provides an opportunity for travel and tourism service providers to intermix traditional marketing channels (i.e. distribution, transaction, and communication) that were previously considered independent processes (Peterson & Merino, 2003; Zins, 2009). A single interaction on the Internet can provide product informa- tion, a means for payment and product exchange, and distribution, whereas more traditional interaction approaches frequently separate these functions (Jun et al., 2007; Stratigea, Papadopoulou, & Pana-giotopoulou, 2015) and recent studies have considered the use of online information sources relative to more conventional ones (Katsoni et al., 2013). Implications of the Literature Review The literature review offers a number of options to analyse the profile of vfr travellers: firstly, an analysis ofthe socio-demographic characteristics. Secondly, an analysis of their trip characteristics: trip organization (package holiday/self-guided holiday), time used to decide about the trip, type ofaccommodation, travel companion, and booking. Thirdly, an analysis of their information sourcing behaviour, based on internal and external information sources, and ict use in particular: the Internet, the use of Global Positioning System (gps) and smartphones. Method This investigation was designed to further understand the tourism market in the province ofArcadia, Greece, in 2012. To eliminate seasonality, the survey included a convenience sample of Greek and foreign tourists in the region over a period of 12 months. Questionnaires were distributed to various survey sites from people working in the prefecture of Arcadia. Data were collected by using a four-page self-administered questionnaire, in Greek and English, primarily designed to gather information on the subjects' general motivations for travel. A total of 3500 questionnaires were distributed to the sites, and 766 usable questionnaires were collected, which leads to the response rate of 21.88%. Their participation in vfr travel was identified through the question: 'As part of your vacation how likely are you to be interested in visiting friends and relatives?' The survey data were coded and analysed using R, an open-source statistical package. Descriptive statistical analysis was applied to the collected data to explore the overall sample profile. In order to identify individual characteristics of the subpopulation of tourists that had replied positively to the question on how likely they were to be interested 20 | Académica Turística, Year 9, No. 1, June 2016 VlCKY KATSONI An Investigation of the Tourism Distribution Channels in visiting friends and relatives on their vacation, the vfr travellers' group was separated from the rest of the respondents, and the following sub-groups for subsequent analysis were constructed: • Group A or 'vfr travellers' (n = 312): 'Very likely' to be interested in visiting friends and relatives. • Group B (n = 454): 'Very unlikely' to be interested in visiting friends and relatives. Then, the individual characteristics of the two subgroups were analysed. Chi-square tests were conducted to verify whether differences between the two subgroups, as regards particular characteristics of the population of tourists, were due to chance variation or revealed some statistically significant trend. Chi-squared tests were chosen for use in this exploratory investigation to aid in making inference about the uniform distribution (or not) of the two sub-groups in relation to demographic, trip characteristics, selection of information sources for their journey and degree of satisfaction from the use of these information sources. Results Demographic Characteristics The initial chi-square analyses were conducted to determine differences in the Group A and Group B tourists' gender, age, education, occupation and nationality. Amongst vfr travellers (Group A) the number of female participants was greater than the number of male participants: females at 60.6% and males at 37.8%. Results in Table 1 reveal a significant chi-square for the variables: Occupation (x^y = 36.03, p < 0.0001). Table 1 also reveals that there is a tendency for unemployed/people looking for a job to visit friends and relatives in their vacation. Visiting friends and relatives is also less popular for scientific, free professional, technical and related workers, as well as for trade and sales workers; Nationality/Origin (Xf = 4.3, p < 0.05), suggesting that it is more likely for Greek than foreign travellers to show preference in visiting friends and relatives on their vacation. Trip Characteristics Trip characteristics were analysed according to trip organization (package holiday/self-guided holiday), time used to decide about the trip, type of accommodation, travel companion, and booking. The majority of vfr travellers (79.5%) organize their holidays on their own and make the final decision of their trip in a period of less than one month before their departure. They prefer to stay in upgraded hotels: first choice (27.2%) is hotel/club of 4- and 5-star categories. Only 2.9% prefer camping facilities. Bookings are made by phone, directly from the producer (55.4%). The tests on the trip characteristics of travellers in Group A and Group B, as displayed in Table 2, reveal that it is more likely for travellers of Group A compared to travellers of Group B to travel on their own or with their family but less commonly so with friends (x2d/ = 10.07, p < 0.005). It is also evident that travellers of Group A are not only interested in visiting friends and relatives on their vacation, but also choose to stay with friends and relatives (x6y = 23.5, p < 0.001). b&b is also more popular for Group A, while living in 2- and 3-star hotels and camping is less popular. Selection of Information Sources The aim of this part of the analysis is to explore the tourists' habits with regards to the preference they show in the selection of information sources for their journey. Comparisons between the two sub-groups (Group A and Group B) have been conducted using the chi-squared test in Table 3, and a significant chi-square has been derived from the sources: Personal experience/knowledge (Xdf = 4.07,p < 0.05) and gps (Xid/ = 6.49, p < 0.05). Figures in Table 3 reveal that it is more likely for travellers in Group A to use their personal experience and knowledge than tourists in Group B. It is also more common for tourists in Group A to get information on the place that they visit using a gps device. Information sources are displayed in the same Table 4, in descending order of preference for travellers in Group A. Thus, travellers interested in visiting friends and relatives on their vacation seek information on the place that they visit from recommendations from friends and family and secondly from the Internet. Third in their preference are travel guidebooks and travel magazines, while personal experi- 20 | Académica Turística, Year 9, No. 1, June 2016 VlCKY KATSONI An Investigation of the Tourism Distribution Channels Table 1 Chi-Square Analysis of Demographic Characteristics of Travelers Who Are Interested in Visiting Friends and Relatives in Their Vacation Category Subcategory Group A Group B df P n % n % Gender Male 118 37.8 200 44.1 3.461 1 0.0628 Female 189 60.6 239 52.6 Age 15-25 54 17.3 58 12.8 8.225 5 0.1443 25-35 102 32.7 135 29.7 35-45 59 18.9 119 26.2 45-55 56 17.9 75 16.5 55-65 23 7.4 40 8.8 Over 65 13 4.2 16 3-5 Higher level of education Primary Secondary/high school 10 85 3.2 27.2 16 105 3.5 23.1 6.8458 4 0.1443 Tertiary 117 37.5 193 42.5 Postgraduate Studies 59 18.9 102 22.5 Other 29 9-3 26 5-7 Occupation Scientific, free professional, technical and related worker 71 22.8 141 31.1 36.0325 9 3.912e Administrative and managerial worker 45 14.4 62 13.7 Clerical worker 54 17.3 88 19.4 Trade and sales worker 17 5.4 37 8.1 Farmer, fisherman, and related worker 8 2.6 8 1.8 Craftsman, worker, operator 24 7.7 16 3.5 Pensioner 16 5.1 24 5.3 Housework 18 5.8 20 4.4 Unemployed, looking for job 27 8.7 7 1.5 Student 28 9 48 10.6 Nationality/ Foreign tourists 37 11.9 80 17.6 4.3096 1 0.0379 origin Native (Greek) tourists 275 88.1 374 82.4 Notes Group A: Verylikelyto be interested (n = 312). Group B: Unlikely to be interested (n = 454). ence/knowledge, radio & tv broadcasts, and information brochures also rank high in their choices. The last two in their choice are the hotel listings and oral information provided by tourist information at the destination or from local tourist offices. Degree of Satisfaction Overall, travellers interested in visiting friends and relatives on their vacation (Group A) are satisfied with the information sources that they use, but not at a sig- nificantly greater or lesser extent than other tourists are (Group B), as shown in Table 4. Discussion The preceding analysis has revealed significant differences between vfr travellers and travellers with other trip interests. Firstly, in terms of demographics, the research suggests that occupation and nationality are not independent of the tourists' reported preference/interest in visiting friends and relatives on their 20 | Académica Turística, Year 9, No. 1, June 2016 VlCKY KATSONI An Investigation of the Tourism Distribution Channels Table 2 Chi-Square Analysis of Trip Characteristics of Travelers who are Interested in Visiting Friends and Relatives in Their Vacation Category Subcategory Group A Group B df P n % n % Trip Package tour/holiday 20 6.4 22 4.8 1.7297 2 0.4211 organization Partial package tour/holiday 40 12.8 49 10.8 Self-guided tour/holiday 248 79-5 376 82.8 Final decision Less than 1 month before departure 203 65.1 289 63.7 5.2688 2 0.0718 for the trip was taken 1 to 6 months before the departure 74 23.7 130 28.6 More than 6 months before the dep. 33 10.6 30 6.6 Type of accom- Hotel/club (4*/5*) 85 27.2 124 27.3 23.5107 6 0.0006 modation B&B 61 19.6 78 17.2 Friends & Relatives 35 11.2 16 3.5 Hotel/club (2*/3*) 63 20.2 119 26.2 Holiday Home 27 8.7 37 8.1 Camping (tent, trainer, mobile home) 9 2.9 27 5.9 Combination of the above 22 7-1 33 7-3 Travel with On your own 29 9.3 20 4.4 10.6707 2 0.0048 With one or more friends 137 43.9 242 53.3 With your family 138 44.2 186 41 Book accom- Travel agent 29 9.3 46 10.1 7.0214 3 0.0712 modation By yourself directly from the producer 173 55.4 289 63.7 through via the telephone By yourself directly from the producer 39 12.5 50 11 via the Internet By other person 63 20.2 63 13-9 Notes Group A: Very likely to be interested (n = 312). Group B: Unlikely to be interested (n = 454). vacation. As might be expected, it is more likely for Greek than foreign travellers to show preferences in visiting friends and relatives on their vacation; however, it is noteworthy that foreign travellers accounted for 12% of the vfr group. There is also a tendency for unemployed/people looking for a job to visit friends and relatives on their vacation. Visiting friends and relatives is less popular for scientific, free professional, technical and related workers, as well as for trade and sales workers. This study also provides evidence for the importance of vfr travel in the contribution of the hosts themselves to the tourism and hospitality industry, as it agrees with other researchers who found that '[.. .]countering the popular image of vfr travellers as irrelevant to the hotel industry because vfr travellers do not purchase hotel rooms, vfr travellers are, in fact, significant purchasers of hotel room nights' (Braunlich &Nadkarni, 1995, p. 46); Backer, 2010; Lee et al., 2005; Pennington-Gray, 2003). Moreover, in this study we found that they prefer to stay in upgraded hotels: hotels/clubs of 4- and 5-star categories being their first choice (27.2%), while only 2.9% prefer camping facilities. The research implies that a segmentation based on the information search behaviour is an appropriate way to develop marketing strategies and to target marketing communications. It also supports the position that trip-related (situational) descriptors have a strong influence on travel information search behaviour. vfr 20 | Académica Turística, Year 9, No. 1, June 2016 VlCKY KATSONI An Investigation of the Tourism Distribution Channels Table 3 Chi-Square Analysis of Booking Characteristics of Travelers Who Are Interested in Visiting Friends and Relatives in Their Vacation Booking characteristics Group A n % Group B n% x2 df P Recommendations from friends and relatives 175 56.1 245 54 0.2568 1 0.6123 Internet 156 50 249 54.8 1.5536 1 0.2126 Travel guidebooks and travel magazines 114 36.5 151 33.3 0.7395 1 0.3898 Personal experience/knowledge 82 26.3 90 19.8 4.0664 1 0.04375 Radio and tv broadcasts (documentary and news) 68 21.8 97 21.4 0.0028 1 0.9581 Information brochures 58 18.6 66 14.5 1.9494 1 0.1626 Advertisements and articles in newspapers/magazines 51 16.3 70 15.4 0.0601 1 0.8064 Information from using a Global Positioning System 24 7.7 15 3.3 6.4894 1 0.01085 Video/cD-RoM/DVD/videotext 24 7.7 19 4.2 3.6567 1 0.05584 Oral information provided by retailer/agency 22 7.1 17 3.7 3.5282 1 0.06033 Information from using a smartphone 21 6.7 17 3.7 2.893 1 0.08897 Hotel listings 19 6.1 28 6.2 0.0119 1 0.913 Oral information provided by tourist information 4 1.3 10 2.2 0.4357 1 0.5092 at destination or from local tourist offices Notes Group A: Verylikelyto be interested (n = 312). Group B: Unlikely to be interested (n = 454). Table 4 Chi-Square Analysis of the Degree of Satisfaction with Information Sources for Travellers Who Are Interested in Visiting Friends and Relatives in Their Vacation Booking characteristics Group A Group B x2 df P n % n% Satisfied 219 70.2 314 69.2 4.2298 2 0.1206 Somewhat satisfied 76 24.4 129 28.4 Not satisfied 13 4.2 9 2 Notes Group A: Verylikelyto be interested (n = 312). Group B: Unlikely to be interested (n = 454). travellers in Arcadia are independent visitors, as 79.5% organize their holidays on their own. A significant finding of this research indicates that vfr travel consumers tend to prefer strongly internal information sources: recommendations from friends and relatives account for 55.1% of the respondents' choices. After a definite trip decision, information from friends and relatives is very important and travel behaviour adapts to their recommendations. The second source of information is the Internet (50%). This increased use of the Internet shows its enormous importance, as a single interaction on the Internet can provide product information, a means for payment and product exchange, and distribution, whereas a more traditional interaction frequently separates these functions (Jun et al., 2007). It is noteworthy, however, that the use of the Internet was quite limited for booking purposes in Arcadia (8%), a fact that needs to be investigated in future studies. Third in their preference was the use of travel guidebooks and travel magazines, while personal experience/knowledge, radio & tv broadcasts, and information brochures also rank high in their choices. The last two in their choice are hotel listings and oral information provided by tourist information at the destination or from local tourist offices. While information from a Global Positioning System (gps) device and information from smartphones 20 | Académica Turística, Year 9, No. 1, June 2016 VlCKY KATSONI An Investigation of the Tourism Distribution Channels was used by a very low percentage of vfr travellers use (7.7% and 6.7% respectively) in this Arcadia study, it was still quite a bit higher than among the non-VFR travellers, suggesting that an initial level of familiarity might be a contributing factor. There is no doubt that in the future, mobile technology will increasingly provide opportunities for real-time travel information. Even today, mobile technology can bring the latest up-to-date information anytime and anywhere to customers. Developments in smartphones provide real-time web links; select automobiles offer telematics (web access in a vehicle), and the new generation of mobile broadband networks provide wireless communication spurring the development of location-based services using Global Positioning Systems (Jun et al., 2007). Indeed, travellers have already begun to use other Web 2.0 websites, which enable them to share their views and opinions about products and services (Xiang & Gretzel, 2010). All these developments will influence both information search and provision (Kat-soni, 2011, 2014). Future studies should be conducted to understand how to connect customers' Internet use to mobile use. Conclusions and Implications of the Study This paper aims to assess the magnitude and significance of vfr travel in the tourism destination of Arcadia, Greece. The findings underscore the important role that vfr travel holds in commercial accommodation, since only 11.2% of vfr travelers actually stay with their friends and relatives, thus confirming the hybrid nature of vfr travel - and this despite the fact thatmostofthe vfr travelers in this study were Greek and in the middle of a severe economic recession. Although vfr travel is a form of travel that provides its participants with feelings of 'home' (evaluated in terms of familiarity), it also seems that vfr travelers in Arcadia enjoy the privacy provided by a paid hotel room and do not want the disadvantages of social obligations and behavioral constraints that emerge when staying with their friends and relatives. Indeed, except for the 'staying with friends and relatives' category, there were no other significant differences in accommodation preferences between the two groups of travellers. Furthermore, the fact that 88.1% of the vfr travellers in this study are Greek highlights the importance of social identity issues involved in vfr travel, as well as pointing to an emerging role of the diaspora in their return visit(s) to the homeland. As such, the findings seem to promote a marketing strategy of organized governance that takes into account identification and focuses on a 'sense of belonging' and community, tailored to the characteristics of this particular target market and aligned with the distribution channels they use, as evidenced in the research findings. One limitation of the study is that Internet use was treated in its general term in order to find ict competence in the vfr travel segment, so research was limited to tourists' general perception of broad and generic Internet use. Further research on the tourism stakeholders themselves and more analysis of Internet use could improve the relevance of the research. References Andereck, K. L., & Caldwell, L. L. (1994). Variable selection in tourism market segmentation models. Journal of Travel Research, 33(2), 40-46. Asiedu, A. B. (2008). Participants' characteristics and economic benefits of visiting friends and relatives (vfr) tourism: An international survey of the literature with implications for Ghana. International Journal of Tourism Research, 10(6), 609-621. Backer, E. (2007). vfr travel - an examination ofthe expenditures of vfr travellers and their hosts. Current Issues in Tourism, 10(4), 366-377. Backer, E. (2010). Opportunities for commercial accommodation in vfr. International Journal of Tourism Research, 12(4), 334-354. Backer, E. (2011). vfr travellers of the future. In I. Yeoman, C. Hsu, K. Smith, &S. Watson (Eds.), Tourism and demography (pp. 74-84). Oxford, England: Goodfellow Publishers. Backer, E. (2012). vfr travel: It is underestimated. Tourism Management, 33(1), 74-79. Bieger, T., & Laesser, C. (2002). Market segmentation by motivation. Journal of Travel Research, 41(1), 68-76. Bieger, T. & Laesser, C. (2004). Information sources fortravel decisions: Toward a source process model. Journal of Travel Research, 42(2), 357-371. Boyne, S. (2001). Hosts, friends and relatives in rural Scotland: vfr tourism market relationships explored. In L. Roberts, & D. Hall (Eds.), Rural tourism and recreation: 20 | Académica Turística, Year 9, No. 1, June 2016 VlCKY KATSONI An Investigation of the Tourism Distribution Channels Principles to practice (pp. 41-43). Wallingford, England: Cabi Publishing. Boyne, S., Carswell, F., & Hall, D. (2002). Reconceptualis-ing vfr: Friends, relatives and migration in a domestic context. In C. M. Hall, & A. M. Williams (Eds.), Tourism and migration: New relationships between production and consumption (pp. 241-256). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Braunlich, C. G., & Nadkarni, N. (1995). The importance of the vfr market to the hotel industry. Journal ofTourism Studies, 6(1), 38-47. Buhalis, D. (2000). Marketing the competitive destination of the future. Tourism Management, 21(1), 97-116. Bywater, M. (1995). New Zealand outbound. Travel & Tourism Analyst, 1,19-29. Capistrano, R. C. (2013). Visiting friends and relatives travel, host-guest interactions and qualitative research: Methodological and ethical implications. Asia-Pacific Journal of Innovation in Hospitality and Tourism, 2(1), 87-101. Cha, S., McCleary, K. W., & Uysal, M. (1995). Travel motivations of Japanese overseas travelers: A factor-cluster segmentation approach. Journal ofTravelResearch, 34(2), 33-39. Fodness, D., & Murray, B. (1997). Tourist information search. Annals ofTourism Research, 24(3), 503-523. Gretzel, U., Fesenmaier, D. R., & O'Leary, J. T. (2006). Searching for the future: Challenges facing destination marketing organizations. Journal of Travel Research, 45(2), 116-126. Griffin, T. (2013). A paradigmatic discussion for the study of immigrant hosts. Current Issues in Tourism, 17(6), 487498. Gursoy, D., & McLeary, K. W. (2003). An integrative model of tourists' information search behavior. Annals ofTourism Research, 31(2), 353-373. Hsieh, S., O'Leary, J. T., & Morrison, A. M. (1992). Segmenting the international travel market by activity. Tourism Management, 13(2), 209-223. Hsu, T., Tsai, Y., & Wu, H. (2009). The preference analysis for tourist choice of destination: A case study of Taiwan. Tourism Management, 30(2), 288-297. Hu, B., & Morrison, A. M. (2002). Tripography: Can destination use patterns enhance understanding of the vfr market? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 8(3), 201-220. Jackson, R. (1990). vfr tourism: Is it underestimated? Journal ofTourism Studies, 1(2), 10-17. Jackson, R. (2003). vfr Tourism: Is it underestimated? The Journal ofTourism Studies, 14(1), 17-24. Jun, H. S., Vogt, A. C., & Mackay, J. K. (2007). Relation- ships between travel information search and travel product purchase in pre-trip contexts. Journal of Travel Research, 45(3), 266-274. Katsoni, V. (2011). The role of ICTS in regional tourist development. Regional Science Inquiry Journal, 3(2), 95-111. Katsoni, V (2014). The strategic role of virtual communities and social network sites on tourism destination marketing. e-Journal of Science & Technology, 9(5), 107-117. Katsoni, V., Giaoutzi, M., & Nijkamp, P. (2013). Market segmentation in tourism: An operational assessment framework. In A. Matias, P. Nijkamp, & M. Sarmento (Eds.), Quantitative Methods in Tourism Economics (pp. 329352). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag. King, B. (1994). What is ethnic tourism? An Australian perspective. Tourism Management, 15(3), 173-176. King, B. (1996) vfr: A future research agenda. In Yaman, H. R. (Ed.), vfr tourism: Issues and implications (pp. 8689). Melbourne, Australia: Victoria University of Technology. Kotler, P. (1998). Marketing management: Analysis, planning, implementation, and control (9th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, nj: Prentice Hall. Kotler, P., Bowen, J., & Makens, J. (2006). Marketing for hospitality and tourism (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, nj: Pearson Education. Lambert, D. M. (1998). Information economics research: Points of departure. Information Economic Policy, 10(3), 325-330. Larsen, J., Urry, J., & Axhausen, K. W. (2007). Networks and tourism: Mobile social life. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(1), 244-262. Lee, G. Morrison, A. M., Letto, X. Y., Webb, J., & Reid, J. (2005). vfr: Is it really marginal? A financial consideration of French overseas travellers. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 11(4), 340-356. Lehto, X. Y., Morrison, A. M., & O'Leary, J. T. (2001). Does the visiting friends and relatives' typology make a difference? Journal of Travel Research, 40(2), 201-212. Leiper, N. (2004). Tourism management (3rd ed.). Frenchs Forest, Australia: Pearson Education. Lepp, A., & Gibson, H. (2008). Sensation seeking and tourism: Tourist role, perception of risk and destination choice. Tourism Management, 29(4), 32-41. Lovelock, C. H., & Wright, C. (1999). Principles of service marketing and management. Englewood Cliffs, nj: Prentice Hall. Madrigal, R., & Kahle, L. R. (1994). Predicting vacation activity preferences on the basis of value-system segmentation. Journal ofTravel Research, 33(3), 22-28. 20 | Académica Turística, Year 9, No. 1, June 2016 VlCKY KATSONI An Investigation of the Tourism Distribution Channels McKercher, B. (1995). An examination of host involvement in VFR travel. In R. Shaw (Ed.), Proceedings from the National Tourism and Hospitality Conference (pp. 246-255). Canberra, Australia: Bureau of Tourism Research and Council for Australian University Tourism and Hospitality Education. Middleton, V. (1994). Marketing in travel and tourism (2nd ed.). London, England: Heinemann. Morrison, A. M. (1996). Hospitality and travel marketing (2nd ed.). Albany, ny: Delmar. Morrison, A. M., Hsieh, S., & O'Leary, J. T. (1994). Segmenting the Australian domestic travel market by holiday activity participation. Journal of Tourism Studies, 5(1), 3956. Morrison, A. M., Hsieh, S., & O'Leary, J. T. (1995). Segmenting the visiting friends and relatives market by holiday activity participation. Journal of Tourism Studies, 6(1), 48-63. Moscardo, G., Morrison, A. M., Pearce, P. L, Lang, C. T., & O'Leary, J. T. (1996). Understanding vacation destination choice through travel motivation and activities. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 2(2), 109-122. Moscardo, G. M., Pearce, P. L., Morrison, A. M., Green, D., & O'Leary, J. T. (2000). Developing a typology for understanding visiting friends and relatives markets. Journal of Travel Research, 38(1), 251-259. Moutinho, L. (1987). Consumer behavior in tourism. European Journal of Marketing, 21(10), 5-44. Normann, R. (1996). Service management: Strategy and leadership in service business (2nd ed.). New York, ny: Wiley. Paci, E. (1994). Market segments: The major international VFR markets. eiu Travel and Tourism Analyst, 6, 36-50. Pan, B., & Fesenmaier, D. (2003). Travel information search on the internet: A preliminary analysis. In A. Frew, M. Hitz, & P. O'Connor (Eds.), Information and communication technology in tourism: Proceedings of the International Conference enter 2003 (pp. 29-31). Helsinki, Finland: Springer. Pennington-Gray, L. (2003). Understanding the domestic VFR drive market in Florida. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 9(4), 354-367. Peterson, R. A., & Merino, M. C. (2003). Consumer information search behavior and the internet. Psychology and Marketing, 20(2), 99-121. Seaton, A. V., & Palmer, C. (1997). Understanding vfr tourism behavior: The first five years of the United Kingdom tourism survey. Tourism Management, 18(6), 345-355. Stratigea, A., Papadopoulou, C.-A., & Panagiotopoulou, M. (2015). Tools and technologies for planning the development of smart cities: A participatory methodological framework. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(2), 1-20. Sung, H. H., Morrison, M. A., Hong, G., & O'Leary, T. J. (2001). The effects of household and trip characteristics on trip types: A consumer behavioral approach for segmenting the U.S. domestic leisure travel market. Journal of Hospitality Tourism Research, 25(1), 46-68. Teare, R. (1992). An exploration of the consumer decision process for hospitality services. In R. Teare, L. Moutinho, & N. Morgan (Eds.), Managing and marketing services in the 1990s (pp. 233-248). London, England: Cassell Educational. Tiefenbacher, J. P., Day, F. A., & Walton, J. A. (2000). Attributes of repeat visitors to small tourist-oriented communities. Social Science Journal, 37(2), 299-308. Van Raaij, W. F. (1986). Consumer research on tourism: Mental and behavioural constructs. Annals of Tourism Research, 13(1), 1-9. Wight, P. A. (1996). North American ecotourism markets: Motivations, preferences, and destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 35(1), 3-10. Xiang, Z., & Gretzel, U. (2010). Role of social media in online travel information search. Tourism Management, 31(2), 179-188. Xiang, Z., Weber, K., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2008). Representation of the online tourism domain in search engines. Journal of Travel Research, 47(2), 137-150. Yuan, T., Fridgen, J., Hsieh, S., & O'Leary, J. (1995). Visiting friends and relatives travel market: The Dutch case. The Journal of Tourism Studies, 6(1), 19-26. Zins, A. H. (2009). Deconstructing travel decision making and information search activities. In W. Hopken, U. Gretzel, & R. Law (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism 2009 (pp. 467-479). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Springer. This paper is published under the terms of the Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (cc by-nc-nd 4.0) License. 20 | Académica Turística, Year 9, No. 1, June 2016