I have after reading Karin Schmollgruber blog post destinations in the network - whether Web 1.0 is or 2.0 whatever, the main thing well done! with the website of my hometown deals and compared as there is the state of affairs compared to Dresden. The points mentioned in the article is also my opinion, a good measure of the usability of the Web site for the future host. These are not "Designmätzchen" but tough economy, ranging from the "lost to a competitor guest" to a lot of catalogs sent to high postage costs.
Advance - the Wittenberg is the memorial of the Reformation and Martin Luther's personal part of the UNESCO world cultural heritage. In 10 years we will celebrate the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, and this city will be the focus of activities. Claim and demand should be adequate.
So for the details:
First Top attractions already found from the home page
The visitor is well above the normal city portal www.wittenberg.de start. Tourism is the top left of the link found relatively easily. On the website of the Wittenberg Marketing GmbH www.wbticket.de (was no longer free domain?) found in the left navigation bar "sights". Prima. Almost 100%.
Second Break down your highlights not geographically
Wittenberg is certainly a small town not the problem. But why the sites are arranged alphabetically? I would have assumed that the visitor the World Cultural Heritage sites of interest first. For the centerpiece of the castle church door with the thesis I have to scroll down to the bottom. Illogical.
Third Downloads should be optimized for self-printer
Brochures are available for download from the 1:1. Expressed thus unsuitable. Too much color, too many pages. Good for browsing on a PC.
4th Targeted Brochure Request
There are only four brochures ordered. These are also quite handy and fit into a long embraced B5. There is not much to differentiate. A query of more data would be safe here counterproductive and would discourage potential visitors to enter their address. As a destination we must consider when to go with the issues in depth. The example of Dresden would have resulted in a more focused query happier customers while reducing its own cost, in Wittenberg makes no sense.
5th Image Galleries, Web 2.0 tools
None. No picture galleries of the images (Google Maps, etc.) in the context of addition, no interactive maps, no interaction options for guests. Here is lagging somewhat behind the development of the website. In particular, if one assumes that Wittenberg acquired in the English-speaking and Scandinavian countries many guests who are in the use of user-generated content, much further, here is wasted potential.
6th That with the signature I have not tested, but as a local patriot I am of course assuming here that the letters are signed by hand.
In summary, the tourism website of Wittenberg still classic 1.0. Certainly in the context of the Luther Decade, a new and more modern website will be in there.
Technorati tags: Wittenberg , Web 2.0 , Travel 2.0 , marketing , destination marketing , Schmollgruber
By God's grace I am doing well. ...
Martin Luther, Rei ...
Best price EUR 12.80
new or EUR 12.80
No related posts.
Hi Detlef,
I'm with you. In my post yesterday I said yes even with respect to small destination:
A little known, small city destination should really learn about all of their advantages. Yet has no info package comes with a kilo of existence of useless catalogs. The presence of stars like Lang Lang or Montserrat Caballe in such a destination - even outside the Guest's stay - will affect the reputation or positioning, of course, positive. Since you can settle like the flyer.
Greetings from Vienna
Karin