MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037940218 · doi:10.1108/20450621111197604

Marketing of the dark: “Memento Park” in Budapest

2011· article· en· W2037940218 on OpenAlexaff
Brent McKenzie

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerald Emerging Markets Case Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismValue propositionMarketingMarketing planBusiness planMarketing mixInternational businessPublic relationsBusinessManagementEconomicsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Subject area Marketing strategy; services marketing; tourism. Study level/applicability Upper year undergraduate business/management, MBA, marketing/international business. Case overview Memento Park is a large open air museum on the outskirts of Budapest, that houses statues, and related ephemera related to the communist period in Hungary. The park opened in 1993, four years after Hungary had shaken off its yolk of communism as part of the Iron Curtain, in 1989. This case presents a classic example of a business enterprise that sprang from a concept and access to inexpensive materials directly resulting form a changing external environment. The case presents the issues involved in making Memento Park a sustainable part of the Budapest tourist experience. Expected learning outcomes This case challenges students to decide how best to determine a sustainable advantage. Arguably the value proposition that is being offered by Memento Park has a number of identifiable benefits to the target consumer. It is not replicable (at least in Hungary), has a truly unique content, and does not have large fixed or variable costs in terms of operations. The question is how to best develop a plan of attack for such a firm? Supplementary materials Teaching notes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerald Emerging Markets Case StudiesSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207