Club Med jako przykład wiosek wakacyjnych z ofertą typu all inclusive
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Club Méditerranée is an European precursor (or even worldwide?) in respect \nof one type of hotels development, called ‘holiday villages’. The first holiday \nvillage was established in the 1950 and in those years it was an offer without the \nequivalent in the holiday departures market. The holiday villages, called ‘clubs’ \noffer very wide range of additional services most of which are included in the \nprice of stay. Package also covers two way transports. Club Med’s villages are \nlocated almost all over the world, however their distinct concentration is mostly \nvisible in the Mediterranean Sea region, what is in accordance with the name of \nthe organization. The idea for all inclusive tourist products very quickly has found \nmany imitators in the market (Robinson Club, LTI, SuperClubs, Sandals, and \netc.) and that was the reason why Club Med experienced some difficulties and \nfinancial losses which are evident in the published year statements. Club Med’s \nholiday villages are an example of the tourist product ‘aging’ and very expansive \ncompetition in this type of service market. Therefore, to survive on the market, \nin 2004 the strategic decision was made to sale a big package of shares to \nthe French hotel industry giant called Accor. The consequence of this decision \nwas not only preserving the capital in French hands (which for French customers \nis a very important element while choosing their hotel facilities), but also far \ngoing changes connected with organization and corporation management. \nUnfortunately, according to the information published in the year statements it \nwas not yet possible to stop the declining tendency of the tourist movement size. \nThe main customers of the Club Med are tourists from West European countries \n(France, Belgium, Italy), US, Canada or Japan. However, the number of tourists \nfrom those countries visiting holiday villages during last five years (2003–2007) \nreveal visible declining tendency. New, very dynamically developing markets are \nRussia and South-East Asian countries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.119 | 0.030 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".