A lot of good stuff in that post, Perche. Here's my two cents on a couple of the points:
Going by what is the Italian view, at least as held by my Professor friend, she considers herself a tourist when she visits other cities, and hopes to some day visit Venice. It's not any different from somebody living in Austin who visits Boston. When in Boston, they count as a tourist. If you just pass through for less than a day, it doesn't count, as in people who see (but don't visit) Venice from a cruise line.
Italians seem to have a smaller "range" than Americans. There are plenty of Romans that have never seen Venice. Probably, percentage-wise, more than New Yorkers that have never been to DC, to compare trips of similar distance. As they say, to us, 400 years is a long time. To them, 400 miles is a long distance.
56% of the people counted as tourists visiting Milan are Italians on a business trip. The other 44% are foreigners, almost all of whom are on a business trip. Nevertheless, by the numbers, Milan is #2 in tourism because of business travel, although few people go there for purposes of actual tourism.
This surprises me a little. Business and leisure travelers are very different market segments. I'd count 'em separately, but I'm not running things!
Quite a different viewpoint than what one gets from the USA, where the only places that seem to exist are Rome, Venice, and Florence! The professor told me that the launch of Naples pretty much started 5-6 years ago, and showed me some impressive graphs.
I'm a little less surprised on this one. I grew up in/around Philadelphia and the Italian community there has a large portion from Naples. Recent immigrants and 1st generation. Based on the people I grew up with, I'd say Rome and Naples were the top two most visited, and many of them really never went north of Rome. But again, there's a little bias in there built into the makeup of that community. It probably shifts a bit when you get into more distant or non-Italian lineage in the US.