5 Reasons Why I’m Thinking About Quitting The Tradeshow Business
The tradeshow business can be a fantastic venture. When you get it right in an industry that really needs the event, you can make a lot of money and at the same time help move an industry forward by bringing all the parties together to talk. That’s the good part. The fun part. The part that keeps me constantly thinking of new events and unique ways to provide value to both sponsors and attendees. I love it when attendees grab me as I’m walking down the hall to tell me how much they are learning and enjoying the conference.
But this post is about the bad parts. The parts that are beginning to make me wonder where I’m headed and if it’s the right business in which to stake my company’s future, my future, and most important to me – my family’s future.
I’ve taken about four days to write this post (mostly in the late evenings during our New Media Expo) and waited a few days after I finished it to make sure I really wanted to make this public. I’m also writing it for two reasons. First, writing it out helps me to solidify the issues with which I am struggling and also helps me to make sure I’m clear in my own mind about what concerns me. Second, it helps me determine if my “business radar” is working properly. That’s where you come in – if you think I’m wrong about any of these – tell me – I want the feedback.
Nobody likes a whiner, least of all me. My philosophy is if you don’t like something, quit complaining and either make changes or find something else. The issues below represent what I believe is wrong with the tradeshow business today but I’ve also proposed one possible fix to each at the end of the description. I want to call attention to them, but I also want to be part of the solution. It goes along with my philosophy that I never want someone who works for me to come to me with a problem that hasn’t thought about a solution too. Come to me with a problem – fine – but you better also give me what you think is the solution.
These 5 things make it increasingly difficult for a small company to start and grow a show. Larger events may not have the same pain because of the economies of scale and negotiating leverage they can bring to the table. But large city-wide shows have their own issues (think about how Las Vegas hotels triple their room rates during CES – a problem CES has had to deal with for years because of the sheer size of the event).
But these are issues that I think threaten the very industry itself – and certainly threatens the smaller show organizers in the business.
Here we go:
1. High speed Internet costs. Nearly all convention centers have long-term, exclusive agreements in place with high speed Internet providers and the prices they are charging are ludicrous. $1,500 for three days of a slower, less-reliable connection than I get at home for $40 per month is asinine. Yet there is no incentive to provide faster, more reliable service at a reasonable price because they have the exclusive contract. You want Internet? You pay us what we ask. Without any competition, this will never change. I’ve had several exhibitors turn us down for booth space for this reason alone. It’s not that they can’t afford it. It’s just that they refuse to be willingly ripped off to participate – and I don’t blame them one bit.
Solution: This one is easy. Open up the service to outside vendors who can compete for the business – prices will drop at least 75% within a year, guaranteed.
2. Drayage. Drayage was a new term for me when I entered the show business. For the folks that may be reading this who don’t know what this is, it is simply the fee to have your booth shipment taken from the convention center dock at the back of the hall to your booth. Why is it that it will often – make that almost always – cost more to transport a large box 50 yards from the roll-up doors of the exhibit hall to the booth than it does to ship it from New York City to Las Vegas? Here’s why – because they can. If you want your stuff, you have to pay. I haven’t had a single person explain to me the economics of drayage and why it costs so much – believe me I’ve asked. Every tradeshow I’ve ever done there has been at least one company who refuses to return the following year because of the drayage bill they received. It occurs most often with first-time exhibitors at smaller companies – the very companies a growing industry needs to have support the show as they grow.
Solution: This one is tougher because I don’t know why the heck the price is so high in the first place! But I would say unions need to realize that high prices will result in less work for their members down the road so contracts need to be re-negotiated to encourage MORE advance shipping rather than exhibitors trying to find crazy ways to get stuff to their booth without being noticed (which results in less work for the workers anyway.) Higher volume with more reasonable prices will, I believe, actually result in higher revenues for general contractors. You wouldn’t believe the things I see exhibitors doing to avoid drayage fees.
3) The Pay to Play Mentality. For the last five years I’ve fought hard against offering any type of speaking opportunities in return for booth space or sponsorship dollars. I refuse to allow any sponsors to speak just because they have written a check. The trouble is, there are plenty of conference organizers out there willing to put a VP of Business Development on some crummy panel in return for money. Unsurprisingly, that speaker then spends his time on the panel discussing how great their company’s product or service is, subjecting the attendee who paid $995 or more to a live commercial. And why not – he paid to speak and wants a return on that investment! If I had a dime for every time a PR person told me, “If we don’t speak we’re not exhibiting.” But here’s the thing: if “we” (as an industry) continue to promote this as business as usual, attendees WILL stop attending. You may have noticed that attendees don’t need us anymore to get together. The Internet affords them the ability to aggregate, discuss and even get together in person without having to endure boring, salesy panels. I’ve worked hard to hold the line, but lately I’ve been wondering more and more if I can grow a show and still turn down exhibitor dollars to speak when it comes with the requirement to speak – because there are plenty of folks who WILL gladly take their money.
Solution: Legitimate conference organizers need to band together and promote the fact that their conference is not a “pay to play” environment. Shame the other conference organizers into playing it straight so that attendees know the difference between the two and attend only those events they know will be true educational experiences.
4) Room Blocks & Attrition. When I first started shopping around a new tradeshow idea last year, I contacted 8-10 hotels in different areas of the country, including Las Vegas. In order to use three ballrooms and two smaller meeting rooms, most wanted at least 2,000 room nights in the contract and a minimum of $50,000 in food & beverage orders AND a rental fee for the space. When most show organizers are finding that paying attrition for unbooked hotel rooms is the norm, isn’t it time to consider that the space to room nights ratio is out of whack? Even to use single ballroom for two days, hotels are expecting that every single attendee will stay in the hotel for the maximum number of nights – it just isn’t going to happen. With more events working to attract local attendees because of gas and airfare prices rising, it’s simply not reasonable to expect that many attendees to book in the hotel. As a small organizer, I’m forced to either sign a contract for room nights that I know I’ll never be able to fill, or go to a convention center and pay regular rental rates and get a small room block at a nearby hotel. I’ve decided not to launch several events simply because I couldn’t find a way to make the contract work.
Solution: Hotels are, of course, more willing to negotiate on this point when business is down and I imagine it is in this economy. Contracting for an unattainable room block in order to get the space and just hope for the best isn’t working. I use convention centers when possible so that you won’t be on the hook for a large room block. I’d rather pay the rental and not pay the attrition. A solution Sue Pelletier mentioned recently about a site to sell unused hotel rooms from a block is also a great idea. Hotels need “heads in the beds.” I get that. But there must be creative ways to have smaller organizers book space without risking the financial future of the company on one event because of enormous attrition penalties.
And finally – the biggest reason:
5) Lack of Control Over The Customer Experience This is a biggie. I’m a control freak. Anyone who’s read a couple posts here can see that. I’m adamant about how our staff treats our exhibitors and attendees. Every phone call, every meeting, every meeting we have with either of them – any touchpoint at all really – must convey how important they are to us and how much we appreciate their business. But the trouble begins when I send out our Exhibitor Services Manual. There are so many vendors the exhibitors need to deal with for even a small booth. All of those touchpoints and contacts are out of my control and because the vendors are typically exclusive, they have no incentive to treat my customers well. You can tell me all you want that “it’s our customer too” but it’s just not happening because I hear about it every day. Here’s the kicker: after the show, they don’t remember that it was a lousy vendor that treated them poorly – they remember that it was at the XYZ Show they were treated poorly. Show management takes the blame for the difficulty they experienced with the Internet providers, the electrical firms, the carpet vendor, etc.
I’ve been forwarded several emails from my exhibitors from convention center vendors and the tone is simply shocking. I would never dream of sending out the types of messages they send to my customers. My staff and I can treat them like royalty but the vendors don’t and it’s frustrating as hell. A week after the show, it’s not that vendor they remember who treated them badly, it’s the overall experience of Tim’s show.
Here’s an example. One of our sponsors at a recent event had a terrific idea of incorporating gourmet soda pop tasting into their booth and hospitality suite. It was a terrific play on the messaging they were delivering at the show and would have been one more thing I could have helped promote as a reason to attend the event. Someone’s not going to travel to a show just to taste soda pop – I understand that – but it was just another small thing I could have piled on as one of hundreds of reasons to attend the Expo. However, the food and beverage contractor wanted them to pay 75% of the total cost of the soda for the “buyout rights” in order to do the tastings. So, they were going to have to buy all the soda but then pay another 75% on top of that to the convention center sales & catering department. The prices are exorbitant – but that wasn’t really the issue. My exhibitor felt like their contact was smug, bored and unwilling to find any middle ground solution that would make it viable. Their attitude was, “take it or leave it.” My excited customer was left feeling terrible – not about the catering vendor – but about our event and what a pain in the ass it was.
In the end they drastically scaled back the promotion – again, not because they couldn’t afford it, but because they were unwilling to be forced into paying a company that had such obvious disdain for their customers. A buyout is expensive – he knew that and was willing to pay – but the attitude of the vendor put him over the edge. The President of the company said to me, “Tim, for a while today I was thinking how much easier it would be to just spend the $30,000 we’re spending on your show on radio ads or search engine optimization or something else. I know it’s important to support the show and the industry, but it’s becoming harder each year to justify it.” This – from the most enthusiastic supporters of our event.
(Don’t even get me started with our own F&B expenses: the cost for a 5 gallon decanter of water in the meeting rooms – $75 per day.)
Solution: All of the vendors who provide services to exhibitors for tradeshows need to wake up and realize that if the customer is not treated with respect at every single step, we all lose. When I send my customers over to work with you, I am trusting you to treat them in a way that makes me look good – in a way that makes us ALL look good. We need to work as a team so that tradeshows are regarded as a fantastic way to spend marketing dollars, not a nightmare necessity that they are forced to endure. Bottom line: When I hand over my customer to you, you’re working for me and you darn well better treat them well.
Each of these things, especially when combined, raise the bar so high in terms of cost and “hassle factor” that generating real ROI is nearly impossible for exhibitors. In the age when every click and ad buy online is tracked and measured, it’s simply become faster and cheaper for companies to advertise or get exposure in other ways, and that’s a shame. Yet tradeshows and conferences create more trusting relationships that could never be achieved via online advertising or social networking. I truly believe in the value of face-to-face events and want to see drastic changes made to the business so it survives. Not just survives, but flourishes. Organizers can’t do it alone. We need our partners in the business to help – now!
So that’s where I’m at today – deciding if I want to continue on and fight the good fight or move on and dedicate my limited resources strictly to educational conferences (where I can control the sponsor experience more effectively) and Internet ventures. Just to be crystal clear, I haven’t made any decisions about this. But I wanted the tradeshow industry to know how serious I am about the fact that I believe these things jeopardize the tradeshow business as a whole. I’m speaking next month at the Event Technology Expo in Washington DC. I’m looking forward to talking with my colleagues in the business about these issues.
August 19th, 2008 at 8:08 am |
Wow, Tim, one thing that shines through in this is your passion to make sure everyone has a good experience, and that it’s mutually beneficial.
You wrote:”Yet tradeshows and conferences create more trusting relationships that could never be achieved via online advertising or social networking.”
The transparency that some conferences are achieving is going to have a direct effect on the problems you describe. You recently wrote about how the electronic conversation between seated attendees during a conference interview caused the entire event to change. Attendees are seizing the reins to ensure they get the best bang for their buck. Exhibitors should do the same.
Since the issues you raise in your post have more to do with the vendors squeezing exhibitors (and too often being ill-mannered about it), that kind of transparency could make all the difference. If exhibitors are networked, part of the same show community (social media again), could they “unionize” and force a change? Drayage: I would bet that the laborers doing the work do not know how exorbitant the charge was for the service. What if they did? Would they think they’re getting ripped off and demand higher wages? Publicizing those drayage fees, the internet fees, making it all transparent, ought to have an effect.
August 19th, 2008 at 9:35 am |
Wow buddy. Good thoughts. Let’s chat before you do – but your reasons are solid.
Paul
August 19th, 2008 at 10:03 am |
Tim, you just listed all of the reasons I stick to event planning on cruise-ships. The alternatives are a nightmare!
Captain Lou Edwards
http://MarketersCruise.com
August 19th, 2008 at 1:40 pm |
[...] Bourquin posted this one – “5 Reasons Why I’m Thinking About Quitting The Tradeshow Business” and, well, I can’t find fault in his thinking. He is up against a [...]
August 19th, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
I think events that are focused on new, growing industries, those that are working with industries that are in start-up economic mode like new media, podcasting, social media, etc. that draw people in the hundreds or low thousands have embraced the unconference model and hybrid models in part for the reasons you outline. A show like NAB or CES that caters to large established industries drawing 100,000 plus attendees can absorb high costs due to monopoly economics since they have the scale, however, smaller events can’t absorb those costs.
I like your aesthetics and approach to running New Media Expo, the purity and quality of the panels and sessions was outstanding, but there was a disconnect between the costs and the experience. I did not like, for example, as an attendee, to pay 12.99 per day for inferior internet access in the hotel, 8.79 for a bad muffin and mediocre coffee for breakfast, and 10.50 in cab fare just to get away from the #*&^% hotel food and eat a decent meal while in Las Vegas. All these extra costs, in addition to poor experience, make for an even worse experience.
Don’t give up. There are many venues for events that are not expensive convention centers like Las Vegas. Many universities have facilities and work with private firms and events, often cost sharing based on show revenue so your costs are variable based on actual show revenue. Tough business challenges call for creative solutions. The unconference phenomenon exists for a reason, a reaction to these problems, and there is room for hybrid approaches. For example, Podcamp Boston 3 this year benefited from a better venue, the Harvard Medical School Conference Center, which cost more money that prior venues, but offered a better environment, and was worth charging a higher registration fee.
Good luck in future events, and I’m happy to brainstorm anytime on creative business arrangements for improving the experience of conferences while keeping costs under control and offering a fair profit to those parties who work hard to make it happen.
August 19th, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
Were these issues true in Ontario? I found that I made fewer Face to Face contacts this year than ever before. There was little to attract the people I wanted to talk to. Most of them stayed off the expo floor for the majority of the conference. Hotels in Vegas were too far apart and too large. I was unable to have the chance encounters that the smaller venue made possible.
I most likely would not go again if it is in Las Vegas. I don’t mind traveling to another state but I need to know that I will be able to meet the people that are important to me. The Las Vegas Venue made that difficult.
August 19th, 2008 at 3:22 pm |
Megan – yes these things are true anywhere – including Ontario. This is not a discussion about New Media Expo specifically. This is a discussion about the business of trade shows.
August 19th, 2008 at 3:22 pm |
Oh, and one more thing, I concur enthusiastically with Brian Crouch that transparency all around is good, for it is equal access to information that makes for better, more efficient markets. Information is a powerful force in transforming markets.
August 19th, 2008 at 3:33 pm |
Tim,
Thanks for the lesson on the tradeshow economics. I would love to exhibit one of these years, but obviously, the cost is out of reach for most entrepreneurs, due in part, to the price gouging you’re speaking of.
I appreciate your frustration, and your transparency, and wish you luck in waking up the industry to the opportunity to serve all marketers (not just those with Fortune 500 marketing budgets).
Dan Safkow
http://LogoYourAudio.com
August 19th, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
Tim:
I thought the event had quality speakers, not just on the art but the business. Like a previous commenter I believe that universities, colleges and community offerings can provide less expensive sites with accomodation in their off seasons. I have experienced the highway robbery of 10$cokes,500.00$power, use my services only-even when they are inferior, and internet access at exorbitant rates. The business of show promotions loses its desire for exhibitors when the cost-benefit disappears. You should be congratulated as an honest,transparent first class operator, providing valuable content,a fun time and great organization. I can’t wait to hear the podcasts of the sessions I missed in each track. Captain Lou has a good idea, even if on a 3-day Bahamas cruise, or a 3 day cruise to nowhere.
August 19th, 2008 at 3:57 pm |
I felt this years New Media Expo was the best yet. I do have to say every time I finish producing an event I feel the way you do. You have a ton of valid points, but I cant see any business you enter which is not going to have obstacles. My headaches usually come from my clients last minute internal problems/changes and then of course we deal with the a lot of the problems you talk about. (Don’t get me started by the raping we have taken for internet drops in ballrooms…and so called “dedicated drops” arrgh)
I can see your frustration and I just appreciate the great job you have done with the New Media Expo. Thank you.
m
August 19th, 2008 at 5:00 pm |
Hi Tim,
We’ve never met. I feel compelled to let you know my very positive experience as a first time “newbie podcaster” attender to the NME. I’m so sorry for the many frustrations, disappoinments, and exhaustion you encountered putting on the NME. I never saw any of this, and was deeply blessed by all the hard work you and your team put into the Expo. As a first time podcaster, I was inspired, learned a lot, and made some great contacts at the NME. I came away encourgaed, charged up, and ready to implement all I learned to make my podcast a success and a blessing to others.
Thanks for being a blessing to me.
Many Blessings,
Kim Fredrickson
Encouragement for Your Soul
http://www.KimsPodcast.com
August 19th, 2008 at 6:23 pm |
Thanks Kim, although I don’t want you to think these are disappointments for New Media Expo – they are business issues within our industry that I believe need to change. NME was a great event and I’m glad you enjoyed it!
August 19th, 2008 at 7:20 pm |
Tim:
This is an excellent, excellent article on everything that needs to improve in the trade show & convention industry if it’s going to remain viable in the age of the internet “meetup” and technological advances in communication.
Surprisingly, I think most people who attend shows have absolutely NO idea about all of this. The only reason I do is because for years I helped out in &/or ran the bindery in my folks’ print shop – which used to do all of the forms for the exhibitor packets for the majority of the shows in Denver at the convention center & previous incarnations of exhibition halls. As a result, I not only saw the prices being charged to the exhibitors and the organizers, but also saw the attitude of the ‘exclusively contracted’ providers. Who knew rolling out carpet that has been reused time & again could be so expensive? Or that if the electrical form wasn’t filled out correctly in 5-copy format that the provider could go so ballistic?
That said, it kind of saddens me to read this – because these same situations you write about were just as true 20+ years ago as they are today. I would’ve thought that it would’ve changed somewhat as people in that industry woke up to the realization that conventions & tradeshows were now no longer the exclusive way to make connections or network.
I hope you find reasons NOT to give it up. Mostly because the only chance it has of changing is if people like you, who want the experience to be positive all around, stay in the arena and fight against the flaws you’ve just pointed out.
Hang in there. Again, great article.
August 20th, 2008 at 4:36 am |
Tim,
I also was a first-time attender at NME and appreciate the hard work that went into planning it. I had no idea the economics of trade shows were so out of whack. How you are able to keep your registration cost so affordable is remarkable considering so many conferences in the communications field routinely expect $1000 or more from their attendees.
Kevin Hunt
http://www.wheelontheweb.wordpress.com
August 20th, 2008 at 4:41 am |
[...] Firstly, I really want to compliment Tim and Emile for putting on the show in the first place. Whilst I always realised it was a lot of work for them, I always knew that there was a lot that goes on “behind the scenes” and this has been exposed somewhat by Tims slightly alarming recent blog post: [...]
August 20th, 2008 at 5:51 am |
Tim,
I really appreciate the things you have shared about “behind the scenes” trade show challenges. And what you’ve shared gives me an opportunity to vent a bit of my own frustration in setting up retreats and conferences for women in ministry. First of all, I think many who provide the services and spaces for conferences and expos are living in a dream world. The prices they are charging and the guarantees they want are just ridiculous. There comes a point when you (and that’s the proverbial “you”) just have to do it another way and say no. I believe with the economy as it is, these companies are not going to make it much longer because no one is going to step up to the plate and pay the prices.
I remember speaking to a lady at one prospective retreat location. She proceeded to list all the costs for pitchers of water and coffee at all the meetings. And then she told me we could not bring any food into the room – if we wanted anything we had to pay them exorbitant fees to provide it. They nickeled and dimed us to death. I finally brought an end to it and honestly, I fired them as a retreat location.
The bottom line is that “the show must go on”, organizing it IS an extremely worthwhile venture, and Tim, you do an INCREDIBLE job of it – one of the best, if I may say. I learned so much at the NME and I would attend again – most definitely. I think the challenge for you and for any of us who organize events, is to find a new way to do it that handles your above-mentioned issues and still makes the learning experience of a conference or expo possible and maybe even better than before. You know, one thing I’ve learned is that when I start to get to the point where I’m wondering if something is worthwhile, then I know it’s time not necessarily to quit, but to shake things up and start dreaming and brainstorming about how to do it another way. I think the conventional way of conventions and trade shows is going to fall by the wayside and something new is going to emerge – maybe universities or even churches can provide the actual meeting space for a lot less money. And most universities and churches have high speed internet built into the campus. I’m sure you’ve already thought through a thousand other ways to do it. I just want to encourage you to keep thinking and brainstorming it because I don’t doubt that with time, those ideas will come.
Thanks Tim, for making NME happen. And for sharing the real life challenges of organizing trade shows. I appreciate your commitment to organizing life-changing events that influence thousands. God bless you.
Catherine Martin
Quiet Time Ministries
August 20th, 2008 at 6:47 am |
Tim,
So tell me again why you got in this crazy business?
I won’t try and solve the problem for you — you obviously know way more about the industry than I, so I’m taking your words at face value.
But what’s the alternative? If all “convention centers” behave in similar fashion, is there a way to go to places with BIG SPACES that don’t have the red-tape? Is there a happy medium between Madison Square Garden and a big revival tent?
It sounds like the industry is locked into a way of doing things and that many people are willing to continue to shove money toward it. Being the little guy saying “please change for me” won’t solve the issue (not that you are saying that). This is going to take some NEW applied thinking. As you say, it’s not just the NME having this problem. As you say, it’s “increasingly difficult for a small company to start and grow a show”.
So if you can’t re-write the rules of the game — change the game. Wish I had specifics on exactly WHAT that entails, but I don’t. Gotta leave that to those of you in the trenches that can lay out the value proposition for everyone and find a new way to get us all there.
August 20th, 2008 at 7:17 am |
I’m totally with you on professional venues. Having run several PodCamps, we’ve avoided “professional conference venues” for many of the reasons he cites, instead opting for the more friendly and more sensible academic venues like universities. PodCamp Boston 3 was at Harvard Medical School which gave us a great team, no hassles with shipping, free super-fast Internet access, and reasonable prices on food and amenities, such as they were.
There are also plenty of colleges out there with BIG facilities able to handle large crowds. Should PodCamp or NME grow to gargantuan proportions, I’d try to stick with universities as long as I can.
August 20th, 2008 at 8:19 am |
[...] at this writing, no dates for a 2009 show are posted on the NME site. Further, Tim Bourquin, in a very informative post on the difficulties of running trade shows on a small scale, suggests that he might be leaving the [...]
August 20th, 2008 at 8:20 am |
[...] at this writing, no dates for a 2009 show are posted on the NME site. Further, Tim Bourquin, in a very informative post on the difficulties of running trade shows on a small scale, suggests that he might be leaving the [...]
August 20th, 2008 at 9:03 am |
Great article Tim. Should be printed out, signed and sent to every one involved in the other side.
As you said: it is not that people could not spend the money but they are unwilling to do so – rightfully so.
It is comparable to the phone costs in the hotels – nowadays everybody has mobile phones and one reason being: hotels being too expensive.
It is a business for both sides, but if they believe they just can take it, people will look for and find alternatives.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:24 am |
Tim,
I’m sorry to hear about the problems you’ve encountered with the tradeshow industry and I hope you will continue on. By posting this information, you’ve done the first step to solving the problem. Without knowing about the problem, nothing can be done to solve it. My hope is that you’ll continue in the industry and use your position to be an evangelist for how it should be done and help others like yourself grow their tradeshows.
I’ve attended all 4 of the New Media Expo’s and while I have some issues with the move to Las Vegas, I still believe in what NME is about and what you’re doing with it. My issues with NME involve bringing the community together and those are issues that can be addressed with a bit of planning from the community. None of us knew what to expect from Vegas and now that we know, we can make things happen. But regardless of those issues, I still had a great time and was able to experience exactly what I went there for, the chance to bond with my fellow podcasters and exchange ideas (usually after about 5 drinks). NME needs a person like yourself that bridges the community and tradeshow industry to truly function. I don’t mean to put added pressure on you but it would go without saying that you lead us out of the desert to the promise land.
Take this blog post and make it your calling to change things. Work with others in the industry to put the screws to the event centers to change things and make them understand it’s for everyone’s good. The economy isn’t great. I was laid off the day I returned back from NME so trust me I know that fact all too well. If the industry is to survive, it must change and be open to new ideas. You opened the door, hopefully others will walk through it too.
August 20th, 2008 at 10:37 am |
Tim. You could not be more correct on your points. The nickel and diming has to stop. This article does need to be printed and sent out to the powers that be.
August 20th, 2008 at 11:18 am |
[...] First, Tim Bourquin, the show’s owner, writes 5 Reasons Why I’m Thinking About Quitting The Tradeshow Business . [...]
August 20th, 2008 at 12:48 pm |
(This is a copy of my comment on Podcastingnews)
I know how hard Tim has been working on this since before the first EXPO four years ago. I have happily travelled across the Atlantic all four times, and I do not regret it at all – and I would go again. However – I could suggest the “cant beat them – so join them”-model – why not set up a conference in connection with one of the bigger tech-shows. I remember Podcamp Stockholm which was in the same EXPO Hall as the Von-Expo. I could think of a better combination, though – but the main thing is, that you as a podcasting consultant as myself can both talk to vendors and sales people and do research in the exhibit hall – and fulfill your need to talk to collegues, listen to sessions and keynotes and have more intellectual benefit from the conference.
Of ourse Tim has to consider his carreer as anyone else, and changes are every mans right, but I just hope that the enourmous expertise and the vast network these guys have could be saved and give value to a less expensive but still relevant event next year.
Doesn´t have to be Vegas – been there – done that
August 20th, 2008 at 5:55 pm |
Tim,
Vegas is vegas. The West Coast is the West Coast.
I live in Toledo, Ohio and many places in the midwest are suffering.
Venues in the midwest would BEND OVER BACKWARDS for the business and exposure that something like the New Media Expo would create.
This is NEW MEDIA!!!
It was be done from a beach in Thailand.
The hills of Maryland.
Toledo, Ohio or anywhere else!!!
For a great show like NME, people in this industry would go most anywhere.
Plus you wouldn’t be fighting with the lights of Vegas for attention.
Hope this helps, Tim.
Austin Beeman
http://www.music4midnight.com
August 21st, 2008 at 1:31 am |
[...] Bourquin posted his frustrations about the business at large here. Gutsy move, actually, and I had a lot of thoughts about the post [...]
August 21st, 2008 at 4:33 am |
Tim,
Great post. I worked as an asst. conf chair for a large non-profit who hosted an annual conference each year. Much of the time spent was not providing a good experience for attendees but jumping through hoops with the hotel. I FEEL YOUR PAIN.
I have to agree with Mr. Toledo Ohio. I think part of the problems is the assumption that attendees want to be in a huge city with a lot of entertainment add-ons. These cities cost more (to eat in, travel in, have a conference in). Why more conferences don’t take place in Louisville, KY, Cincinnati, OH, Indianapolis, IN or St. Louis., I don’t know. If people want to vacation, they should do that. All of these cities have great dining and events. And they are cheaper to host anything in.
Your post was not whiny in the least. If you ever get to a city nearby, I’ll be there, but I’m a bootstrapper so travel budget is limited.
Kelly
Problogger/Social Networking Consultant
August 21st, 2008 at 7:30 am |
Tim -
I appreciate your passion and candor, and hope for the sake of all of us toiling in New Media that you’re able to resolve these issues. I had no idea what an uphill battle it was fighting instituational lethargy and greed, but I hope you’re able to find a convention site that shares your integrity and good long-term business sense.
Thanks for fighting the good fight.
Drew
August 21st, 2008 at 8:22 am |
Tim,
Wow, thanks for putting this all in perspective. My company spends a tremendous amount of money at ad:tech each year and I see the poor service provided by vendors that you speak of. You’re right, in my mind I associate it with ad:tech and not the governing bodies of the facility.
Thanks for taking the time and letting us peak behind the curtain a bit. You did a great job with the NME. I hope you’ll continue next year.
-Scott
August 21st, 2008 at 9:59 am |
In response to David Tames…as a former NABer, you can’t assume that the mega shows have it easy and are able to more easily absorb costs. It is all relative. Mega shows usually also have the pressure of funding mega associations. NAB has spent the last several years working really hard and fighting really hard for their exhibitors. It is an ongoing process that takes a huge amount of dedication and persistence. Building relationships with all of your vendors, exclusive and non-exclusive, constantly fighting for lower costs and better service. Often that means finding the balance between the show management “free-bees” and your vendor’s exhibitor pricing. The job is never done, it is an on-going process. Not a battle, because in the end the industry doesn’t need winners and losers. We need a model that allows all of us to co-exist and mutually profit.
The second component that I would throw out there is the value of exhibitor education. It’s huge. It is show management’s responsibility to properly arm exhibitors with the tools and knowledge to succeed. There are ways exhibitors can reduce costs and save money. There are ways to increase ROI. Providing marketing and promotional tools that are practical and effective is vital.
I guess my point is this…don’t give up the fight! I agree that there are parts of the model that are broken. So what? Let’s as industry come together and find solutions that benefit all parties. The fight is what makes this industry challenging and fun. Easy is boring. I look forward to meeting you at ETE.
August 21st, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
Tim, great piece and another great expo.
Austin is right in citing the Midwest as a viable alternative. There are plenty of cities with accessible airports and spaces hungry for a conference of NME’s size.
August 21st, 2008 at 8:36 pm |
Kudos to you, Tim, for speaking out on behalf of show managers and exhibitors everywhere who are sick and tired of being treated like cattle instead of treasured clients! As a trade show consultant, I’d like to offer my support in your protest. Feel free to contact me to brainstorm solutions. While every company is entitled to make a profit, there are right and wrong ways to do it. Those who have chosen the wrong ways shouldn’t continue to profit from innocent victims. (I just attended a conference where not only did the hotel charge for Web access, they even blocked the free downtown WiFi!)
And to echo the reader from Toledo, let me say if you would consider hosting NME in Kansas City, you would have my personal assistance to make whatever connections you need to make it the best expo ever!
Marlys
August 22nd, 2008 at 5:30 am |
I totally understand your dependence on strong relationships, trust and collaboration (read “control freak”). All events depend on those three things coming together in order to be successful. And all elements depend on people, money and coordination. It’s a complicated and delicate mixture.
You post makes me think that the various social media conference and trade show organizers should connect to vet problems and brainstorm solutions. We can all benefit from sharing our experiences to make all of our events more relevant and attractive for everyone in the community.
August 22nd, 2008 at 10:31 am |
Tim,
I attended the New Media Expo on behalf of the Federal government and AIDS.gov, and I wanted to let you know how valuable the experience was from our perspective. I can certainly understand your frustrations over vendors and costs, but I wanted to communicate how important the Expo was for those of us who are trying to push our organizations to adopt new media approaches and technologies.
AIDS.gov works with our Federal colleagues and our partners in the private sector to educate them and their clients on using new media in response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Our ability to network with leading podcasters at the Expo led to specific, positive outcomes for us. As a result of our participation at the Expo. AIDS.gov is now working on HIV/AIDS messaging with a college in California and a community health provider in Vermont. We would never have met our colleagues in those organizations without the Expo. The conference workshops give us an important avenue to explore the ever-involving world of new media. I hope you will consider that when deciding whether to continue your work in this area.
Regards
Miguel Gomez
AIDS.gov
August 22nd, 2008 at 6:40 pm |
Tim,
I’ve attended all four Expo events. I’m sure you are well aware of the lack of face-to-face contact with this year’s Las Vegas show. In Ontario, the show was held in a more concentrated area. In Las Vegas, show attendees were overwhelmed with both the scale of the venue as well as the ever present Vegas tourist crowds.
A couple of years ago I attended a non-tech convention that was held entirely in a smaller Las Vegas hotel that had it’s own very large meeting rooms in the same property. As a result, things were much more concentrated.
I would think that smaller cities would be much more competitive regarding the issues you site. Different areas of the country, such as the midwest for example, would likely demonstrate a completely different attitude than larger, high-population venues closer to the coasts.
Most people are traveling in by airplane anyway. It’s likely that most podcasters would be willing to travel to the Expo, regardless of where it was held, say, Kansas City, for example, especially if the costs could be kept down. If you can get a large group of podcasters to show up, regardless of the location, I would think that the vendors would also follow.
The disconnect with Las Vegas and podcasters is that the business of podcasting is a very social phenomenon. The Las Vegas convention center just doesn’t seem to lend itself to this social aspect of this business. I am more than willing to spend money with vendors, particularly if I am able to meet them face to face and develop a relationship.
I’m convinced that podcasters need and benefit enormously from an annual meet-up. Hopefully this annual meeting will somehow continue to be facilitated in the future. From a podcaster standpoint, Ontario was close to ideal, Las Vegas much less so.
August 24th, 2008 at 4:55 am |
This is great info to know. I will pass it on to my group to consider for the conference we are developing.
August 25th, 2008 at 1:09 am |
Dugg it:
http://digg.com/tech_news/5_Reasons_Why_I_m_About_To_Quitt_The_Tradeshow_Business
Recognized a lot of problems we have had too at The Next Web Conference in Amsterdam…
(sorry for the typo in the title!)
August 25th, 2008 at 1:10 am |
I thought your last part about the customer experience was most interesting.
Is it possible that whilst you can’t control it that perhaps you can influence it in someway?
If a 3rd party treats your Clients to a service anything less than you’d deliver yourself is there someway in which you can vow never to them again? Harsh, maybe even entirely unworkable however if you don’t take a stand against such practices, nobody will. Maybe there is some sort of campaign here about getting these Companies to step up and be responsible. Maybe even posting about it will allow Companies who will do a great job to see this and contact you and perhaps you will find these great firms.
A possible solution may be if people like yourself and others actively involved in the Industry join forces and create a Standard for Tradeshow Excellence (that answers all the points you have raised and more). No firm will be able to say they meet that standard without stepping up and complying. People will then see if the firms involved meet a standard or not and choose accordingly. It’ll take a while to change things.
I don’t recommend invoice discounting to ppl for the same reason. Every contact with a customer is an opportunity to create “customer delight” or something far less.
Mike Ashworth
Marketing Coaching and Consultancy
Brighton and Hove, Sussex, UK
August 25th, 2008 at 1:58 am |
It seems to me that Las Vegas in particular is milking the industry for every penny it can get. I understand San Francisco isn’t much better. As @scot and others say – what about other cities? If they can successfully get low cost data centers in the mid-west then why not conference venues? Better still – is there any mileage at all in banding together with your colleagues and going the whole 9 yards and building your own? It’s maybe not trendy to go vertically integrated but with costs sky rocketing in the manner you describe, is it viable – seriously? I’ll bet there’s a business case just begging to be made.
August 25th, 2008 at 2:04 am |
My $0.02 as an attendee and as an exhibitor:
As an attendee – I go, or send people, to tradeshows in order for them to make direct contact with manufacturers, vendors, prospective partners, etc. We can gain much info from websites these days, but reaching out and making contact, start a relationship or just plain get a feel for a company is best done by speaking to actual employees. How useful is it then when you walk into a booth where the staff are models, a magician, some circus performers, and a company employee whose job is booth logistics – and no one actually knows who the biz dev person is, if the product scales, or whether there is a way to tie into the product’s APIs. And try finding this out while you elbow your way through the crowd gathered to see the circus performance, the scantily clad models or the sports car that’ll be raffled off.
Please ask your exhibitors to consider whether part of the user community building shouldn’t include some face time with senior employees, engineers, or execs, who then actually get to talk to attendees and get a real sense of the market, market interest, issues, and partnership and enhancement opportunities are. I can’t tell you how often I have been told that the person I am looking for was only there on the first morning of the show.
As an exhibitor, I have to agree, the vendors we have to deal with and the union workers and the venue reps, have left a bad taste in our mouths, year after year. I have seen no improvement. We always dread having to deal with some – how about being forced to hire a union worker to help assemble a special rack of equipment which is best done by our own employees, and the union worker then just stands around and makes sure that the sky isn’t falling. Or when we want to have a smaller, less public demo room, and we have to resort to distant hotel rooms as the show-floor or venue meeting rooms are priced for the Intels and Microsofts of the world, and we’re forced to buy soda at $5 per bottle even for bottles that go unopened! (Meanwhile rooms go unused since the venue doesn’t understand how to price their meeting rooms).
As you say, the venue providers and vendors benefit from the monopoly, and the fact that despite their lack of performance, their lack of professionalism, exhibitors will have to come back year after year, and therefore there is no incentive to improve. And when the venue loses a show, they’ll blame it on the economy or the web, and not on the dreadful experience they created for the exhibitors.
Aside from issues already mentioned, there is an issue with the location of many (larger) tradeshows. When we used to exhibit in San Jose, SF, or Atlanta, to name a few, the show organizers would tell us ahead of time the amount of traffic they expected to see, and we would pretty much see that. As most big shows moved to Vegas, we noticed a big discrepancy in the numbers given to us before the show and the actual number of attendees we’d see. Well, as it turns out, many of our prospect companies would send people to Vegas to attend the show. Unfortunately, many of them would get distracted by Vegas – that day or the night before – and never make it to the show floor, or past the few biggest booths. It’s difficult to compete with Vegas for our prospect’s time and attention. We are finding better attendance at smaller regional shows.
(Oh, BTW, please don’t let any booth, or anyone, give out free beer or alcoholic beverages to the attendees during exhibit hours. It’s hard enough keeping an attendee’s attention, it’s even harder when they are buzzed.)
Lastly, in any show, the show organizers need to mix up the smaller and bigger booths in order not to create booth “ghettos” that prospects avoid. Don’t put AT&T and Cisco in the front, and then, way in the back, bunch up two small up-and-coming companies with a dozen mousepad and iPod case vendors. If you get rid of the black curtain and aluminum curtain rods that separate the smaller booths from each other, and replace it with something more aesthetic, you can then integrate those smaller booths with the larger ones. Not only would you be making the smaller exhibitors happy by allowing them to be closer to the crowded larger booths, you also make attendees happy by letting them see cutting edge smaller companies, and the larger exhibitors also will benefit from being spread out a bit more from their other competitors.
Good luck!
August 25th, 2008 at 2:09 am |
[...] Tradeshow Startup » 5 Reasons Why I’m Thinking About Quitting The Tradeshow Business But this post is about the bad parts. The parts that are beginning to make me wonder where I’m headed and if it’s the right business in which to stake my company’s future, my future, and most important to me – my family’s future. [...]
August 25th, 2008 at 2:20 am |
Well son..
You either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain.
August 25th, 2008 at 5:47 am |
“But I would say unions need to realize that high prices will result in less work for their members down the road…”
Oh boy… you are in trouble now. LOL…
August 25th, 2008 at 8:34 am |
I coordinated a volunteer-run show in Canada with about 1500 attendees for two years and loaded phrase “fixed costs” doesn’t begin to describe how unions and must-use vendors bite the hands that feed. Hundreds of dollars to keep a coffee urn in a speakers lounge, crazy amounts for phone (required for point-of-sale) or internet hookup, requiring a unionized engineer to turn room lights off and on during sessions, unionized plumbers to fill and drain kiddie pools, no choice on mediocre, no-variety food services or catering for speakers, outrageous corkage, once an agreement is signed too many venues and suppliers do their best to squeeze a captive customer.
I was really thankful to find great venue management people who could help us fight past these obstacles that their own companies put in place. After many months of looking, I found one. That’s the guy who gave us a chance at success, that’s the guy I stuck with and insisted on working with, and if you don’t find one you’re a hostage. And even then you have to manage the relationship to be double-sure you don’t get blind-sided, but we did get lucky. Most don’t.
Organizers who came after me didn’t have the patience, and quickly moved back to non-union venues so they could focus on putting together great shows. Though it meant down-sizing and losing exposure to some new audiences, it also immediately made the show more profitable.
Schools and universities are great when they’re available. Town halls and community centres can be good but rarely have good session rooms and there are occasional battles on the details; the larger they are, the worse the union interference. Hotels range from good to lousy depending on how steeped in the business they are and usually their suppliers are locked in (i.e. you’re a captive audience) but it’s still possible to get lucky. Dedicated conference facilities were/are always the worst.
And then the expenses you cannot (and should not) avoid – security and on-site first aid are two; in Canada for smaller shows the Commissionaires are often a good choice for both.
Cheers,
-Eli.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:21 am |
hey tim-
we’ve never met, but you’re one of those folks i have permanently circled as “i need to have a coffee (or more preferably beer) with that guy.”
I run a small-ish conference called defrag:
http://www.defragcon.com
I say small-ish because i’ve decided quite intentionally – A) to have it in a hotel; B) to limit its size (attendees and sponsors/exhibitors) and C) to have it Denver.
I’ve done shows in CA (never Vegas), and can absolutely sympathize with everything above (i’m spending over 12k on wifi for Defrag this year — to ensure that my 350-400 attendees have AMAZING wifi; I’m spending 86 dollars for a gallon of coffee; etc — you know the deal).
In any case, I do think that folks like you and me can provide tremendous value through targeted, intimate, personal-touch events. I’m doubting that expos are either useful, relevant or do-able anymore.
If you’d ever like to chat, please be in touch (enorlin AT mac.com).
ejn
August 25th, 2008 at 12:46 pm |
One possible way of keeping third party suppliers on the straight and narrow might be to implement a real-time performance rating system.
Kinda like how Amazon.com allows buyers to rate Amazon affiliate stores.
You have a big screen showing realtime rating results. Those with the highest ratings get some sort of performance bonus.
Those with the lowest ratings get to pay penalties.
‘Honest’ suppliers would be nervous of such a system, but would be willing to give it a blast. ‘Bloodsucker’ suppliers would balk at this, and you’d pretty much know right then and there that they’re to be avoided.
Peer pressure writ large.
Blue skies
love
Roy
PS: I would LOVE to be a supplier at any of your conferences. I’m a visual facilitator, making live digital paintings of the ideas being discussed, and projecting them big for added visual impact. And I really don’t mind having people rate my performance!
August 25th, 2008 at 7:59 pm |
First off Great Post Tim!
Secondly for those that don’t know, I am the founder and CEO of BlogWorld & New Media Expo. Tim’s show and mine are indisputably at some point competitors so please keep that in mind with everything I am about to say. And yes our events even share the same name.
Tim and I met each other before either of us launched our events. We both started them because we wanted to attend them and they didn’t exist. Tim googled “podcasting tradeshow” and I googled “blogging tradeshow”. If I had only googled podcasting as well as blogging before launching BlogWorld who knows where we would be now.
With all that said, on to Tim’s post.
On the internet costs, you and I agree completely. This is criminal. As I Told you at NME Tim, I told the president of Smart City just a week before your event that they were straight up criminals. This was at what was supposed to be a very feel good setting where the LVCC (Las Vegas Convention Center) had flown in all of the show managers from their largest events (CES, SEMA, NAB, an event I work on AWFS and about 50 others)to tell us about the pending construction at the LVCC. When he was introduced to me, I apologized for what I was about to tell him and proceeded to tell him the same thing I have told every other smart city employee I have ever met, the VP of the LVCC, and anyone else in the business who will listen. There is no justification for the current internet charges in the convention / tradeshow industry. NONE.
Drayage is a different story. This is not the simple delivery of stuff from your dock to the booth. Drayage is the off loading of your boxs / crates and delivery to your booth, the removal of your empty boxes / crates, storage of those empties during the show, return to your booth for repacking and finally re-loading them on your vehicle at the end of the show. For advanced shipments arriving up to a month before the show starts, drayage also includes unloading, storage, and loading at the warehouse as well.
When you explain that to exhibitors they understand it is a lot more complicated than “delivering stuff to your booth”. Still the charges are excessive at most shows. Here is the reason why; when the show manager signs the contract with the General Service Contractor (GSC) that contract usually contains some services for free like aisle carpet, or aisle signs, or X amount of free freight for show management, or show office furniture rental etc. Well as we all know nothing in life is free. Someone has to pay for that stuff and in the tradeshow business that is the exhibitor. Some Show managers don’t know this and some don’t care and ask for a “zero invoice” contract. This means the show manager pays the GSC nothing for the service they provide the show manager. Again the exhibitor subsidizes that free service. Some show managers like Reed and Advanstar will even ask for a commission on the services the GSC provides to an exhibitor. These last two examples are where the exhibitor really gets gouged and drayage rates are in the $80 – $100 per CWT (Carton Weight or 100 lbs) rate.
Even when you have a great show manager like Tim who wants to provide his customers with real value, and does everything in their power to protect their exhibitors from exorbitant costs the GSC model is broken. They undercharge for other services because they make up for it in the drayage. Small shows like NME and BlogWorld suffer the most from this broken model. This needs to be changed and there is quite a bit of clamor in the industry for this to change.
This is not, I repeat not the union workers fault. This responsibility lies directly with the GSC’s and show managers. If the only thing built into drayage was a teamsters $35 an hour salary no one would be complaining. Service is another matter. But more on that later.
Hopefully that answers your question about why drayage is so high Tim.
We agree on Pay to Play completely Tim. Exhibitors and show managers share the blame on this one. I can tell all of you that Tim is serious about this one and has told me as much in private conversations as well. I don’t think being an exhibitor should disqualify you as a speaker, but it shouldn’t gaurantee you a slot either. The considerations for making a decision on a speaker imo should be 1. can they put butts in the seats, 2. do they have a relevant an interesting topic to deliver to attendees, and 3. are they going to give a compelling talk that keeps gets attendees excited and feeling fulfilled instead of putting them to sleep.
Rarely do you find a speaker who can do all three.
For attrition, I tell every show manager the same thing, never ever ever sign a contract with an attrition clause. If you hotel insists, then find another hotel. You may have to shop for a while, but when you are ready to walk many hotels will give up on this point. Secondly never forget hotels are never your friends. They just want your money. In bad times they will be your best friend, but when they are doing well they will do everything they can to stick it to you. I have never come across an exception to this rule with hotel operators.
Your last point is the hardest to address Tim. Any good show manager things exactly the way you do Tim. Unfortunately there are far to few good show managers and unfortunately do the nature of our business we can not afford to keep full time staff all year long that we only need for one weeks time. None of us can afford a fleet of forklifts or all the other equipment needed to produce a tradeshow. So we have to rely on good contractors to service our attendees. I know you do this Tim, but you have to micromanage your contractors, and you have to educate your exhibitors. You have to let them know they are dealing with numerous entities, and you have to let them know that if they ever experience bad service with any of those contractors that they need to come to you to get their issue resolved.
Now you know as well as I do that we can’t always resolve it the way we would like, but what we can do is treat our customers they way any customer deserves to be treated; with respect. We can let them know that we value their business and they are important to us. Often times we will get that contractor to make some concession that while not entirely satisfies our customer, they can walk away knowing that someone listed and was an advocate on their behalf.
Any contractor or contractor’s employee caught threatening, insulting, verbally abusing, or soliciting bribes from one of my attendees or exhibitors is going to be thrown out. Every contractor we deal with knows it.
The caterer you are referring to at the LVCC is Aramark. They suck. Just like all exclusive vendors. Again there is a valid reason for having an exclusive caterer in a major convention facility. Food safety is a very big deal, particularly when you are serving thousands, to tens of thousands, to over a hundred thousand people. I see why that would raise prices somewhat, but not to the levels every show manager, attendee and exhibitor experiences at any convention center in the country. To put it in perspective this is no different than any other mass gathering space, like an amusement park, or sporting event. In fact you have the same catering companies servicing those venues.
I will disagree with your conclusion on face to face marketing. Even with all of those hassles, and high prices, there is no other single investment that an exhibitor can make that will return a comparable ROI. That is how powerful face to face events are. If we could solve some of these problems face to face events would be even more attractive.
As a competitor, as a peer, and I hope as a friend Tim I am asking you not to “quit the tradeshow business”. Our industry needs people like you if we are ever going to address the inherent problems we have. If you quit the rest of us who agree with you are going to have to fight that much harder to get these changes made.
Ps. For those blaming Las Vegas for Tim’s post, any adverse effect it may have had on NME, or that it is in anyway “the most expensive” tradeshow city. I will respectfully disagree. The average show moving to vegas experiences a 22% increase in attendance their first year. I have personally witnessed it with AWFS and DEMA. Every show that rotates between Vegas and other cities always sees higher attendance in Vegas. Several studies have been done by show managers, and independent researchers that prove attendees spend more time on the tradeshow floor in Vegas than any other major convention city (I personally think this is less true for smaller events). Las Vegas is the #1 tradeshow city in the world. It is the second least expensive city to fly into in the United States (Orlando is #1). It is the only city in the US that actually attracts attendees that would not otherwise attend your event imo. Chicago, Philadelphia, New York and Boston are much more difficult to work in than Vegas. Vegas is actually somwhere in the middle when it comes to labor rules, and exclusive vendors.
That doesn’t mean it is the best city for every event, far from it. It just isn’t as bad as bad as many commenters made it out to be.
August 26th, 2008 at 5:47 am |
Hey Tim,
Couldn’t resist providing some feedback from your Dutch fans. Great article, and pretty shocking to me. We have been on many congresses as speakers, participants and vendors. True that you see many ‘commercials’ being executed in Expert Panel discussions. But apart from that, let me give you our view on the event, coming all the way down to Vegas to participate in a congress like yours (I realize that your post was not about the NME specifically, but what the heck. I want to come back next year again).
First of all, for us it’s quite an investment. Being a start-up company flying all the way from Holland to Vegas is not only an investment from a financial point of view (airline tickets, anyone?) but also from a time point of view. We make our decisions to go to a congress carefully and our ‘ROI’ must be clear from the beginning. That’s for example reason we couldn’t go to PICNIC2008 in Amsterdam. Although next door for us, it’s freakin’ expensive, prohibitively expensive.
Having said that, there was no doubt that we would go to the NME in Vegas, and we will go next year again, wherever it is. For us the most important aspect is to learn from fellow new media creators (lectures), see what’s new in the market place (vendors) and meeting great people (expo floor, bars, restaurants, you name it).
Although interesting from a traveling and sight seeing point of view, we couldn’t care less if a congress is in Vegas, Ontario, Kansas City or Thailand if a go/nogo decision is based on that. As long as the three ingredients (lectures, vendors and possibility to network) are there. Yes, I agree with most people’s comments that Vegas was less ‘intimate’ than Ontario. That doesn’t mean that we didn’t have a great time (as you can read here: http://digiredo.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/the-new-media-expo-our-first-impressions/). Lessons learned, time to move on.
I also agree with people’s comments (especially Miquel Gomes from Aids.gov) that the NME is an important event for our industry. If we as a community have to change settings and call for action, so be it. Like said before, tough business challenges require creative solutions.
I hope your post opened up the discussion (to see the long list of comments I would guess it did) and also that you’ll find motivation to continue organizing this great event. Be it in a barn somewhere, I don’t care. Next year we’ll be there…
(About the barn thing, let us know beforehand so we can bring our typical wooden shoes from Holland)
Be Well!
Erik van der Zijden
Rene van den Bos
DigiRedo
August 26th, 2008 at 7:43 am |
[...] 5 Reasons Why I’m Thinking About Quitting The Tradeshow Business by Tim Bourquin on Tradeshow Startup [...]
August 26th, 2008 at 5:23 pm |
Tim,
I am so happy you chose to write this. It explains also why the unconferences and podcamps are becoming more popular though they/we cannot begin to compete with the expertise and professionalism of you and Emile.
We are facing the same issues with http://www.podcamphawaii.com – though fortunately we do have a champion in side the Hawaii Convention Center. I hope the time is ripe for a wholesale shift so we can move on in to Conference 2.0 otherwise the trade show industry is looking to go the way of Detroit’s auto industry. In so many of the examples above, people are willing and happy to ay – a FAIR price. Usury does not build fans or jobs.
On my name, I also linked to a video I posted addressing some of these issues but adding to the mix – those of us in the industry as well. Let’s a figure a way to keep this industry (and I mean podcasting here) alive. We are just starting to get the data and traction to be understood. I’d hate to see a very out-dated trade show industry be the reason we don’t move forward.
August 27th, 2008 at 6:41 pm |
Yes, thanks for the behind-the-scenes look and your transparency about the industry tactics.
It sounds like you enjoy what you do, so perhaps it’s not time to find something else, but just change where you hold the tradeshows.
Other people mentioned universities. There are also quite a few large churches, for example, that can hold conferences — they have kitchen facilities to provide food, ample space for booths and rooms for sessions.
Plus, members can be hired from the church membership — and usually, everyone is respectful to others so treating attendees and exhibitors well shouldn’t be a problem here.
Our own church here in Alberta, Canada, has 5,000 members and regularly holds various events. Plus, we have the beautiful Rocky Mountains!
An example in the US would be Willow Creek Community Church; see http://www.willowcreek.com/events/leaders/reveal/conferenceataglance.html
for an example of the kind of events they hold.
John McCain and Barack Obama held their first joint appearance in a debate at a large church:
http://www.saddlebackfamily.com/story/9153.html
which was attended by nearly 5,000 people.
As long as people put up with the price gouging of the hotels and convention centers, the more they will have no reason to change.
As Dr. Phil would say, “How’s that working for ya?” If it’s
not working so well, but you like what you do and you’re good at it, perhaps it’s time to just make a major change with the part that’s not working: the venue.
Sooner or later, the message that this circus will no longer be participated in, will be loud and clear.
Yvonne
September 10th, 2008 at 9:29 pm |
Good Post. You stated “you can make a lot of money and at the same time help move an industry forward”, you could make a little less money and prevent some of your issues.
For example:
The cause of the drayage issues you stated is show organizers who want services for free or don’t pay the true costs of providing those services. I’m sure you didn’t pay for every service provided by your GC or if you did pay it only covers a portion of the cost and the rest was paid for by your exhibitors in the form of drayage. Consider drayage the particpation tax that provides the show organizer free or discounted services rather than the cost to move a box from the dock to a booth.
Facilities cut exclusive deals with internet providers and food service providers that in turn pay commissions back on those services. This allows the facilities to charge the market or below market rates for space. I never have met a show organizer yet that has suggested that they pay a little more for the use of the facility in order to have flexibility over in house vendors. They are always to happy to sign the lease and take the benefit of the lower cost space.
I’m always humored by show organizers who have the largest profit stream from all exhibition participants, pick apart the costs structure of participating entities that have considerably lower margins or forget that they benefited from the lower rent or free services.
It is kind of like a sports team owner that gets a city to build a new stadium that is supported by parking fees, ticket taxes and food & beverage taxes. The team moves in, he makes a fortune but still has the nerve to complain about the cost of the hot dogs and parking when these are the items that are supporting his event that allows him to make the margins on the games in the first place.
Sorry, never met a show organizer yet that when the rubber hit the road or his wallet in this case, wasn’t willing to take free rent, free or discounted aisle carpet,etc They are also the same ones that will complain about the cost of those services to put up a good front the exhibitors before they go to the bank.
September 12th, 2008 at 10:15 pm |
Most of those problems would be dealt with if there were no unions. Why are there unions in the trade show biz anyway? In looking at the MANY responses of those that feel your pain and ‘feel’ their wallet and show reputation equally – I think there is a solution: Between us all we can afford our own building, our own hotel, with 100% of our own in house NON UNION services.I’ll throw my hat in the ring to run the ooperations end of this new customer service – wallet friendly complex.If we all just pitch in what we paid for drayage or catering minimums for each of our last event – it would be close to paid for!
September 13th, 2008 at 12:01 am |
Tim-
As a member of one of the exhibitors at the NME, I have to say you nailed it x 5!!! As new exhibitors, I must say, we were shocked at the added costs. I personally echo EVERYthing you said. I have to say, the comments about Universities is a real sharp one worth considering. Better yet, in a Right To Work state. Nevada is listed as one of these states, but you would NEVER guess that.
As this is still a new industry, your comments about considering the ROI of a convention are real issues with smaller companies and new startups. Universities would appreciate the business I’m sure, and would carry with it some amount of prestige, just being at a University. I would rather attend events AT a university just for the open environment found at most U’s. The cruise ship idea (even to nowhere) is a great one, but the problem is attendees are locked into 3 days, which I know would exclude a large share of attendees. All Universities have hotels nearby, and there’s no Minimums. Sleep where you wish. I’ve found they even give great deals for even relatively small blocks. I’m sure these are things you’ve already long considered, but I’m voicing my thoughts out loud for others to comment.
So, My personal recommendations if I may toss my 3 cents in, would be throwing a show in a:
1). University or Independent convention center,
2). Mid-sized centrally located city,
3). Right to Work State, which I feel promotes independent commerce, and competition.
4). A city with good public transpo to and from local hotels and the convention center, such as light rail or shuttles.
5). A city meeting the previous criteria that has hosted large events and have their infrastructure in order as a result. Such as Political conventions, Olympic events, or well-known festivals. Heck, tie it in with a festival which might encourage attendance in a lesser known area.
6). A city that is hungry for convention activity. One that WANTS to bend over backwards for your business. I bet if you meet 1-5, you’d find this as a result. One with a pro-active Chamber of Commerce.
I think with fresh thinking outside the “Convention Center box”, smaller conventions can net greater Returns on the Investments for both the attendees and exhibitors. And this just might net a better user experience for everybody, reducing the attrition factor. Well I guess that’s 6 cents worth, but thems my thoughts and I stands bys them.
TNC is a true pillar in this community of podcasting and we appreciate EVERYthing you do. You are awesome.
September 15th, 2008 at 1:11 pm |
Tim,
It was good to hear the organizer of the event voice frustrations shared by attendees and exhibitors alike, that certainly improved the customer relationship in a challenging situation and I appreciate your frankness. I sincerely hope you stick with it and I am especially looking forward to next year’s NME after this kind of community brainstorming. Thank you!
October 5th, 2008 at 6:41 pm |
Tim,
Thanks for taking the time to verbalize the frustrations on the back end of something as large and powerful as NME. I’ve been in event/conference planning for 5 years and always find it hard to balance making the venue, sponsors and attendees happy with all costs involved. You can have a great venue and pay for it, but then have to charge sponsors/attendees more in order to cover costs and make a profit. Every little thing costs money and it’s often hard to negotiate with larger venues, such as convention centers.
I completely echo what others have listed about considering changing cities in order to find a less expensive, but equally impressive venue. It’s at least worth it to compare costs and use to go back to your Vegas venue in order to negotiate a better cost with them, if possible.
One other suggestion, if you haven’t already considered it…I used to host conferences for 800-1000 people in Indianapolis. We got better deals on our conference rooms and needs because we hosted the event in a hotel and were able to block rooms, at a discounted rate, for our attendees. We often got all of our conference rooms for free due to the room guarantees we worked with the hotel. I’m happy to give more info if you need it.
Thank you again for sharing the back side with your attendees and sponsors in a professional and well thought out manner. I am saving this article for reference in my career as an Event Planner.
*Cheers,
Karen
October 12th, 2008 at 8:48 am |
Great conversation about events- want to add two more cents to the discussion:
Lot of thoughts about alternative venues and destinations – they should be explored. If you can attract the same audience in a destination like Indianapolis over Las Vegas at a lower cost you should do it. I don’t think your final attendance numbers will support that decision. Similar with other forms of media, you pay more for a 30 second TV spot during the Superbowl than other programming, why – audience… If someone in Las Vegas will discount and dare to be compared to Indianapolis you have found a weak link, take advantage.
What does Right to Work Mean? There is some confusion that hosting a meeting in Nevada, a right to work state, means the influence of organized labor should be less, as we know it is not… Let me help. Right to Work means a worker has the right to work in a job and not join the union. For example, a server in Las Vegas has the right to work in a hotel and not pay Culinary dues, his job duties, pay & benefits will still be determined by the collective bargaining agreement signed by his employer, but he has a right to work without paying dues. Most don’t choose to be represented without the ability to vote their wishes.
What Right to Work does not mean is that you can hold a meeting in a hotel and your exhibitors can perform any work that they wish. This scope of work is determined when the show organizer signs a contract with the contractor. That agreement determines who does what work. If you hire a union contractor that contractors agreement will support the CBA that they have signed.
Hope this helps. There are more non-union friendly destinations, some are even not right to work states. Where, 2nd and 3rd tier cities…. ie. Indianapolis.
So we finish where we started, pick your destination based on attendance capture, price accordingly based on attendance and the costs will be commensurate with the marketing opportunity.
October 28th, 2008 at 11:58 am |
Tim, hang in there. These vendors will realize one day that if the customers stop attending the events, they will have to lower their prices. But at the same time, it’s supply and demand. Unless the majority of the trade show hosts team up and refuse to pay or even attend these events, the vendors will keep on charging the high prices.
You are right about the customers not be treated fairly, but that’s the business world. I think you should keep on doing the trade shows. It might be costly, it might hurt some new businesses, but the results are not predictable. Some might benefit from the events and it will be because you decided to stay in.
November 5th, 2008 at 12:30 pm |
[...] – bookmarked by 6 members originally found by mkidkap123 on 2008-10-17 5 Reasons Why I’m Thinking About Quitting The Tradeshow Business [...]
November 24th, 2008 at 9:19 am |
Tim,
Hear, hear! Every point you made is solid and dead on!
When I started planning the first WordCamp Dallas last year, I contacted the Dallas Chamber of Commerce who put out the word to every hotel and convention center that I was looking for a venue. Every one of them offered the ballroom(s) for free, but I’d have to agree to outrageous room blocks (this was supposed to be primarily for DFW-area residents, after all), plus pay for catering, A/V, WiFi, etc.
I know the hotel needs to make money, but they need to learn to be competitive! In the end, I decided to go true unconference style and hold the event at what was essentially a free venue. We practically broke even, which was fine because it was never intended to be a for-profit event.
I can only imagine how maddening this Mickey Mouse, nickle-and-dime thuggery can be, and you have my sympathies. You’re a good influence on the tradeshow industry, and it’d be a real shame should you decide to leave on account of the hassle:reward ratio.
November 24th, 2008 at 5:52 pm |
Cost are becoming too high but there are alternative places like Universities, however I still feel your pain
December 10th, 2008 at 10:54 am |
Say, after seeing you sold NME – I guess you really WERE serious. hehe
So, now that you have some time on your hands, how about starting that Trade Show association/union/group that reps trade shows to convention centers?
> High speed Internet costs.
ditto. There is a fine line between legitimate and gratuitous monopolistic price gouging. We are seeing the later at many convention centers. These are exclusive agreements at these shows and they know they have a monopoly and you have no choice.
> Drayage
I have tried to produce a way around Drayage, and have not been able too. Atleast with a general contractor, we have a choice and there is competition.
> The Pay to Play Mentality.
Yep, we run up against it all the time. We try to draw the line, but often, who are the most qualified speakers? It is tough to have a session about Windows Vista Internals without someone from Microsoft on the panel. At the same time, you know they are going to be in the expo hall as well. Which came first – the session or the sponsorship dollars?
>Room Blocks & Attrition.
Ouch. It is a tough nut to crack. I don’t know the answer, other than to low ball your room block figure at the start and demand a 30 day opt out clause.
>5) Lack of Control Over The Customer Experience
Agreed. Dealing with venues and outside vendors is difficult. I think we have all been in those situations before.
I would like to start a trade show “union” to represent shows to venues and vendors.
December 17th, 2008 at 2:43 pm |
It occurred to me while reading this that one of the traditional ways to break monopolistic practices was by forming a CO-OP.
Can you imagine the purchasing power and resources a few dozen (or hundred) shows would have? If a venue wanted the business from any of them, they’d have to provide rates and services acceptable to the co-op (or trade association, or whatever).
If a venue wanted to be an approved location, they would have to offer transparency and fall within certain guidelines. Their upside obviously is that as long as they make the co-op happy, the co-op will continue to send them far more business than any one show could hope to offer.
Heck for all the money involved, a large enough co-op could actually buy it’s own venue(s) and cut out the middlemen. Whatever the result, I’ve found that working together (even with competitors) tends to work better than getting screwed one-by-one.
Just thinking out loud – but if any group was capable of organizing this type of thing, you’d think professional event organizers would be
March 14th, 2009 at 9:57 am |
Reading your article refreshed my memory of tradeshows. I am looking to get back into be an exhibitor and some of the tactics are pathetic. There is blame game, but as an exhibitor I think that it should not be too hard to fix some of these problems.
April 6th, 2009 at 8:31 pm |
Although I’m not a trade show maven, I have to tell you that I TOTALLY respect your post! It’s ABOUT TIME someone stopped pussy-footin’ around an industry issue. I never understood it; sounding out about what isn’t right, I mean. I keep thinking … haven’t others in the industry figured out that the MORE of us that sound-off about stuff, the MORE chances that things will change?
So, whether I’ve done one trade show or not (and I haven’t) – I support you 100% for taking a stand and not booty-kissing the egos of the status quo.
YOU ROCK and don’t you EVER forget it!
BTW, your personal experiences have been such that, when it comes to thinking about becoming a trade show exhibitor (which I never gave one iota of a thought, prior to reading this)I have to say no, thank you – not interested – got enough on my plate.
April 21st, 2009 at 7:38 am |
Hello Tim,
As a 12 year veteran of the Trade Show Industry and with experience helping run Fortune 500 Trade Show programs, I can surely understand your sentiments and agree with most of them.
Too many vendors are “locked” into the business, and too often, show organizers want a substantial cut on top of those rates…which skews them even more (including drayage).
In regards to Drayage, I definitely think our US drayage rates are out of whack, but there is definitely more that goes into Drayage than most people are aware (which is part of the problem, very few people understand or educate about the overall cost of drayage).
1. The show contractor has to bring in all of the semi-tractors, trailers, and fork-lifts to manage moving all of the containers.
2. All of the exhibitor containers are moved:
-onto the show floor for set-up
-back off the show floor for storage during the event
-then back to the exhibitor’s booth after the show for tear-down
-and then back to the loading docks and loaded onto the exhibitor’s outbound shipping truck
(granted, this is more than a small exhibitor with self-contained components, but this is what happens with 90% of the exhibit floor on medium to large shows)
3. Shows require 100’s of fork-lifts, fork-lift operators, 100’s of semi-trailers, plus the semi’s to pull all of the trailers (plus people to drive them), a marshalling yard and area to keep all of the 100’s of trailers during the show. All of this equipment, fuel, and personnel are brought in for the show…they are part of the show’s contractor, they are not supplied as part of the show hall. While I believe there is way too much mark-up on Drayage…it’s probably not as much as one may think. But, I definitely believe the drayage rates could definitely come down about at least 25%-35% and people could still make money. The problem is, too many hands are trying to make money on the drayage and other show services.
Regarding Electric service for example, all of the electric grids, wires and service for a show have to be set-up from scratch for each show. Remember, when an association reserves a hall, they are getting a “blank hall”. The contractor has to haul in all of the electrical equipment (same with furniture, internet, etc), wire it all, and dispurse it to each booth for the show. Then, after the show is done, they have to haul it all out of the show and back to their storage. That is the cost people are paying for, the actual “electricity” is a minute part of the equation.
Now that it sounds like I’m defending the industry, let me say there is still way too much corruption and unfair business practices in trade shows making it too expensive for companies to participate in this difficult economy. Unless there are drastic changes, the industry will essentially demolish itself forcing it to completely rebuild from the bottom up. Please see a recent blog posting of mine entitled, “Overcharging, Legal Extortion, Unfair Manipulation of Rates and Dates Oh My…” http://www.eventpeeps.com/profiles/blogs/overcharging-legal-extortion
Thanks!
Matt