Some thoughts on trade shows

Since my return from the Licensing Show, I have been thinking a great deal about trade shows.   This year has seen an across the board drop off in show attendance. What I noticed in Las Vegas, however, was a dramatic decrease in exhibitor commitment to the show. Some major exhibitors did not show and many other dramatically cut back on their booth space, their exhibit quality and their sizzle (far fewer celebrities, costumed characters, etc.)

The fact that so many did so tells me that  despite the dramatically reduced costs for exhibition space, hotels, food and air fare, they thought that the return on investment was simply not there. But why did they feel that way?

Here are some possibilities:

• Their experience in New York over the last few years was weak and they would have cut back if the show had remained in New York.

• Their experience in New York was good but they did not believe that the Las Vegas venue would give them the value for dollars spent.

• Their concern regarding the economy caused them to cut back on show expenses.

• As long as the show was in New York, the decision to exhibit was on automatic pilot. It was a habit and therefore a budgeted cost of business. Moving the show, however, forced management to think about the costs of the show.  

I have given this a great deal of thought and here is my analysis:

First of all, it has nothing to do with Las Vegas or New York. It has everything to do with moving from city “A” to city “B. Any discussion of specific cities is a red herring that takes us off track. The fact is that a show in Nuremberg, Germany can dramatically outdraw a show in New York City. There is no reason that Las Vegas or any other venue could not do the same provided that the perceived value was there. Simply put, exhibitors and attendees come because they believe they are getting value for their total dollar and time spent.

What I think is the critical issue is moving a successful show from an established location to a new location. It is just plain risky. Why, because it causes long time exhibitors and attendees to reconsider what they have been doing automatically. When something occurs every year, it is simply booked into the budget.   When an event moves, it ceases to be seen as a part of the business cycle. Rather is becomes an option. As you can imagine, Moving a successful show during a recession is even more risky.

There are many good reasons to move a show; cheaper prices, user friendly venues, less demanding unions and a centralized location to name a few. These pale, however, in comparison to the damage the move will inevitably do to habitual behavior.

So, if you are going to move a show, the lesson, at least to me is: If you feel you must move, make sure that you dramatically and conspicuously increase the value offered.  If not, you may end up with a less expensive venue but with fewer exhibitors spending less money to exhibit.