The trade show has long been dead (in theory)

I'll leave speculation about the back story behind Steve Jobs bailing on the upcoming Macworld--and Apple bailing on future ones entirely--to others.

Rather, I'd like to poke a bit further at what this says about the trade show business. ZDNet's Sam Diaz writes:

I hadn't really thought too much about it, but it only makes sense that the Internet's next victim would be the trade show. Think about the outreach tools that companies have at their disposal these days.

Webcasts have become online events where people from around the globe can attend without booking a flight, hotel room, or restaurant reservations. Viral videos are being produced by companies to showcase their products and technologies in real-world environments. Brand names are creating loyal followings via "fan memberships" on social-networking sites such as Facebook. And, increasingly, there are smaller, intimate shows that cater to crowds with specific interests--conferences dealing with social networking, cloud computing, open source, and more.

Those shows reach the audiences they want to reach, and the bank doesn't have to be broken to participate. But what a devastating blow to local economies.

I don't disagree with any of this. Webcasts, viral marketing, and so forth do indeed offer additional, and much lower-cost, ways of reaching out to customers, partners, and developers. And, in Apple's specific case, it doesn't especially strain credulity to at least accept that Macworld is no longer as good a marketing fit as it once was. However, if one takes the broader perspective, I'm not at all sure that this says all that much about the trade show business in general.

That's because the trade show business has always been a bit of a racket. A former boss regularly complained about the money he wasted on trade shows in which he had to participate. And that was more than 10 years ago.

Companies often effectively have to exhibit because it's expected. (Hmm. ACME isn't at the show this year; it must be in trouble.) Participation might also be seen as a cost of doing business with an important partner. (Want Oracle to work with you? Better exhibit at OracleWorld.) There isn't necessarily a quantifiable return on the investment.

Inertia and general politics are other factors. Lots of groups both inside and outside of companies have a strong vested interest in keeping the trade show gravy train going. And that includes, as much as anything, attendees, for whom shows can be as much about getting out of the office for a week as they are genuine business value.

That's not to say that the real-life interaction that happens at these events has no value. Anything but. For me, one of the greatest values of shows is that they offer a convenient focal point for lots of face-to-face discussions, both formal and less so.

In fact, I have this pleasant fantasy that the IT industry could replace its most lumbering shows with get-togethers in nice locales. No need for all the big exhibits at the expensive, antiseptic convention centers. Throw in some unconferencing. (One example somewhat along these lines in Sun Microsystems' CommunityOne. It will be interesting to see how CommunityOne East fares, given that it marks the first time one of these events has been run independently of JavaOne.)

But the reality is that there's a natural tendency toward structure in such things. I'm sure that we'll all have plenty more opportunities to partake of bad convention center food.

[J. Blow]

Trade shows aren't dead. Stupid article. At the very least trade shows are a great way to network with your peers and survey the industry. Regional shows, web casts, etc don't accomplish this. One meeting, everyone's there, done in a couple of days.

There's just no better way to do this then in person.

[ghaff]

As I wrote, I think there's value in people getting together face-to-face. However I also think that there are various vehicles for doing so that don't require a big convention center with expensive exhibits as characterizes a lot of traditional trade shows. Not that I expect to see a lot of fundamental change in this regard.

[Penguinisto]

"Trade shows aren't dead."
COMDEX
Networld
E3 (almost dead)
Brainshare (officially dead now)
Macworld (about to die)
OSCON (still there, but dying fast)

...outside of developer-specific (WinHEC, Apple WWDC) or tiny shows that no one outside of the niche cares about (Oracleworld), the trade show is pretty much a dinosaur suffering in its last throes of extinction.

Face-to-face has a ton of value, but I don't need to wander through a vast hall full of over-eager sales-droids just to get that value.

Case in point: In 2002, I did what then known as a "Geek Cruise" *. For a week, I got to spend time on a cruise ship with 40 other people, and near-total access to the founders of Perl, Linux (Linus Torvalds), the lead C++ programmer from Nokia, the gent who invented Python (Guido VanRossum), and several very big names who drive Linux. It cost a bit, but the time spent was awesome to say the least (ever wanted to ask about the wheres and whys of a given bit of a language like Python from the guy who created it? No problem...)

* If you're curious, they're still around and doing pretty well: http://www.insightcruises.com/

Point is, there are many, many other ways to get the knowledge you crave (and the networking you need) without having to hand out business cards and/or put up with hype.

[rapier1]

Dunno about that. Tradeshows like SC (a yearly supercomputing conference SC08, SC07, etc) have been doing better over the years. SC08 just topped their previous attendance records with close to 10,000. While thats less than 10% of CES and 20% of MacWorld there isn't nearly the same broad consumer appeal in our industry. Likewise the PAX expo drew 21,000 more attendees this year than last (topping at around 50,000 people). So there are tradeshows and conferences that are doing quite well... they just aren't the lumbering disorganized monstrosities of the old IDG shows.

[Penguinisto]

Ah, but you forget: SC is a niche (Supercomputing).

PAX I can (only sorta) give you, but only because of why and how it started, and what it actually is (read: ginormous frickin' LAN Party).

[rapier1]

How did I forget that SC was niche? I said it was niche but its doing, and has been doing pretty well. I've been to the last 12 of them. You claimed that trade shows were dead. I gave a couple example of trade shows that are doing fine. My point, which I pretty clearly laid out, was that the IDG stye throw everything in a room consumer level lowest common denominator might be having hard times but trade show that are well run and give the audience what they want seem to be doing just fine.

[nonoshow]

test

[nonoshow]

@ J. Blow
written like a person who does not have to make the financial decisions regarding the effectiveness and efficiency of marketing efforts. in these times (economically) and with new tools (technology) the idea of spending truckloads of money so that people can 'network with peers' and 'survey the industry' is not a sound/sane reason. the archaic, corrupt, virtually worthless concept of the trade show--which no one, for years, has been able to quantify regarding brand development or sales ROI--will finally die the death it deserves. RIP

[ghaff]

I actually think that "networking with peers" and other face-to-face interaction can be useful. But there are IMO better ways to accomplish that than traditional trade shows. (Which I agree rarely have a positive ROI--at least for exhibitors.)

[ghaff]

I agree with your other comment with respect to focus. What's tended to kill the big shows over time (e.g. Comdex--LinuxWorld, CES probably coming) is that they became these huge messes that weren't about anything in particular.

[cerebral_but_dull]

Nonoshow: I am from a different industry than computers, but for us the tradeshow is essential and we are suffering from low attendance. A lot of the "wastefulness" is actually funding of the educational society and the trade group. Without the show: no money for staff, no industry education, no technical journal, no one representing us in Washington, no growth, no peering, limited learning. Financial decisions that allow no consideration to the growth of your employees and the support of your industry may be shortsighted.

[nonoshow]

understand...and i consider some of the super-niche or vertical confabs to be of more import than the bloated, generic confabs such as CES. But what does it say that your attendance is down? My advice, do not fret about a marketing channel that is dying a natural death, as 'the market' (your customers and industry peers) is voting with its non-attendance. You can't wish the natural order of things to remain the same. It will be a bit painful, but you will have to figure out how to reach, network with, and compel your audience in new ways. The good news? Technology has made this so much easier and more effective. Still need some face time? Use the demise of the trade show to really target those you want to spend time with and create a smaller get-together that makes the best use of everyone's time.

[Penguinisto]

Err, question: Why do you need representation in DC?

[Bill Kovach]

Gordon - I really have to take issue with your article.

While I can certainly appreciate your opinion, if I had a dollar [today's nickle] for every time I've heard someone say that Tradeshows are dead, I'd be in Fiji watching the sun set in front of my mansion.

Tradeshow marketing, properly executed, is a tremendous revenue generator for companies who would otherwise never have the same exposure in the marketplace.

Granted, the paradigm has changed drastically and will continue to do so. That's progress. But with lower front-end costs, new light-weight materials, site personnel training and other cost saving tactics, no other marketing method can compare with properly structured Tradeshow marketing.

The cost per contact and cost per sale is less that 50% that of more traditional sales/marketing efforts and the increase in visibe impactnin the marketplace is well worth a carefully structured program.

There is an exacting process that governs the overall strategy. When implemented and fully embraced, the ROI on Tradeshow marketing is far more impressive as a method to develop and maintain revenue streams than electronic or other media marketing.

Having been in the industry for over 30 years, [since before Velcro] we have developed a success strategy that, when properly embraced, delivers extremely positive results for all of our clients.

When coupled with a successful, outcome-oriented strategy and structured site tactics, this integral part of an overall marketing/sales plan is of tremendous benefit to companies and will remain so for years to come.

For more information, feel free to contact me direct

Bill Kovach
Kovachcommunications.com

[ghaff]

I'm really afraid that I was too clever with the headline which was intended to be a play on something Nick Carr wrote a while back about Microsoft. That's why the headline reads Trade shows are dead *(in theory)*. And I conclude with "But the reality is that there's a natural tendency toward structure in such things. I'm sure that we'll all have plenty more opportunities to partake of bad convention center food."

That said, I am skeptical about the overall value of a lot of trade shows--especially the big or unfocused ones. Not to say there's no value or that some aren't pretty good (as someone else noted Supercomputing in Austin last month was pretty good.) But I don't really expect them to go away.

[rhsc]

So basically trade shows are dead because Apple says so?

[acoole]

Let's not forgot that Apple's focus has changed recently and they are more of a retail/entertainment company now. In addition they have the luxury of retail stores around the world, in effect creating their own mini Macworld on a daily basis. Not all companies have this luxury and for my company for example, which is in the Internet space, although the Internet is good for promoting we get a lot of new business from sponsoring and exhibiting at trade shows. Can we always prove ROI? No we cannot, then again neither can we prove that from other mediums including the Internet. However with all of our marketing efforts as a consolidated effort - yes we can prove a positive ROI. Also we launched into the States 2 years ago and now we are recognized and known in the niche market we serve. That was achieved via face to face events. During the recession we are exhibiting more than we ever have. In regards to the quote "Hmm. ACME isn't at the show this year; it must be in trouble" I would like to apply a TV analogy. "Hmm, If I cancel my adverts my sales drop." Companies like me, love it when competitors don't exhibit as I can spend an hour demonstrating our product to and then having a meal with their clients. Is the trade show dead? No, because not every company in the world can sell via online social networking and viral videos. End note: Apple's share price dropped - are they in trouble?