One word...

Another Motivation Show is in the books.  Two fabulous days of networking and client meetings.  Two days of trying to determine what on Earth has happened to the once singular show for our market.

I started asking my counterparts, my reps, anybody I came across to summarize their show experience in a single word.  As the show progressed, some retracted their early words and replaced them with others.  Some couldn't find one word, so they found three or four and said them really fast in the hopes it would be interpreted as one word--sort of like "fuggedaboutit" or "knowwhatimean?".

The range of responses, as you would expect, was wide.  It ranged from "grim" (said early on Wednesday, it should be noted) to "terrific".   Of course, you would get this from ANY trade show, as the perceptions are subject to wide dispersal based on how any one person's experience.  But some other words were more revealing:

"Claustrophic"
"Compact"
"Intimate"

There were several variants on "small" or "smaller".  Obviously the walls were closer this year, and that caused many to feel uncomfortable.  But the reality is that the room has shrunk to the size of the audience.  Had we had 20% more exhibit space, we would have thought the show was "deader" than it was.  Perhaps this is the New Reality of Chicago--a much more concentrated footprint that creates the atmosphere of busy-ness that might not be relative to the absolute numbers of attendees.

"Interesting"
"Different"

I've been referring to this year's show as a "coalition of the willing".  Those who made the trip were there because they wanted to be.  Those who paid to exhibit wanted to talk to customers, and by God they did.  So the Vibe was pretty upbeat--as it should be with a room of like-minded people.  And the absence of many brands that used to be here (mine included) was not a real factor--the 4-5 of us who were at the show but not exhibiting wouldn't have changed the size of the show's footprint all that much.

"Transitory"
"Uncertain"
"Done" (and it's sibling, "Over")

There was no shortage of Bears in the building (fitting, since we were about a half mile from Soldier Field).  Many exhibitors believe the show has lost its way and will never return to its glory days.  This is probably true, and doesn't distinguish the Mo Show from dozens of other trade shows.  Other than CES and PPAI's Expo,it's hard to find a trade show on an upward curve.  Maybe we should just get over it.

Chicago's challenge is that everyone enters the building with comparisons to some time in the indeterminate past when things were "better".  And until/unless the Show gets "blown up" it can never overcome these perceptions.  Take PPAI's Expo.  For years it was in Dallas.  It had its good and bad attributes.  When PPAI took the bold step of moving the show to Las Vegas, there was no sentiment of "gee, I wish it was still in Dallas", or "it's not as good as it was in the past".  It was "HOLY CRAP!!  WE'RE IN VEGAS!!.  HOW COOL IS THIS?"

This is what Chicago needs to do.  Not necessarily move to Vegas (although there is plenty of sentiment for that), but to do something extraordinary that makes everyone forget the "good old days" (even if they weren't all that "good") and focus us on the here and now. Having it at McCormick Place in October will not create that buzz. 

And finally, I heard this word just as I was heading for the door:

"Necessary"

Our business needs a convention, not just a trade show.  A place where ideas can be exchanged, new contacts made, and a moving forward of our market for our customers.  This cannot be accomplished at PPAI no matter how important "brand" is.  There are just too many suppliers whose products are not well suited to the Promotional Products market.  No--we need our own venue, with our own kind, to nurture the business.  If Chicago cannot be that venue, then let's get all the smart people together and find out what/where it needs to be.

What we need to stop doing is asking whether Chicago is "in trouble"--it is.  Desperately so.  If IMEX delivers on its promise to exhibitors and attendees, incentive travel is "done" for Chicago.  That leaves a much smaller universe of exhibitors from which to create a raison d'etre for a show.

The rise of the "multiples" has further dimmed Chicago's prospects.  When 22% of the entire Exhibitor list is resident in a single booth (92 out of 411 exhibitors according to the directory) we are moving towards a show with a half dozen exhibitors.  That isn't good no matter how you slice it.

Chicago wasn't half-bad.  But it was probably 40% bad based on what it used to be and what some exhibitors (like me) want from the show (new business, new channels, etc.).  I'm unsure whether a 40% bad show (again, not half bad) can survive in today's world.  Which brings me to my final word on the subject:

"Unfulfilled"


Pete