Slashdot Mirror
Doc Searls On Fixing Tradeshows
zachlipton writes "Almost everyone seems to have a love/hate relationship with tradeshows, the giant geek, suit, and vendor gatherings put on by a handfull of corperations. Doc Searls writes in this month's LinuxJournal on his suggestions for fixing tradeshows. The problem, as he puts it, is that traditional shows make two assumptions: 'what matters most is helping vendors sell stuff to customers' and 'knowledge flows top-down, from speakers to audiences.'"
Remember presentation of Windows 98?
BSOD while presenting the new "features"?
Products speak for themselves, you don't need to talk about them, just let people have a "test drive" and it's enough to give them a clue. And vendors will learn ALL that is wrong if they just watch people on their "test drives".
(yep, one of parts of BOFH, plug-in the high-voltage laptop into SCSI port because the port supposedly is meant to withstand it and be capable to communicate this way. If you're down some $10.000 on demo equipment you will learn not to lie to customers next time.)
Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
For those of us who consistently work 12-20 Hour days (including most weekends) it IS a perk. Especially if it's on the other end of the island so you have to be put in a hotel and your basic needs are covered (free food).
Even if you stay at an all inclusive it doesn't cost that much extra to take your girlfriend along.
Trade shows are in fact a substitute for vacation time if chosen carefully.
Note that no mention is made of new products or educational speeches. Relax and have fun if that means listening to Linus and ESR hurry through a Panel Discussion so they can get to Duns River Falls, cool. If it means going uh-ah-whoa over the same junk they showed last year. Irie. If it means grabbing free stuff from every booth in sight. Enjoy.
For me they are a "Perk". Even on the occasions where my company is presenting and I have to help set up the booth.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Amen to that! Why do you think places like Vegas, Miami and other touristy spots get chosen for big shows? Conferences are great because I get out of the office and talk to others on how they cope with their problems and when there's absolutely nothing going on at the conference that I like, I go to the beach or the casino. Best thing is I don't have a phone rininging off the hook unless it's REALLY a problem.
Gorkman
Scenario: you are an IT manager type. Your division is about to take on two new missions. You go to the trade show; in one place and in a relatively short amount of time - typically 2-5 days - you get to see the major players in relevant markets exhibiting their wares. You can compare features and prices and tinker with hardware, often speaking to marketing, sales, and even technical folks in the space of ten minutes. You can also make a ridiculous number of contacts. Yes, you are paying to receive marketing, but if you have the need (as in the scenario) you get at at least as much out of the exchange as you give.
That sounds like good bang-for-the-buck, yes?
PS Disclaimer-thingie: I generally think of the RSA Security Conference when I think of trade shows. YMMV with smaller expos.
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
...I remember when I could actually learn things at trade shows. I could belly up to a booth and play with some software hands-on and learn its capabilities. The people in the booth actually knew the product. In some cases they were developers.
The turning point came circa 1987 or 1988 and I remember the instant it occurred. I was evaluating a word processor, and the person in the booth didn't know whether it could import files from some other word processor. I said, "Well, let's try," and pulled out a diskette containing some files. And she said, "I'm sorry, we've been instructed not to let anyone insert diskettes in the demo machine."
I used to walk up to booths that were demonstrating OCR equipment, which, of course, always worked perfectly on the particular sheets they were scanning for the test. I would ask a couple of questions about its ability to scan a wide range of material, to which the answer was always "yes." I would then pick up some of the booth literature describing the product and ask them to try scanning it. If they said, "Oh, that's glossy," I would look around for anything in my bag or lying around that was, say, an ordinary typed (remember this the eighties) document on bond paper, until I found something that the booth representative agreed was a fair "real-world" test. They'd put it in the stack and scan it. The results were very revealing.
Starting in the early nineties, I started to encounter booth people that would no depart from their memorized scripts, had know knowledge apart from their memorized scripts, and would not allow any hands-on interaction or requests to explore features more deeply ("OK... so could you show us what happens if you...").
At MacWorld, I'd always head for the booths that were farther from the entrance where you'd sometimes find little companies that were interested in showing you their wares, not giving you the hard-sell. And I used to love the funky little BCS "Mac Megameeting," a low-key trade-show-like event.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
What does "attrition" mean? The term's not clear from the context. Why was it so important to your argument?
You clearly stated the traditional goals of the trade show, but your proposed goals are not nearly as clear.
Otherwise, a thought-provoking piece and a topic you should continue to examine. Trade shows suck; let's make them better.
I present at 6-8 trade shows a year, for about five years now. I've also done a lot of booth duty over the years, and covered shows as press.
One thing the original article missed is the big difference between people who pay the $300-$1200 to attend the sessions and seminars, and those who get the free (theoretically you have to pay ~$50, but free passes are very readily available).
Those two groups have very different experiences. Exhibit-only folks don't hear any sessions other than sponsored sessions. Full attendees get to do sessions, and often free food and decent swag, like conference bags. Best show ever for that kind of thing is Apple's WWDC. For example, free sit-down dinners, all the Krusty Kreme you can eat in the morning, fresh Jamba Juice throughout the day, an honestly good bag, and something Impressive. Last year, everyone got a free iSight, for example.
Lots of people I've hears complaining about how lame a show is are exhibit-only, and are missing the bulk of it. Also, folks in the booths are often told to prioritize their attention depending on the badge type. Attendees and press get the most attention - attendees since they've already shown they're willing to spend some money, and press because they're press. Speaker badges are pretty effective as well. Exhibitor badges make get a close look to see if it's from a competitor. Exhibit-only are on the bottom of the totem pole - they'll get talked to, but with less attention than any of the above.
The other thing that may not be apparent is the cost of the booths for exhibitors. A small booth rental, plus the cost of shipping of equipment, and transport for booth workers can easily be $100,000 for a significant show. I'm sure companies like Sony spent well in excess of $10M for a big show like NAB.
My personal favorite show is DV Expo, just because it's a fun group of folks, and at a human scale. NAB is where I do business development for the next year. WWDC wins for sheer geek envy.
My video compression blog