Comments on: Conferences are Dumb (and Wasteful)

By: April

April — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 00:29:46 +0000

Hi Saeed,
You’re right. There are still a few good, focused trade shows out there that do a great job for their segments. In general I find that those same shows are also good for driving leads because customers see them as critical to attend. I could imagine VM World being a show like that.
I’m less convinced that a competitor could gain an advantage over you because you weren’t at a particular show (unless they are getting the good leads you aren’t of course). I’d still measure ROI on the booth by revenue.
Last week I was at Interop/Web2.0 Expo for the sole purpose of doing press/analyst meetings. Not once was I asked why we weren’t in a booth (and frankly, I doubt the analysts I met with had even walked the floor).
I also really like the idea of taking the money you would have spent on a booth and doing something more creative around the show like the Iterasi Bus at Gnomedex which had loads of people talking. Another company I used to work for held a customer/partner event which was much cheaper than the booth would have been with a much bigger impact on key customers. If it’s worth doing (and some of them are for sure), it’s worth doing in a remarkable way.

By: Saeed Khan

Saeed Khan — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 23:33:15 +0000

April,
Interesting post. Having just returned from VMWorld last week, I have to say I do appreciate where you are coming from…BUT…generating leads and networking aren’t the only objectives or benefits of exhibiting at a show.
First, let me say that not all shows are equal. Some shows can have more value than others. While that is a truism, it is easy to forget in these discussions.
Some of the other benefits include meeting with partners and key customers, analysts and press, providing a venue for “soft” marketing with prospects, and most importantly being seen by competitors and other industry luminaries.
The sad truth about certain shows, (VMWorld being one of them if you play in the virtualization space) is that like certain Hollywood red carpet galas, being seen in attendance is as important as what you do when attending.
As you know, marketing is the art of managing perception and reputation, and while being seen isn’t the only reason to attend a show, it is one which is hard to measure with the $100 test.
So, the net (IMHO) is that trade shows, like any other marketing activity need to be thought through, the objectives clearly defined in advance, and the results measured (not simply the lead->close #s) to identify if the expense was justified.
Saeed

By: Rob Tyrie

Rob Tyrie — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 21:23:57 +0000

I agree with you on this for North American shows.
However, the Europeans, specifically CEBIT, have a better approach where buyers, sellers and partners are organized enough to do business at these meetings. On top of the trade show elements, they also factor in large social events for staff and customers. This model works because of concentration of effort and focus, From what I was told when I went, it was the one show a company would do in a year. The NA approach just doesn’t follow this model, they are too much like commercials and not enough like business meetings IMHO. RT