Must the show go on?

The electronics industry’s history is marked by the tomb­stones of once-great shows

The economy being what it is, many companies have had to cut operating costs, and one of the quickest ways to do that is by eliminating noncritical travel. The drop in the current airfares and hotel room costs is one testament to that, and even a show as ingrained in the industry as CES saw a dropoff in attendance. (I suspect it would have been much greater, were it not for the fact that many paid reservations and travel arrangements were made before the economy tanked in the last quarter of 2008.)

The fiscal situation is leading many people to question the value of trade shows and look for less-expensive and less-time-consuming alternatives, such as virtual or online shows. Some even say that trade shows are dead, a vestige of an old way of doing business that doesn’t make sense in the Internet Age. Indeed, the electronics industry’s history is marked by the tombstones of once-great shows: Electro, Wescon, NCC, Comdex.

Trade shows do have disadvantages, both real and perceived. It’s not cheap to send someone to them, and the cost of exhibiting is even more significant. They take people away from the office and disrupt their routine. Some see them as just an excuse for a boondoggle, that not much is really accomplished.

I have my issues with those perceptions, but before going into them, I think it’s necessary to provide a disclaimer: Hearst Business Publications’ Electronics Group DOES NOT own or produce any trade show, although we do occasionally help promote industry events. Editorially, our show coverage is based on the event’s relevance to our readers.

Back to the issues. I would not argue that trade shows aren’t costly, but rather that the investment is more than worth the return. I know of no better way to actually find out what’s really happening in the industry than to go to a show. Within the course of a few days, it’s possible to see all the latest equipment and devices, learn who the major players are, and see where the technology is headed. To do that from a desk takes much longer, even with e-mail and the Web to help.

Some say that virtual shows can do that too, but I’m sceptical. Until there’s full 3D virtual environments with haptic feedback, I don’t see how I’d really get the feel of an instrument interface or the heft of a portable device, or just get the opinion of an engineer standing next to me.

As to those who see shows as boondoggles, I’d suggest they follow a show attendee for a day. Sure, there may be a party in the evening where people relax and network, but after a day spent on the floor and in technical sessions, everyone needs to put their feet up for a few minutes. And while a show may seem like a wonderful opportunity to visit exotic places to those who don’t go to them, all most attendees get to see is a hotel room and a conference center; there’s not much glamour in show travel.

Shows will undoubtedly die, as they have in the past. But those previously mentioned disappeared either because of a technology shift, an error in marketing strategy, or both; economics usually eliminates shows only when they become redundant and/or irrelevant. You may disagree with my point of view, but if you do, I’d like to discuss it with you. Drop me an e-mail or, better yet, see me at the show.

Richard Comerford