Discussion

By Michael J on Oct 08, 2009

Adam,

Have you seen any numbers on total cost spent on the show? Or the numbers on how many deals were closed?

By Cary Sherburne on Oct 09, 2009

I think it is also interesting to compare Print 09 with Graph Expo. Print 09, even though it was longer, drew just slightly more attendees than Graph Expo 2008, which GASC reported at more than 26,000 from 8,800 individual companies, presumably including exhibitors. According to GASC, there were 28,678 attendees at Print 09, which included exhibitors and attendees, and 18,999 actual verified attendee/buyers from 10,512 unique companies. Print 09 had 680 exhibiting companies that occupied 566,284 square feet, compared to Graph Expo 2008's 450,000 square feet and more than 600 exhibitors.

Although the last two years have not been "normal" for the industry by any measure, the size of the two shows was not dramatically different and one wonders whether the "Print" distinction is worth pursuing or whether all of the shows should be called Graph Expo (or whatever) and remain at the shorter duration of a Graph Expo. The show company is already planning for Graph Expo 2010, with 550 vendors (down from 2008), the return of PackPrint and six special interest pavilions, including the debut of the Newspaper Pavilion.

Print 09 had a significant amount of focus on education, both in the conference and within the vendor booths. We hope to see that continue, and expand, as more printing companies struggle to find a way forward in light of the difficult economy and the structural change our industry is undergoing. What would be really exciting is some sort of partnership with organizations on the buy-side, like the CMO Council, the DMA and others, that might draw more marketers to the event and provide education relative to what marketers expect from the graphic communications companies of the future.

I could envision a Red Couch or K-Zone kind of scenario where panels or individuals from these constitutencies as well as the "new" print buyer are cycling through a show-floor talk show that could provide deep insight and a wake-up call to a lot of printer attendees. It could even be broadcast live, taking a page from Kodak's book. And how about free keynotes before the show opens each day as On Demand has done for years, featuring high profile folks from inside and outside print -- focused more on the outside. Senior marketers, ad agency leaders, people who are in the midst of driving the changes that are impacting our industry. Maybe Bob Garfield of Ad Age and author of The Chaos Scenario would be a good choice. And a Google speaker is always pretty educational. Just a thought ... I am sure GASC has their thinking caps on as to how to serve their core constituency while at the same time helping everyone understand the impact of the transition we are undergoing.

By George Alexander on Oct 09, 2009

I agree with Cary: I think the every-four-year "Print" concept (at one time, it was every 5 years) has lost its value. Back when the shows were focused on "heavy iron", a four-year cycle made sense: major new products were introduced at about that rate. Now, though, most things are digital and development cycles are short. Let's just have Graph Expo every year.

As Cary notes, the last two years were anything but normal. Still, it is worth noting the decline in attendence at Graph Expo/Print. Here are the official numbers for non-exhibitor attendance (from press releases following the shows):

Graph Expo 2006: 20,079
Graph Expo 2007: 20,285
Graph Expo 2008: [non-exhibitor figure not reported to my knowledge]
Print 09: 18,999

Although the economy is sure to recover, our industry is shrinking and I don't think we'll see those 20,000+ numbers again.

By Patrick Henry on Oct 09, 2009

Messe Düsseldorf reports the value of deals done at drupa. As far as I know, GASC doesn't provide the same information for the Graph Expo and Print shows. That probably has spared GASC a lot of embarrassment over the last two years, but we are still in the dark as to what the Chicago shows actually contribute, in dollars-and-cents terms, to the economic vitality of the industry.

I like the idea of adding high-profile content for buyers and marketers. "Verticalizing" the shows by organizing the exhibits around end-user segments is another approach worth exploring. But would giving the Chicago shows a customer's-customer focus do anything to make them better venues for selling equipment, supplies, and services to printers? I don't know, and for the opinion that matters, I'd turn to the only group qualified to give it: the exhibiting vendors, whose ROI expectations are the benchmarks we should be applying in any discussion of the future of the GASC events.

While it's true that the last two years have been atypical, the absence of some vendors from Print 09 and the diminished presence of others tell us that the Chicago shows have lost some of their allure as sales opportunities. Restoring it will take more than post-show press releases about square footage and head counts. Where is the evidence that a heavy investment in exhibiting at Print or Graph Expo is measurably good for a vendor's bottom line?

By Michael J on Oct 09, 2009

Cary, I think those are great suggestions.

I think Patrick has put his finger on the problem with the biz model of trade shows. If the only opinion that counts are the vendors trying to make sales, the future, in my not so humble opinion, does not bode well.

I think I remember seeing a tweet during the show "heard from Heidelberg, as in Maybe we should just go to Drupa and the big show in China ( sorry I don't know the name.)

The inconvenient truth is that the growth market for selling hardware is in Asia and BRIC countries, not here in the US. DRUPA seems to me the natural center in Europe and China or Australia is the natural center in Asia.

Here in the States we need to invent new markets and new ways of using the excess capacity of the installed base and streamlining to continue making it more efficient. Given that the genius of America has always been inventing business models, it should work just fine.

But for the trade show model, Where are the new revenue streams.

I feel a bit like a one horse pony, but I can't see why looking at "educating the industry" and "training new entrants into our workforce" could not work as a profit center, instead of a cost center.

Given the amount of money being spent for CTE, and graphic design at very understaffed Community Colleges, it seems like a low hanging fruit.

By Ian Mackenzie on Oct 12, 2009

We chose to exhibit at Print '09 this year.
Here are my comments:

First, I am intrigued by the stats that Mike has posted that shows an increase in the number of exhibitor attendees. How is this possible given that there were decreases in all other areas? are "us vendors" seeing the situation differently? or, are there just more products coming to market? Either way, this disparity should not go unnoticed.

Second, these shows simply must be shorter. Three days is fine. Sunday, Monday, Tuesday or Thursday, Friday Saturday. Everyone agrees that, at print '09, Monday and Tuesday were well attended. Wednesday was abysmal. Friday, Saturday and Sunday were anemic. If you combined the traffic of Friday, Saturday and Sunday into one day, then added Monday and Tuesday, it would yield a productive event.

Third, I also believe that the small conferences (IPA, PIA/GATF, IDEAlliance Summits)should consolidate their initiatives around the larger trade shows for the betterment of all. Let's face it, print providers (the attendees) are facing tighter budgets and print buyers (also attendees) are spending less. Therefore, they are also going to less events. Instead of these events all competing with each other, they should leverage individual strengths to create a stronger overall impact.

For example, if the IPA Technical Conference was at the Hyatt at the same time as Graphexpo in Chicago and that was combined with a G7 Summit Day, wouldn't that be cool?

Our entire (global)business system is consolidating, rolling up, combining, merging and uniting. Isn't it time for trade shows and conferences to respond to this to remain competitive and relevant?

By Heime Schwartzbaum on Oct 13, 2009

We are going at this too late in the game. Printing has changed, permanently. This was the worst attended show I can remember. As more marketing communications go digital, and younger workers take the reigns, the future belongs to the Internet, Facebook and Twitter. Glossy, printed brochures are out, and "Green" is in.

Chicago is just too expensive of a venue as well. The union rules at McCormick are stifling, and even the cheapest hotels are not cheap. Why would print shop owners, struggling to make ends meet, spend all that cash just to listen to Heidelberg reps tell you to "stay the course." Stay the course? It's game over. The industry needs to wake up.

By Patrick Berger on Oct 14, 2009

Networking is why I gone to the shows for 31 years.

Let's get real. How many go to the show blind with the intention of making a major purchase? There are always exceptions but they are very far and few between.

The shows value is the camaraderie. No where else can you get this with so many vendors.

Asking service techs and installers questions and observing their body language is extremely important in a one on one question and answer session in a public venue. This alone is worth going to the shows.

Watching and listening to vendors speaking to customers is priceless.

By Jim Hamilton on Oct 14, 2009

Published show reports at the time put the attendance figure for Print 05 and Converting 05 at 62,000. See http://americanprinter.com/mag/print_05_1005/index.html. So the GASC estimated numbers basically split that right down the middle.

By Lisa Bickford on Oct 15, 2009

Patrick Berger: Here! Here! Love the show - have gone 11 out of the last 13 years including this year. Want to go to Drupa and heard there is a cool one in Italy. We always go with a plan, always go to lunch with a vendor, and we always go on Saturday.
Heime - if you own a print shop, perhaps you should "fire-sale" it to me, if printing as dead as you say??? (Said with a little jab, not a big jab.)

By Heime Schwartzbaum on Oct 19, 2009

Lisa,

DRUPA is great, and it's nice to meet people in the industry, but the one thing you don't mention is what new equipment you bought at Print09. If owners/attendees keeping going to these things just to party and to get free lunches, we are already dead. Why would vendors keep supporting a show where all they do is spend money and get nothing in return?