TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Hal Hart <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Tue, 28 Jan 1997 09:22:04 -0800
text/plain (51 lines)
Rod states a common-sensical strategy below which was articulated by
Tri-Ada'96 planners & SIGAda officers long before last month.  I think
#1 & #2 were accomplished and hopefully #3 can therefore happen.  We
will never grow Tri-Ada back near 1000 attendees.  We know we can have
a technically successful event at a much smaller size, but we really
have to "prove" to vendors that a show drawing approx.  600 is of
enough value to them, at least to send stuff for a 10x10 or 10x20
booth (less booth equipment, less staff, maybe just a regional office
instead of HQ).  Hence the strategy below.

For those who don't know, after TA95, largely at the request of our
best vendors, we decided to limit booth sizes for TA96 (a double being
the largest offered, no more mega-booths) so that our biggest vendors
would not feel compelled to continue over-spending to "keep up with
the Jones's."  While this appears to have NOT paid off for TA96
(we had maybe 1/3 less distinct vendors, approx. 60% less floor
space sold), there were other factors too, as Rod mentions  --
continued mergers in the industry, a very late start in selling
TA96 exhibit space due to change of Conf. Mgmt Contractors after TA95,
etc.  I don't know if mergers will continue (how many more could there
be??), but we know that exhibit contacts & sales is going to be many
months ahead of last year; it's essentially started already.

Beyond that, perhaps every SIGAda member ought to work as an extension
of the Exhibits Chair: Any vendor you deal with offering
products/services related to or compatible with Ada, lobby them to be
at Tri-Ada this year.  Tell that that there will be many hundreds of
people like you there.  Give their names to Ben Brosgol and Rod
Abraham (see 1st 2 cc's above).                 -- hh

>The reason for the '96 [Exhibit Hall] decline has nothing to do with
>Thanksgiving. We interviewed every '95 exhibitor (or at least those still in
>business or not acquired by another exhibitor).  No one gave that as a
>reason.  The consensus: it is no longer a good show at which to
>exhibit !  All the rest is commentary.  Our goal in '96 was to:
>1. stop the decline in conference attendance;
>2. produce a conference that would cause attendees and exhibitors to
>say good things about the conference;
>3. using the positives from #2 as the beginning of turning things
>around for '97