Thomas asks: “Should vendors at these events insist on a report as to number of registered attendees, number of walk-ins, etc. after the event?” My answer: “Absolutely and not just after the event”! At shows I exhibit at I not only get the pre-conference attendee list, I get their website traffic stats for the conference home page and any other page my logo/name appears on. I get the click-through rates on any emarketing that the conference sends out as well as any deliver ability rates for print mailings. All of that data is needed to calculate your ROI and just as importantly your ROO…return on objectives. The exhibitors and sponsors should be treated as a partner of the conference and you work together to make the conference successful. It’s a mutual relationship, you can’t have one without the other. Also, don’t think “I just have a 10×10 booth with a sign and a table cloth, that sort of data tracking only applies to the big guys.” Don’t ever sell yourself short, you have obviously worked hard to create/market/sell a product or service and you deserve to be treated with the same respect as those with a 20×30 booth. You should also operate with the same level of professionalism as an exhibitor with a 20×30 booth.

What does the conference management do in the way of working with their exhibitors and sponsors? If they are not providing you with any data, what are they giving you? Do these conferences generally hold a pre-event conference call with their exhibitors? That is very helpful as it gets everyone on the same page with what marketing opportunities are available and provides those that may not be as secure in the marketing area to get help from others that are. I often wonder why I don’t see more vendors promoting the conference before hand? What if every vendor spent months 6 to 3, leading up to the conference, promoting the conference then months 3 to 1 promoting themselves? Doesn’t it stand to reason you would see more attendees through the door just through increased marketing volume? I feel strongly that exhibitors should be working “with” the conference and the conference should facilitate this relationship.

This is the biggy…I hear so much swirling around about the value/benefit of networking at conferences. When I attend a conference my networking is random…it’s social. When I exhibit there is NOTHING random about my networking. If I approach you, you can bet I have been all over your website and LinkedIn profile frontwards, backwards and sideways. If you approached me, I looked you up as soon as I had a chance. When I attend a conference I go to dinner with whoever asks and whoever I want to. When I exhibit, you know you are going to breakfast, lunch or dinner with me because I called you before the conference (from the attendee list I gain as an exhibitor) and scheduled the meal. Exhibitors/Sponsors/Speakers…you MUST be focused in your networking at conferences. Face-to-face marketing is a very powerful tool, but you need to be looking at the right face. If you are a promoting a new book…why are you going to dinner with me? I’m not a publisher or distributor. If you are wanting to speak at regional conferences, why are you going to dinner with me? I’m not on any board of any society that hosts a conference. You want to have an entertaining dinner…I’m your girl, but if you are truly at the conference for business purposes and concerned about your bottom line you should be targeting your dinner partners to those that can further your career in some way. If the attendee numbers are lower than you would like, but you have identified who you need to be doing business with and connected with them, your conference value will be strong.

I don’t know that the trade show industry as a whole is seeing a drop in attendance numbers. Currently I’m at back-to-back conferences that both have record-setting attendance numbers and both exhibit halls are sold out. I do know that with our business model, the larger the conference attendance the LESS likely we are to exhibit. This relates to what we have set as our objectives for exhibiting. Do you exhibit for: sales, leads, product demos, product launches or customer relation building? Your objectives should drive first, if you should exhibit and second at which conferences. I don’t know that the conference model needs to be turned on it’s ear but I do know we need to have options. I also know that just like you educate yourself in proper genealogy research, vendors need to educate themselves in exhibiting best practices.

The crowd at NGS in Cincinnati this year did not seem to be down at all from the previous year in Charleston so I’m not convinced that all conference attendance is in decline just yet. Many sessions in Cincy were packed to the point that everyone didn’t always get into the session they wanted. On the surface there doesn’t seem to be much difference in the two cities. Both had local/regional research opportunities and the programs were comparable with many of the same big name speakers. The only real difference was the mid-western vs southern flavor to some of the sessions. It will be interesting to see if the numbers shift next year when NGS is in Las Vegas while FGS has the draw of the ACPL in Ft. Wayne.

Looking at ways to improve things, including considering why other types of conferences are drawing bigger crowds, is always a good idea. That really should be done even when things are going well but it’s imperative when they are not. It’s obvious from the comments here and elsewhere that people have been thinking about this issue. I hope the people who have the power to make changes are listening.

Thomas – thanks for starting this conversation.

Why was the Cincinnati conference so well attended compared to Birmingham?

It’s not fair to compare a conference in London with one in the U.S. Millions of people can get to London in 1 day on a good rail system. In the U.S. there are few places that could compare.

I attend conferences, but hate to pay for registration and find that many of the sessions require additional fees. Every year more and more “pay per view” sessions are being added. Maybe all lectures, workshops, etc. should be paid for separately, with no overall conference fee.

But Diane Boumenot’s comment “Those with established products and large booths need to quit the chit chat with each other and appear ready and willing to be approached” caused me to shout ‘YES’ at my computer. If I’m already a customer/user what incentive did I have to approach their booth? Act like a groupie and tell them how much I love their service? I might have to interrupt their conversation to do it.

Look, all sarcasm aside, I have worked the booth before in another life. I know it can be boring and exhausting work, frequently with the Catch-22 of negative ROI for attending or bad press for not attending. But get out into the walkways. Not a user? Let me show you what we’ve got. Already a user? What do you like and how can we improve. Is that so much to ask?

For the lecture format as constituted, I would be opposed to pre-selling tickets. I changed my lecture schedule a couple of times. Twice based on recommendations from other attendees, once based on lecture X made me want to attend lecture Y. I also think pre-selling for the basic lecture format might leave first timers/beginners feeling disappointed with how they allocated their funds.

On the other hand, the waiting list for some of the paid workshops should be a big neon sign to organizers these hands on/advanced events should be playing a bigger role.

I want to be clear, I loved attending FGS2012. I absolutely expect to attend at least one national conference in 2013. (I wanted to attend NGS but I can’t afford Vegas and have no research there.) The face to face interaction and business networking opportunities are invaluable. I absolutely loved taking the screen that usually separates me from some of the folks who encourage and inspire me out of the equation.

We would gladly provide attendance numbers to our exhibitors if they asked for it. When we exhibit at other conferences, though, we wouldn’t think of asking for “proof.” That’s not what it’s about for us – it’s all about partnerships and collaboration.

Our count reports do jibe with reality. We explicitly describe what the count represents. We don’t have any reason to inflate attendance.

Here’s what I see about conferences. We get many, many attendees that are not wired in to the online genealogical community. They are not over-exposed to lectures, either live or webinar. They truly appreciate the opportunities that Jamboree affords. We don’t want to neglect these occasional or offline researchers.

I agree that the conference structure can use a big boot in the patootie to get more innovative. If you have an idea on how to do that, I encourage you to volunteer with one of the many genealogical events to help implement your ideas. Everyone will be better because of your involvement.