What did you take away from ASI 2007? What caught your eye as interesting? What was “all hat and no cattle”?
Considering its size, was it a more focused show on the core of the industry, catering to buyers in a more intimate format, as show planners argue? If not, what was the tradeshow's main value?
Also, as a recent blogger posed, “Why does coin-op need two shows a year when a much larger industry such as amusement parks only has one (IAPPA)? Is there so much new equipment shown each year that we need two shows? If a regional show is required, why not depend on the distribution network to provide it?”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I might not agree with everything Richard Dutton says, but in this point, he's certainly right on the money. One national show for the amusement industry per year is certainly sufficient. If more are needed, a local show put on by the distributor or a regional show done by the same could be done, and, in fact, -should be- done.
New amusement equipment is honestly at more of a trickle than a flood. There are fewer manufacturers vying for fewer customers, and therefore, less product to be shown. I'm happy to travel once a year to the big old party, speak with factory reps, see the shiny new stuff, and ponder what looks like it will earn the best on my route. Twice a year? It's a bit much. Not that I don't enjoy a good party, but I do have a business to run, and in the separate shows, there's often the same equipment at -both- shows. Where's the benefit in that?
There are other resources for me to find out about new equipment, too: a visit or call to my local distributor, watching companies' websites online, reading the trade magazines, etc. It's not that hard.
Chalk me up for the one show a year side of the vote.
To answer the question of why we have two shows we have to go back to 1980 when Ralph Lally, owner of Playmeter magazine put on the first Amusement Operators Expo to address some needs he saw in the industry. Namely a Spring show, because the video game business was changing faster than a single show could do justice to, as well as a need to introduce operators to educational seminars (which I don't believe the AMOA show included at that time).
Shortly thereafter, Playmeter ran an article in which an operator showed how to take an old cocktail table and put a Atari 2600 in it and make his own video game. This angered the factories so much that they tried to bury Playmeter with an ad boycott. Further they created their own Spring time show in direct competition with Playmeter's show.
After some "negotiations", Playmeter agreed to a sharing of the Spring show for 10 years, after which it would be the Factories' (AAMA) show.
The Spring show became an income source for the AAMA just as the Expo is an income source for AMOA.
So, even though the industry is about as exciting as it was in 1967 and no longer needs two shows, we still have two shows. And the real reason is not because the industry needs them, but because the associations need the income of two shows.
While this is a case of the "Tail wagging the dog", you're not going to have one show until you solve the income issue.
So until then, enjoy an excuse to write of a Spring trip to Vegas.
Cool story you got here. It would be great to read something more concerning that theme.
By the way look at the design I've made myself London escort
Post a Comment