The years after the 1996 peak saw a slide in 1997 and again in 1998, with a bump up to 4.77 million total attendees for 2000. But in the wake of recession and 9-11, overall attendance fell and remained low, at just 4.18 million for 2004. Tradeshow Week reported a notable jump in attendance in 2006, up to 4.62 million from 2005’s 4.16. Yet that sharp increase in 2006 was really a product of the decision to add six events put on by privately owned trade marts in Dallas, Las Vegas, and High Point, North Carolina. These trade mart events averaged 50,000 attendees, well above the average for the balance of the “200,” thus boosting the overall attendance. Yet even with these added events, total attendance remained at about the level of the mid-1990s.
The “200” attendance for 2007 was 4.41 million, followed by 4.56 million in 2008—still below the 1996 peak of 5.08 million and the 4.8 million of 1997, and equal to the total for 1998. Then, for 2009, the “200” attendance total came to just 3.84 million—a drop of 15.8 percent. Major event attendance had not, by 2008, even rebounded to the peak levels of the late 1990s. The 2009 total brought the “200” events back to the total attendance they had garnered in 1989.
A Note on Measuring the “200”
Contemporary consultant analyses that employ measures of the “200” events usually show historical data in terms of year-to-year percent change or index numbers. For example, a February 2009 market analysis for the New Orleans Morial Convention Center by CSL International included a chart of “Tradeshow Week 200—Convention & Tradeshow Industry.” The chart showed index number values of space use, attendance, and exhibiting companies for “200” events from 1987 through 2007. The index value for total attendance in 1991 was 110, hitting 142 in 1997 and, after a post-9-11 drop, reaching about 163 by 2007. The clear impression from this chart is that attendance steadily grew through the 1990s, fell in 2001 and 2002, and then resumed a steady upward trajectory. That image of annual attendance growth is thoroughly incorrect.50
The CSL chart indicates that “200” attendance grew by some 48 percent from 1991 to 2007. The actual totals for 1991—3.88 million—and 2007—4.56 million—yield a percent change of 17.5 percent. And where the CSL chart indicates that attendance for 2007 neatly exceeded the total for 1997 (about 15 percent greater), the actual total attendance figures were 4,795,872 in 1997 and 4,413,372 for 2007—a clear drop. How could CSL turn slow growth into dramatic increases and a decline into a gain?
Each year, Tradeshow Week provided a summary total of each measure of the “200,” including attendance and exhibit space use. The editors also report these totals for the prior year. So, for example, the 2007 events attracted a total of 4.4 million attendees, compared to a reported total of 4.29 million for 2006—an apparent increase. Yet the report a year earlier on the 2006 events showed a total attendance of 4.62 million. In the aggregate, attendance dropped. Tradeshow Week nonetheless reported an increase in attendance of 1.6 percent. Tradeshow Week thus compares an event’s current performance to a revised figure for a year earlier submitted by the event organizer. And those revised figures for individual events often differ substantially from those reported a year earlier. For example, the “200” listing for the 2007 SEMICON West show for the semiconductor industry gave an attendance figure of 14,348, together with a previous year (2006) figure of 12,740. That worked out to 12.6 percent increase in attendance. Yet a year earlier, the Tradeshow Week “200” listing showed attendance for SEMICON West’s 2006 event at 19,600. By employing the revised attendance total for 2006, what should have been a decrease of 27 percent turned into apparent attendance growth.
Much the same thing occurred for the 2007 Outdoor Retailer Summer Market. Attendance for 2007 was shown as 7,840, compared to a revised 2006 total of 7,150—an increase of 9.6 percent. Yet the Summer Market’s attendance in the 2006 edition of the “200” was shown as 7,879, for a real if modest decrease. And a similar revised attendance figure for a year earlier for the annual Shooting, Hunting, and Outdoor Trade show (a revised 24,366 for 2006 versus the original 26,139) reduced the event’s attendance drop from 22 percent to 16 percent. This same pattern of a revised figure for the previous year occurs for exhibit space use. Not every “200” event restates its attendance and space use numbers for the previous year. But enough do so to affect the overall totals and the calculation of percent change.
Tradeshow Week’s consistent use of revised figures for the previous year has led to the calculation of annual percent change values that do not accurately represent the performance of the actual events. Modest actual increases turn into large gains; small seeming declines are actually far larger. The overall result, whether reported as the calculated percent change or transformed into index numbers based on percent change, as the CSL firm has done, is to create the appearance of regular year-to-year growth when actual growth is far more modest. Even Tradeshow Week’s recent “200” publications have made the gap between the annual percent change numbers and the actual performance evident, by presenting a table of cumulative annual growth rates based on the aggregate “200” totals. In the table and bar chart showing the 1997 and 2007 attendance totals, 2007 is lower than 1997, yielding an annual growth rate of −0.8 percent. Still, the consultant reports portray the 2007 attendance as well above the 1997 figure.
The gap between CSL and other consultants’ index numbers and reality is even more dramatic for 2009. The chart in the 2009 edition of the “200” shows the total attendance of 4.51 million in 1999 and 3.84 for 2009, noting a cumulative annual growth rate of −1.8 percent.
The figures on annual convention and tradeshow performance produced by Tradeshow Week thus have to be evaluated and employed with real care. By employing index values or percent change measures rather than actual totals, it has been possible for almost every industry consultant, including John Kaatz and Bill Krueger of CSL, Charlie Johnson of C. H. Johnson Consulting, Tom Hazinski and Hans Detlefsen of HVS, and David Petersen and Rob Canton of PWC, to overstate demand growth and provide an inaccurate picture of the industry. Such a picture would, of course, help local officials and business leaders make the case, in city after city, that a new or larger convention center would see a substantial and growing stream of new business.
PriceWaterhouseCooper’s Annual Convention Center Report
Where both the Tradeshow Week data sources, and the more recent Center for Exhibition Industry Research annual Index, sought to measure only the demand side of the convention equation, PriceWaterhouseCoopers has long tracked a series of measures of the actual performance of convention centers. The firm’s annual “Convention Center Report,” begun in 1985 by Laventhol & Horwath, covers just over 100 individual centers each year, with the most consistent reporting from larger centers in major metropolitan areas. These “Gateway Centers” are located in metropolitan areas with at least 30,000 hotel rooms and have at least 100,000 square feet in exhibit space, a group that amounts to some 30 centers each year. PWC also reports figures for two other categories of centers. “National Centers” are in metropolitan areas with between 15,000 and 30,000 area hotel rooms, or in areas with over 30,000 rooms but with less than 100,000 square feet of exhibit space. “Regional Centers” are located in smaller metropolitan areas, or are smaller or secondary facilities. The Convention Center Report only shows center performance on such things as occupancy and attendance purely as means, with no breakdown of data for individual centers. And it does rely on voluntary reporting by center managers. But it has the decided advantage of tapping real performance, separating center events between the conventions and tradeshows that generally draw out-of-town attendees and the largely local public or consumer shows, like an auto show or home show.51
PWC presented an analysis of the performance of Gateway Centers as part of its strategic plan for an expansion of the San Diego Convention Center, with a chart covering 1999 through 2007. In 1999, these centers averaged about 67 conventions and tradeshows, figures that excluded consumer or public shows. That total fell to some 59 for 2000 and 62 for 2001. No year from 2001 through 2007 has equaled those totals—the highest convention and tradeshow total since 2001 was 2003, at 56. The total for 2007 came to 53.52
PWC included more recent data in its 2008, 2009, and 2010 Convention Center Reports. The firm reported an average of 57 conventions and tradeshows at Gateway Centers