PDA

View Full Version : SHOT Show Downside



Stickman
7 February 2010, 11:55
SHOT Show 2010 was larger than ever, with more floor walkers, and more manufacturers than I've seen. It was also chopped up with no real sense of layout that made sense. Remington Military mixed into the hunting section? Come on, how is that helping dealers, distributors or the manufacturer?



I heard from multiple well known manufacturers that SHOT is less and less of what it used to be. As MIL and LE gets thrown into the Hunting section, and the show grows to obscene size, the return on the manufacturers investment doesn't seem to be there. One of the guys commented that SHOT runs about 250k once you figure everything in. For that money, they could be doing adwork in print or pushing into pictures and online work more heavily. I also heard a lot of people commenting that SHOT is no longer an insider show, and that now its everyone who knows a guy with a FFL running around witha bag looking to load up with free stuff.

I think the internet and raw size of SHOT is detracting from what it used to be.


Anyone else getting similar feedback?

Slippers
7 February 2010, 12:44
I agree with you on the size becoming an issue. It was so large, and spread through so many rooms, that it was actually difficult to find the vendors you were looking for. The map was useless, and completely incorrect in some cases.

I happen to do trade shows in other industries, and you can't completely get away from the bag toting people that only want free stuff. It's a side effect of any venue like that.

Also, it seems as though people these days lack the courtesy and respect to not waste a salesperson's time at a show unless they have a genuine interest in purchasing a product.

TripleBravo
7 February 2010, 12:45
I can't speak about past shows because this was my first, however I did find the layout very disjointed and confusing. Many of the conversations I had with vendors/manufacturers felt rushed. Some guys...Bill Geissele comes to mind...were just too swamped to talk to at all...that is after you actually found his relatively small booth amongst the crowds and huge displays.

Overall, the show seemed almost too big to me...but I was chalking that up to me being a newbee to the industry and it being my first Shot Show experience. They definitely need to do something about that cab line!

Stickman
7 February 2010, 13:20
Some guys...Bill Geissele comes to mind...were just too swamped to talk to at all...that is after you actually found his relatively small booth amongst the crowds and huge displays.


I swung by his booth 3 or 4 times, and each time he was mobbed. My talking with him wasn't anything that couldn't be said over the phone or via email, so I didn't jump in.

Bill was one of the people I had wanted to speak with at SHOT that I never got a chance to. Last SHOT Show, we were able to talk for awhile, but his booth location was different.

tac40
7 February 2010, 13:31
Right on Stick. This year's SHOT at the Sands Convention Center was not perfect. By Friday, the vendors were leaving by noon time and rushing out. Like all, the people I wanted to talk to were overwhelmed or crowded out. Hopefully Sands will figure this out next time.

Stickman
7 February 2010, 15:44
Do you think SHOT has the ability to launch new products the same way that it did 10 years ago?

Devilphish
7 February 2010, 17:03
Looking at videos from contributors that were at SHOT, it seems like instead of manufacturers taking some of their product line they are taking a good deal of it above and beyond their new products. While I didn't have the pleasure of attending the show I have to wonder if the venue is suited for the size of the show anymore, or if the organizers are equipped to deal with the magnitude of the show anymore. Seems like the companies that released their 2010 product catalogs (Magpul, for instance) prior to the show got a lot of talk on this board and others.

So the big question is, I think, Is it more effective to concentrate efforts on a web based attack versus an exhibition show or would a combined effort pay off for the introduction of new product?

rob_s
7 February 2010, 17:58
All it's going to take is one major vendor (Glock, Remington, one like that) to realize the whole thing is a waste of time and pull out and the house of cards is going to come crashing down.

I think that most are only there because everyone else is there.

Eric
7 February 2010, 21:10
It will be interesting to see what happens over the next few years. With the astronomical cost involved, will manufacturers with an already stressed budget pull out?

I haven't made it for the past two years, but I plan on going next year. Hopefully by then the venue will be all squared away.

tac40
8 February 2010, 07:13
Do you think SHOT has the ability to launch new products the same way that it did 10 years ago?

IMHO, no. Too many venues out there and the rising cost may turn some of the big vendors off. The crowd felt like it was looking for an used car deal.

JustMatt
8 February 2010, 10:54
This happened in the video game industry a few years ago. They have a trade show called E3, it all but disappeared in a matter of a year. I never attended E3 but by all accounts it was on par with SHOT. I did attend last years SHOT in Orlando and was impressed with the size and didn't find it over crowded that bad. I remember guys from LWRC, MagPul, Larue, Surefire, ASP and Taser all taking time to talk to me even when I identified myself as a correctional officer and that there product didn't affect me professionally but I was interested personally. Maybe Vegas is bigger than SHOT when it's in Orlando? As to new product launches, how many people there are in a position to buy the LEO/MIL only stuff that 90% of us go there to see? I did bring back some info for my CERT team commander but the majority of what I was there to see was for my own personal enjoyment. It would seem that maybe SHOT has grown to big and can no longer serve it's purpose as originally intended.

Creeky73
8 February 2010, 17:57
it would seem as though the internet would be killing these kinds of trade shows. If a trade show's main purpose is to get retailers to invest in the vendor's new products and make them available to the public, I see one problem with this. I routinely feel as if I am better informed about what products are available (at least in my particular areas of interest) than most store owners I have come across. The internet means that savvy shoppers don't have to go down to Bill's Gun and Pawn and assume that all he has, is all there is. I would rather these manufacturers use that $250k to either build a better product or maybe make it cheaper for us instead of blowing it on a spot in a trade show that every tom, dick and harry with a gun blog can get into.

jdun
8 February 2010, 20:01
This happened in the video game industry a few years ago. They have a trade show called E3, it all but disappeared in a matter of a year. I never attended E3 but by all accounts it was on par with SHOT. I did attend last years SHOT in Orlando and was impressed with the size and didn't find it over crowded that bad. I remember guys from LWRC, MagPul, Larue, Surefire, ASP and Taser all taking time to talk to me even when I identified myself as a correctional officer and that there product didn't affect me professionally but I was interested personally. Maybe Vegas is bigger than SHOT when it's in Orlando? As to new product launches, how many people there are in a position to buy the LEO/MIL only stuff that 90% of us go there to see? I did bring back some info for my CERT team commander but the majority of what I was there to see was for my own personal enjoyment. It would seem that maybe SHOT has grown to big and can no longer serve it's purpose as originally intended.

E3 was dissolved because it started to strictly limit the number of people that was allowed to enter. Instead of over 60+K attendees, it drops down to less then 5k.

The E3 staff did it because there were complaints that the convention was costing way too much for the vendors. Cost did come down but the vendors saw less people to promote their products too. In the end the vendors start leaving E3 because well no one came to see their products.

What end up happening was many new gaming conventions started taking over what E3 used to offer. Now instead of going to one big gaming convention every year, the vendors are going to multiple gaming conventions each year.

Becareful what you wish for, E3 was not the only one that fell for it. Comdex comes to mind

joffe
9 February 2010, 02:19
They might just need to hire new people. There are plenty of huge trade shows, especially within consumer electronics and computer games, that manage to organize very effectively and draw crowds and praise every year. Maybe they could poach some of those people? ;)

Stickman
9 February 2010, 17:45
Poor overall management may be a part of it.

John Hwang
10 February 2010, 16:49
From a dealer's point of view, I wish they have 1 day set aside for dealers only. I'm sure I could get a lot more done if that was the case.

Stickman
10 February 2010, 19:49
From a dealer's point of view, I wish they have 1 day set aside for dealers only. I'm sure I could get a lot more done if that was the case.


For dealers that only get one day away from their shop, I'm sure that would be extra important.

rob_s
11 February 2010, 03:40
That brings up a good point, one that I always thought made sense when they did Thur-Sun. Thurs-Fri with stricter controls. No press, no LE, no individual mil, just dealers. Copy of FFL and/or business license, limit 2 attendees per license. Sat-Sun, loosen it up; individual LE and mil, press, "guests" of FFLs, etc.

SHOT used to be the place to go to get face time with those you did business with and to place orders for the year. It's morphed from that and they need to embrace that morphing. With the internet, phones, etc. there is really very little reason to sit down at SHOT and "make a deal". Hell I have ordered millions of dollars of construction materials and supplies without ever having more than a phone conversation with a vendor. If joe-bob local FFL can't order $10k worth of CAA junk the same way...

SHOT has become about the consumer to some extent. I'm not saying they should open the doors wide (although they never once checked a badge in 2009) but they need to embrace that aspect of the show.

dragondoc
13 February 2010, 22:34
Do you think SHOT has the ability to launch new products the same way that it did 10 years ago?

Stick as an outsider looking in I can tell you that the Shot Show created quite a bit of buzz. All of us potential customers were waiting to find out what new products would be in the offering. The downside is that we were depending on folks like you, Tom Gresham, and others to give us the skinny on these new products. So if you and others are having difficulties getting to talk to vendors then that makes it hard for you to get the word out about their products.

dragondoc
13 February 2010, 22:45
That brings up a good point, one that I always thought made sense when they did Thur-Sun. Thurs-Fri with stricter controls. No press, no LE, no individual mil, just dealers. Copy of FFL and/or business license, limit 2 attendees per license. Sat-Sun, loosen it up; individual LE and mil, press, "guests" of FFLs, etc.

I was going to get fired up about the no mil until I saw that you proposed Sat and Sun as designated days for mil. Many soldiers want to buy a firearm and many of these soldiers are young and inexperienced. Naturally they turn to the one person they trust to have all the answers, their Sergeants (NCO). Several of my soldiers have approached me about buying sidearms and rifles. I try to give them the best advice I can and I encourage them to do some research. My point is that it would be extremely helpful to know a few of the vendors along with their products so that you can aid your soldier in making a good decision. I bought my first firearm at 21 from an NCO who was an FFL. I didn't buy another gun for 19 years due to various reasons. I was fortunate that he gave me good advise and I have a sidearm that has served me well for 19 years. Bottom line the individual service member may have serious influence with their, peers, subordinates, and superiors. That is quite a few potential customers that tend to favor brand loyalty.

Stickman
13 February 2010, 23:39
Doc,

No one on this board would suggest anything to slight the military.

On a side note, I saw quite a few guys at SHOT this year who were wearing very generic name tags that were active duty, as well as the legit name tags and guys in uniform.

dragondoc
14 February 2010, 01:15
Doc,

No one on this board would suggest anything to slight the military.

On a side note, I saw quite a few guys at SHOT this year who were wearing very generic name tags that were active duty, as well as the legit name tags and guys in uniform.

I wish I could have gone but that would be a hard sell to the chain of command. Hospital Commanders will drop thousands for medical training but the purses suddenly close when you mention actual soldier training. I guess I am one of the enlightened few who would see the value of mastering arms as well as the healing arts.

rob_s
14 February 2010, 04:20
I was going to get fired up about the no mil until I saw that you proposed Sat and Sun as designated days for mil. Many soldiers want to buy a firearm and many of these soldiers are young and inexperienced. Naturally they turn to the one person they trust to have all the answers, their Sergeants (NCO). Several of my soldiers have approached me about buying sidearms and rifles. I try to give them the best advice I can and I encourage them to do some research. My point is that it would be extremely helpful to know a few of the vendors along with their products so that you can aid your soldier in making a good decision. I bought my first firearm at 21 from an NCO who was an FFL. I didn't buy another gun for 19 years due to various reasons. I was fortunate that he gave me good advise and I have a sidearm that has served me well for 19 years. Bottom line the individual service member may have serious influence with their, peers, subordinates, and superiors. That is quite a few potential customers that tend to favor brand loyalty.

Personally, having attended 3 SHOT shows, I don't see how SHOT would help in this regard AT ALL. In fact, I could see it as being detrimental due to the sheer volume of bright & shiny objects with which to get distracted.

Anyone making a recommendation to a first-time gun-buyer should be doing so based on their own experiences actually firing the guns in question, should be couched with admonishments not to screw up the gun with a bunch of crap bolted on to it or aftermarket parts "dropped in", and should rely on proven track record of performance for the platform(s) in question. All of which an NCO looking to bone up on could get with an hour at a local indoor range with gun rental.

I am not trying to slight the military here, or LE, or anyone else. However from the original mission of SHOT, the only people that should be there are vendors, buyers, and press. An individual NCO is not a buyer, however someone working for a purchasing section of the military is.

Vendors are grousing at the extreme costs of the show, the extortion paying rental fees and union labor rates, only to be inundated with questions from the ones-and-twos crowd. They are looking for a return on their investment, and that means limiting to the show to people buying in quantity and those that will get them large amounts of exposure in print.

Specialized Armament
14 February 2010, 06:15
That brings up a good point, one that I always thought made sense when they did Thur-Sun. Thurs-Fri with stricter controls. No press, no LE, no individual mil, just dealers. Copy of FFL and/or business license, limit 2 attendees per license. Sat-Sun, loosen it up; individual LE and mil, press, "guests" of FFLs, etc.

SHOT used to be the place to go to get face time with those you did business with and to place orders for the year. It's morphed from that and they need to embrace that morphing. With the internet, phones, etc. there is really very little reason to sit down at SHOT and "make a deal". Hell I have ordered millions of dollars of construction materials and supplies without ever having more than a phone conversation with a vendor. If joe-bob local FFL can't order $10k worth of CAA junk the same way...

SHOT has become about the consumer to some extent. I'm not saying they should open the doors wide (although they never once checked a badge in 2009) but they need to embrace that aspect of the show.


Personally, having attended 3 SHOT shows, I don't see how SHOT would help in this regard AT ALL. In fact, I could see it as being detrimental due to the sheer volume of bright & shiny objects with which to get distracted.

Anyone making a recommendation to a first-time gun-buyer should be doing so based on their own experiences actually firing the guns in question, should be couched with admonishments not to screw up the gun with a bunch of crap bolted on to it or aftermarket parts "dropped in", and should rely on proven track record of performance for the platform(s) in question. All of which an NCO looking to bone up on could get with an hour at a local indoor range with gun rental.

I am not trying to slight the military here, or LE, or anyone else. However from the original mission of SHOT, the only people that should be there are vendors, buyers, and press. An individual NCO is not a buyer, however someone working for a purchasing section of the military is.

Vendors are grousing at the extreme costs of the show, the extortion paying rental fees and union labor rates, only to be inundated with questions from the ones-and-twos crowd. They are looking for a return on their investment, and that means limiting to the show to people buying in quantity and those that will get them large amounts of exposure in print.

Sagely perspective, couldn't have said it better.

We probably won't be attending SHOT again unless there is a major format change.

rob_s
14 February 2010, 08:59
For what it's worth, I'm only repeating the opinions that I'm hearing from vendors.

Before SHOT this year I got my ticket and was ready to attend. I wanted to make more connections to have more things to write about, and I wanted to meet more publishers to have more people to write for. Of the first group, most that I pinged didn't seem to care. They either already had an opinion of me and whether or not they'd want to work with me, or they had no idea who I was and were still able/willing to open a dialog via email. More than a few, however, indicated that this may be their last time at the dance if things didn't change. Followup email conversations after the fact and they are even more pissed off than they were before.

I wound up not going. I regret it because I missed a chance to meet some of the publishers, but I can just as easily do that on a vacation to their towns with the family and take an afternoon to go see them.

The show is a monster now. And I stand by my initial statement that if Glock, or Remington, or similar pull out in the next year or two you'll see the whole thing collapse in on itself. Most are there now because they feel they have to be.

dragondoc
15 February 2010, 17:01
Personally, having attended 3 SHOT shows, I don't see how SHOT would help in this regard AT ALL. In fact, I could see it as being detrimental due to the sheer volume of bright & shiny objects with which to get distracted.

Anyone making a recommendation to a first-time gun-buyer should be doing so based on their own experiences actually firing the guns in question, should be couched with admonishments not to screw up the gun with a bunch of crap bolted on to it or aftermarket parts "dropped in", and should rely on proven track record of performance for the platform(s) in question. All of which an NCO looking to bone up on could get with an hour at a local indoor range with gun rental.

I am not trying to slight the military here, or LE, or anyone else. However from the original mission of SHOT, the only people that should be there are vendors, buyers, and press. An individual NCO is not a buyer, however someone working for a purchasing section of the military is.

Vendors are grousing at the extreme costs of the show, the extortion paying rental fees and union labor rates, only to be inundated with questions from the ones-and-twos crowd. They are looking for a return on their investment, and that means limiting to the show to people buying in quantity and those that will get them large amounts of exposure in print.
Fortunately I can go to Rock Island Arsenal and talk to the directorates that do the procurement for the Army's small arms. They are the SMEs for our service. The drawback is that it isn't as sexy as visiting the Shot Show and a visit to John Deere Commons is a far cry from the Vegas Strip.

dragondoc
15 February 2010, 17:05
For what it's worth, I'm only repeating the opinions that I'm hearing from vendors.

Before SHOT this year I got my ticket and was ready to attend. I wanted to make more connections to have more things to write about, and I wanted to meet more publishers to have more people to write for. Of the first group, most that I pinged didn't seem to care. They either already had an opinion of me and whether or not they'd want to work with me, or they had no idea who I was and were still able/willing to open a dialog via email. More than a few, however, indicated that this may be their last time at the dance if things didn't change. Followup email conversations after the fact and they are even more pissed off than they were before.

I wound up not going. I regret it because I missed a chance to meet some of the publishers, but I can just as easily do that on a vacation to their towns with the family and take an afternoon to go see them.

The show is a monster now. And I stand by my initial statement that if Glock, or Remington, or similar pull out in the next year or two you'll see the whole thing collapse in on itself. Most are there now because they feel they have to be.

Has anyone compared the Consumer Electronics Show to the Shot SHow? I know the missions maybe different but the CES seems to be successful. What are they doing that the firearms industry can emulate.

Devilphish
15 February 2010, 18:08
Has anyone compared the Consumer Electronics Show to the Shot SHow? I know the missions maybe different but the CES seems to be successful. What are they doing that the firearms industry can emulate.

Or even SEMA.. Seems like the overall supporting structure of big shows like those gives a lot of spotlight to their vendors and helps launch new products whereas with SHOT it seems that the vendors are on their own to create buzz and try to get a spotlight.

One example that is fresh is that Glock kept hyping their Gen 4 and said they'd be at SHOT. But even on their own website information on the Gen 4 is more or less non-existent. Surely didn't see any press releases from SHOT about it or any of the other cool stuff that unveiled.

Seems SHOT and some manufacturers need to become more technologically advanced (maybe aware is a better word) and use it to their advantage.

All in all, when the day is done and over, SHOT needs to work for the vendors if they want to keep vendors coming.

Stickman
15 February 2010, 21:01
All in all, when the day is done and over, SHOT needs to work for the vendors if they want to keep vendors coming.


I think that sums it up nicely.

I've also heard from a lot of vendors that they feel like they are shaken down by the venue and affiliates.

rob_s
16 February 2010, 03:38
Or even SEMA.. Seems like the overall supporting structure of big shows like those gives a lot of spotlight to their vendors and helps launch new products whereas with SHOT it seems that the vendors are on their own to create buzz and try to get a spotlight.

One example that is fresh is that Glock kept hyping their Gen 4 and said they'd be at SHOT. But even on their own website information on the Gen 4 is more or less non-existent. Surely didn't see any press releases from SHOT about it or any of the other cool stuff that unveiled.

Seems SHOT and some manufacturers need to become more technologically advanced (maybe aware is a better word) and use it to their advantage.

All in all, when the day is done and over, SHOT needs to work for the vendors if they want to keep vendors coming.

I don't know about you, but I got INUNDATED with emails from SHOT and vendors prior to the show, just because I had a ticket. Now I don't know if that's because I had a press pass or not, but I've never had that volume of shit come in. What's worse, is most of it was hunting related garbage.

Which brings up another point, that the "tactical" side has now grown. This means more of "us" that get aggravated when they stick the booths we want to see in with the hunting gear, and more of the hunting vendors getting aggravated seeing all of "us" wandering around in our 5.11s. The show definitely needs to do a better job focusing on what the individual buyers and vendors are specializing in, and focus that media appropriately.

Fontaine
16 February 2010, 09:47
What end up happening was many new gaming conventions started taking over what E3 used to offer. Now instead of going to one big gaming convention every year, the vendors are going to multiple gaming conventions each year.


Penny Arcade Expo is a great time, and it's an example of what happens when you get fans to make a convention by the fans for the fans.

It seems to me that SHOT show truly is no longer a industry event. Literally half of my firearms buddies got into the show, and only a small percentage of them are actually involved in the industry.

Clearly, there is some pent up demand from the fan boys and armchair commandos for a venue (count me in their ranks), hopefully someone somewhere sometime will be able to form an event where they can get all the manufacturers that hate each other to set up booths in the same convention center. [BD]