quote:

"

quote:

Originally posted by Use Enough Gun:
I'm with Mark. I would be surprised if the exhibitors don't quickly tire of all of the moving around, especially those that store large amounts of exhibit materials here in the U.S. SCI needs to quit putting nails in its own coffin. SCI originally held its first convention in Las Vegas and it should have been permanently left in Las Vegas. Friends of mine here in Vegas helped with the first convention, which was quite small with about a dozen exhibitors. One of the reasons that DSC has been and continues to be successful is that it is permanently in one city, and the participants and exhibitors can count on that. Of course, cost of the DSC convention is another. . . . . .

quote:

Originally posted by farbedo:
Outside of Vegas, Nashville is probably the best of all things. Lots for spouses to do, easy to navigate, and good convention facilities.

Indy is actually a great convention location from a facilities, ease of getting around, hotels, and food standpoint. But there isn't much else to do unless you really like car racing.

Vegas is good, but I can see SCI not being thrilled with the facility charges there. They have raised them a lot in the last 10 years. Several manufacturing trade shows that I attend moved from there due to cost alone.

Jeremy

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

quote:

Originally posted by farbedo:
Outside of Vegas, Nashville is probably the best of all things. Lots for spouses to do, easy to navigate, and good convention facilities.

Indy is actually a great convention location from a facilities, ease of getting around, hotels, and food standpoint. But there isn't much else to do unless you really like car racing.

Vegas is good, but I can see SCI not being thrilled with the facility charges there. They have raised them a lot in the last 10 years. Several manufacturing trade shows that I attend moved from there due to cost alone.

Jeremy

Interesting that you say that . I just spoke to some last week who was rattling off some of the charges in Vegas. They were eye opening. Unbelievable actually.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
I don't believe anyone is losing money...breaking even in exchange for other benefits, yes.Las Vegas is a major recreational/entertainment area-one can actually go out and walk around, and not some hole downtown in some large city.

quote:

If SCI is to appeal to the "rank and file" deer hunters and swell membership they not only need to deliver value to that demographic but also accessibility.

quote:

Originally posted by Woodhits:
Nashville will be great. The NRA convention there a few years back was universally popular among both exhibitors and attendees. Only problem with Nashville is that it has some of the highest hotel prices in the U.S.

quote:

Originally posted by Use Enough Gun:

quote:

If SCI is to appeal to the "rank and file" deer hunters and swell membership they not only need to deliver value to that demographic but also accessibility.

I beg to differ. I am a Life Member of SCI and a Benefactor Member of the NRA. SCI is not, and has never been DSC nor the NRA. SCI has NEVER appealed to "rank and file deer hunters", like DSC and the NRA has. Nor have they ever made it possible financially for the "rank and file deer hunters" to attend their conventions like DSC or the NRA has. You are unfortunately comparing apples to oranges. So, changing venues like changing underwear and making it more difficult on the vendors/exhibitors is not going to be the ultimate answer, in my opinion. Changing the real life costs, expenses and accessibility to SCI's Convention in relation to the "rank and file deer hunters" is a bigger key to SCI's ability to survive. Time will tell, but I believe that they are not addressing the core issues. The SCI Convention lost attendance and significant money flipping it back to Reno, and panic set in thereafter. Why would running the SCI Convention all over the United States, making it hard for vendors and exhibitors, be the panecea now, if the "rank and file deer hunters" are still required to pay an ARM AND A LEG to attend a MEMBERS ONLY convention? Do you seriously think that membership is going to swell based upon moving the convention like they have planned? Look at the real issues people. Damn, I'm afraid that somebody's got their head up their ass. Does anyone really believe that the SCI BOD is looking at swelling the convention with "rank and file deer hunters" by changing venues like they have planned without making significant financial changes to membership and convention costs? Good luck-you'll need all you can get. And then there's the issue of the required financial/hunt donation 'contributions' that SCI makes of their vendors/exhibitors, the so-called awards program, and the list goes on and on. And as it does, DSC looks better and better to the majority of hunting/fishing convention vendors/exhibitors and attendees.

quote:

Originally posted by Use Enough Gun:

quote:

If SCI is to appeal to the "rank and file" deer hunters and swell membership they not only need to deliver value to that demographic but also accessibility.

I beg to differ. I am a Life Member of SCI and a Benefactor Member of the NRA. SCI is not, and has never been DSC nor the NRA. SCI has NEVER appealed to "rank and file deer hunters", like DSC and the NRA has. Nor have they ever made it possible financially for the "rank and file deer hunters" to attend their conventions like DSC or the NRA has. You are unfortunately comparing apples to oranges. So, changing venues like changing underwear and making it more difficult on the vendors/exhibitors is not going to be the ultimate answer, in my opinion. Changing the real life costs, expenses and accessibility to SCI's Convention in relation to the "rank and file deer hunters" is a bigger key to SCI's ability to survive. Time will tell, but I believe that they are not addressing the core issues. The SCI Convention lost attendance and significant money flipping it back to Reno, and panic set in thereafter. Why would running the SCI Convention all over the United States, making it hard for vendors and exhibitors, be the panecea now, if the "rank and file deer hunters" are still required to pay an ARM AND A LEG to attend a MEMBERS ONLY convention? Do you seriously think that membership is going to swell based upon moving the convention like they have planned? Look at the real issues people. Damn, I'm afraid that somebody's got their head up their ass. Does anyone really believe that the SCI BOD is looking at swelling the convention with "rank and file deer hunters" by changing venues like they have planned without making significant financial changes to membership and convention costs? Good luck-you'll need all you can get. And then there's the issue of the required financial/hunt donation 'contributions' that SCI makes of their vendors/exhibitors, the so-called awards program, and the list goes on and on. And as it does, DSC looks better and better to the majority of hunting/fishing convention vendors/exhibitors and attendees.

quote:

Plenty of people sold nothing

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by shootaway:
I don't believe anyone is losing money...breaking even in exchange for other benefits, yes.Las Vegas is a major recreational/entertainment area-one can actually go out and walk around, and not some hole downtown in some large city.