Macworld Expo Moves to February; No One Cares

[Vincent Ferrari]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.idgworldexpo.com/WWWRoot/SitePage.aspx?site=11&id=bcf1b794-87ce-4b39-8423-8e24dfedbd0f&art=34' target='_blank'>http://www.idgworldexpo.com/WWWRoot...dfedbd0f&art=34</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Macworld Expo&reg; 2010 is scheduled to take place February 9 - 13, 2010, at the Moscone Center in San Francisco, IDG World Expo announced today. Responding to feedback from the Mac community of exhibitors, attendees, media and fans of the show, IDG World Expo is ushering in a new era for the event by shifting the show dates away from their historical early January timing. The new dates will give exhibitors and attendees more breathing room between the busy holiday season and the world's largest event focused specifically on Apple products."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/at/auto/1238501860.usr18053.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #d2d2bb;" /></p><p>Not that I think the folks at IDG should just roll over and die now that Apple has shown they're not interested in participating in Macworld anymore, but is anyone really finding themselves looking forward to the next one out of anything but morbid curiosity?&nbsp; Macworld thrived because people could head out and see a Stevenote and see what Apple was offering, not because some wacky company was offering some stupid iPod accessory.&nbsp; In fact, two years ago, MacBreak Weekly had wall to wall coverage of the garbage that was in the back end of the hall, and most of it was just horrificly boring.&nbsp; Is this the kind of stuff Macworld is going to be all about?</p><p>I'm not so sure Macworld matters without Apple.&nbsp; I understand why Apple walked out on the expo, but I don't understand why IDG is bothering to continue it without them.</p>

[jdmichal]

You know, it's this kind of thought that really scares me about Apple. "If Apple is not involved, what's the point of having it?" Well, these vendors need some kind of event to display their goods, make announcements, scout their competition, etc. Just because MacWorld will no longer be the thing it was before, does not mean that it should not continue to exist in a new form.

[Vincent Ferrari]

You know, it's this kind of thought that really scares me about Apple. "If Apple is not involved, what's the point of having it?" Well, these vendors need some kind of event to display their goods, make announcements, scout their competition, etc. Just because MacWorld will no longer be the thing it was before, does not mean that it should not continue to exist in a new form.

And my point is that no one is going to Macworld to see the latest in iPhone cases. They go there to see Apple, and then whatever else is there gets noticed while those people are cruising around.

Why does that scare you? It seems perfectly logical to me. If Apple isn't involved in Macworld, what the hell difference does it make if vendors are? Remember when all the big boys started pulling out of E3? It didn't last very long, did it?

It would be the equivalent of booking a main event fight, then saying the main event wasn't going to happen but keeping it going so the undercard guys could get on TV. That may be a nice sentiment, but I reckon there won't be a lot of people buying that PPV.

[Macguy59]

You know, it's this kind of thought that really scares me about Apple. "If Apple is not involved, what's the point of having it?" Well, these vendors need some kind of event to display their goods, make announcements, scout their competition, etc. Just because MacWorld will no longer be the thing it was before, does not mean that it should not continue to exist in a new form.

CES is making it attractive for MW vendors to show their wares

[Vincent Ferrari]

CES is making it attractive for MW vendors to show their wares

See, if I'm an accessory vendor, that's where I go. Not Macworld. Way more eyeballs.

[Jason Dunn]

See, if I'm an accessory vendor, that's where I go. Not Macworld. Way more eyeballs.

But not exactly a Mac-centric audience - which I assumed was the whole point of Macworld. The guys selling iPhone cases are already at CES.

[jdmichal]

I guess I just don't see the problem with letting MacWorld attempt to create an identity for itself separate from what it was previously. Would you have had any qualms if a new convention suddenly sprang to life that focused on products and accessories for the Mac ecosystem? What's the problem with another convention that lost its identity doing this instead? Would you have preferred they changed their name to remove any links to their old identity?

I mean, if the idea is not viable business, that will be shown soon enough. But there's no harm in them at least making an attempt. The business plan of "roll over and die" doesn't go over very well when it's pitched, and that's basically what you're advocating.

[doogald]

I guess I just don't see the problem with letting MacWorld attempt to create an identity for itself separate from what it was previously. Would you have had any qualms if a new convention suddenly sprang to life that focused on products and accessories for the Mac ecosystem? What's the problem with another convention that lost its identity doing this instead? Would you have preferred they changed their name to remove any links to their old identity?

I mean, if the idea is not viable business, that will be shown soon enough. But there's no harm in them at least making an attempt. The business plan of "roll over and die" doesn't go over very well when it's pitched, and that's basically what you're advocating.

This has happened before. For many years, MacWorld was held twice a year, in the summer in Boston. Apple decided that they wanted it in NY, so they moved it. Then they decided that they had no interest in the summer show, so IDG ran the show in Boston for two years without Apple. Almost all of the other exhibitors pulled out, especially because far fewer people signed up to attend, so they had to shut it down.

And that was when the economy was growing. Unless Apple wants back, it seems certain that something similar will happen with this show. Without Apple, without the Steve Jobs keynote, people simply will not spend the money to fly to SF, get a room, and spend hundreds just to attend a conference.

Personally, I think that if IDG wants to give it a go, that's fine for them - they probably already have costs for booking the facilities that they would lose if they close for next year anyway. I just think think that history, the fact that it's so easy to find out information you learn at the show from the internet without traveling to a show and spending thousands, compared with what existed when this show started, and knowing that these companies can save thousands by not building big exhibits and hiring folks to staff it - it just makes sense to me (especially in a down economy) that this show will not survive very long past a year, maybe two.

[Vincent Ferrari]

I guess I just don't see the problem with letting MacWorld attempt to create an identity for itself separate from what it was previously. Would you have had any qualms if a new convention suddenly sprang to life that focused on products and accessories for the Mac ecosystem? What's the problem with another convention that lost its identity doing this instead? Would you have preferred they changed their name to remove any links to their old identity?

I mean, if the idea is not viable business, that will be shown soon enough. But there's no harm in them at least making an attempt. The business plan of "roll over and die" doesn't go over very well when it's pitched, and that's basically what you're advocating.

There's no "problem" and I'm not "advocating" anything. I just think it's foolish to think, as Doogald points out, that the large portion of the Macworld crowd that doesn't live in California, Northern California specifically, will bother with this conference just to see iPhone cases and other silly baubles they can read about online.

I don't care one way or the other; if IDG wants to run a conference, more power to them, but I think in order to reconcile yourself with the idea that this conference is worth attending, you have to convince yourself that Apple's own presentations weren't the reason most of the attendees showed up. I guess if you can make yourself believe that Belkin will pile 'em in the way Apple does, then this conference makes perfect sense.

I have a feeling 2010 will be attended out of morbid curiosity. In 2011, if it goes off at all, will probably be the last.

I'm not advocating, just predicting.