"Can One Con be all things to all people?" Topic

Historicon tries to cater to both the people who want to shop and the people who just want to game till they drop.

It would be interesting to see if there is actually enough of a dichotomy between those two broad categories to sustain two conventions.

BCC can be for the shoppers (they must enough $$ to afford the venue in the first place) and family vacationers, and a "2nd tier" location such as Lancaster for the unwashed.

Since BCC will make a profit, it can subsidize the costs of the other -- which is perfectly fair across the HMGS membership as a whole, as long as the two combined break even.

Holding them one right after the other would allow for people to attend both -- you only need one day at BCC for shopping. So there is the potential for people who can't choose one to get some of both.

[Insert "One Con To Rule Them All" poem here]

I ought to add that my concept is as follows:

1) I think that its conservative to believe that at least 25% of the membership is "unhappy" about the move to BCC. Its a reasonable working figure, and is significant. Even 10% would be significant.

2) I think that its reasonable to believe that most of them will attend BCC anyway, but that's not relevant to my point.

3) The relevant point is that HMGS cannot succeed in the long term if a quarter of the convention-going universe is disgruntled.

4) Therefore HMGS has a duty to make them happy or prove why it cannot be done.

It will be argued that BCC can't make a profit without a critical mass, so HMGS needs to force everyone to go by NOT providing a parallel venue. I respond that that they need to PROVE that parallel conventions will not add up to a greater financial loss than is being budgeted for at the BCC. The same degree of loss, with a happy membership, is a better result.

Admittedly I have somewhat equated "membership" with "convention goers;" I do know that a significant % of attendees are not members.

A survey questionnaire could read:

1) Yes/No: I would attend a summer convention at the Lancaster Host, for the same cost to me in admission and lodging, for the same number of days as I usually attend, IF there were no dealers.

Note that dealers are not prohibited, but it is presumed that the vast majority are attending the BCC event instead of Lancaster.

2) Same as 1) except my cost for admission and lodging rises by
a) 10%
b) 20%
c) 25%

3) Same as 1) but the Lancaster event runs from Monday thru Thursday, and the BCC begins on that Thursday. Therefore I would be able to make a day trip to BCC for shopping without increasing the days required, and go home from BCC. [ can people fly into Philly and depart from BWI ? ]

4) Same as 3 but the dates are such that I would have to allocate 1 more day.

5) same as 3) and 4) but there is a low-cost bus from Lancaster to BCC and return

6) I would attend BOTH events:
1) but only for the same total days as I normally attend Lancaster, splitting my time.
2) for ??? days more in total
3) both events in total

If 10-20% of the convention goers wanted to stay in Lancaster, that amounts to about 350-700 people. Could HMGS get the same room rates for that number of people ( noting that the Host is also getting the CW and FI convention business, so they have some incentive especially if the rooms would be empty otherwise) ?

[3) The relevant point is that HMGS cannot succeed in the long term if a quarter of the convention-going universe is disgruntled.]

Oh I don't know about that. Those of us who hated the Host were a pretty big minority, too, and we were disgusted with it every year, and complained about it every year, but we kept going. It's reasonable to believe that the same will apply to those who are disgruntled with the move to Baltimore.

Anyway, I think there's a lot more overlap than your dichotomy suggests:

1. A lot of guys play a game, get interested in a period or theme, and then go to the dealer area to buy some of it. Impulse buying is a critical part of dealer revenue at a con.

2. A lot of game designers put on demo games, specifically with promotions linked to somebody in the dealer area.

3. The huge majority of dealers are also gamers, and enjoy participating in the con. Given the huge amount of work they have to do to set up and tear down their stores, why would they want to have to attend two different events in order to get both? (Not to mention; could they afford being away from their businesses or homes for that long?)

Wait,did that horse just move? Nope,it was some flies buzzing around.

Are you suggesting in your survey example that HMGS-E run two back to back conventions in both Lancaster and Baltimore and have people day trip to shop?

Do you feel that is realistic and achievable?

You need both dealers and games. I get tired of shopping after a few hours and like to go play a game. A shopping only event would be only a one day thing for most attendees IMO.
I quite enjoyed H'con 08 because I was able to get into at least one game per day (one day two). Plus forays to the dealers area.
I think if the convention staff want more GMs then they need to move their cut off to closer to the event.

Conventions are so many things to so many people. And it caries more by the location and size of the event.

There are more for the Historical gamer out there than just Historicon. Sadly some local cons sceduled with a month of the three East shows may have people opt to go to the East shows rather than support their own show. For local conventions the reduction of even a few bodies is more devastating to them than the loss of a few guys at the East shows. Better scheduling needed…perhaps?

Local shows serve few several key purposes. Networking new gamers, good games, seeing a few vendors with products that they normally would not see, tournment play and others.

For a convention' failure to be all things to all people is not the fault of the convention. It is the fault of the individual gamer who has established expectations too high.

Now a comment on Historicon. Look, I attending H'con for many years. My first show was at the Sheridan in Washington DC area. Over the years, I have seen Historicon in three locations and Baltimore will be the fourth (though I will not be there). Attendance has dipped and sky rocketed at each location and I would expect the same at Baltimore.

If the convention staff/ local club members (not the vendors of which I was one or 'members' from different parts of the country) wants to move it to move it to a new location that is their choice and others including myself must respect that.

One might point out that no con can be all things to all people. It's unrealistic to expect it. Some want to shop, some want to play all day, some want a mix. Some folks like a big crowded convention (it looks successful) while others prefer smaller crowds (one can move easily and find things). Some want all historical, some want a little fantasy. Some want just games, others want tournaments. It is highly unlikely anyone will get a perfect convention.

Perfect is not necessary nor doable. Good enough to make the vast majority happy is obviously important. That, I think, is also achievable.

Someone is going to and moan about whatever happens. The ideal would be to have few moaners at the end of the day.

Moaning? I believe that is referred to in some circles as Constitutionally-protected free speech.

Milan – you seem to misunderstand. Both cons would have gaming. Lancaster would be cheaper, and without so many dealers.

***

>Perfect is not necessary nor doable. Good enough to make the vast majority happy is obviously important. That, I think, is also achievable.
>

Exactly. Everyone can create their own market dichotomy to improve over "one con to rule them.". Bifurcation is an _analyzable_ hypothesis. I'm not asking for anything that can't be done.

***

>Do you feel that is realistic and achievable?

Dunno. The BoD are supposed to be the subject matter experts. I am presenting a rational, testable hypothesis. If 2 cons would make more people happy for the same cost, then 2 cons ought to be created.

There is already a call for an independant con which has been disparaged for lack of funding. HMGS has the means to guarantee the funds so the _experiment_ could happen. If it lost money and was a fair test, then HMGS would have proved its case AND fulfilled its obligation satisfy the largest number of members.

If anyone knows how to turn my questions above into a real poll on TMP, please do so.

Question 2 forces the individual to analyze his overall cost differential; transport to Lancaster is the same as what he always pays.

7) True/False: If I had a choice of locations, I would NOT go to BCC even if my overall costs for BCC were the same as for Lancaster. (Some people may have overriding non-economic reasons; for instance travel time/convenience).

You would need to take this idea to the "TMP Poll Suggestions" board found here…

TMP link

Alternatively, you could take it to the "please flog my dead horse" board which doesn't exist, but would be damn funny if it did.

whatever

>Alternatively, you could take it to the "please flog my dead horse" board which doesn't exist, but would be damn funny if it did.>

If you don't care about the issue, then . You are rude.

But that just points out the truth: that One Con *can* be all things to all people--as long as The Powetrs That Be silence all the dissent!

Please don't euthanize all the old gamers!

Allen

It could work. In the Old Days[TM], a local club would hold a games day in a church basement, fire hall or even an college auditorium, and that was as close to a "convention" as we got. People would drive as long as a couple of hours – each way! – to spend the day there. It was a good time, inexpensive, and the local club(s) could recruit new members by running games and meeting folks. There weren't any merchants, though often the FLGS would supply some prizes, and there might even be a flea market for an hour or so in the afternoon.

Is this what you were thinking of, PaintsByNumbers – except with a bigger fire hall, more clubs showing up to run games, and the event lasting for a few days?

aecurtis – What's the cut-off age for "old"?

I have to agree with all the points Ron Jeremy made.

stop interrupting the conversation between those who do.

>it's TMP any one can post

There should be controls on ing. Really, TMP is not suitable for actual discourse because noisemakers are allowed to flourish.

>>> aecurtis – What's the cut-off age for "old"?

That's up to the Powers That Be. I think somebody said that they will have panels to determine this.

Probably it's something along the lines of being old enough to remember that people used to organize their own events!

Allen

Paints – I would like to point out that I was actually answering your question.

If anyone knows how to turn my questions above into a real poll on TMP, please do so.

You would need to take this idea to the "TMP Poll Suggestions" board found here…

TMP link

I then followed it up with a joke. There was no malice or trolling intended. If you can't take a joke, well then… you know what to do.

Not if it hopes to even remotely be a success!!!!

Paul

>I then followed it up with a joke.

Its a repetition of a tactic that I've seen multiple times in the other threads to do with the BCC situation. Not funny, just a snarky bandwidth-waste. Its part of the noise being promulgated by those with an agenda to quash discourse about the topic.

LOL… if thats what you think I was doing you are sadly mistake.

Oh, and you are welcome for the answer to your question.

whatever

Paaaaaaainty Painty Painty,

Turn it down a notch, ok hombre? Your self importance needle is pegged. Dan answered your question, politely furthering the topic, and followed with an offhand quip. Hardly an effort to derail the conversation and well within the bounds of civil discourse as defined by folk who, well, who aren't you. The first and foremost rule on TMP is "play nice kiddies" and brother, you are the party falling short of the mark right now.

BTB – At a minimum you owe Dan a "Thank You". A "Sorry I Overreacted" would not be out of the question either.

Underscoring the uselessness of TMP for reasoned disourse.

Why do people keep insisting that the Host is a viable alternative? The new management doesn't want Historicon (or any other summer gaming convention) there, for a number of very good reasons. The most important is that they can make more money renting the rooms to the golfers and the tour bus people (like $50-$70 a night more).

Second, the Comedy Club is a profit center, and they have to shut it down for the weekend of Historicon.

Third, we are not a hard drinking crowd. Bar reciepts for Historicon are up to 50% below "normal" summer weekends.

Fourth, we interfere with the wedding/banquet trade. They can get quite a bit more than HMGS was paying for the ballrooms and conference rooms for such events, with less work. Not to mention that, because of the long term contract, HMGS was paying substantially less than the current rates – so much less that the new contract would have doubled them. And room rates would have been going up, too.

All this information was gleaned from ten minutes of schmoozing with the hotel staff, including a manager.

Remember, too, that the dealers pay a significant part of the space cost (80% is the number I've heard most often), so how is a "mostly games" convention going to handle that?

Start your own ing professional peer-reviewed journal if you want to limit the participants in your erudite discussions to a preening circle of like-minded anal retentives. If you come to a public board and expect, nay, demand, that eeeeeeeverybody stop in their tracks to gratefully, gushingly acknowledge your display of high-minded intellectualism, (lackluster though it might be, sorry dude) and thus enthralled, hew to your (one, true, pure) notion of acceptable and thence worthwhile, discourse, then buddy you are just asking to be treated like a [Thing That Lurks Under A Bridge] ‘cuz you have swung so far around that you are coming right up on that same Aspergersy territory from the other side of the spectrum.

To quote Sgt. Hulka, "Lighten up Francis . . ."

Underscoring the uselessness of TMP for reasoned disourse.

Now who's derailing the conversation?

Ummm…errrr…..like…PEACE….brothers!

Dude, I am at peace and my wa is undisturbed by this exchange. But thank you for your concern. : )

rmaker: Discourse at last. those are points worth verifying. If all that is true, why hasn't the BoD publicized them as part of the dataset used in making decisions?

What % of the total sq footage is used by dealers? The Expo center is probably cheaper per foot than the ballroom. A smaller convention could make use of cheaper space. It might fill up beds not used by the carriage/golf trade, and thus actually be preferable to the Host than a con using their entire facility.

Paints – Interesting idea to use the Expo Center alone.

You can find the room sizes and specs for the Lancaster Host here…

link

According to the stats from the link above, the Expo Center is 214' x 110' (23,540 sq.ft.) and should accommodate 1,500 people using the banquet standard, or 2,000 people using the Reception standard. The question is, how much would the Host charge for this space and how much would you have to charge the con attendees (not the GMs as they usually get in for free) to at least cover the expense?

I just called and the Host rents out the Expo Center for $5,000/day. If you have a four day con that is $20,000. Given an attendance level of 2,000 people you would need to charge $10 USD per person just to break even. If you think attendance is going to be lower, or want a smaller con then you might want to shoot for 1,000 attendees and charge them $20 USD each to cover the expense of renting the Expo Center.

However, you might want to tack on an extra $5 USD to give yourself some headroom to cover any unforeseen expenses, such as accidental damage. My guess is there will be a number of hidden expenses in this venture.

Sound ok so far?

Something to consider is if you pack the Expo Center with 1,500 people, the noise level is going to be pretty high.

Another issue to consider, is given that you will have 1,500-2,000 con attendees (give or take) will the Host be willing to provide additional food service and to what level?

For the record, attendance at Historicon 2008 was 3,667 and that was spread over the entire hotel. The after action review for 2009 isn't out yet.

link

Was that "discourse" enough for you? Cheers.

The requirements for sq ft per gamer (including aisle space) is known the HMGS -- the cons used to be a just few hundred people in size.

Might be that the Host does not sell out all its meeting rooms in July either.

If about 20% simply prefer Lancaster, thats 700-800 people. That size might even be a desirable size from the Host's perspective to fill up otherwise empty space.

Ok, so you rent out the Expo Center for four days at $20,000 and plan on an attendance of 800. That brings your entry price to $25 USD per person just to cover the cost of the space. Add in another $5 USD just to be safe and you are at $30 USD a head.

You are now a full $5 USD under ($10 if you don't leave yourself any wiggle room) the weekend rate to attend Historicon at the Host and what have you gained? No dealers room and ~75% less attendees.

Cheaper for travel & lodging.

So your stats seem to indicate that the HMGS COULD support such a con and not run at a loss.

So your stats seem to indicate that the HMGS COULD support such a con and not run at a loss.

That is assuming the ONLY expense you will have running your con is the Expo Center itself. I am guessing you will need a few volunteers to help you staff and run your non-con.

If you think it will work then write a check or take out a bank loan and get started. There is far too much speculation on what COULD be done and not enough actually DOING. HMGS made their decision, now lets see if it pans out. I don't think it would be a wise move for HMGS to start two new con ventures at the same time.

I could care less what is supported where. I am just tired of all this speculation by people that cant be bothered to pick up the phone and check the internet to gather their own data. The searches above took me 15 minutes.

Sorry if I come across a little, well… cross, but this is an iritating discourse that solves and/or proves nothing. If you want to know if that kinda con COULD be supported then just do it and see. If you build it, they will come… or not.

600-800 at the Host is nothing new for HMGS. Are there GMs for 600-800 amongst the disgruntled?

>this is an iritating discourse

So stop reading it.

The Lampeter room goes for $2,000 a day. Two day gaming gathering $4,000. 200 attendees at $20.00 USD head. Doable? Yeppers. Put that in yer filthy ape skull and ponder it.

Maybe avg as 4 gamers/table, 5x8 plus 4' aisle and 2' between tables = 9x10 call it 10x10 = 25 sq ft per person required. Probably really need more per gamer.

HMGS has accurate data…

The big problem with the initial premise of this thread is that shoppers don't game and gamers don't shop, that the two groups are mutually exclusive. I would stake a large pile of cash on most attendees being both. There are some who only do one or the other, but I am willing to bet that it is a minority of the membership.

Then you could also say that 25% of the membership is not happy at the Host (Pull numbers out of a hat). So if they are also people who just want to game, they will not be happy if the gaming stays there. Not to mention the shoppers/holidayers who wanted to stay at the Host, so they are not happy with the BCC, so you still have the same disgruntled 25%, but now it is a different crowd. I will not even bring up the 25% who are disgruntled with either choice, are just disgruntled, or whatever.

Plus, how many of the members will be disgruntled because they want to attend both but it would be impossible because they can only afford to travel for one? Now you have a whole new pack of disgruntled who would have to choose one or the other, who may instead choose none.

Staying at the Host lost a percentage. Moving will lose a percentage. Trying to make everyone happy is impossible.

Staying at the Host lost a percentage. Moving will lose a percentage. Trying to make everyone happy is impossible.

exactly

HMGS has accurate data…

Then ask them for it. If they won't give it to you, then host your own con and find out.

We have already crunched enough of the basic number for YOU, so now it is time for you to decide for your self and move forward or drop the issue.

>the initial premise of this thread is that shoppers don't game and gamers don't shop, that the two groups are mutually exclusive.
>

Not really; just a broad generalizaion. Seems like there may be 10% who won't come to BCC for whatever reasons, and 10% that would prefer the Host, maybe even without many vendors.

The HMGS is brain-locked into the "One Big Con" paradigm, and there are personal financial gains involved in that.

… page flip.

Not really; just a broad generalizaion. Seems like there may be 10% who won't come to BCC for whatever reasons, and 10% that would prefer the Host, maybe even without many vendors.

… and this figure of 10% comes from where? Is that 10% of the attendees that you have polled? Or 10% of the people you personally know and have asked? You keep using these "generalizations" in your discourse, but you fail to justify where you get the numbers.

Ya know what? …Nevermind! I officially don't care anymore. Keep your discourse and your contrived generalizations. I am done with this thread. Cheers.

I admitted I am making up numbers, just like everyone else. 36% of the people who read this will understand that. 47% won't care anyway.***

Now, back to the nonsense. Unfortunately we have lost one person. Now we have to revise the numbers. Drat. Now I will have to start over. Will someone please delete this thread so we can start over?

*** This information was gathered from scientific poll of 1 person, who has multiple personalities, and voted 87,000 times, but did not sign the ballot, and it had hanging chads.

" Not funny, just a snarky bandwidth-waste."

Oh, I don't know, I think it's a fine use of the "real estate".

teh internets is serious business

Kyoteblue, I actually have that sound clip on my computer at work for the start up.

Hey, we are being serious! Aren't we?

Someone pointed out that assuming there were people who are only gamers and some who are only shoppers is a fallacy.

It is not only a fallacy. It is an altogether absurd one.

Most HM gamers shop to acquire toys to play with. True, there are people who buy toys and don't play with them. They are called collectors and are taken advantage of by places like Valley Forge.

Most of us attend conventions to game, shop, and hang out with old and new wargame buddies. We don't want to game in Lancaster, then drive to BCC to shop. That would leave no time to hang out with wargame buddies.

Generally, while even a small convention can be enjoyable,the choice of games and products as well as the opportunity to meet old and new wargame buddies increases with size.

The idea of HMGS EAST, in spite of its dysfunctional leadership (there are always people who think any particular BOD is dysfunctional, and some of us think they all are) being dumb enough to hold a shopping convention opposite a gaming convention is absurd.