Future of the National – South and West Locations

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by KCRfan1

If the goal is to get foot traffic ( hence consumers ) thru the door, the show has to be in the eastern part of the country.

This is where the population base is. A venue in Cleveland, drawing an 800 mile radius, has access to tens of millions of people. AC is the same, as is Chicago although a lesser extent.

This is a distance that can be driven in a day.

Vegas, unless you live in LA, you are flying, not to mention a much more limited population to draw from with the same 800 mile radius.

I live in South County and would love a national, however if I were involved in the decision making process there is no way I go west with the show.

55,000,000 people live within 500 miles of Vegas.
50,000,000 live within 500 miles of Dallas (about the same for L.A.)
**For comparison Chicago has 85,000,000 that live within 500 miles**

We aren't talking about moving it there every year, just throwing a bone to those populations that aren't served by the same venues year after year.

[perezfan]

Unless they throw a bone to somewhere west of the Mississippi, they should just rename it "The Regional".

[KCRfan1]

I agree Rhett.

I would love a National here.

I have never been to one and probably never will living in OC. Now if I go, I pay airfare and hotel rooms. That's a grand already. A west coast show is only driving.....gas maybe a hotel room, that leaves so much more money I can spend on cards to support the venue. If it is LA or SD, only gas money.

My guess, and that is all it is, is that many east coast dealers will decline a trip west due to expense, travel time, and more burdensome to transport items to sell.

The show likely becomes a west coast dealer venue, and a smaller venue at that.

From a business standpoint, I don't see it happening.

But I would absolutely love it if it did! I would love a bone tossed to SoCal even if it were as you suggested, every 3 or 5 years.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

55,000,000 people live within 500 miles of Vegas.
50,000,000 live within 500 miles of Dallas (about the same for L.A.)
**For comparison Chicago has 85,000,000 that live within 500 miles**

We aren't talking about moving it there every year, just throwing a bone to those populations that aren't served by the same venues year after year.

How many people are within 100 miles or 200 miles? Only serious collectors are going to travel 500 miles for a show and it is going to take extra days of travel plus extra hotel costs. A lot of traffic comes from those who can make it a day trip. I am ok with LA or Dallas, but Las Vegas makes no sense.

With the recent growth of the hobby the National should look at expanding the number of venues it visits. That is how it was when the hobby was growing in the 80s. The show should be profitable now no matter the distance traveled.

[timzcardz]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

55,000,000 people live within 500 miles of Vegas.
50,000,000 live within 500 miles of Dallas (about the same for L.A.)
**For comparison Chicago has 85,000,000 that live within 500 miles**

We aren't talking about moving it there every year, just throwing a bone to those populations that aren't served by the same venues year after year.

Continuing on . . .

Atlantic City has 94,000,000 people within 500 miles

Cleveland has 130,000,000 people within 500 miles


Other considerations aside, the National location population numbers speak for themselves.

"If you build it they will come." Maybe.

But if you build it where they are, well, they're already there.

What successful business would say "Hey, let's forgo one of our current locations for one that has less than two thirds of the population?

[Exhibitman]

Population within x miles is irrelevant. I have had to plane travel to every National since 2006. Whether I am flying 500 miles or 3000 is basically the same. What counts is number of direct flights and difficulty of ground transport in and out once I land. Chicago is easy. New York is easy. Cleveland has only a few direct flights from LA but is easy once on the ground. Baltimore was great because I could visit NY first then take a very pleasant train ride. AC is quite difficult no matter what airport I use. Last I checked the only airline that went to AC is Spirit and I had to get to Detroit to catch that flight. No ready train access either. The choice is basically Philadelphia then drive an hour.

We've had this discussion before and have always heard the same excuses. The reality is that the people who run the show live on the proceeds and will only go where they can get the venue for nothing, or next to nothing, and where the downside risk of hotel reservation counts is minimal.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Population within x miles is irrelevant. I have had to plane travel to every National since 2006. Whether I am flying 500 miles or 3000 is basically the same. What counts is number of direct flights and difficulty of ground transport in and out once I land. Chicago is easy. New York is easy. Cleveland has only a few direct flights from LA but is easy once on the ground. Baltimore was great because I could visit NY first then take a very pleasant train ride. AC is quite difficult no matter what airport I use. Last I checked the only airline that went to AC is Spirit and I had to get to Detroit to catch that flight. No ready train access either. The choice is basically Philadelphia then drive an hour.

We've had this discussion before and have always heard the same excuses. The reality is that the people who run the show live on the proceeds and will only go where they can get the venue for nothing, or next to nothing, and where the downside risk of hotel reservation counts is minimal.

Your last statement is 100% the reality of the situation. I’d like to see a few new venues maybe one for the foreseeable future Chicago and AC look like the reality of it.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Your last statement is 100% the reality of the situation. I’d like to see a few new venues maybe one for the foreseeable future Chicago and AC look like the reality of it.

Don't get me wrong; i am perfectly happy to go to Chicago every year. It's an easy and enjoyable trip for me with lots of air possibilities, and good accommodations and food. If the National was a Chicago every year event, fine. Comicon is always in San Diego, which has to be a PITA for northeastern travelers. But I notice that Comicon has started up regional shows too. Maybe the National organizers could consider that model? I went to some hellacious good regional shows in the 1980s and 1990s with 500+ tables and 3-4 days of show. There was a 500+ table show at the Moscone Center in SF every year I was in law school up there and I usually ditched classes the first day to go. I remember one year I was able to literally walk up to get autographs and chat with Stan Musial, Bob Gibson and Lou Brock because traffic was relatively light at mid-day. Still have the Musial (and we need a card):

[Rhotchkiss]

I live in DC. I would not fly to Vegas or out west for a card show; in fact, I haven’t yet attended the show in Chicago. But I do go to almost every Philly and Chantilly show and I usually don’t miss Nationals in Cleveland and Atlantic City. I fly all the time for work and pleasure, yet I really have no interest flying for a card show. I sincerely hope you west coast people get a National, or a similar show, and if you do, send some pics bc I will not be attending.

[Yoda]

Given that I live in the state, I am no doubt biased but I wonder if serious thought has ever been given to Orlando as a S/E location for the National. To me, it has many advantages; easy access, very consumer friendly, tons of hotels and restaurants, large populations centers in close proximity, eg. Atlanta, Tampa, Jacksonville, Mobile etc. and, of course, let's not forget Mickey and Minnie Mouse.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

The reality is that the people who run the show live on the proceeds and will only go where they can get the venue for nothing, or next to nothing, and where the downside risk of hotel reservation counts is minimal.

Agreed. There's no incentive for them to move it around more than it does, so why would they? The amount of work to find a new venue and sort the logistics out it is astronomical. Why do all that leg work for no extra payoff? It's not like a new city is going to bring in more people, it's just going to bring different people. While that may be "good for the hobby", it's not for the bottom line, which is really all that matters to them.

[isiahfan]

AFAIK....They have an agreement with Rosemont for quite some time to do it there every other year. Chicago is a top city for basically everything, cheap public transportation, tons of hotels, close to many cities, two major airports, etc. That isn't going to change. They also had an agreement with Park Corp/IX Center in Cleveland for every fourth year. They sold so that changed the plans. For now the non-Chicago years will rotate. Assuming the National stays in late July/early August...you can eliminate all of Texas and probably Vegas. San Francisco and NY are just too expensive IMO so cross those out as well. Plus SF and TX already have large shows (not that Chicago doesn't). Anaheim, where they had it in 2006 pretty much checks most of the boxes, and although it was very successful, many are just against schlepping their inventory across country...adds a bit to the already exorbitant table prices. I also heard Anaheim needs a certain amount of time and assurances way ahead of time that the National just won't commit to. I would love a large show in SoCal or drivable as Kit Young isn't throwing his luau shows any more.