Do you think the National should be expanded to twice a year ?

[Leon]

We can learn later...I added a poll. Hope that is ok...I also voted .

[tedzan]

....for getting this poll to work.

See, you can't teach an old dinosaur new tricks


T-Rex TED

[Rob D.]

I voted no because I think, like so many other areas in the hobby that have fallen prey to the "too much of a good thing" mentality, having two Nationals a year would cheapen the product.

My guess is this poll/discussion was sparked by the recent disappointment and continued poor performance of the Philly show. Though it's sad that the former hallmark shows of the hobby are going the way of the Edsel, the solution isn't to take what is now a strong and vibrant show -- the National -- and weaken it by asking it fill the void left by the other "big" shows that are dying or have died (condolences to the friends and families of those shows, along with the entire New York Yankees organization).

The National is fine as it is.

[Matt]

I agree with Rob 100%. The result of 2 Nationals would be many dealers either going to one or the other and not both, thereby defeating the purpose.

[Exhibitman]

Not to sound like an old fart, but I really miss the days of multiple local card shows on every weekend. I used to plan day trips all over SoCal to attend shows every weekend. I cannot remember the last time there was a good local show in the L.A. area. I hear you lucky bastards in the N.Y.C. area have back-to-back-to-back show weekends this month, though.

[barrysloate]

To continue Rob's point, too many collectors would not be able to afford traveling to two nationals a year. For many this is their once a year event, one they plan for a year in advance and save up for months. In a bad economy too many people wouldn't be able to swing this. The result would be two weaker shows instead of one very good one.

[kkkkandp]

I agree that two Nationals every year is probably not a great idea, but I'd like an east coast city to be the site of a once-a-year National show more frequently than every 10 years!

When Gloria Rothstein ran her White Plains show billed as the "East Coast National" it was well attended by both dealers and buyers.

[tedzan]

Regarding this......
"......having two Nationals a year would cheapen the product."

History, during the GROWTH years (1970's to 1990's), of major BB card shows totally contradicts such an absurdity.

For example. the Philly Show started as an annual event in Willow Grove, PA in 1975. Then it was expanded to a March and September show.
Bob Schmierer expanded it to 3 times a year in 1988. And, when it moved to a larger facility (Ft. Washington) in 1993, it was expanded to 4
shows a year. Each of these expansions increased the attendance and improved the quality of this show. The same can be said for several
other shows across the country in that time period.

However, for various and sundry factors, we are no longer in a GROWTH trend in this hobby. Having the National twice a year may introduce
some new excitement into the hobby, and reverse this trend.


KEVIN

This is what I am suggesting here, the Baltimore venue would be a permanent annual East coast Show, while Chicago, and California shows
would alternate.



TED Z

[Rob D.]

Originally Posted by tedzan

History, during the GROWTH years (1970's to 1990's), of major BB card shows totally contradicts such an absurdity.



TED Z

Ted,

If it's such an absurd statement, then why weren't there two Nationals during the GROWTH years? Seems like that would have been a prime time to try such an experiment.

Maybe fixing the failing shows is a solution rather than breaking one of the few shows that flourishes. I'm not sure how doubling the pinnacle event of the hobby would "introduce some new excitement into the hobby." That seems like a throwaway line to me, i.e. something that sounds good but really has no basis of fact.

Again, part of the allure of the National is that it's an annual event. Take away that aspect of it, and you take away part of the allure. Pretty simple concept, and not that absurd at all, when you really consider it.

[barrysloate]

The Philadelphia show expanded from twice a year to four times a year during a period of strong growth in the hobby. Today's hobby appears to be in attrition, with the baby boomer generation getting older. It may not be a good time to think expansion. It's in fact possible that by having fewer shows, the ones that remain will be stronger.

And I'm just speculating, as I have not attended a show in over ten years.

[Tony Gordon]

While I didn't make it out to Baltimore, I talked to several Chicago dealers who relayed that sales were just okay. The location where their sales are highest is Cleveland. Naturally, I don't mind having the National in my backyard but I think dealers are shortchanged when the show is in Chicago because the promoters do a lousy job at local advertising. The Chicago Sun-Times newspaper is on life support and advertising a show in it is a wasted effort. I believe advertising on the two Chicago sports radio channels and on local cable television would increase attendance significantly.

[Leon]

First of all I don't think it's absurd to talk about 2 shows cheapening the product. If nothing else, it's a good discussion either way, but to call it absurd is absurd in itself, imo. Nothing personal Ted. I just don't think it's an absurd recommendation either way.

For me, and maybe not too many others, I would love to have 2 giant, great shows to go to in one year. I would gladly attend both. I realize I very well might be in the minority though. I would bet 2 cents this whole discussion is how REA feels on the subject of 1 vs 2 (auctions a yr). It would potentially water down the "event". I think this is a great topic and one that is easily debated on both sides. I certainly see good points for having one or two shows a year. regards

[asoriano]

"I voted no because I think, like so many other areas in the hobby that have fallen prey to the "too much of a good thing" mentality, having two Nationals a year would cheapen the product."


Exactly.