IT.COM

Is the future of NamesCon virtual?

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

equity78

Top Member
TheDomains Staff
TLDInvestors.com
Impact
28,355
So I was talking with another domainer yesterday about acquisitions and aftermarket prices. He shifted the conversation with the following statement, "Boy guess I have attended my last Namescon." I asked him forever? He said yes and that his wife drove home the point by telling him if he ever thought about attending a large conference he would be hit with divorce papers. The live events … [Read more...]
 
4
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
will pick up this point you raised at the end....

"Another strategy might be to employ smaller local events. Could NamesCon for example put on a series of smaller events where people did not have to travel as far as they would for one big show."

Conferences have been declining for some time imo

The feedback I get from directors, VP's C-Suite executives is that their voices are not heard, they are tired of being sold to and they do not get to discuss trends, strategy or share their experiences with their peer group.

Smaller, more personal exchanges are the way forward (15 - 25 people). it is what I am already doing within HR globally and the feedback we constantly get is that it is a breath of fresh for execs.

We have moved digital for now for obvious reasons but will be going back to these more intimate exchanges when the time is right, you try hosting an all day exchange online for a whole day and see how that goes, where is the lunch networking? The short coffee breaks where you can discuss a point that was raised one on one with someone? where is the personal greetings? The eye contact? The general sense of connection with your fellow peers? There is none..... It does hold the same value and would be more mentally draining.

People by nature are social creatures, that is why sales conversions are always higher on the phone or face to face rather than email shots or web based funneling as an example....
 
2
•••
I can be convinced either way on this. Big conventions have a strong appeal, but as noted, the heightened concern about social meetings will live on, to some degree after the pandemic, I think.

In most subjects, I agree with @NickB that smaller more regional meetings have a lot of appeal. I find actually that going to a conference of 150 attendees is often way more productive than one with 1500. If care is given re the location and setting (all conferences should be in the wilds of Canada :xf.grin:) for these smaller conferences, the risks can be at least lowered.

I also see a future for hybrid meetings - with perhaps small groups meeting locally, but also connected with shared online keynotes for part of the time.

Thanks for kicking off an interesting discussion. @equity78. Where would the domain community be without your insightful and prolific writing? Not in nearly as good a place, in my opinion. Thank you.

Of course NamePros itself is a never-ending conference :xf.smile:, so we are all good!

Bob
 
2
•••
I can be convinced either way on this. Big conventions have a strong appeal, but as noted, the heightened concern about social meetings will live on, to some degree after the pandemic, I think.

In most subjects, I agree with @NickB that smaller more regional meetings have a lot of appeal. I find actually that going to a conference of 150 attendees is often way more productive than one with 1500. If care is given re the location and setting (all conferences should be in the wilds of Canada :xf.grin:) for these smaller conferences, the risks can be at least lowered.

I also see a future for hybrid meetings - with perhaps small groups meeting locally, but also connected with shared online keynotes for part of the time.

Thanks for kicking off an interesting discussion. @equity78. Where would the domain community be without your insightful and prolific writing? Not in nearly as good a place, in my opinion. Thank you.

Of course NamePros itself is a never-ending conference :xf.smile:, so we are all good!

Bob
Good points Bob,

Another point would be creating a profitable income stream, you would not be able to charge as much for a "digital" conference/meeting/exchange compared to face to face events/meetings....

We have already found that you have to reduce the time spent online, we have gone from all day face to face exchanges down to 1hr 30min (feedback obtained from execs) - people do not want to be staring in front of their screens all day.

This means sponsors will be/are paying much less than they would for a all day or multi day event......they need to see a return on investment and a big part of their calculations is time spent in front of people, networking and contributing to the discussions (thought leader positioning)

If you run smaller face to face exchanges/meetings you can charge a decent amount and run them monthly around the globe = more sponsors per session, more sponsor opportunities (badges etc) and your audience is more engaged = decent return and repeat business....
 
0
•••
1
•••
Good points Bob,

Another point would be creating a profitable income stream, you would not be able to charge as much for a "digital" conference/meeting/exchange compared to face to face events/meetings....

We have already found that you have to reduce the time spent online, we have gone from all day face to face exchanges down to 1hr 30min (feedback obtained from execs) - people do not want to be staring in front of their screens all day.

This means sponsors will be/are paying much less than they would for a all day or multi day event......they need to see a return on investment and a big part of their calculations is time spent in front of people, networking and contributing to the discussions (thought leader positioning)

If you run smaller face to face exchanges/meetings you can charge a decent amount and run them monthly around the globe = more sponsors per session, more sponsor opportunities (badges etc) and your audience is more engaged = decent return and repeat business....

Oh agree Nick much less revenue to be generated. Sponsors might feel like they can put their own virtual show on.
 
0
•••
"Sponsors might feel like they can put their own virtual show on." - Instead of getting to put on their own show in person.HAHAHA

- the same sponsors, with the same ad pitch, & lack of "educational" content is what kills the long term viability of a conference.

I wish & hope the conference takes this seriously as it may lead to problems, there will have to be real incentive to get attendance - post Pandemic/Social Distancing + (even bigger) financial issues that some take years to recover from.
 
0
•••
"Sponsors might feel like they can put their own virtual show on." - Instead of getting to put on their own show in person.HAHAHA

- the same sponsors, with the same ad pitch, & lack of "educational" content is what kills the long term viability of a conference.

I wish & hope the conference takes this seriously as it may lead to problems, there will have to be real incentive to get attendance - post Pandemic/Social Distancing + (even bigger) financial issues that some take years to recover from.

Sponsor's are already running their core business's - unless they already a huge service provider, even then these companies still use the sponsorship model as it creates additional touch points for them to engage with new potential clients.

To run a conference, round table, virtual exchange etc takes time and energy which a lot of providers do not have......

Just last week we had a FTSE 100 service provider sign up to sponsor one of our virtual events, they could easily afford to run one themselves, but a lack of time, lack of new new business contacts, and employee experience (event sales people) stopped them doing it -always the same.....
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Back