BCEC expansion | Seaport

Gameguy326 said:
We could really use a larger convention center to make us competitive with the biggest convention destinations.
Click to expand...
There is no "we" who could use a larger convention center, unless you're counting bureacrats and a one time upside for construction trades.

Big Conventions are being killed by e-networking (which companies are using instead) and better-targeted, smaller conventions (which e-targeting has made it possible to invite you to a conference where every topic & booth more-exactly meets your needs).

Upthread you will read that the BCEC is underutilized (rarely full) as it is, and that up-sizing for the very biggest conventions is "sizing the chapel for Christmas morning" (it will sit even emptier most of the year).

And worse, the "biggest conventions" arms race is a fool's game, just like playing in the "build a stadium to attract a [major sport] franchise" would be. The imagined "Christmas morning" uses happen too freakishly infrequently to ever pay back.

Gameguy326 said:
New development can really go anywhere. The rest of the convention center can only go in one place.
Click to expand...
Not really. And specifically, the best new development goes in the accessible core, close to Logan, South Station, transit, and hotels. Offices would be a much more consistent source of hotel stays than big conventions. Indeed, Boston hotels are all operating essentially full based on the aggregation of very small business trips generated by offices, small meetings, and future-sized (targeted) conventions.
 
Gameguy326 said:
The rest of the convention center can only go in one place.
Click to expand...

Well, unless they are talking about meeting spaces instead of contiguous floor exhibition spaces... in which case those meetings can go into the hotels.

Whatever they do it should go hand in hand with planning for the surrounding blocks. On one side is the bypass rd and the other two sides are light industrial type of businesses.

I'd say let Kraft have at it for a stadium, but I still hold out hope that UMass Boston will come back to the table for the Bayside location.
 
While not being an expert I have also heard the convention business is on the downswing. Beyond that while Boston is a great place a lot of conventions are going to go to warm weather cities that are almost totally dependent on the tourist economy such as New Orleans, Vegas or Orlando. Current convention center seems to do the trick and I'm all in favor of building more hotels because the demand seems to be there.

As a compromise state could build another hotel in the area previously designated for expansion and then put housing on the rest of it.
 
Arlington said:
Big Conventions are being killed by e-networking
Click to expand...

I just honestly have absolutely no idea what this even means, or where it comes from.

That can be said for a lot of your post - I have no idea where people get this idea that big conventions are dying. Is there data on this?
 
Gameguy326 said:
I have no idea where people get this idea that big conventions are dying. Is there data on this?
Click to expand...

I have no idea where you get the impression that conventions are growing or worth chasing.

So start here: Is It Time to Stop Building Convention Centers?

Attendance at the 200 largest conventions peaked at about 5 million in the mid-1990s and has fallen steadily since then.(Citylab 2012)
Click to expand...

The timing hints at causation: teleprescence and online networking killed the business rationale for shipping employees to buy and sell at conventions. Survey Sample of One == my old boss, who turned down ever-more convention-travel requests in favor of "just do a webinar"

In the face of documented flat-or-falling demand (and no sources suggesting growth greater than GDP growth) we nonetheless see huge increases in space:

(Citylab, 2012) Over the last 20 years, convention space in the United States has increased by 50 percent; since 2005, 44 new convention spaces have been planned or constructed in this country alone. (Citylab 2012)
Click to expand...

The result is predictable declines in occupancy and the need to offer discounts, reflected in operating losses at BCEC.

And take San Diego's 2013 choices as basically the twin of Boston's 2015 go/no-go call on expansion: Convention center expansion would build into a glut

Boston does not need to throw conventions to attract visitors. We have world class institutions and unique, booming industry clusters (software, life science, automation). These industries are are unique competitive advantage where we don't have to discount, but where we do have to make it easy for them to do business, with stuff like good transport, hotels, airport, & rail. Invest in stuff that actually has a local multiplier.
 
Gameguy326 said:
I have no idea where people get this idea that big conventions are dying. Is there data on this?
Click to expand...

Alternatively, is there data to support the idea that there are enough really big conventions that the Boston Convention Center cannot host now that we could potentially get with an expansion that would justify the expense of building more floor space... and then we have to compete with all the other cities and actually get those conventions.

Take all the big conventions that we aren't currently getting and then assume that they will then add Boston into the rotation for an equal share of those conventions... does the math then add up?
 
Arlington said:
Invest in stuff that actually has a local multiplier.
Click to expand...

Right now BCEC has its own dedicated tax revenue source via the hotel tax. The legislature should really be looking at where that money should go if there is no expansion.
 
^ The inward-focused, daily, do-your-job, manage-your team workplace collaboration (at a single employer) that IBM is worried about is VERY different from the outward-facing "marketing" and "professional education" line items that conventions serve.

Most organization's internal justification for why they attended a trade show or convention usually focused on one of the following tasks all of which are now being done faster cheaper and more data-driven in an online and telepresence way:

SALES & MARKETING
- getting the brand out there / publicity
- identifying sales.leads
- engaging and educating sales prospects
- concluding handshakes

PURCHASING
- learning about new and existing offerings
- refining the list of choice criteria
- attending presentations made by customers and vendors like me and mine

CONTINUING EDUCATION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
- attending workshops
- logging continuing education hours or credits
- attending presentations where buyers like me talk about their experiences with vendors like mine

I will readily admit that these are large ongoing needs and activities for almost every business in the United States and that they are almost always backed up with large budgets. But when it comes time to allocate budget ,flying staff around, and devoting staff time to travel makes no sense when the [core, productive] elements of these things can be done at one's desk.

Small conventions with super targeted groups vendors and buyers still make a lot of sense.

I know folks who used to be asked to speak at conventions and be paid for their time. This doesn't happen anymore and speakers who just provide content are no longer a thing (because content can be delivered in much more efficient ways).

Convention organizers cannot attract as many attendees or demand as high fees as they used to. Now they pitch them as a matter of "targeted access" and frequently demand that in order to speak the speaker must pay the convention organizer in order to put him or herself in front of a small/select convention audience.
 
Last edited:
Conventions are still a thing in tech. They're usually in desirable locations and serve a lot of purposes from marketing to education and also as a reward for good employees since companies will frequently ship engineers out to them for a week as a "Good work, go enjoy a week on the company eating and drinking and maybe learning some stuff".
 
Boston has always fought an uphill battle against four season convention locales. Boston in February is not an appealing convention destination.
 
RandomWalk said:
Boston in February is not an appealing convention destination.
Click to expand...

Can't you say the same for Phoenix, Miami, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston etc. (i.e. some of the bigger convention cities) in July when it is brutally hot and/or humid? is Chicago in February really much better? Beyond San Diego, there are few convention cities with year round great weather. Vegas, despite the summer heat, is a different animal because, well, it's Vegas.
 
BosDevelop said:
Can't you say the same for Phoenix, Miami, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston etc. (i.e. some of the bigger convention cities) in July when it is brutally hot and/or humid? is Chicago in February really much better? Beyond San Diego, there are few convention cities with year round great weather. Vegas, despite the summer heat, is a different animal because, well, it's Vegas.
Click to expand...

My intuition would be that:
- July & August (Boston's competitively-best months vs tropical/desert "4-Season" cities) happen to be bad "business convention" months because too many staff (on both sides of "the booth") have vacation plans then.

- July-August are a good time to have a political convention, or, better "fan" convention (eg. Comicon in August or D23 in July)...but that these necessarily have smaller $/capita expenditures because the boss isn't paying for food and lodging.

The rest of the year:
- When Boston might need a convention (November - March) nobody'd want to come for fear of snow.
- When Boston is great to visit (April/May/June & September/October),
Boston's already full and doesn't need one When convention attendance is viewed as a perk for Northeast-MidAtlantic-Midwest-Rockies workers, lo and behold it is perkiest when it is Winter at headquarters and glorious in SoCal, Vegas, PHX, Texas, New Orleans or Florida.

If you're Vegas or Orlando, the dominant reason to visit is that it has a tourist-based economy. Conventions *are* their economy. They'll always have more $ for facilities and better payback. Boston will always have fewer uses, crappy payback, and better things to do with its economy.
 
The American Chemical Society has its meeting in Boston in August every 3-5 years. Lots of complaints from attendees about getting to lunch from there. Walking along either Summer Street or World Trade Center Ave, you are under the beating sun at its highest point in the day. I'm young and don't mind, but you invite someone in their 60's to lunch and they're complaining before you've even gotten across the bridge.

(That said, I've found most convention centers to be pretty anti-urban, even when near an urban environment. So, this isn't unique to the BCEC. I think a major improvement to the convention center would be ground level restaurants in nearby buildings, and then meeting space above for extra convention capacity that can also be used independently by smaller meetings.)
 
FWIW conventions drive a lot of Union work. Tight work rules around who can drive and unload trucks etc. Don't know the specifics in Boston, but currently planning my company's participation in a Chicago convention and the costs get real high real fast.

I suspect that this is an important part of the explanation for:

- Why so much enthusiasm from some stakeholders for a bigger BCEC
- Why Boston will always struggle to be competitive with the big Southern / Southwestern destinations...
 
why is Orlando so popular for conventions? Are convention goers really shelling out $150 to go to the Magic Kingdom or Epcot after their convention ends for the day? Do that many of them pack up and take the whole family for Orlando conventions so their kids can go to the theme parks with their non-convention going spouses? It's not like the nightlife in Orlando is anything special or they have unique restaurants/bars not found in on other cities.
 
in my own experiences at conventions held in/near orlando (i've been to... 4 such events since 2002) you're spot-on. exhibitors and attendees do tend to bring the whole family and treat the convention as a disney/universal/golf vacation that they can partially bill to the company and/or write off on their taxes.
 
Attendees don't decide where conventions are; hosts (industry groups) and exhibitors (big companies) do.

Local attractions matter to the extent that they boost turnout, but for the biggest events the bulk of the turnout is coming anyway- as a professional obligation.

Cost and capacity are 90% of the battle. Public investment in a bigger bcec would mostly benefit convention organizers - who will continue to negotiate competitive rates - Boston will still be bidding against Chicago, Orlando and vegas and will have to give competitive price incentives to win deals.

Mostly this is a redistribution from general taxpayers to hotels, restaurants and teamsters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top