Even as advancing technologies and emerging markets are prompting new show launches and spin-off niche events, some existing shows are finding it advantageous to merge or otherwise combine their efforts.

There are a number of reasons for shows to enter into a joint relationship. Sometimes shows that address related areas see their markets broadening and beginning to overlap. Exhibitors and attendees that participate in more than one event realize that they are duplicating their efforts and complain that there are too many shows. They can't spare the time and money for two -- and sometimes more -- related shows, yet theydon't want to miss an important industry event. That is a particular concern for shows with international participants, who simply must make choices.

Sometimes a show is faltering, but clearly has potential a strong partner couldmaximize. Or two events might have complementary assets. For example, one might have a strong show, the other a strong conference.

In such instances, a merger or co-location -- two shows held at the same time in the same place -- might seem to be the answer. The resulting events will be both more focused and more comprehensive, and there are likely to be many economic benefits. But even withthe right reasons, and players who have the best of intentions, the changes are not easyto implement. Many issues must be worked out, and the process is often long andcomplex.

World Media Expo
Several factors prompted the merger of four exhibitions into one event that willdebut in October as World Media Expo. The predecessor shows were sponsored bythe Society of Broadcast Engineers (SBE), the Radio and Television News DirectorsAssociation (RTNDA), the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE)and the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB).

At each show, there were exhibits of equipment and services aimed at what had oncebeen a clearly defined industry segment. Gradually, however, the interests and concerns of each group began to touch upon the others'.

SBE and RTNDA merged their shows in the fall of 1993. SBE attendance was flat, saysExecutive Director John Poray, and exhibitors were struggling to attend all the relevantshows. "The connection between engineering and the news departments had becomecloser," he explains. "In a combined show, the chief engineer and the news directors canwalk the aisles together and make joint decisions." A merger made perfect sense.

Meanwhile, notes RTNDA President David Bartlett, "Our people are very interested inthe technical goodies exhibited at SMPTE, but our show was never big enough to attractthose exhibitors. And a lot of SMPTE people are interested in what goes on in news." Butneither show could command the exhibitor base that a combination could attract, he says.

According to SMPTE President Irwin Young, broadcasting and motion pictures are matureindustries, thus their markets are declining. "Our exhibit peaked and then declined," hesays. "Also, we're extremely professional at running a conference, but not an exhibit."Consequently, the association had for three or four years sought a compatibleorganization to handle its exhibit.

Enter NAB. Its spring meeting, for both radio and television broadcasters, is highlysuccessful. But its fall show, for radio broadcasters only, had hit a plateau.Nevertheless, "It takes almost as much time and energy to do the radio show as to do thespring show," says Rick Dobson, Senior Vice President, Conventions and Exhibitions."We were looking for ways to generate more revenue and to maintain the importance ofthe radio show."

By happy accident, all four associations scheduled their meetings for Los Angeles withina six-week period in 1994. For exhibitors and attendees to try to participate in whatwere at that point three shows would have been madness. This seemed the idealopportunity to combine them. NAB, which had the staging and resources to handle amajor event, approached each of the other organizations to discuss a merger of theexpositions, while retaining the individual conferences.

Automotive Aftermarket Industry Week
Three shows, all serving the automotive aftermarket, have become two co-located showsunder the umbrella name Automotive Aftermarket Industry Week. Five associations wereinvolved, however. The Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA) and the AutoInternational Association (AIA) jointly sponsored the SEMA/AI Show. The AutomotiveService Industry Association (ASIA) and the Motor & Equipment ManufacturersAssociation (MEMA) jointly sponsored The Automotive Aftermarket Show International, commonly referred to as The Big I. And the Automotive Parts Accessories Association (APAA) sponsored its own show.

As the three shows competed, The Big I and the APAA show were losing both exhibitorsand attendance, and SEMA/AI was feeding off their losses, according to Chuck Schwartz,Chairman of the Board of Epic Enterprises, which manages SEMA/AI. Initially,organizers of The Big I and SEMA/AI agreed to co-locate. APAA exhibitors wanted to jointhem, and eventually an agreement was struck whereby APAA would merge with The BigI. The co-located events have been held twice, in 1992 and 1993.

Surface Mount International
Surface mount technology is the process of soldering. the components of integratedcircuits onto the surface of circuit boards. The industry was served by The SurfaceMount and Related Technologies show -- the SMART show -- sponsored jointly by theInstitute for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits (IPC) and theElectronic Industries Association (EIA). Then, in 1988, the Surface Mount show,sponsored by the Surface Mount Technology Association (SMTA) and managed by MillerFreeman, was launched.

Each event had its own strength. "We had a very good conference," says Pete Walsh,Vice President of EIA. "Their [Miller Freeman's] strength was in shows."

Meanwhile, "Miller Freeman and SMTA saw the SMART conference as an attractivepartner because it had a good following," says Jim Wurm, Group Director of High TechShows for Miller Freeman.

Merger discussions began in 1989. In 1991, the first Surface Mount International eventwas held; the name SMART was dropped. The two shows were combined into one, managedby Miller Freeman. The two conferences were combined and a conference director washired; each association provides a co-chair.

To be announced
A new name has yet to be chosen for the merged show that the Dairy & Food Industries Supply Association (DFISA) and the Food Processing Machinery &Supplies Association (FPMSA) hope to launch in 1995.

DFISA's show, the Food & Dairy Expo, began as an exhibit of products and services fordairy processors. As those processors, including such companies as Kraft and Borden's,moved into new markets, the show broadened its focus accordingly. FPMSA's show, theInternational Exposition for Food Processors, once targeted companies that canned fruitsand vegetables. Today, however, exhibitors show equipment and supplies for a wide rangeof food and beverage processors and packagers.

The expansion of the two shows resulted in some overlap. "There are 110 companies thatare members of both organizations," says Liz Overstreet, Vice President of Expositionsfor DFISA. "As their focus became more similar to ours, it made sense, rather thanhaving two shows, to have one very focused and yet horizontal show."

The associations had considered merging shows in 1993. "But we were already pretty faralong in planning our 1993 show," says Overstreet, "and FPMSA was changing its showdates." Thus November 1995 seemed a more reachable target.

Since the initial discussions were held, however, another facet has been added: a mergerof the associations themselves is being considered, with a target date of January 1995.

These summaries present the rationales -- the "Why we should do it." The "How will we doit?" encompasses a number of issues that relate to the concerns of show managers,association executives, exhibitors and attendees.

Maintaining identities
Association executives and members feel strongly about maintaining their individualidentities. Despite the time and money savings and marketing efficiencies that can resultfrom partnerships, emotion can overrule reason, and the process can be derailed if thoseconcerns are not thoroughly addressed. No detail is too small, and nothing is irrelevant.

"I'm adamant about pointing out that we aren't merging organizations," says RTNDA'sBartlett. "We're doing a joint trade show. There's no reason for us to merge; we havedifferent constituencies. And our convention broke registration records last year. Wehave no convention problem. But to combine our shows, we have to co-locate ourmeetings."

He acknowledges that RTNDA's members were skeptical at first. "It wasn't immediately obvious to the members that we weren't merging the convention. We had toexplain to them that this was only a trade show issue and that our conventionwasn't being put out of business."

One way that will be clearly communicated will be through pre-event promotion."Mailings will be totally separate," says Bartlett. "Each organization will promote registration to its own convention." There will also be separate registration areas at theshow.

But what happens when the name of one conference disappears, as when the SurfaceMount show absorbed SMART? "Certainly there was concern about the loss of identity,"says Tom Dammrich, Executive Director of IPC, one of the conference sponsors. "Buteach partner has had ample opportunity to create its identity. Individual organizations dotheir own promotion. For example, we promote it as an IPC event that we're doing withother partners, and we hold our own meetings at the event."

Separate conferences raise the issue of meeting space, Bartlett notes. "Allocation of space at the convention center will probably be the most complex question year after year. NAB is responsible for doing it, but it's in RTNDA's contract that we must approve the arrangement of space." Naturally, each group wants its meeting rooms to be in one area, for efficiency. But Bartlett makes another point: "The four meetings are happening simultaneously in the same convention center. We must be sure that two associations aren't having lunch in the same room at the same time."

Hotel assignments are a concern mentioned by Poray at SBE. "Each organization wants tomaintain independence and also have a situation where members can meet members. Eachorganization has one or two headquarters hotels, which will enable us to put most ofour members in the same hotel."

Although some groups see pre-show promotion as an aid to maintaining their identity,Schwartz saw it as potentially one of the most troublesome areas for the AutomotiveAftermarket show. But he believes that the way it was ultimately handled is a key tothe show's success.

The difficulty, Schwartz explains, is that there is one joint promotion for the co-locatedshows. "We have only 12 to 16 pages in the promotion piece, and we must have it laid outso that each show is equally represented and everyone is comfortable with it." Moreover,there were some underlying stresses. "Everybody expected this marriage to be rockybecause we were all competing for the same exhibitors, and all three shows claimed theywere No. 1.

"Once we agreed to do a combined show, all that disappeared," he continues. "Part of thepeace is that we have outside people doing public relations and promotion. That keeps thepolitics out of it and takes a lot of the pressure off."

Now all promotion, publicity and planning are geared toward making it appear to theindustry that these two co-located exhibitions are actually one show. Yet an exceptionremains, Schwartz says. "SEMA represents niche markets, and The Big I does not.Because SEMA was concerned that its niche markets would lose their identity, itcontinues to do its own promotion to those markets."

Concern about identities makes choosing a name a delicate issue. In most instances, theobjective is a name that neither slights nor favors any party. Bartlett explains how"World Media Expo" was named: "The four of us came up with a name that described theevent, and we made sure it didn't specifically refer to any one of the four constituencies.We're all worldwide, and we're all in the media." And, of course, no one could object tothe choice of "Expo." Each association now adds the new tag line "and World Media Expo"to its existing conference name.

A tilt toward one entity is not always a problem. The sponsors of the former SMART showare unconcerned that the name is gone. "I don't think that was an issue," says Dammrichat IPC. "We let it go," says Walsh at EIA, adding, "Many attendees still call it the SMARTconference."

But when more than the exposition is involved, when associations with a long historymight merge, decisions are more difficult. Thus an independent firm has been retainedto develop an appropriate name for the combination of the Dairy & Food Industries and Supply Association and the Food Processing Machinery & Supplies Association. "There is definite value in both associations' identity," says Overstreet. "We need something that reflects the history and identity of both."

Survivor and successors
When shows merge, an unfortunate result is that management companies may loseclients and staff members may lose jobs. When three shows became two to createAutomotive Aftermarket Industry Week, the show management firm that had operated theAPAA show lost a client. World Media Expo is one show, managed by NAB, that used to befour. The show management firm that had managed the other three expositions is now outthree clients. Associations are affected as well. For example, the SMPTE staff that wasinvolved in its exhibit has been let go. "That's part of the saving money," Young says simply.

The change was not quite so dramatic when two shows merged to become SurfaceMount International. Walsh at EIA, who had managed the former SMART show, has relinquished those duties but retained his others.

Those who remain must settle many contractual matters. In the case of World MediaExpo, Dobson notes, "These are not-for-profit organizations with elected boards and paidstaff, many of whom serve at the pleasure of their boards. It was important to haveagreements protecting them from arbitrary changes in politics." Severance agreementsand cancellation clauses had to be formulated. And, to provide a comfort level, the initialagreement is for eight years.

One of the hardest things to work out, of course, is compensation. The shows were theassociations' most significant source of revenue outside of dues, Dobson notes.Confidential financial agreements were negotiated individually with each association; any other approach could have risked antitrust violations.

Operation of the show itself is another issue. If the new event has a single show manager, the line of authority is clear-cut. But if there are two show managers, the allocation of duties and decision-making authority must be carefully established.

The merged Big UAPAA event is now managed by William T. Glasgow Inc., which previously managed APAA. Epic Enterprises continues to manage SEMA/AI. There's an irrefutable need for two show managers -- there are two separate venues, a mile apart. Still, the two people don't operate totally independently. Responsibilities are shared -- handled by one person for both shows -- if the procedure is the same for both shows and sharing reduces costs. To determine who would handle which shared areas, Schwartz at Epic and Bill Glasgow Sr., Managing Director of The Big I/APAA, first indicated their preferences on a checklist. "Then we reviewed the list to see how much time was involved," says Glasgow, to be sure that the allocation was equitable.

Among the shared responsibilities: Arrangements for shuttle buses; production of alldirectories; advertising -- because exhibitors can advertise in both shows;communications with trade magazine publishers -- because bonus distribution is done atboth shows; and press registration and press conferences -- to eliminate schedulingconflicts. Attendee registration is also shared and a single database is created.

Responsibilities that are handled separately for each of the co-located shows includeexhibit sales, selection of general service contractors and hiring of security companies.Both shows use the same van line, but the service is handled separately because ofdifferences in the rules of the two buildings.

Attendance promotion is shared because the show is positioned as a single event.Exhibitor promotion is independent, however. Recognizing the potential for difficultiesin that area, "We agreed in the beginning that neither of us would publish anything aboutthe show without the other person seeing it first," says Schwartz.

With the joint DFISA/FPMSA show more than a year away, allocation of responsibilitieshas not yet been determined. "There will be two people working on the show," saysOverstreet at DFISA. "It will be a large enough show, with plenty to do. There'll be asharing of duties, and we'll work out who'll have the final call." And she foresees a majorbenefit in having two show managers: "It will help to have people who are familiar withall of the members."

DFISA President John Martin believes that with two show managers, it will be importantto clarify areas of responsibility. "If, for example, one does the floor layout, and onedoes registration, we must be sure that the member knows who to call."

Policies and procedures
Several areas could really be minefields as mergers are implemented. Whose operatingrules and show rules will be followed? What happens to exhibitors' priority points?This is where heavy negotiation, cooperation and compromise come into play.

An operating committee can guide the players through those minefields. The committeefor the Automotive Aftermarket show was composed of industry representatives, who voted, and salaried association executives, who did not. The two shows were equallyrepresented on the committee, but each had only one vote. Thus, before a show could castits vote, all its representatives had to agree. During 1991 and 1992, as policies werebeing formulated, that committee met three or four times per year. Now it meetsannually.

DFISA and FPMSA created a merger policy steering committee, composed of members ofeach association. The committee merged the show rules and rewrote the bylaws to applyto the proposed new association. Both boards have approved the committee's plan, saysOverstreet, but the total membership must also approve it before it can be implemented.

Priority points were a major challenge when the APAA and Big I shows merged. APAAexhibitors attained charter status if they had been in the show for 22 years, but for TheBig I, it was 39 years. Consequently, APAA had three or four times as many charterexhibitors, Glasgow recalls. "We reduced the requirement for Big I exhibitors until weequalized the charter exhibitor numbers." Similar adjustments were made forexhibitors in the next group to draw for space. "We kicked it around to decide how tomake it equitable," says Glasgow. "There was a lot of give and take."

A different challenge faced show management for the World Media Expo. "Our initialintent was to come up with a formula that properly weighted the participants in each ofthe four events," says Dobson. The problem was that not all the organizations had keptequally accurate records. "We found that there was no way to properly compensate someof the exhibitors. So we chose to give every company that had participated in the last twoshows the same base points." Those companies will be placed first, on a first-come,first-served basis. NAB will then develop a formula for subsequent shows. Although someexhibitors could be shortchanged in the first show, Dobson expects everything to gosmoothly: "Because the Los Angeles Convention Center has more gross square footage thanwe expect to need the first year, we'll have some flexibility."