This book includes a plain text version that is designed for high accessibility. To use this version please follow this link.
continued from page 41


whatever group is coming in. The rise in convention centers that are modern and fairly large in size so that they can accommo- date mid- to large-size conventions has been impressive in these secondary markets. And they’re able to better compete because in some cases there are no unions involved—the cost of liv- ing in those second- or third-tiermarkets tends to bemuch lower. Associations are choosing these second- and third-tier cities


based on feedback they’re getting from their members, and they’re trying to offer a value package to their attendees and exhibitors. By going to some of these second- and third-tier cities, we’re able to do that—offer a great experience at lower cost. If there’s a perception that a second-tier city is a less excit-


ing destination for attendees, that falls on the part of aCVBand the people who have made the decision to bring their meeting to that city to promote and play up all the positives.Really, when you look at it, all those cities have their own unique set of offer- ings and attractions that some of the big cities just don’t have. It’s incumbent on the association to get the word out that this city may be considered in your eyes to be a secondary city, but it has many things to offer. I encourage people to explore secondary cities and not just


keep going back to the major first-tier cities. It’s nice to spread the wealth. Some of our smaller cities across the country need


—particularly now—for the hospitality tourism business to support them. I think it would be helpful, just from an information and


meeting planner’s perspective, if there could be a clear definition of what is considered to be a first-, second-, and third-tier city —and what goes into that criteria or defines them as such. I thinkit would be helpful for a meeting planner who is trying to figure out if a city is going to be a good fit for a particular group and convention, if there were a better description. If this was based on, say, 10 criteria, they could be listed as first-, sec- ond-, and third-tier cities. But that doesn’t mean planners should discount any of them. You need to continue to do your own research to see what’s going to match up best with your own specific needs. I think someone has to take the initiative and push for this


to happen. Maybe the Convention Industry Council can take the lead. Someone needs to step up to the plate and say that it would benefit a lot of our convention organizers if they had this kind of resource to access. I look at it as a CIC initiative rather than an individual organization, because it would benefit all the different levels of planners who belong to all these different organizations in the hospitality industry. 


‘The Smaller-Tier Cities


Get It’ Carla Aho, Vice President of Global Accounts ConferenceDirect


I have one client — a multi- level marketing organization in the telecommunications indus-


try—that does four very large citywides annually, and the vari- ations between the cities and bids are significant. Typically, we base the 20 cities we bid out to on their flight accessibility, and





ROLLING OUT THE CARPET: For Carla Aho, the differ- ence between a first- and second-tier city is the


level of service the CVB provides. In her experi- ence, first-tier doesn’t come out on top.


then from there, we’ll go into the concession list.We compete with the NHL and the NBA [for dates], because we try to go into arenas rather than convention centers. The smaller-tier cities get it. When they know that they have


the potential to bring a 20,000-person citywide to their city— when they’ve got the room product and the arena—they will continued on page 44


42 pcmaconvene February 2011 www.pcma.org


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108