Macworld Boston: is there still such a thing?


joecool85

macrumors 65816
Mar 9, 2005
1,355
1
Maine
I'm "new" to mac, switcher in 2003, so I didn't even realize that Macworld Boston use to be Macworld NY...It seems kind of strange that Apple doesn't attend. It must be more than just the move to Boston that did it, anyone know the real reason?
 

billpalmer

macrumors member
Jan 24, 2004
85
0
There's a long and ugly story behind it, and it sort of goes like this:

In 2003, a clown at IDG named Charlie Greco decides he's such a big fan of his hometown Boston that he's going to move Macworld New York to Boston in 2004 at any cost

Apple tells Greco that Boston is too small to be worth the massive amount of time money involved in attending, and that if the Expo is moved there, Apple won't attend

Greco announces he's Expo to Boston starting in 2003

Hours later, Apple announces that it will not attend any Expo in Boston, nor will it attend the 2002 New York Expo

Greco responds by announcing that he's going to ban Apple from the San Fransisco Expo in retaliation

The 2002 New York Expo undergoes several name changes and ultimately bombs

Somewhere along the line, IDG fires Greco, presumably to get back on good terms with Apple, or perhaps because they realized that Greco was mentally ill

By this time it is contractually too late for the move to Boston not to happen, so the Expo goes to Boston in 2004 and is very small due to Apple's lack of attendance

Apple continues attending the San Francisco Expo, but apparently never will show up in Boston

Each year, Mac fans everywhere sit back and wonder if A) the Expo will ever get moved back to New York, B) will Apple begin attending again if it does, and C) where can we get Charlie Greco's head on a platter?
 

mkjellman

macrumors regular
Oct 14, 2003
158
0
you are forgetting a few "small" components.

i live in boston so I got another side of the story. MacWorld was always in boston until they decided to move it to New York. Boston was devastated. Then we spent tons of money on this new hall and the city couldn't rent it out because the timing happened to coincide with the beginning of the recession. Macworld knew they could get cheep space and move it back to Boston where there were many Mac fans and a city that really wanted them there.

This was front page news in 2002 in major newspapers because Macworld was always in Boston and it was coming back. Boston really isn't that small of a venue because it has served Apple and others fine before, but instead it was speculated that Apple didn't have enough to release at two keynotes and instead to cut costs only would give one on their own coast.

Since then MacWorld Boston has turned into less of a commercial event and more of a cultural gathering. They may have lost the battle with many companies not willing to waste money but I am thinking of going because the community atmosphere will be there. People go to gather and talk "Apple" and thats really what a convention should be, IMHO.
 

wdlove

macrumors P6
Oct 20, 2002
16,570
0
berkleeboy210 said:
Why do people always take hits against Boston. We don't Bite.

Why does Apple currently have 3 new Apple Stores going up in the Boston Area if they don't like us??
Boston hosted the Democratic Convention last summer, showing the capacity to act as a world class city. It's almost like Apple is trying to compensate in some way. It would help MacWorld Boston if Apple would have a booth. Other wise it seems that Steve cares more about Paris. :(
 

mkjellman

macrumors regular
Oct 14, 2003
158
0
well i don't think Apple neglects boston (me and you) in any way, I just think that if you look at numbers Paris to Apple who would you want to spend the money on to get the most bang for your buck.

Apple has 3 Apple stores and the one in the Northshore mall there was one of the first in the country.
 

mac-mania

macrumors member
Jun 12, 2005
93
1
Anyone here attending the Boston show?

Side note: I am, and if anyone wants to meet up, PM me.

@ Macworld, I'll probably be the jackass with the windows laptop taking videos from his webcam. You can't miss me.
 

billpalmer

macrumors member
Jan 24, 2004
85
0
mkjellman said:
you are forgetting a few "small" components.

i live in boston so I got another side of the story. MacWorld was always in boston until they decided to move it to New York. Boston was devastated. Then we spent tons of money on this new hall and the city couldn't rent it out because the timing happened to coincide with the beginning of the recession. Macworld knew they could get cheep space and move it back to Boston where there were many Mac fans and a city that really wanted them there.

This was front page news in 2002 in major newspapers because Macworld was always in Boston and it was coming back. Boston really isn't that small of a venue because it has served Apple and others fine before, but instead it was speculated that Apple didn't have enough to release at two keynotes and instead to cut costs only would give one on their own coast.

Since then MacWorld Boston has turned into less of a commercial event and more of a cultural gathering. They may have lost the battle with many companies not willing to waste money but I am thinking of going because the community atmosphere will be there. People go to gather and talk "Apple" and thats really what a convention should be, IMHO.
My recollection was that the "Apple doesn't want to do two U.S. Expos" was something that Charlie Greco invented and fed to the press in an attempt to cover his tail when Apple called his bluff. But then again, I was rooting for it to stay in NYC all the way, so maybe my recollection is clouded by that fact.

But seriously, Boston? I mean, we do a lot of business in Boston, so I know the iPod really popular there (as are, presumably, Apple's other products). But is Boston even among the top ten media markets in the country? From the standpoint of a nationwide company (worldwide, actually), it just doesn't make sense to do one big East Coast trade show each year, and have it be in a smaller town. Your goal when making a major time/money investment like that is maximum exposure possible, and that means the largest city possible. It's fine to have an Expo in Boston, but not one that's supposed to represent the entire eastern half of the nation.

If you're going to have Macworld in a place like Boston, you might as well have it here in Kissimmee, which by the way is exactly what IDG tried to do last year with "Macworld On Tour" until they found that me and about twelve other people were the only people interested in attending, and I was only gonna go because it was twenty minutes away.

As far Apple not having enough stuff to do two Stevenotes a year, that really doesn't fit the situation we're looking at. Steve does a minimum of three Keynotes per year, including MWSF, WWDC, Paris, plus sometimes Tokyo. So it's not as if the man doesn't have enough products to announce, otherwise we wouldn't be doing more than the one MWSF Keynote per year.

Bottom line, I believe, is that Boston is good for a regional show at best, and just isn't the right place for a major show that's supposed to represent the entire East Coast. And Apple doesn't see fit to waste its time with regional shows, even when IDG has one dressed up in a national show's clothing.
 

billpalmer

macrumors member
Jan 24, 2004
85
0
iMeowbot said:
Nielsen put Boston at 6.
OK, fair enough. Larger than I would have thought.

But Miami is 8, so why should the East Coast Macworld be in Boston and not Miami? Or how about Orlando, with its newly renovated convention center? Or maybe Philadelphia or Atlanta?

My point is that as soon as you get away from the idea that Apple's East Coast trade show should be held in a town other than New York City, you can then easily argue that it could be held just about anywhere. And once you get to that point, you can see pretty easily why Apple wouldn't want to bother with it.

There's a reason why no one is watching the NBA Finals right now: neither the New York team nor any California team (nor the team with Shaq) are involved. San Antonio and Detroit might or might not be better basketball cities, but when it comes to the big draw and the attention, it just isn't there. The current Finals is a nice little basketball series that almsot no one outside of San Antonio or Detroit much cares about.

Accordingly, Macworld Boston is a nice little expo that almost no one outside of Boston cares about.

And you don't send your CEO to do major product announcements, along with a massive team of booth folks and engineers, to an expo that fits the above description.
 

shamino

macrumors 68040
Jan 7, 2004
3,386
130
Purcellville, VA
billpalmer said:
My point is that as soon as you get away from the idea that Apple's East Coast trade show should be held in a town other than New York City, you can then easily argue that it could be held just about anywhere.
Which is why it should be in Washington DC. This way I can attend without paying for hotel and airfare :D

Hey, it's just as good a reason as any other one I've heard so far.
 

mac-mania

macrumors member
Jun 12, 2005
93
1
You know, if your gonna critize Boston as a small market for Apple, why not San Fransisco? On the West Coast you could do LA, Las Vegas, etc.
 

Gasu E.

macrumors 601
Mar 20, 2004
4,420
2,219
Not far from Boston, MA.
Silly

billpalmer said:
In 2003, a clown at IDG named Charlie Greco decides he's such a big fan of his hometown Boston that he's going to move Macworld New York to Boston in 2004 at any cost
That's such a silly premise that I don't think even you believe it, Bill.

As has been stated previously, before moving to NYC, MacWorld was held in Boston for many years. It was a huge and extremely successful show in a major media market, #5 (according to this link, http://www.nielsenmedia.com/DMAs.html), ahead of the SF area. It was a wonderful, vibrant event that basically took over the entire city. It was also by far the major trade show in Boston every year.

When MacWorld moved to NYC, the speculation was that Apple was behind the move. The idea was that Apple wanted to focus more on the core market of media production, and NYC is arguably the center of the media universe. So this move appeared to fit better with Apple's strategy at the time.

The move back to Boston was strictly a financial decision on IDG's part. Holding a show in Manhattan is hugely expensive and was difficult for so many of the smaller vendors that made the Boston show so vibrant, as well as tough on IDG's bottom line. The Boston facilities, now idle for a great deal of June, were offered back to IDG for a song, and IDG grabbed at them. This led to the brinkmanship between IDG and Apple; nobody blinked, and so here we are.

Finally, the size of the media market should not be the primary consideration for a trade show. Las Vegas is media market #51 and is unquestionably the prime convention city in the USA. What really matters is how well the event fits with the locale. MacWorld Boston was in its day a brilliant show for Mac heads; a treasure we have lost forever.
 

billpalmer

macrumors member
Jan 24, 2004
85
0
Gasu E. said:
That's such a silly premise that I don't think even you believe it, Bill.
Nah, it's more or less a fact. Source: Charlie Greco

"Greco is clearly proud to bring his success back home. 'I won't deny there are economic reasons,' he says, 'but it's also a kind of legacy for me.'"

And if Greco himself admitting that he moved the show to Boston for personal reasons isn't enough, then how about Greco's replacement stating that "it could make more sense to keep the show in New York"?

Out across the internet, if you want to dig for it, you can find even better supporting evidence, much of it coming directly out of Greco's own mouth, that shows that Greco moved Macworld to Boston because he wanted it in his hometown of Boston for personal reasons. That he was ousted (er, sorry, "resigned") from his CEO position at IDG less than a year later, suggests that either A) IDG decided that the move to Boston was such a mistake that they canned him for it, or B) Greco knew all along that moving the Expo was going to cost him his job, but he did it anyway to create his "legacy" and then bailed out shortly thereafter.

In any case, even if you believe that going to Boston was the right move, I think you have to agree that it was done for the wrong reasons. If you're going to argue with that, than I believe that you're showing a bit of hometown favoritism yourself.
 

billpalmer

macrumors member
Jan 24, 2004
85
0
Gasu E. said:
As has been stated previously, before moving to NYC, MacWorld was held in Boston for many years.
And if I'm not mistaken, those were the same years that Apple was bleeding like stuck pig. Can we all agree that the people running Apple in between the Jobs eras (Scully, Spindler, Amelio) didn't know what the hell they were doing? If so, then arguing that the show was in Boston during their tenure isn't much of an argument for Boston.

The fact that the show was successful in Boston during the last go-around merely shows the point I've been trying to make all along, which is that Boston is fine as a regional expo but doesn't cut it when trying to represent an entire coast and get the maximum national media attention possible. If you're Apple, you don't launch a product for the people of Boston. You launch it for the entire nation, the entire world to see. And you don't do that from Boston. Almost no one outside of Boston gives a damn about what goes on inside Boston. It's nothing personal, it's just that Boston ain't New York City when it comes to getting the nation's and the world's attention. And that's why it's not worth Apple's wasted effort to show up.
 

mkjellman

macrumors regular
Oct 14, 2003
158
0
bill, your bias and bs are killing me...stop looking into this so much. boston was sucessful and i don't think you can spin it in reality any way unless you start to speek for people when you are just making assumptions.
 

wdlove

macrumors P6
Oct 20, 2002
16,570
0
Again when you say that Boston is a regional city, you are forgetting that the Democratic National Committee doesn't agree. The DNC held a very successful convention here last summer that was carried internationally. The convention was a great success. Very much on the same par as NYC. Boston is just a more affordable city when it comes top conventions. Logan is also a world class airport. We also have a great rail, subway, & bus system.
 

billpalmer

macrumors member
Jan 24, 2004
85
0
wdlove said:
Again when you say that Boston is a regional city, you are forgetting that the Democratic National Committee doesn't agree. The DNC held a very successful convention here last summer that was carried internationally. The convention was a great success. Very much on the same par as NYC. Boston is just a more affordable city when it comes top conventions. Logan is also a world class airport. We also have a great rail, subway, & bus system.
The political conventions are held in a different city each year, presumably to keep the various local electorates happy. Totally different ballgame.

You're trying to come up with any angle you can to try to justify why Macworld is in your town of Boston, but it ain't working. It's not your fault that Macwortd being in Boston is detrimental to Apple's overall well-being, but you'd do well to stop trying to defend it so much. It would be no different than if I spend page after page trying to justify why Macworld should be in Orlando. Macworld doesn't belong in my town any more than it belongs in yours. It belongs in New York City. And it's not just Apple that agrees with me. Since the move to Boston, East Coast Macworld attandance has fallen off a cliff, and that speaks more loudly than any argument that you or I or anyone else can make here on this board.
 

billpalmer

macrumors member
Jan 24, 2004
85
0
mkjellman said:
bill...stop looking into this so much.
Okay, but only because you asked... :eek:

What are you afraid of, that I'm somehow going to single-handedly convince IDG to move it back to New York?
 

latergator116

macrumors 68000
Sep 30, 2003
1,675
0
Providence, RI
billpalmer said:
.... Since the move to Boston, East Coast Macworld attandance has fallen off a cliff, and that speaks more loudly than any argument that you or I or anyone else can make here on this board.
Oh, really? Maybe because Apple decided not to attend? By the way, when Apple was in Boston in the nineties, they filled the two largest exhibit halls in the city.
 

sacear

macrumors 6502
Jan 12, 2005
457
0
Boston -> New York -> Boston, where next?

joecool85 said:
I'm "new" to mac, switcher in 2003, so I didn't even realize that Macworld Boston use to be Macworld NY...
Which in turn was MacWorld Boston prior to being in NY. :eek: :)

billpalmer said:
Apple tells Greco that Boston is too small to be worth the massive amount of time money involved in attending, and that if the Expo is moved there, Apple won't attend

Apple continues attending the San Francisco Expo, but apparently never will show up in Boston
That's odd, considering San Francisco is smaller than Boston.

If size of community is the reason for where MacWorld Expos are hosted, then the January West Coast MacWorld Expo ought to be in San Jose or Los Angeles.

billpalmer said:
From the standpoint of a nationwide company (worldwide, actually), it just doesn't make sense to do one big East Coast trade show each year, and have it be in a smaller town. Your goal when making a major time/money investment like that is maximum exposure possible, and that means the largest city possible. It's fine to have an Expo in Boston, but not one that's supposed to represent the entire eastern half of the nation.

Bottom line, I believe, is that Boston is good for a regional show at best, and just isn't the right place for a major show that's supposed to represent the entire East Coast. And Apple doesn't see fit to waste its time with regional shows, even when IDG has one dressed up in a national show's clothing.
So likewise then, having the January West Coast MacWorld in San Francisco does not make sense. San Francisco is smaller than Boston and is the smallest of the well-known metropolitan cities on the West Coast.

billpalmer said:
...why should the East Coast Macworld be in Boston and not Miami? Or how about Orlando, with its newly renovated convention center? Or maybe Philadelphia or Atlanta?
Likewise, why should the West Coast MacWorld be in San Francisco and not Los Angeles? Or how about San Jose which has a new convention center, is much closer to Apple HQ, and is the heart of Silicon Valley. Or maybe Sacramento or Las Vegas?
 

fixyourthinking

macrumors 6502a
Oct 24, 2002
665
0
Greenville SC
The drama version vs the real version

billpalmer said:
There's a long and ugly story behind it, and it sort of goes like this:

In 2003, a clown at IDG named Charlie Greco decides he's such a big fan of his hometown Boston that he's going to move Macworld New York to Boston in 2004 at any cost

Apple tells Greco that Boston is too small to be worth the massive amount of time money involved in attending, and that if the Expo is moved there, Apple won't attend

Greco announces he's Expo to Boston starting in 2003

Hours later, Apple announces that it will not attend any Expo in Boston, nor will it attend the 2002 New York Expo

Greco responds by announcing that he's going to ban Apple from the San Fransisco Expo in retaliation

The 2002 New York Expo undergoes several name changes and ultimately bombs

Somewhere along the line, IDG fires Greco, presumably to get back on good terms with Apple, or perhaps because they realized that Greco was mentally ill

By this time it is contractually too late for the move to Boston not to happen, so the Expo goes to Boston in 2004 and is very small due to Apple's lack of attendance

Apple continues attending the San Francisco Expo, but apparently never will show up in Boston

Each year, Mac fans everywhere sit back and wonder if A) the Expo will ever get moved back to New York, B) will Apple begin attending again if it does, and C) where can we get Charlie Greco's head on a platter?

Of course this IS the drama version - the REAL reason was Apple was spending WAY too much money on the east coast trip - OF ANY KIND and from what I know personally - the union workers at Jacob Javits Center was crazy expensive, lazy, and (shhhh mob like).

This was purely a cost cutting measure by Apple and a way to make World Wide developer's Conference have more prominence.

As for Bill Palmer's opinion - he is the most idiotic person with the most uninformed incoherent opinions in the Mac realm. He borders on being worse than John Dvorak
 

wdlove

macrumors P6
Oct 20, 2002
16,570
0
adzoox said:
Of course this IS the drama version - the REAL reason was Apple was spending WAY too much money on the east coast trip - OF ANY KIND and from what I know personally - the union workers at Jacob Javits Center was crazy expensive, lazy, and (shhhh mob like).

This was purely a cost cutting measure by Apple and a way to make World Wide developer's Conference have more prominence.

As for Bill Palmer's opinion - he is the most idiotic person with the most uninformed incoherent opinions in the Mac realm. He borders on being worse than John Dvorak
When it comes to saving money, Apple would save a lot more if they canceled MacWorld Paris. I personally see no reason for that convention either. It's bound to cost them more than MWSF, Boston, and WWDC combined.