FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1990
1990 - 2632.PDF
GIFAS will add 10,000m2 show space at Paris in bitions company, joins the Japanese trade association in seeking a biennial US market place. AA1 president Hans Hollander says that such an event should be "...interna tional, strictly for the purpose of doing business with American firms in America and not to. compete with existing events". Airbus, Lockheed, MDC, Gulfstream, Textron Lycoming, Garrett, Cessna, Piper, Westland and Bell all say a large "No". P&WC believes that the US Department of Commerce-supported show at Dayton (Ohio) fits the bill. Piper points out that the many specialist events already established in the USA "...provide more than adequate visibility". Smaller shows, often national or specialist events, receive votes of approval in some quarters, particularly from smaller compa nies. For example, US general-aviation man ufacturer Piper finds that the national AOPA Convention and Experimental Air craft Association fly-in among the best marketplaces. UK helicopter builder Wes tland ranks the US National Business Air craft Association (NBAA) Convention as more valuable a showcase than Europe's Hannover show. For Textron Lycoming, regional-airliner shows in the USA and Europe and various specialist military events are good ex hibition opportunities. The SJAC regards Canada's west-coast show in Abbotsford as a stepping stone into that marketplace. Gulfstream values the NBAA Convention equally highly with the Paris, Singapore, and Dubai shows while, for Cessna, the defence show in Chile is valuable. For P&WC, the US Helicopter Association In ternational convention ranks alongside re- 1991 turers share this view. gional-and business-aircraft shows as an important marketplace. The quality of visitor is easily the most important consideration for exhibitors in gauging the value of a show, according to the Flight International survey. General-aviation manufac turers Cessna and Piper link sales to show appearance very strongly, while Gulfstream, Westland, Bell and trade associations fre quently see a relationship. The largest manufacturers, including Lockheed, MDC, Garrett, Textron Lycoming, Pilatus Britten-Norman and P&WC, say that sales can "rarely" be traced back to a show. General Electric is the only manufacturer polled to acknowledge openly that sales "never" accrue from shows, although privately two major airliner manufac- INTANGIBLE BENEFITS Farnborough organisers say that the value of shows in generating sales is "fearfully intangible". According to SBAC director Sir Barry Duxbury: "No one comes out of the blue and says T will take three of those'." If the trend is away from the traditional international showplaces to new regional centres, where else would manufacturers and aerospace-industry associations like to exhibit? There is no general consensus from manufacturers polled in the Flight Interna tiona] survey, although several possible lo cations are cited. Westland would like to see shows in Eastern bloc countries, but acknowledges that historically Paris has provided a shop window for the Soviets. Many air shows around the world have enjoyed Soviet participation in recent years (although the SBAC has a singularly diffi cult task in repeating its 1988 coup when the MiG-29s took part at Farnborough). P&WC is keen to see a large event in China, while Bell would like shows in Japan "more often". Piper, many of whose designs are built under licence in South America, suggests a major show take place in that continent. Most manufacturers argue that the cost of air-show participation is spiralling ever upwards, but none has volunteered to withdraw from the established venues. Air bus says that each show presents its own difficulties. MDC, Bell and Pilatus Britten- Norman represent the whole spectrum of manufacturing industry in calling for re duced show costs (see box on page 120 for comparative costs at recent major air shows). Textron Lycoming concedes that exhibitions represent "a tremendous drain on resources". The SBAC claims to be conscious of show costs, acknowledging that "hardware, litera ture, fittings, and manning" all add to exhibitors' investment. Farnborough 1990 was sold out "... very early on", but the organisers are not complacent about th^ future, saying: "The SBAC must be careful not to price itself out of the market. We are a non-profit making venture carrying risks." Some £80 million is said to have been invested in the Farnborough site (owned by the Ministry of Defence) over the years. Given the increased demand for space at Farnborough and the additional space being prepared for Paris 1991, the SBAC says that the organisers — both of which are trade associations — are ideally placed to judge whether there are too many shows. So, are air shows worth all the effort that goes into them? Our European manufac turer of light turboprop transports seems to think that all the work is worthwhile: "Some will argue that they advanced further toward a contract in three meetings at an air show than in three months of meetings in the normal course of business". Q Shows at Singapore (below) and Dubai have overtaken the Hannover show, according to manufacturers 122 FLIGHT INTERNATIONAL 5-11 September 1990 >•
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
