<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Virtues of Virtual</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tradeshowstartup.com/2006/10/27/the-virtues-of-virtual/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tradeshowstartup.com/2006/10/27/the-virtues-of-virtual/</link>
	<description>Lessons From the Launch of Tradeshows &#38;  Internet Media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:59:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: RichW</title>
		<link>http://www.tradeshowstartup.com/2006/10/27/the-virtues-of-virtual/comment-page-1/#comment-2788</link>
		<dc:creator>RichW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Oct 2006 23:52:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tradeshowstartup.com/?p=79#comment-2788</guid>
		<description>Tim,
Millions have been thrown down that black hole already.  While you can validly argue the merits of meeting face-to-face, I&#039;ve alwasy found the problem with the &quot;virtual trade show&quot; was that whomever was designing or specing the show project always confined themselves with some type of physical show model in mind - which meant they built it from the exhibitor&#039;s needs outward, not from the attendee side.  They never used the intraweb for what it was good for.

You recall seeing any virtual trade shows that have an Amazon-like recommendation system (people who visited this booth also visited...)?  An eBay-like rating of sellers (or tire-kicking attendees)?  Hell, let&#039;s go more basic than that - ever see one with a live chat feature?

Reed was getting somewhere with its old manufacturing.net portal in the late 90s - that was actually pretty well done - better than Vertical.net (remember when we were all worried about Walsh taking over the world?).

Anyway, good points all around.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tim,<br />
Millions have been thrown down that black hole already.  While you can validly argue the merits of meeting face-to-face, I&#8217;ve alwasy found the problem with the &#8220;virtual trade show&#8221; was that whomever was designing or specing the show project always confined themselves with some type of physical show model in mind &#8211; which meant they built it from the exhibitor&#8217;s needs outward, not from the attendee side.  They never used the intraweb for what it was good for.</p>
<p>You recall seeing any virtual trade shows that have an Amazon-like recommendation system (people who visited this booth also visited&#8230;)?  An eBay-like rating of sellers (or tire-kicking attendees)?  Hell, let&#8217;s go more basic than that &#8211; ever see one with a live chat feature?</p>
<p>Reed was getting somewhere with its old manufacturing.net portal in the late 90s &#8211; that was actually pretty well done &#8211; better than Vertical.net (remember when we were all worried about Walsh taking over the world?).</p>
<p>Anyway, good points all around.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

