Last month Jeweller asked an important question: Can the Australian jewellery industry support two fairs on the same weekend in the same city?
A screen capture of each fair’s exhibitor lists was taken to analyse the situation on 24 June. It showed a vast difference in terms of support for each event.
At the time, the International Jewellery Fair at Darling Harbour, organised by Expertise Events, listed 134 individual exhibitors.
The Jewellery Industry Fair at the Railway Workshops, run by the Jewellery Industry Network, listed 25 exhibitors.
It was noted that the number of exhibitors for each jewellery fair would likely increase as the events approached. Now, four weeks from each fair, what do the numbers look like?
A second screen capture of the online exhibitor lists was taken on 19 July. The exhibitor count for the Darling Harbour event has increased from 134 to 145, while the Railway Workshops event has risen from 25 to 32.
Spin-free zone
As previously reported, Jeweller has used a stringent formula to evaluate the offerings of each show on a like-for-like basis.
There is a good reason for this. It is not unusual for event organisers to overstate or exaggerate the reality of their show.
For example, many trade shows outside of Australia promote the number of ‘booths’ at their event rather than the number of individual exhibitors.
Within the events industry, a ‘booth’ is classified as a three-metre by three-metre (3X3) floor space; however, the size of stands often vary; for example a nine-metre by three-metre (9X3) stand.
Using booths as a measure, a single 9X3 stand can be promoted as three booths despite belonging to a single exhibitor. This practice exaggerates the size of an event and can mislead visitors.
As another example, some event organisers list brand names as exhibitors even though one company, such as a distributor, may showcase many brands at a single stand.
This practice can also mislead visitors and make the event appear much larger than it is.
Jeweller maintains that the exhibitor is the business that booked the stand. One exhibitor is equal to one stand, a company’s products and brands should not be counted as multiple exhibitors, and booths are an imperfect way to measure the size of a trade show.
These promotional manoeuvres are often described as ‘puffery’ – advertising or promotional material that makes broad or exaggerated statements that are a matter of opinion rather than objectively measurable.
When promoting an event such as a jewellery fair, organisers must tread a fine line between an acceptable degree of puffery and outright misleading and deceptive conduct.
It can be a tricky balancing act, as the Jewellery Industry Fair organisers discovered last year when the directors found themselves in the Federal Court over misleading and deceptive claims surrounding their inaugural jewellery fair.
As previously reported, Jewellery Industry Network directors Laura Moore and Angkham (Andy) Phanthapangna were forced to correct several misleading and deceptive claims in an email dated 26 July 2023, only one month before the inaugural show.
A subsequent investigation by Jeweller found that Jewellery Industry Network’s marketing material overstated many other matters about its inaugural fair, which were not covered in Moore’s corrective statement.
The 12-month legal battle - which resulted in the Jewellery Industry Network settling out of court - is estimated to have cost Moore and Phanthapangna between $80,000 and $100,000.
The latest figures
That background information aside, to provide a like-for-like comparison between the two upcoming jewellery fairs in Sydney, Jeweller has adhered to stringent definitions to provide retail buyers with enough information to make their assessment.
For example, an exhibitor was defined as an industry supplier because the primary objective of retailers when visiting a jewellery fair is to view and purchase new products.
This means that industry associations are not counted as exhibitors. While their presence at an event is beneficial, there would be no exhibition without the industry suppliers.
The Jewellery Industry Fair lists six industry associations as exhibitors, which have been excluded from the count.
The International Jewellery Fair lists TAFE NSW as an exhibitor; however, it has not been included in the count of its exhibitors.
Furthermore, the like-for-like comparison does not include any businesses 'related' to the event organiser.
As previously reported, the Jewellery Industry Fair records four ‘related' businesses as exhibitors owned by Moore and/or Phanthapangna, as well as one owned by Moore’s father.
These businesses are not included in the like-for-like comparison. The International Jewellery Fair does not list any ‘related' businesses.
In an unusual discovery, one business owned by Moore is even listed as the Gold Sponsor of the Jewellery Industry Fair, the business also owned by Moore and Phanthapangna.
It is not the only example of a business owned by the duo being listed as a sponsor of an event they own.
Insights for buyers
The above table details some interesting insights after excluding any businesses that cannot be deemed a jewellery industry supplier and any duplicate listings by the way of brands, as at 5pm on 19 July (Friday).
The International Jewellery Fair is nearing the same number of exhibitors it had in 2023, while the Jewellery Industry Fair is experiencing a 40 percent decline year over year.
The number of overseas exhibitors at the International Jewellery Fair exceeds the total number at the Jewellery Industry Fair.
There is another fascinating insight that will be relevant to watch buyers.
For many independent jewellery stores, watch sales can account for 8 per cent of annual revenue, and that percentage naturally increases for stores that have a greater focus on watches.
Background reading: Federal Court - More questions raised about Jewellery Industry Network
That said, it’s worth noting the support from the watch sector at each fair, as there is a large discrepancy.
At the time of publication, the Jewellery Industry Fair recorded two watch exhibitors with one brand each - Boccia and Delma.
On the other hand, the International Jewellery Fair accounted for more than 40 watch brands from at least eight exhibitors.
These include high-profile brands such as Guess, Timex, Maxum (Designa Accessories), Daniel Wellington, Jag, Baume & Mercier (Duraflex Group Australia), Roamer, Maurice Lacroix, Ice Watch (West End Collection), and Citizen Australia – as well as several smaller watch brands.
Big question for the industry
This brings the analysis back to the original question: Can the local industry support two fairs on the same weekend in the same city?
Like most things in business, the market eventually decides. Twelve months ago, the inaugural three-day Jewellery Industry Fair benefited from its ‘curiosity’ value as a new event.
There was also no clash of dates, meaning some companies attended both events.
After reducing the event to two days, Moore’s Jewellery Industry Fair intentionally shifted its dates to clash with the International Jewellery Fair, forcing suppliers to choose one fair or the other.
While there are still four weeks until the two events — and both shows will most likely add more exhibitors — the Jewellery Industry Fair is facing an alarming 40 per cent decline in exhibitors.
Conversely, the International Jewellery Fair is just five exhibitors short of its total from the previous year—a 3 per cent decline.
For those who would argue that Australia can support two jewellery fairs in the same city on the same days, it’s even more concerning that 38 of the 53 exhibitors (70 per cent) at the inaugural Jewellery Industry Fair appear not to have rebooked for 2024.
More than 10 companies that previously exhibited at the Jewellery Industry Fair are now booked at the International Jewellery Fair in 2024.
It’s also not a secret that the Jewellery Industry Fair is in dispute with one or two companies that have asked to be relinquished from their contract as they no longer wish to exhibit.
The strategy of deliberating causing a clash of dates and forcing suppliers to choose between one show and the other has caused division, which has been seen previously on three well-documented occasions.
The question of who benefits from this arrangement will be answered in mid-August when suppliers and retailers decide where to spend their time and energy. For business owners, time is perhaps the most valuable commodity, and retailers and suppliers must spend it wisely.
In the meantime, Jeweller hopes that by presenting this information, readers will be able to make their own assessments about who really benefits from simultaneous events in the same city?
As is almost always the case, the market will ultimately determine the most efficient outcome.
FOOTNOTE: As a matter of transparency, readers should note that Jeweller produces the trade fair directory for the International Jewellery Fair. As part of this arrangement, the magazine has a stand at the fair; however, in accordance with the methodology described above, Jeweller has not been counted as an exhibitor for the purpose of this like-for-like comparison. It also should also be noted that this analysis only counts exhibitors as a single ‘booking’; neither the size of the venue, the size or quality of each stand - nor the industry prominence of the exhibitor and its products - have been factored into this research. |
More reading
Jewellery Trade Shows II: Is all ‘fair’ in love and war?
Jewellery Trade Shows I: The facts and figures without puffery
Jewellery Fair: Special visitors from US heading to Sydney
Industry unity: Showcase Jewellers commits to Sydney Fair
Blast from the past: More questions raised about Jewellery Industry Network
Jewellery Industry Network: Moore moves to correct misleading trade fair statements