We're all creatures of habit — people tend to follow familiar patterns and routines, which means human behaviour is often predictable.
While predicting the specifics of the future is difficult, even the most basic understanding of human nature makes it clear that some things are unavoidable.
Beginning in June, Jeweller set out to compare two jewellery trade shows set to unfold in Sydney on the same weekend.
In August, the International Jewellery Fair (Expertise Events) and the Jewellery Industry Fair (Jewellery Industry Network) competed for the loyalty of the broader industry.
Jewellery Industry Network willingly set its event to clash with the ‘traditional’ fair run by Expertise Events for more than 30 years.
Before this year, two Australian jewellery fairs in the same city on the same days had never occurred before; albeit it was attempted by the Jewellers Association of Australia in 2017. That attempt was a financial and public relations disaster.
This was a critical factor in the decision to pursue the project. For the first time, suppliers were effectively being ‘forced’ to choose between the two, because of the deliberate strategy to create a clash of dates.
Jeweller's analysis of the two fairs was complex. To provide an accurate like-for-like comparison, strict definitions were required to navigate the characteristics of each event, such as exhibitor lists, to cut through puffery like a hot knife through butter.
The report aimed to provide retailers and suppliers with a clear understanding of what to expect from the two events if and when they had to choose between them.
The scheduling conflict raised many questions the jewellery industry has previously been asked to answer. After the dust settled, two things became apparent.
Collateral damage is inevitable when an industry is divided, and most people dislike being forced to choose between two options. These are facts of life.
Caught in the crossfire
‘Collateral damage’ is broadly used to describe any unwanted, unintended, or unforeseen fallout from an action or event.
Ironically, it began as an abstract euphemism used by the military to take ‘the sting’ out of conflict analysis.
I hope you’ll permit its use in this context because the competition between the two jewellery trade shows in Sydney had more than its fair share of unintended fallout.
It began before the shows had finished when visitors hoping to travel between the fairs encountered issues with a bus service.
People took to social media to air their grievances about these late, or possibly non-existent, buses, and the finger-pointing soon began.
It was an easy matter for Jeweller to put to rest – the responsibility of organising the service fell on the Jewellery Industry Fair.
However, this simple explanation evaded some people. An industry supplier made unsubstantiated claims about the International Jewellery Fair, reloaded, and took aim at Australia’s largest buying group!
For seemingly no reason, these outlandish comments dragged Nationwide Jewellers into a row it had no involvement with. The supplier also added the Independent Jewellers Collective to his criticism.
In the aftermath of the event, the supplier apologised to the Nationwide Jewellers; however, he did not immediately address the impact of his outburst on Expertise Events.
Jeweller can reveal that the supplier has now also apologised to managing director Gary Fitz-Roy, effectively ending the matter.
The collateral damage didn’t end there!
This week, the ‘owners’ of the Facebook group hosting these unsubstantiated claims issued a reminder to members to refrain from making defamatory comments.
They noted past legal cases against Facebook administrators - another headache for another unintended target.
I’m sure very few people would have expected this specific chain of events to transpire; however, it was predictable.
Two jewellery trade shows competing on the same weekend in the same city is an industry divided.
Fragmented resources, confusion, and a weakened voice damage industry unity. These factors can - as we have seen many times before - create a ‘powder keg’ of tension, and when it explodes, we can’t be surprised when uninvolved parties are found in the rubble.
Don’t make me choose!
Generally speaking, people dislike being forced to choose between two options. The pressure to make a decision, especially when both options are important or appealing, leads to stress and anxiety.
People worry that they may make the wrong choice and face negative consequences. They fear missing out on potential opportunities because they made the wrong decision.
These emotions manifested in Sydney. For suppliers, there’s the fear that suitable buyers may be walking the floor of the other fair.
For retailers, the same fear was reversed. Perhaps there’s only time to visit one fair, and a better price or superior product is available with an exhibitor at the other show.
Making a difficult decision can feel overwhelming, especially with high stakes. People resent being forced to take on this responsibility, especially if the choice may have significant implications for their business. The insult is doubled when the need to make a choice is entirely arbitrary; in this case, it seems it was.
There’s no discernible reason as to why the dates had to clash. As we’ve asked many times before: Who benefits from having two fairs occur in the same city at the same time?
See you next year!
Broadly speaking, for a trade show to be beneficial, it needs to enhance the industry rather than create division.
The clashing schedules of these two jewellery fairs created many issues, and ‘innocent bystanders’ were inevitably caught in the crossfire. The specifics of the chaos were unpredictable; however, problems were easy to forecast — it’s human nature.
With that said, there’s a question that's been asked many times that remains unanswered: Who benefits from this arrangement?
As planning for next year’s fairs now begins, this question will be asked again.
READ EMAG