Detnews on Detroit's lure as a convention destination

[iheartthed]

There is a distinct difference between hosting meetings and conferences as a normal course of business, and predicating a modern metropolitan economy and urban revitalization on attracting more of those meetings. Indianapolis takes the latter approach [[would anyone go there at all in the absence of the various NCAA events?).

If Detroit makes itself into an attractive and interesting city, the meetings and conferences will show up. The reverse is not true, however. Spending public money [[tax incentives are public money) to construct hotels that would remain sparsely occupied through much of the year is not a solid foundation for growing the economy of a large metropolitan region.

My point isn't that tourism will make Detroit into an attractive city. My point is that Detroit is missing out on a huge industry that could employ people and fund services in the poorest big city in America.

[ghettopalmetto]

My point isn't that tourism will make Detroit into an attractive city. My point is that Detroit is missing out on a huge industry that could employ people and fund services in the poorest big city in America.

You're saying "tourism". The article at the top of the thread discussed "meetings" and "conventions". Those are totally different things.

If you want to discuss "tourism", then we need to look at the occupancy rates of existing hotels to determine whether more are needed. Building more hotels won't increase the number of leisure visitors, just as wearing bigger pants won't increase your appetite. The remainder of the tourism ingredients already exist.

[iheartthed]

You're saying "tourism". The article at the top of the thread discussed "meetings" and "conventions". Those are totally different things.

If you want to discuss "tourism", then we need to look at the occupancy rates of existing hotels to determine whether more are needed. Building more hotels won't increase the number of leisure visitors, just as wearing bigger pants won't increase your appetite. The remainder of the tourism ingredients already exist.

That is semantics. The point is still the same. The convention business is a large driver of tourism.

[ABetterDetroit]

More just plain good news. It is a change and a damn good one. I myself see things like this as a piece of the puzzle that is fitting together that will pay dividends to the city and it's residents. Not any one of these pieces will stand alone as "the answer" or a "cure", just one more part that is changing for the good.

[ghettopalmetto]

That is semantics. The point is still the same. The convention business is a large driver of tourism.

It's not semantics at all. There is a clear difference in purpose between conventions and tourism. The beneficiaries of the former are primarily hotels, who sell meeting rooms and catering services in addition to sleeping rooms. With tourism, you're seeing benefits to restaurants, cultural attractions, and retailers in addition to sleeping rooms. Tourists want to see and experience the city, and don't have a full-day slate of meetings in the hotel conference center to limit their itineraries. Further, tourists are more likely to appear on the weekends, when conventioneers are back home and downtown hotels see decreased occupancies.

To claim, in so many words, that more conventions will drive increased traffic to the Henry Ford [[as an example) is a bit of a stretch, and not a gamble I'd be willing to make.

[MSUguy]

It's not semantics at all. There is a clear difference in purpose between conventions and tourism. The beneficiaries of the former are primarily hotels, who sell meeting rooms and catering services in addition to sleeping rooms. With tourism, you're seeing benefits to restaurants, cultural attractions, and retailers in addition to sleeping rooms. Tourists want to see and experience the city, and don't have a full-day slate of meetings in the hotel conference center to limit their itineraries. Further, tourists are more likely to appear on the weekends, when conventioneers are back home and downtown hotels see decreased occupancies. .

What the hell do you think people do with their free time? Yes they may not have as much time as leisure visitors, but do why do you think the most popular convention cities are popular leisure destinations? Walkable cities with plenty of restaurant and entertainment options in the area is one the most desirable characteristics for meeting planners.

If Detroit makes itself into an attractive and interesting city, the meetings and conferences will show up. The reverse is not true, however. Spending public money [[tax incentives are public money) to construct hotels that would remain sparsely occupied through much of the year is not a solid foundation for growing the economy of a large metropolitan region

I would agree that is the most important thing. That doesn't mean that there aren't other things that can't help drive business to the city. In 2010 Cobo hired consultants to recommend to the type and scope of improvements needed. The third highest suggested improvement to Cobo, after improved customer service and upgrades to the facility was an attached hq hotel. A pretty standard feature at most major convention centers.

Just as an recent example, the city of Chicago is actively pushing the development a new hotel at McCormick Place, even an attractive and interesting city like Chicago isn't just twiddling their thumbs say 'well they'll show up'. Detroit should be looking at other ways it boost it convention business too.

http://drcfa.s3.amazonaws.com/doc/DR...__June__16.pdf

[ghettopalmetto]

I would agree that is the most important thing. That doesn't mean that there aren't other things that can't help drive business to the city. In 2010 Cobo hired consultants to recommend to the type and scope of improvements needed. The third highest suggested improvement to Cobo, after improved customer service and upgrades to the facility was an attached hq hotel. A pretty standard feature at most major convention centers.

Of course the consultants recommended a "headquarters" hotel. Convention consultants recommend those in EVERY city, just like every stadium consultant always claims that a new taxpayer-funded stadium is necessary to drive economic growth. When every city in America has a "headquarters" hotel attached to its convention center, should Detroit expect to be landing more bookings of a declining industry?

Just as an recent example, the city of Chicago is actively pushing the development a new hotel at McCormick Place, even an attractive and interesting city like Chicago isn't just twiddling their thumbs say 'well they'll show up'. Detroit should be looking at other ways it boost it convention business too.

McCormick Place is also enormous, and Chicago is hands-down one of the top five convention cities in the U.S. [[along with Las Vegas, Orlando, and Los Angeles). What's appropriate at that scale is not necessarily appropriate for Detroit.

In a region of nearly 5 million people, I just don't see how sporadic meetings of one-or-two-thousand people are going to grow the economy much.

[iheartthed]

It's not semantics at all. There is a clear difference in purpose between conventions and tourism. The beneficiaries of the former are primarily hotels, who sell meeting rooms and catering services in addition to sleeping rooms. With tourism, you're seeing benefits to restaurants, cultural attractions, and retailers in addition to sleeping rooms. Tourists want to see and experience the city, and don't have a full-day slate of meetings in the hotel conference center to limit their itineraries. Further, tourists are more likely to appear on the weekends, when conventioneers are back home and downtown hotels see decreased occupancies.

To claim, in so many words, that more conventions will drive increased traffic to the Henry Ford [[as an example) is a bit of a stretch, and not a gamble I'd be willing to make.

C'mon man, this is demonstrably false:

The World Tourism Organization defines tourists as people "traveling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism

[Lowell]

Very good points and discussion all. I can't pull it up just now but the good and important news is that downtown Detroit hotel occupancy is good and rising. That more than any thing will drive new room creation.

[MSUguy]

Of
McCormick Place is also enormous, and Chicago is hands-down one of the top five convention cities in the U.S. [[along with Las Vegas, Orlando, and Los Angeles). What's appropriate at that scale is not necessarily appropriate for Detroit.

In a region of nearly 5 million people, I just don't see how sporadic meetings of one-or-two-thousand people are going to grow the economy much.

Fine, don't like that example how about Cleveland?

http://www.wkyc.com/story/news/local...hotel/8417519/


Meetings of one or two thousand? Did you read the article and the size of some of the events coming to the city?. I didn't even see Youmacon or the SAE convention listed both whom bring 15,000+ to the city annually.

Mind you no one is saying we should incentivize the building thousands of hotels room to sit around to be empty. What developers would even agree to that? The point is the city/visitors bureau should be looking to make this a feature of Cobo.

[Gistok]

The former Ponchartrain Hotel [[now Crowne Plaza) was intended to be the Convention Hotel. Cobo Center expansion was designed to include a never built catwalk over to the hotel... which was also planning on a [[never built) 2nd 400 room hotel tower, thus bringing it up to 800 rooms.

[ghettopalmetto]

Fine, don't like that example how about Cleveland?

http://www.wkyc.com/story/news/local...hotel/8417519/


Meetings of one or two thousand? Did you read the article and the size of some of the events coming to the city?. I didn't even see Youmacon or the SAE convention listed both whom bring 15,000+ to the city annually.

Mind you no one is saying we should incentivize the building thousands of hotels room to sit around to be empty. What developers would even agree to that? The point is the city/visitors bureau should be looking to make this a feature of Cobo.

Cleveland has also opened 8 other downtown hotels within the past five years, with several more on the way. The Convention Center Hilton is adjacent to the recently-opened Medical Mart, which will drive a consistent amount of traffic. With the exception of the Hilton, it was not as if some government official decreed from on-high that "We must build more hotels to hopefully attract more meetings and conventions."

The position taken in the lead article of this thread is more of the "If you build it, people will come" approach in which Detroit seems to be stuck. It's just more of the same false confidence--economic development based strictly on "luring" people downtown. The stadiums and casinos were supposed to "lure" suburbanites downtown for an evening. The Super Bowl was supposed to "lure" visitors for a one-week period. The new arena is supposed to "lure" retailers, whose customers are primarily hockey fans. A renovated Cobo and more hotels are supposed to "lure" conventions. It's an approach that reeks of cheap gimmicks, heavy tax subsidies, and a whole hell of a lot of praying. Yet, not a single God damned peep about making the City of Detroit a place where people choose to live and to open businesses. I tend to think the latter has a far more positive and permanent impact, as Dan Gilbert has aptly demonstrated. So pardon me if I quickly tire of the latest trick designed to "lure" temporary visitors.

[Ray1936]

That is good news indeed. Personally I always enjoy the religious conventions. People dressed to the nines and the hats. I adore hats. Worked for a millenary company for a few years and still collect them. Mostly I wear them once, then give them away. Women in hats are accorded such polite behavior.

On the other hand, men wearing baseball caps on backwards are not necessarily accorded such polite behavior. They look like goons.