London Halloween Bake-off Show

Fnuckle said:
That's a real shame. It looks like a lot of energy went into the project. I hope the 50 who went enjoyed it!
Click to expand...

Yes it was half as many as needed to break even so seeing as it is sponsorship then the loss can be set against tax but it would be better not to have had it as it threatens the concept. Was the low turn out due to Wigwam refusing to promote it, as they are the bake-off kings, was it my involvement. That people wouldn't accept I was just sponsorship after originating the idea and promoting it on the forums, was it Halloween night, who knows. But for those who *were* there then there was a buzz of enthusiasm I haven't seen at other shows even Scalford, with people taking gear from room to room to try in different combinations. The only room that maintained the same speakers and amps through the whole day I think was the computer audio room.

Anyway we have write ups here and at http://thehifisubjectivist.com/18/1888/london_bake-off_show?18,1888 and at http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=85450&page=2 but nothing at the other forums I have seen yet.
 
It was the first show of this type so I don't think we should be too critical. Best to bag the good bits and work to improve the negatives to make successive events better.

On factors that might have influenced the low turnout and of those mentioned above:

- Wigwam not promoting. It isn't big enough to seriously impact turnout on it's own IMO.
Limited promotion on more active sites like pfm is an issue though and you know my views on that.

- Your involvement. Had it clearly been an NVA event then yes it would have clearly damaged turnout, though I'm sure some will have stayed away on grounds of personality clash etc. Room bosses effectively ran the event and anyone looking in the rooms can't have failed to see the Rogers, Quad, Nagra, Avondale, Garrard, EMT, Cyrus, Rega, Arcam and assorted other stuff. For anybody wondering, there was absolutely no direction given to room bosses - they used whatever equipment they chose and it was a completely open event in that regard. Perhaps some who didn't attend expected things to be different, well I think enough people attended to say otherwise and that can only be good for the next event. The proof of the pudding was definitely in the eating.

- Halloween/time of year. Not an issue IMO.

But we shouldn't be dwelling on these things because this is surely just the start, and those attending had a great day.

I think two things are key for show number 2.
Firstly, getting more people on-board across all of the forums.
For that you need ambassadors and I think they are not just the enthusiasts but also those smaller trade contributors who populate and contribute to forums.
Les and Jon at Avondale and perhaps Guy from Puresound are just the type of ambassador to make such an event popular.
Get a dozen or so on board as sponsors and I think the numbers issue would be solved.
You can still retain the themed rooms and still invite visitors to bring along equipment. The sponsors get to offer kit to the rooms and help run them in partnership with non trade bosses. You should still organise it - this is your idea after all.
 
for me, the date crept up on me.

I think we need to post the date of the event, re-post the date of the event, and then just to remind every body say the date of the event again.

Big bold letters and even a ticking clock of countdown!

I would have definately come if I'd planned it into my life a little better. Like most people time is short and only the most pedantic of event planning makes it !
 
There is nothing wrong with transfering this concept to other parts of the country, that was my point in doing this in the first place.

For example a Birmingham one, a Bristol one, a Merseyside one, a Scottish one, just find a cheap venue. If it can be forum based and promoted then there is nothing wrong with this. The London one stays we try again next year. I think my involvement should become less and less apart from sponsorship, Docfoster did a brilliant job this year with the website and should in my opinion be the Hi-Fi Subjectivist rep for t' committee. Rob was brilliant as well and should be Zerogain rep. Beechwoods is a really nice bloke and will represent AoS. We need the other forums brought in.

I am wary of too much trade involvement, I still think the rooms should be themed bake-off rooms, if they become peoples systems then it is a Scalford, if it is manufacturers rooms then it is a trade show. I think we should stick to the system of room bosses but allow small manufacturers to bring product (I did it this time) to loan to the room and to put in the mix and in exchange give a sponsorship payment to the cost. I see nothing wrong with that as long as it is made clear they come with their enthusiasts cap on and not to sell!! if after the event people want to contact them and buy then all well and good. Good product sells itself.

And there is a problem with Wigwam, the owner hates me, and has motivated his members to think I am doing this to put down Scalford, nothing is further from the truth, I sponsored this years Scalford show to the tune of £500, would I have done that if I wanted to harm it, and I got nothing but crap and rudeness for my effort. Scalford is a different concept and a brilliant event in its own right, and the more the merrier.

So because of my Marmite personality I think Rob should head t'committee as that means there would be better exposure at PFM and I am sure he can smooth things with Wigwam, as he is a business pro and a natural diplomat. I will still help in any way I can as my desire is to promote the concept and help change the hobby to being enthusiast based one as opposed to *industry* based.
 
I agree about too much trade involvement. I think you did a fine job fronting this Richard, but I suspect people stayed away due to what they considered trade involvement from you; even though you tried your level best to do this as an enthusiast, those who view the world through the cynical filter - and let's face it, that pretty much sums up a substantial amount of forum life - will see you as trade first, enthusiast second.

The thing is, a bake-off is different from a show setting. The Pie Show is very much a traditional show-like thing, only with end users replacing manufacturers demonstrating their wares. Aside from moving from room to room, there's not much comparison taking place. A bake-off is different, but have hitherto been restricted to half a dozen blokes bringing their pet product round to someone's house. I don't know if this type of event can scale easily, but I think it should be tried again.

Problem is, by whom? The owners of the forums are quite proprietary and prickly in their own different ways. I can't see all of them promoting a bake-off run by one of them, because some seem to consider the rivals 'competition.' And I can't see them promoting it if it were run by a commercial entity, a member of the trade, a trade body or a magazine. I thought of HFW running this kind of thing, but a mag would probably put this down as "everything to lose, nothing to gain".

I'm really not trying to run this concept down. It should work and just needs some fine-tuning to make it work. I just don't see how as yet.
 
Agree with the show comments above and proposed way forward, and thanks for the kind words :)

Happy to head a committee for the event but preferably jointly with Richard.
The show is Richard's baby.
 
Fnuckle said:
I agree about too much trade involvement. I think you did a fine job fronting this Richard, but I suspect people stayed away due to what they considered trade involvement from you; even though you tried your level best to do this as an enthusiast, those who view the world through the cynical filter - and let's face it, that pretty much sums up a substantial amount of forum life - will see you as trade first, enthusiast second.

The thing is, a bake-off is different from a show setting. The Pie Show is very much a traditional show-like thing, only with end users replacing manufacturers demonstrating their wares. Aside from moving from room to room, there's not much comparison taking place. A bake-off is different, but have hitherto been restricted to half a dozen blokes bringing their pet product round to someone's house. I don't know if this type of event can scale easily, but I think it should be tried again.

Problem is, by whom? The owners of the forums are quite proprietary and prickly in their own different ways. I can't see all of them promoting a bake-off run by one of them, because some seem to consider the rivals 'competition.' And I can't see them promoting it if it were run by a commercial entity, a member of the trade, a trade body or a magazine. I thought of HFW running this kind of thing, but a mag would probably put this down as "everything to lose, nothing to gain".

I'm really not trying to run this concept down. It should work and just needs some fine-tuning to make it work. I just don't see how as yet.
Click to expand...


Good points raised.
I think the trade involvement should be limited to providing kit and coughing up some cash for the event, very much as Richard has outlined. The venue this time was excellent - good sounding large rooms and a central seating area for people to sit and chat. It cost £1000 so why not split this, and I'm sure most small 1 or 2 person audio ventures would gladly cough up £100-£200 each. We keep the themed rooms where people bring their own kit but we also have plenty of equipment on hand from the trade sponsors. Must be the small fish though - no IAG, Linn, Cyrus etc - this is not for them (unless a visitor brings something of course).
 
RobHolt said:
Good points raised.
I think the trade involvement should be limited to providing kit and coughing up some cash for the event, very much as Richard has outlined. The venue this time was excellent - good sounding large rooms and a central seating area for people to sit and chat. It cost £1000 so why not split this, and I'm sure most small 1 or 2 person audio ventures would gladly cough up £100-£200 each. We keep the themed rooms where people bring their own kit but we also have plenty of equipment on hand from the trade sponsors. Must be the small fish though - no IAG, Linn, Cyrus etc - this is not for them (unless a visitor brings something of course).
Click to expand...

Exactly what I mean.
 
So Ben puts the link up at HiFiWigwam, go look at how they reply Rob if you think there is no problem, it is sick!
 
WW is blocked on our work server so I'll look tonight.

When I say no probelm, I mean for the future of the event. We just do it without them.
 
Richard Dunn said:
So Ben puts the link up at HiFiWigwam, go look at how they reply Rob if you think there is no problem, it is sick!
Click to expand...

I've just had a look, totally disgusting are my thoughts. I think alot of the poster's just jump on the hate bandwagon to win some sort of forum kudos, pathectic really.
 
conisby said:
I've just had a look, totally disgusting are my thoughts. I think alot of the poster's just jump on the hate bandwagon to win some sort of forum kudos, pathectic really.
Click to expand...

It is the way that forum operates, it is gang rule, with the owner being the head of the gang.
 
Just for the record and to publicly dispel the smears about me / pfm over on the Hi-Fi Subjectivist site:

a) The discussion of NVA product is not and never has been banned on pfm.

b) As a goodwill gesture I ran a stickied thread for the London Halloween Bake-off Show show at the very top of pfm's busy audio room for months in advance of the event. This thread gained many thousands of views and probably represented the vast majority of the show's promotional reach. I did this despite it originating from a forum hosting content about myself and my site that I consider potentially libellous, and despite a suspicion that the show would be used to covertly promote NVA kit (i.e. would fall foul of pfm's strict trade advertising rules). Judging from the show pictures on this thread this latter suspicion was not entirely unfounded.

My thanks for this? A never-ending string of revisionist insults on the Hi-Fi Subjectivist site including the remarkably vindictive act of publishing of several of my private and confidential emails.

Tony.

PS From my perspective this show has proven a far from enjoyable experience. Effort and time on my behalf repaid once again with scorn, revisionism, egotism and rudeness. In fact it's left a distinctly bad taste in the mouth. I've a lot of time for Rob, Lindsay, Gromit, DocFoster etc, all of whom clearly put a lot of time, effort and enthusiasm into the show and got something worthwhile out of it. I'd not wish to do anything to hinder them, as such I am reluctant, at this stage at least, to refuse to promote future events regardless of your behaviour towards me.
 
TonyL said:
Just for the record and to publicly dispel the smears about me / pfm over on the Hi-Fi Subjectivist site:

a) The discussion of NVA product is not and never has been banned on pfm.

b) As a goodwill gesture I ran a stickied thread for the London Halloween Bake-off Show show at the very top of pfm's busy audio room for months in advance of the event. This thread gained many thousands of views and probably represented the vast majority of the show's promotional reach. I did this despite it originating from a forum hosting content about myself and my site that I consider potentially libellous, and despite a suspicion that the show would be used to covertly promote NVA kit (i.e. would fall foul of pfm's strict trade advertising rules). Judging from the show pictures on this thread this latter suspicion was not entirely unfounded.

My thanks for this? A never-ending string of revisionist insults on the Hi-Fi Subjectivist site including the remarkably vindictive act of publishing of several of my private and confidential emails.

Tony.

PS From my perspective this show has proven a far from enjoyable experience. Effort and time on my behalf repaid once again with scorn, revisionism, egotism and rudeness. In fact it's left a distinctly bad taste in the mouth. I've a lot of time for Rob, Lindsay, Gromit, DocFoster etc, all of whom clearly put a lot of time, effort and enthusiasm into the show and got something worthwhile out of it. I'd not wish to do anything to hinder them, as such I am reluctant, at this stage at least, to refuse to promote future events regardless of your behaviour towards me.
Click to expand...

People should read the thread on Subjectivist and see who has been subject to rudeness and insult, which is why I published the posts. I sat the whole day by the door collecting money at the show and only occasionally stuck my nose in a room, I didn't even get the pleasure the attendees got, my job was to sponsor and support a show that was originally my idea and the future will be the same, the room bosses chose what they used or showed not me, this is just your usual vindictive biased crap.

So far I have sponsored two public Bake-Off type shows to the tune of £500 in each case, to receive nothing but insults about Scalford and London from Wigwam and now you. As I said earlier in this thread I wash my hands of it apart from sponsorship and pass it to Rob, so you can try to be as vindictive as you bloody well like, which seems just part of your nature, but I can assure you you will get it back with interest.

Quite simply if you think what I say is libelous you can try to sue me with pleasure, but you should read about fair comment first, it might educate you to the law.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you were very even handed about the whole thing Tony. Giving free space to talk abut the event on your forum, which is you business outlet let's not forget.

Zg was a little more open, as befits the only site not to have banned Richard.

Given the antipathy between Richard and members on the Wam the response there is hardly to be expected. Richard did after all use ZG to present his assassination of the Scalford show, yet it looks to be going ahead again regardless of chesterfield dropping out.
 
sq225917 said:
I think you were very even handed about the whole thing Tony. Giving free space to talk abut the event on your forum, which is you business outlet let's not forget.

Zg was a little more open, as befits the only site not to have banned Richard.

Given the antipathy between Richard and members on the Wam the response there is hardly to be expected. Richard did after all use ZG to present his assassination of the Scalford show, yet it looks to be going ahead again regardless of chesterfield dropping out.
Click to expand...

You lying b*stard, when ever there is an opportunity you jump in with both feet. I have *NEVER* put down Scalford I have supported it even with my own money. All I did was create a thread saying that Chestergroup have dropped out and that Wigwam and the owner should get off their arse and do it themselves, which they finally did. It is here in the archive for all to see.
 
Richard, on the basis that what you have posted about Tony and his actions toward you on Subjectivist, and on here previously, I think this can run.
I know Tony well enough to understand that what you are posting about him is utterly wrong, and I had a front row seat as a pfm moderator witnessing Tony do everything possible to fight calls for your banning.

If you are going to run threads picking fights with other forums and their owners/moderators don't be surprised when they bite back.

As I said tonight on Subjectivist, I'd recommend mending a few bridges, perhaps starting with an apology to Tony.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top