Head count for 08

[airhead6]

Missed it this year but how many people made it? What was the final head count?

[PGlaves]

5,103

[GSCOOKEMNSTER]

If I remember correctly, this has to be the least attended national rally in about 5 years. Vermont was over 9,000, Wisconsin was around 8,000. I can't remember seeing a head-count this low in some time.

Isn't there a break-even attendance required for a national?

Perhaps this rally proves that holding it so far from population centers, no matter how nice the area, will not draw attendees. Something to add to the rally site selection criteria?

Brian

[R1100rtP]

If I remember correctly, this has to be the least attended national rally in about 5 years. Vermont was over 9,000, Wisconsin was around 8,000. I can't remember seeing a head-count this low in some time.

Isn't there a break-even attendance required for a national?

Perhaps this rally proves that holding it so far from population centers, no matter how nice the area, will not draw attendees. Something to add to the rally site selection criteria?

You're correct. Anything in the eastern area of the US has much larger attendance due to the number of riders/members and population in general. The Western rallies are always lower in attendance. Spokane, Durango, and Redmond had attendance of 5900-6400 (not sure of exact attendance..sorry)

We knew attendance would be lower, but are o.k. with the numbers considering the current gas prices and expenses in general.

That's why we have "zones" for our rally site selection consideration. If we were always shooting for high attendance, then we'd have all rallies east of the Mississippi. Not quite fair to our membership base.

Attendance needs for break-even/profit will always vary depending on site costs, entertainment costs, and all other expenses. If the attendance is always 9,000, the Rally Site Selection team would have to change many requirements, and our potential sites would definitely be limited.

Thanks for the input!

[osbornk]

Perhaps this rally proves that holding it so far from population centers, no matter how nice the area, will not draw attendees. Something to add to the rally site selection criteria? Brian

I think there was a lot more to the low attendance in addition to the distance from population centers. I think the shortage of affordable lodging had a large impact on the attendance. Also, the lack of trees, grass and normal summertime temperatures also impacted the turnout.

When you consider the long distances involved, the cost of fuel along with the expensive lodging, the price of attending the rally was over the budget for many working folks who would also have to miss several days of work to attend. The cost in both money and time kept many people away.

[SHERIDESABEEMER]

2007 West Best, WI 7875
2006 Burlington, VT 9230
2005 Lima, OH 8048
2004 Spokane, WA 6187
2003 Charleston, WV 7198
2002 Trenton, ONT 5682
2001 Redmond, OR 6677
2000 Midland, MI 6188
1999 Rhinebeck, NY 6440
1998 Missoula, MT 6050

[airhead6]

2007 West Best, WI 7875
2006 Burlington, VT 9230
2005 Lima, OH 8048
2004 Spokane, WA 6187
2003 Charleston, WV 7198
2002 Trenton, ONT 5682
2001 Redmond, OR 6677
2000 Midland, MI 6188
1999 Rhinebeck, NY 6440
1998 Missoula, MT 6050

WOW! thanks for the data!

Well sounds like a lot of people had a great time this year. I did want to comment on the lack of photos for us folks who stayed home. Whom ever was in charge of last years rally photo shots and posting of them on the site did a great job. I know its a volunteer's job so let me be the first to volunteer my services next year to take a post a zillion photos so the folks at home can see all the fun they are missing.

Thanks again for the numbers
Gmac

[bigrider]

Are there any statistics maintained on from where attendees come? I would hope that big numbers are not always the diriving force in site selection. Giving an opportunity for all members to get in on a rally, despite the prospects of lower numbers would really make me feel better...you do want me to feel good..don't you?

Dave H
San Antonio, TX
Currently drying out from Molly

[R1100rtP]

Are there any statistics maintained on from where attendees come? I would hope that big numbers are not always the diriving force in site selection. Giving an opportunity for all members to get in on a rally, despite the prospects of lower numbers would really make me feel better...you do want me to feel good..don't you?

We absolutely want you to feel good, Dave. Big numbers are not always the driving force. We know certain regions will get larger attendance, and other regions may have smaller attendance. The reason for having Rally "zones" is to provide varied locations that may appeal to some and not others. We knew this year's attendance would be lower than VT, but fair's fair!

[OldAndBusted]

any idea what accounts for those numbers? i'm amazed that VT of all places would have the highest number in recent years. i would think something in the middle of the country like WI would have attracted the most people.

more BMW owners concentrated in new england?

[Rob Nye]

any idea what accounts for those numbers? i'm amazed that VT of all places would have the highest number in recent years. i would think something in the middle of the country like WI would have attracted the most people.

more BMW owners concentrated in new england?

Vermont is inside of 500 miles from NYC, Boston, Baltimore, Washington, DC, Philadelphia, PA, Montreal and a whole lot of people.

We also put some extra effort into attracting first timers from these areas.

Between the concentration of riders within 500 or 1000 miles and our efforts to attract rally virgins we shattered the record.

I think Gillette was down due to the economy and to some degree our very own forum.

[GSCOOKEMNSTER]

As was noted, Vermont is central to large population centers and has great riding and uncrowded roads.

I believe Gillette was down simply because of location. Its a longggg way from anywhere. There are many who will ride to where ever the rally is located, but then there are many club members who don't have the time to ride that far. I agree that moving the rally around is great, but I also think having it closer to centers/pockets of the club members would generate more interest and attendance to the rally. And I really don't think the discussion of the benefits/faults of the Gillette location on this forum had much if any impact on attendance.

I also believe if the rally were held Tues-Thurs, that attendance would increase. With that schedule, it mean that members have a full 3 days to travel both before and after the rally and still stay the full 3 days of the rally. So a week of vacation time allows for a great week of riding and Beemers.

Brian

[greenwald]

As was noted, Vermont is central to large population centers and has great riding and uncrowded roads.

I believe Gillette was down simply because of location. Its a longggg way from anywhere. There are many who will ride to where ever the rally is located, but then there are many club members who don't have the time to ride that far. I agree that moving the rally around is great, but I also think having it closer to centers/pockets of the club members would generate more interest and attendance to the rally. And I really don't think the discussion of the benefits/faults of the Gillette location on this forum had much if any impact on attendance.

I also believe if the rally were held Tues-Thurs, that attendance would increase. With that schedule, it mean that members have a full 3 days to travel both before and after the rally and still stay the full 3 days of the rally. So a week of vacation time allows for a great week of riding and Beemers.

Brian

In terms of attendance, I think you have to go back to circa 1993 to find a less-attended MOA rally than Gillette. Location, lack of BMW dealer-support, and no impressive proximity riding (Hundreds of miles away roundtrip, i.e. Devil's Tower, Yellowstone, Rushmore, etc. doesn't really count) all contributed to a rally that we can learn from and improve.

Given the low number of members that take the time to contribute on the forum, I agree with you that 'internet discussion' can hardly be made out to be the villain here.

I like your idea of a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday rally! Though I am retired and could accomodate any schedule, many members need to combine travel time with actual rally attendance, and your concept of a week's vacation allowing for both is interesting. Too late for '09 and probably '10, but I hope the Rally Selection Committee picks up on this suggestion and gives it some study.

Nice thinking 'outside the box.'

[SUE]

There are two schools of thought about a mid-week rally:

Rallies in less-populated areas and with a lower density of BMW MOA members would do well with a mid-week rally. Almost everyone could get to a rally anywhere in the country and home again, and only need one week of vacation. (3 days of travel to, 3 days at the rally, and 3 days of travel home...)

But imagine if you had a rally in your backyard. Would you want to burn a whole week of precious vacation time if you didn't have to? Wouldn't it be great if you could leave your house on Wednesday after work and get to the rally, knowing you haven't missed anything?!

So --- for a rally that is close to a large population area... If there are a lot more people who are within (let's say) a 6-hour ride of a rally location, they could get away with only taking one or two days of vacation if it is held on a weekend, but if it held in the middle of the week, then they TOO will have to burn more vacation time.

Just saying. There are two schools of thought. This is another one of those, "..Damned if you do, damned if you don't" issues for the Rally Site Selection Committee. No matter what decision they make, someone is not going to be happy.

[redclfco]

In terms of attendance, I think you have to go back to circa 1993 to find a less-attended MOA rally than Gillette. Location, lack of BMW dealer-support, and no impressive proximity riding (Hundreds of miles away roundtrip, i.e. Devil's Tower, Yellowstone, Rushmore, etc. doesn't really count) all contributed to a rally that we can learn from and improve.

.'

I am really stuck on somthing; West Bend was a great facility, and the proximity to the big pond was nice; but honestly here...what other fine features/attractions that even hold a candle to the Devils Tower, Bighorn Mountains, the fine fly fishing found in Wyoming? Where did I miss all that Wisconsin had to offer in 50 miles and under? What great feature rides did westbend have in store for us?

BOTH locations had great riding, BOTH facilities were fantastic. I think the argument that Gillette had no place to ride is pure hysterics. The SAME hysterics that caused such an uproar on line that infact DID greatly impact attendence in Gillette. Fact is, many people had the fact that the rally was in Wyoming stuck in their craw, and it was the naysayers their inuendos and unfounded criticisim of Gillette partially responsible for many not attending. Granted, I agree anything west of the Mississippi had an influence, lodging was also an issue that contributed to low attendence, but to blame attendence on the lack of riding is pure hogsh@^.

thats my opinion.