Chicago is the best location all things considered. Easy to get to, good event space, good amenities.
Cleveland is pretty easy to get to, and the site is pretty good. It's the lack of amenities in and around the site that is the primary issue.
Atlantic City is a major hassle to get to, but the site is pretty good and the amenities are good. Being that close to New York I suspect is actually what keeps it in the mix.
I heard good things about Baltimore, although it's not as easy to get to as Chicago/Cleveland. However, I seem to recall there were some site issues that ultimately dropped it out of the future mix.
I went to the National in Anaheim, it was a really good show from my perspective. However, I do think cost, including cost of the amenities (hotels specifically) creates some issue there because of the Disney proximity.
I'd certainly be willing to do Dallas, easy to get to and pretty good amenities.
Houston is easy to get to and tons of great amenities.
I'd be willing to try Kansas City.
Phoenix could easily handle this, but it would be lung burning hot that time of year.
Vegas could easily handle this, I've never heard a good reason why The National is the only convention that can't seem to make it work - and the gambling argument is dumb.
Atlanta would very likely work.
Orlando probably could work, although it possibly has some similar Anaheim type issues.
Nashville is too small, it's somewhat of a pain to get to.
San Diego works for Comic Con, seems like it could work for this? But the non-show stuff I'm sure is pretty expensive.
What about Denver?
At the end of the day, unless things changed for cities to submit "bids", I think the committee just sticks with what works. There is no incentive to change the rotation unless something falls apart (like when Cleveland's site shut down). Although, the "market" has changed pretty dramatically over the past few years and I imagine attendance would be bananas wherever you put it.
|