The third ITMA Asia is over. It took place in Shanghai July 27-31 and was the first event held in
China under the ITMA — European Textile Machinery Manufacturers Association (CEMATEX) — flag, which
includes the eight most important supplier countries in Europe.
Ups And Downs?
The first two days, the show was quite crowded, with some 25,000 visitors, according to the
organizers. The third day was just okay, but the last two days, very few people attended. In spite
of show regulations, right after lunch on the last day, most of the Chinese exhibitors started
dismantling their booths. Coming back to the Textile World booth at around 2 p.m., and without
advance notice, our staff found the booth “clean” and empty.
If one didn’t know that it was ITMA Asia, one could imagine they were at an ordinary local
Chinese show. There were so many Chinese exhibitors that it was hard to realize this was an ITMA
Asia. Strange enough, next to every well-known European or outside-China brand, a local Chinese
exhibitor presented its machinery, which sometimes had a very familiar look compared to the
existing models from abroad.
Copying And Counterfeiting?
In a recent Rupp Report, I mentioned that the organizers of ITMA Asia + CITME 2008 had
declared they would take serious action against copying and counterfeiting, and that any offender
would risk expulsion from the show, as the show organizers announced stringent new measures to
enforce intellectual property rights. This issue was extremely hot among the European
manufacturers, but we’ve heard only from one case, in which the Chinese exhibitor was forced to
cover the clone. On top of that, rarely were more people seen in an exhibition with more cameras
and even professional video equipment.
Devaluing The ITMA Brand?
In an exclusive survey during the last two days,
asked exhibitors for their opinions and impression about the first ITMA Asia + CITME 2008. It
is widely agreed that in Singapore, the organizers of ITMA Asia did a perfect job. However, most of
the interviewed people mentioned that this event was ok as a local Chinese show, but never reached
the level of an ITMA. One person even said that with this kind of event, CEMATEX is devaluing its
own brand of ITMA in a bad way.
The Right Place?
So, therefore, mixed emotions were expressed when asked the question where should the next
ITMA Asia be located. From a market point of view, it was quite clear that Shanghai would be the
right place. However, the organization and the provided services were considered to be questionable
in most cases, and the prices sometimes were double that of similar services in Europe. And the
biggest issue was the availability of visas. Many countries, i.e. customers, were not able to enter
China to participate in the show. With these difficulties, many said, “ITMA Asia should ‘go home’
The Wrong Frequency?
Having mixed emotions about the right location for ITMA Asia, all interviewed people argued
very strongly that a two-year cycle for ITMA Asia is completely the wrong decision. Wherever ITMA
Asia may be, nobody is willing or can afford to spend the time and money to attend an ITMA Asia
every two years — in which case, in 2010, ITMA Asia will be one year prior to ITMA Europe. It was
also said that the Chinese will probably organize an exhibition in 2010 anyway — with or without
But one thing seems sure: As some CEMATEX officials confirmed, nothing is signed yet, in
spite of the announcement — in Chinese — outside the halls to invite visitors to the 2010 event. I
see the following scenario: Whatever will happen, the location for the next ITMA Asia is Beijing.
The excuse, sorry the reason, for not going to Shanghai is obvious: In 2010 there is a World
Exhibition in Shanghai from May to October. And there are only 7 official exhibitions in Shanghai
every year. With this, no one loses face.
The full report on ITMA Asia + CITME 2008 will be published in upcoming issues. By the way,
the next events are at your doorsteps: India ITME in Bangalore and CINTE Techtextil in Shanghai.
You are invited to share your opinion with us. Send your comments to
email@example.com, whether you
agree or not.
August 5, 2008