Debate
Audience questions: The spring 2025 CMW Lunch Club in The Holmes Hotel London engendered a big debate on whether fam trips should come with a no-show fee
to paint a picture of doom and gloom”. The industry wants to stress the positives of establishing a more balanced partnership. So, what’ s the solution?
Roger Bradley argues that agencies“ need to build contribution fees into annual plans”. This, he claims, will“ allow event professionals to attend highquality BDTs with shared investment”.
He continues:“ Not only does this help offset the cost for DMCs and destinations, but it also increases buy-in and accountability from attendees.”
Agencies were a little thin on the ground at the Lunch Club discussion – leading some to think that much more work is needed to bring them on board.
Lessons from Europe Some of the attendees look across the Channel for solutions. While in the UK agencies appear flooded with fam trip invitations, European counterparts are far less trigger-happy.
Chris Jordan says:“ European agencies seem to understand what a BDT can bring in terms of internal knowledge and client outcomes. That mindset feels more ingrained. They also understand how costly these trips are to put on – especially when outbound travel is harder and more expensive from their side.”
Mercedes Conde-Nieto adds:“ We need to make it the norm.”
SITE, however, says that importing an external model isn’ t necessarily the answer. CEO Annette Gregg explains:“ Some models in mainland Europe, where fees are charged and invite lists are tighter, could offer valuable lessons. However, harmonisation isn’ t simple. Cultural, commercial and regulatory differences make it complex.”
How do we set a standard? At the Lunch Club, most were in agreement that these were good ideas, based on good principles. If there was one major trepidation, though, it was about how to set this standard industry-wide.
What happens if a competitor undercuts the rest by not charging this fee? Could some DMCs and destinations actually lose business?
SITE has a suggestion.“ We believe a cross-sector task force – comprising DMCs, DMOs, agencies and event planners – should be convened to define best practices and propose scalable frameworks for fees, vetting and accountability,” says Annette Gregg.“ Without collective alignment, the model will remain fragmented and open to abuse.”
Gregg continues:“ The idea of co-creating a shared code of practice, potentially under the guidance of global industry bodies like EIC, JMIC, SITE, MPI, ICCA, PCMA, IAPCO or Destinations International, is one that we would wholeheartedly support.”
Speakers at the Lunch Club agreed that the conversation needs to go beyond agencies and DMCs.“ We need to bring the big hotel partners on board,” says Conde-Nieto.“ Accor, Melia – that level. You can’ t reset expectations unless the major players are involved in the conversation.”
A positive message The message, it was agreed, can’ t be that the sky is falling.
“ This isn’ t about punishing anyone,” says Pádraic Gilligan.“ It’ s about ensuring that incentive travel continues to be a reciprocal and respectful business practice.”
Chris Jordan adds:“ We don’ t see these trips as supplier handouts. We see them as partnerships. If a trip helps someone win a pitch or opens the door to a new destination, that has real value. A small contribution fee is a way of recognising that – and a sign that we’ re all in this together.”
Mercedes Conde-Nieto told CMW that her company once trialled a similar system.“ We used to say what the trip would cost a client, and what it was costing us to put on. But we were the only company doing it, so we stopped. But maybe we shouldn’ t have.”
Perhaps, as an industry, that’ s where we should begin. n
ISSUE 136 / CONFERENCE & MEETINGS WORLD / 69