Exhibit Committee Recommendations
Feedback Summary
The ANA Board of Governors wishes to thank the people who took the
time to provide feedback on the recommendations from the Exhibit
Committee as well as many other topics.
After reviewing the members’ comments and suggestions at the
Oct. 27 meeting in Las Vegas, the board has asked the Exhibit Committee
to reconvene and consider the following questions:
- Why do we have exhibits at conventions and what do we want to
accomplish with those exhibits?
- How will the proposed exhibit changes accomplish our goals for
convention exhibits?
- Who looks at exhibits?
- Who do we want to look at the exhibits?
The answers to these questions will help the Board formulate their
decision.
The number of people who agree with consolidating exhibit categories
slightly out-numbered those who were against the proposals; but, whether
or not they agreed, a common thread was the endowment process.
Bill Fivaz posed the question “If some
existing exhibit categories are consolidated, what happens to the
endowment monies that were initially donated for those categories that
are no longer individualized?”
The consolidation of the Love Token and the Elongated Coins exhibit
categories brought the most passionate responses. All were against
combining two distinctly different areas of collecting.
Bob Fritsch writes “…both classes have
endowed awards, and the Dottie Dow Award for Elongated Coins should not
go to a Love Token exhibit.
Those who commented on the proposed convention theme category were in
favor of giving it a try.
Fred Borgmann commented: “As long as the
proposer, Clifford Mishler, is willing to fund his idea we should give
it a try. It is not often that we can find someone willing to put his
money where his mouth is.”
Other comments included allowing exhibitors to exhibit for one or two
days instead of for the entire show; requiring exhibitors to set-up
their own exhibit; not allowing appointed officers and ANA family
members to compete “because it invites malfeasance, favoritism,
and social discord within ANA;” and a proposal to remove the
anonymity of the exhibitors and judges.
There were two members who felt our entire exhibiting area should be
jazzed up.
Richard Frajola writes “I …arrange
displays for coin and stamp exhibits for many clients. …the entire
way in which private coin exhibits were mounted should be re-examined.
The professional ANA mounted exhibits were great – the
‘case’ exhibits were uncomfortable to view, were generally
not creatively displayed, coins mostly too far away from viewer, not
possible to clearly tell a story within a case, and space was wasted.
…I believe that this is one of the few areas that stamp exhibiting
outshines coin exhibiting.”
Bob Hartje writes “Our current exhibit format
is stale and uninteresting. We have not changed with the times. What we
need are interactive exhibits with bells and whistles. Current exhibits
lie flat in a sterile showcase. We need exhibits that have height,
color, texture and shout ‘Look at me!’ It would be nice if
the exhibits had buttons that would allow an individual to hear a story.
…Our current exhibitors are competing amongst themselves in a game
that only they care about. … We all need to revisit the whole
purpose of exhibits. Is it to have a nice esoteric contest amongst a
bunch of die-hard exhibitors? Or is it to educate the public? If it is
the latter, we need to get with the times.”
Bob Hartje also questioned the feedback process
“I have doubts as to whether or not this Feedback Forum is
real.”
Bob, we can assure you it is real, and we are listening!
The ANA Board received feedback on other topics including: rumors
about the proposed Bylaw changes, the eBay Advisory Committee, ANA
Conventions, the U.S. Mint, Numismatist Magazine, Grading
Services and the Club Representative Program.
Members can send their comments to the Board and the Executive Office
on these or any other topic by completing the online Feedback
Form.
|
