RMAF Nixes 2020

Denver’s Rocky Mountain Audio Fest (RMAF) has canceled its 2020 show. In an email to exhibitors signed “Your Friends, Marjorie and Marcie,” show director/owner Marjorie Baumert and Operations Director Marcie Miller state, “The course of action that we must take to remain a viable entity is to cancel our show for 2020. As we stated in March, RMAF will be issuing full refunds to those exhibitors who made their initial deposits.” (See the email.)

In the message, which was distributed in the early hours of May 19, the RMAF organizers cited Centers for Disease Control projections of “an even more deadly second wave in the fall . . .. We are frightened on behalf of our friends in the audio industry on many levels. While the financial health of our exhibitors is reflected in our own company's well-being, for us that is a secondary concern. The very worst thing that we can envision is for someone to fall ill because they came to our show, whether as an exhibitor, a journalist, an attendee, or a volunteer. Good health is a precious gift, and we are learning that although recovery is possible, the residual effects of COVID-19 can be profound, and we are unwilling to risk even one case.”

Acknowledging that “finances can be a delicate balance” in such challenging times, RMAF pledged to deposit refunds within the next 7—10 business days. Companies that issued checks were assured that they remain undeposited and will either be returned or shredded per each company’s direction. When questioned about the financial ramifications of her decision, Marjorie (as she prefers to be addressed) would say nothing other than, “It’s my way of doing business.”

Looking toward the future, the letter ends with the scheduled dates of the next RMAF: October 7—10, 2021.

COMMENTS
germay0653's picture

What model and assumptions are they using for this round of projections? Just curious as their credibility is of major concern. You never want to endanger people and you err on the side of caution but on the other hand is this reaction/projection valid? I guess only time will tell!

jmsent's picture

....truly a class act.

Anton's picture

Here's to a great 2021 RMAF!

barrows's picture

As an Exhibitor, I totally agree. Msrjorie is fantastic.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Wonder what is gonna happen to two other major audio shows in 2020, CAF and TAF :-) .......

SamTaf's picture

As for TAF we have to wait to make any official announcement. We have to let the legal department do their job. So we can't confirm if there will be a TAF in 2020. If it is cancelled 100% of the funds will be returned to the exhibitors.

Anton's picture

Not counting this post.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

12 Monkeys? :-) ........

Jim Austin's picture

Upon reading this, I could not decide if it was intended seriously or facetiously. So, before I remove it, I thought I'd offer an opportunity for you, Briandrumzilla, to defend it. I'm all ears (or eyes, or whatever).

Jim Austin, Editor
Stereophile

Briandrumzilla's picture

Dear Mr. Austin,

Thank you for the opportunity to respond. You can delete or censor the comment if you feel the need to. That is entirely your privilege. However, it should be obvious that the lockdowns have gone on for entirely too long. States that have fully opened up have not seen significant upticks in cases despite the dire predictions of the media that those states would in fact, be sacrificing their citizens. The social distancing train left the station. The audio shows scheduled in the upcoming months could have opened. I don’t think my comment is outside of what ordinary citizens are now observing. I for one, cannot wait to return to a record store or an audio shop but, these draconian lockdowns are preventing that return.

I suspect you have a problem with the “fake” part of my comment. I assure you that many of my audio associates are of the same opinion.

Jim Austin's picture

Your description of the shutdowns, which were fully supported by the mainstreams of virology and epidemiology, as "fake" was my main concern. To call the shutdowns "fake" is, well, fake. Of course you are welcome to your opinion about the rate at which states should reopen. But here again, in your second comment, you're distorting reality: There have in fact been "upticks" in areas that have started to reopen, as can easily be verified with a Google search.

There's no shortage of people these days aiming to redefine "reality." Fortunately, in cases like this, in questions of life and health, there's a simple, obvious approach. Trust the people who understand the situation best: The scientists.

Your original post has been deleted. I will leave your latest one up, but this conversation will not continue.

Jim Austin, Editor
Stereophile

Briandrumzilla's picture

I said "States that have fully opened up have not seen significant upticks in cases despite the dire predictions of the media that those states would in fact, be sacrificing their citizens." A simple google search shows "small rise in cases on states that have reopened." That sir, matches my statement. Who is distorting reality here?

A comment above questions "CD Projection Credibility" and that comment stands free from attack. You seem to be singling me out.

Jim Austin's picture

As states reopen, U.S. sees ‘unmistakable’ rise in coronavirus hospitalizations, former FDA chief says

"“We now see a trend in an uptick in hospitalizations. It’s a small uptick, but it is an uptick and it’s unmistakable and it is probably a result of reopening,” Gottlieb said."

I don't see how that's consistent with "have not seen significant upticks in cases."

That is one example of several I found.

As for the CDC comment: It is a source of great regret for me and for many that after many years as the world's go-to agency for epidemiology and disease control, the CDC IS now open to legitimate questioning. Its response to COVID-19 has been widely criticized, including by respected scientists. Anyway it's a defensible position. Calling state shutdowns "fake" is not.

Jim Austin, Editor
Stereophile

Briandrumzilla's picture

Sir, we can all "cherry pick" google for stories that substantiate our PoV however, I don't see how you can't see a similarity between "small" and "not seen significant."

Furthermore, if the CDC is open to legitimate questioning shouldn't the draconian lockdowns that have had serious economic consequences not to mention the physical and mental effects on people be open to questioning? Or are as a society we are no longer allowed to question, you know, because the science says so.

IMO, the audio shows could go on, I could go to a record store or an audio shop and possibly could have done so weeks ago.

I should have replaced fake with excessive, harsh and enduring lockdowns. My mistake, but let's see what the historical analysis of these lockdowns will be.

X