I guess you and I are looking at this from opposite ends. I just do not see how you can correlate ANY VFP conference with the ComDex attendance figures because these are 2 entirely different animals. I know he is not piling on the VFP is dieing argument, and that is a positive in his analysis, but I just can not buy into the relevance of comparing the attendance figures of any VFP conference to those at ComDex. The decline of the Advisor DevCon attendance, IMO, is not primarily tied to the overall health of the IT sector. It has more to do with its costs, locations and high quality competitor conferences that offer a much better value.

>>He was comparing 1 specific VFP Conference to the IT world.
>
>That's irrevelant whether he picks one or all for the argument he is presenting.
>
>>Why not select the conference in Prague?
>
>By picking the worse performing Devcon (with the biggest downward trend) he is showing that the worse VFP conference is still better than the industry average.
>
>> He selected the one with the stats that suited his purpose.
>
>In fact he is doing just the opposite, he is picking the weakest stats and showing that they demonstrate his premise. If he would have shown all conferences together (see http://fox.wikis.com/wc.dll?Wiki~VFPConferenceAttendance) then the trend is certainly not downward (see table at bottom and graph the totals in excel).
>
>> This is the problem with statistics. It is not necessarily what is included but what gets left out.
>
>In this case the numbers he has left out (the other conference attendance) would have strengthened his argument.