Tonight I was chatting with a car show speakerine about the necessity of the ipad as a tool she would need for the car show. She was speaking about how the file weighed two to three kilos and how it tired her to carry it. She said that the ipad was the solution. As a former ipad user I argued with her that she did not need to have an ipad to do her job properly. Instead a different work flow and expectation management were the two issues. The first issue is why the people go to the car show. I work under the assumption that if you are looking for information you are looking for a physical appreciation of the product rather than the nitty gritty details of options colours and such. What the customer would want to know is how the car feels, how easy is it to change the seat configuration and whether features meant you would have a clear view of the road. For those things what you need is a physical car to sit in and see how it feels. If you want additional information such as GPS, media playing, tire types and other information you could go to a central desk where staff would be ready to answer the questions the iPad was redundant. This is assuming that the staff do not want to carry around a heavy file and that they are not expected to know everything as they have only had one day of training. In my opinion the iPad would have made a very nice tool to work around with, and to show off with, but for practical reasons was not the ideal tool. It costs 700CHF per unit and whether or not you make sales because you have an ipad are debatable. What you need instead is a work flow whereby the happy person giving information would reflect properly on the brand and spike their interest whilst a more experienced salesperson/marketer would provide the features information. That’s according to my logic. I spend money on technology out of my own pocket and unlike a reviewer my opinions do not affect what future devices I may receive. My point in the argument, although I did not make it is that although the iPad is fun to walk around with and show off the information you provide could more cost effectively be provided by a static person at a desk with access to the two kilo file. Consumers such as myself are interested in the physical appearance and feel of the object rather than the options. Options are there only to add that extra shove towards a purchase. For the blackberry I just bought I did not buy it on technical specs or other features. I bought it on feel and practicality. We are in a practicality market now. Is it easy to use, will I be able to do what I want to do and will I waste time or save it. Technical specs are a bonus and the ipad can provide this but whether a product feels or does not feel good seals the deal. I had an ipad and after only three or four months I sold it. It didn’t provide the quality of service I needed. Same issue with the Nokia n97 I purchased at full cost. Look at Apple and their apple stores. Their unique selling strategy is full usability experiences gained through the apple store. You know the Ducatti advert you see on youtube? Well that advert was given digested for people experimenting with FinalCut pro to experiment with. Did they like the experience. If yes then you have a purchase. If not well they can try the simpler iMovie application instead. If your purchase is on specs rather than feel and appearance then you don’t need the Salon de l’auto. You need a comprehensive site. This doesn’t require an iPad. This requires a good information dispensing website. What would you do with the ten seven hundred franc devices once you sold them? That’s seven thousand swiss francs you could save in one form of marketing and re-invest in better website usability once the client goes home. The question is where do you want the marketing to turn into sales. Do you want the sales to happen immediately or do you expect the purchaser to go home, discuss it with the spouse and friends and then decide? How do sales people carrying iPads end up in additional sales for the brand?