Condit review

Excellent — 5 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 25% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 23 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 12 · Strong 11. The typical agency here scores Excellent, and none scores higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Named client activations and exhibit programs with enough specificity to be checkable — the show, the year, the footprint or attendance. Weight scale-matching heavily: an agency that builds 40x50 island exhibits and one that builds 10x10 inline booths are different businesses, and so are a 200-person user conference and a 20,000-person trade show. Score whether the evidenced work matches the brief's size, not whether the roster is impressive.

Scores high — Recent, attributable work for demanding brands at a comparable scale scores 4-5.

Scores low — A gallery of renders and stock-looking imagery with no named clients scores 2.

What we found — 37 case studies at /portfolio/case-studies/, most naming client, show and year with a stated footprint. Read first-hand: The IMC Group at IMTS 2024 (McCormick Place) with two islands, a 60x100 (6,000 sq ft) and a 50x50 (2,500 sq ft), naming the client's Marketing Communications Manager Hadas Zeira; Cochlear, a 20x20 at the ACI Alliance CI2026 conference with an interactive Rube Goldberg activation, built with partner agency Moonlab/Bloqlab; Feeney, a 30x40 double-deck island at the International Builders' Show; Bluegrass Ingredients, a 10x20 inline with in-booth kitchen at Natural Products Expo West 2026. Scale range runs from 10x10 inline to 6,000 sq ft island, so scale-matching is possible across brief sizes. Independently corroborated rather than self-published alone: Exhibit City News's 2026 ExSys winners writeup credits 'Design/Fabrication: Condit Exhibits' on OluKai at Surf Expo 2025 (30x30), Osano at Privacy Security Risk 2025, and Applegate at Natural Products Expo West 2025, and Event Marketer's 2026 Fab 50 roster lists CONDIT EXHIBITS. Work is current (case studies dated through 08.2026). That is the high band above, which is why it scored Excellent.

On the record — “The IMC Group case study documents two island exhibits at IMTS 2024 at McCormick Place, a 60x100 (6,000 sq ft) and a 50x50 (2,500 sq ft), built by Condit's Chicago facility with coordination of electrical, A/V and rigging vendors, and quotes the client's Marketing Communications Manager by name.” condit.com ↗

On the record — “Independent trade press confirms three 2026 ExSys Awards credited to Condit Exhibits: Silver for OluKai at Surf Expo 2025 (30-by-30 footprint, listed as Design and Renderings), Bronze for Osano at Privacy Security Risk 2025 and Bronze for Applegate at Natural Products Expo West 2025, both listed as 'Design/Fabrication: Condit Exhibits'. This corroborates Condit's own account of the same three awards.” exhibitcitynews.com ↗

Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.

Excellent — 5 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 20% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 23 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 6 · Strong 10 · Adequate 7. The typical agency here scores Strong, and none scores higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: The unglamorous half that decides whether the thing opens on time: owned fabrication versus subcontracted build, warehousing and asset storage, shipping and drayage handling, install and dismantle crews, and show-services coordination with venues and general contractors.

Scores high — Owned or directly managed fabrication plus stated logistics capability scores 4-5.

Scores low — Design-only shops that hand off to a builder score 2-3 — legitimate, but the buyer then carries the integration risk and should know it. Silence on who actually builds and installs scores 2.

What we found — The capabilities page states five owned functions: design, custom fabrication, show site logistics, installation and dismantle, and maintenance and storage. It names in-house construction disciplines (wood, laminate, paint, metal, fabric, acrylic, extruded aluminum) and states that the temperature-controlled storage facility is under the same roof as the manufacturing shop. Two manufacturing and warehouse facilities, Denver and Chicago, the latter added via the 2019 acquisition of Exhibit Source, Inc. (ESi), per /about/. Show-services coordination is described concretely: a dedicated team per project that submits paperwork by the discount ordering deadline, arranges transportation, and supplies vetted show labor and an event-site supervisor. The booth-storage case study documents the actual operating procedure (master inventory of every part, a post-show Maintenance and Inspection report with damage photographed, HOLD/RTS labeling, repairs quoted as work-order line items). Not a design-only shop handing off to a builder: independently corroborated by Event Marketer's Fab 50, which is explicitly a roster of the top 50 exhibit fabricators, and by ExSys crediting Condit for fabrication as well as design on two of three awards. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Excellent.

On the record — “Condit states five owned capability pillars: design, custom fabrication, show site logistics, installation and dismantle, and maintenance and storage, with a temperature-controlled storage facility 'under the same roof as our manufacturing shop and administrative offices', and a dedicated per-project team that files paperwork by the discount ordering deadline and supplies vetted show labor and an event-site supervisor.” condit.com ↗

On the record — “Condit operates two manufacturing and warehouse facilities, Denver and Chicago, the Chicago presence added through the 2019 acquisition of Exhibit Source, Inc. (ESi). The company was founded by Bill Condit in 1945.” condit.com ↗

Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.

Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 15% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 23 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Excellent 1 · Strong 1 · Adequate 5 · Weak 15 · Poor 1. The typical agency here scores Weak, and 1 of them score higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Score disclosure of the pass-through layer specifically: drayage, rigging, electrical and venue services routinely add a large fraction to a quoted number, and an agency that explains where those land is telling the buyer something the category usually hides.

Scores high — Published budget ranges, program minimums, or a stated cost model (design fee, fabrication, per-show services) score 4-5.

Scores low — A stated engagement structure without numbers scores 2-3; nothing at all scores 1-2.

What we found — Unusual for this category: /exhibit-cost-calculator/ is a working four-step calculator that returns a dollar range for the buyer's own booth size and rental-or-purchase choice. Its published rates, read from the form's calculation formulas, are 150-250 USD per sq ft for rental and 300-450 USD per sq ft for purchase depending on size band. The page also states on-screen show-services estimates by footprint: 10x10 15,000-25,000 USD, 20x10 25,000-35,000 USD, 20x20 40,000-60,000 USD, over 400 sq ft custom quoted, with a disclaimer that these vary by location, time of year and general-contractor requirements. That is direct disclosure of the pass-through layer the rubric asks about. Reinforced by /condit-temporary-structures-transparent-budgeting/, which publishes an expected line-item breakdown (design, engineering, permitting, technical drawings, project management fee, structure price, leveling and anchoring, shipping, install and dismantle) and argues against single all-inclusive prices, and by a stated rule of thumb that rental runs about half the cost of a new custom build. Held at Strong not Excellent: no program minimum or annual-spend floor is published, the design-fee versus fabrication split is never priced, and the base per-sq-ft rates surface only through the calculator rather than as stated text. Scored separately from /trade-show-labor-costs-by-city/, which is a vendor-authored cost guide carrying only relative dollar-sign rankings by city and no Condit pricing. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Strong.

On the record — “The published exhibit cost calculator states on-screen show-services estimate ranges by footprint: 10x10 at 15,000-25,000 USD, 20x10 at 25,000-35,000 USD, 20x20 at 40,000-60,000 USD, and custom quoting above 400 sq ft, with a stated disclaimer that these vary by show location, time of year and general-contractor requirements.” condit.com ↗

On the record — “The same calculator's underlying calculation formulas price rental at 150-250 USD per square foot and purchase at 300-400 USD per square foot below 400 sq ft and 350-450 USD per square foot at 400 sq ft, applied to the booth size the buyer enters.” condit.com ↗

Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.

Weak — 2 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 15% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 23 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Strong 4 · Adequate 16 · Weak 3. The typical agency here scores Adequate, and 20 of them score higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: What the agency does about proving the event worked: lead capture and CRM integration, attendee data, engagement measurement, post-show reporting. Treat guaranteed business outcomes (pipeline, revenue) as a claim to be sceptical of rather than a strength — attendance and conversion depend on the client's own sales follow-up.

Scores high — A described measurement approach with named integrations scores 4-5.

Scores low — Reporting confined to footfall and impressions scores 2-3. No stated measurement scores 2.

What we found — Weakest area, and an absence rather than a negative claim. The capabilities page defines the service menu as five pillars and none of them is measurement or reporting. Site search returned zero results for Salesforce, HubSpot and CRM, and no lead-retrieval or post-show reporting deliverable is described anywhere read. What exists is blog content, not an offering: /tradeshow-exhibit-analytics/ (07.2025) advises exhibitors to plan booth zones for traffic counting and lists infrared beam counters, floor-mat sensors, overhead computer vision, facial-expression and demographic analysis, RFID badge scans and Wi-Fi/Bluetooth sensing as options, phrased as what 'our team at Condit usually sees' rather than what Condit delivers. The only other measurement item located, /conversations-with-condit-tactics-to-measure-event-success/, is a 2012 roundtable recap. So the design team will accommodate data capture, but no measurement scope, integration or post-show report is stated as something the buyer is buying. To Condit's credit, no guaranteed pipeline or revenue outcome is promised anywhere read. That is what the low band describes, which is why it scored Weak.

On the record — “Measurement is not among Condit's stated services. The capabilities menu contains no measurement or reporting pillar, and on-site search for 'CRM', 'Salesforce' and 'HubSpot' returns no service page. The measurement material located is advisory blog content on foot-traffic counters, RFID and Wi-Fi sensing, plus a 2012 roundtable recap.” condit.com ↗

CRM — customer relationship management system: the database of record for contacts and deals — HubSpot, Salesforce and kin.

pipeline — the dollar value of open, qualified deals sales is working. “Pipeline created” ties marketing to money, where lead counts don’t.

deliverability — deliverability: whether cold email actually lands in the inbox rather than spam. The tell is infrastructure talk — warmed sending domains kept separate from your main domain — because a burned domain outlasts the engagement.

Evidence: inferred — our reading of indirect evidence, not a documented fact.

Stronger here: George P. Johnson scores Strong on the same dimension.

Adequate — 3 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 10% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 23 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Adequate 13 · Weak 10. The typical agency here scores Adequate, and none scores higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Who owns the physical exhibit and its design, and what reuse across a show season costs. Rental-only models score 3 where stated plainly — a legitimate and often cheaper choice — but a rental sold as a build is a real problem. Where the agency stores client-owned property, note whether storage fees and retrieval terms are disclosed: an asset you cannot get back without an unpriced invoice is not fully yours.

Scores high — Client ownership of the structure and design files, with stated storage and refurbishment terms, scores 4-5.

Scores low — Silence scores 2.

What we found — The rental-versus-purchase distinction is stated plainly, which is the main thing this dimension guards against. The rental page says rentals draw on 'new or existing inventory that we own and maintain' and that at project close components return to Condit's general rental inventory, so a rental is not sold as a build. Purchase is offered as an explicit alternative in the cost calculator, and /exhibit-lifespan/ states custom exhibits are designed to last 5-7 years with maintenance. Reuse across a season is evidenced, not just asserted: one case study documents Cochlear repurposing exhibit components into a corporate installation at their Lone Tree headquarters. Refurbishment terms are described procedurally, with M&I findings sent to the estimating team and repairs appearing as work-order line items. Capped at Adequate because two things a buyer needs are never stated: who holds title to the design files and drawings, and what storage actually costs. Storage is described as a service with no rate, no minimum term and no retrieval or release terms, which is the unpriced-invoice risk the rubric flags. That is between the two bands, which is why it scored Adequate.

On the record — “Rental inventory is stated plainly as Condit-owned: rentals use 'new or existing inventory that we own and maintain', and at project close components are unpacked and stored 'within our general rental inventory'. A separate post states rental cost is typically about half of a new custom build.” condit.com ↗

On the record — “Post-show asset handling is documented as a three-step procedure with a per-project Master Inventory listing every component, a Maintenance and Inspection report photographing damage, HOLD and RTS labeling, and repairs quoted by an estimating team as work-order line items. No storage rate, minimum term or retrieval terms are published anywhere on the site.” condit.com ↗

Evidence: partly checkable — corroborated in part against the sources below; the remainder rests on the agency’s own account.

Strong — 4 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 10% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 23 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Adequate 10 · Weak 13. The typical agency here scores Weak, and none scores higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Union labour rules at major venues, permits, insurance and liability, safety and structural certification, and what happens when a show is cancelled or moves.

Scores high — A stated approach to venue labour rules and cancellation terms scores 4-5 — these are the things that generate surprise invoices and disputes.

Scores low — No evidence either way scores 2 with LOW confidence rather than a penalty, since most agencies never discuss this publicly.

What we found — Substantially more public detail here than the category norm. /trade-show-labor-costs-by-city/ sets out venue labour jurisdiction by market: Las Vegas union requirements for material handling, installation, electrical, rigging and hanging signs, and the point that power tools, forklifts, chain motors or electrical connections trigger jurisdiction; McCormick Place jurisdiction split among Teamsters, IBEW electricians and rigging crews with overtime and weekend double-time thresholds; Orlando's narrower requirements. It also covers Exhibitor Appointed Contractor registration deadlines requiring insurance documentation, labor notifications, credential approvals and safety compliance paperwork, warns that missing advance-order deadlines moves work to floor rates 20-50 percent higher, and notes tightening structural and engineering review for hanging signs, suspended structures, LED walls and multi-story exhibits. The temporary-structures budgeting page adds permitting, ADA compliance, to-code steps and technical drawings for permit applications. Held at Strong because the other half of the rubric's test is missing: no cancellation or postponement terms, no force-majeure position, and no statement of Condit's own insurance or liability coverage was found. Confidence on the missing half is low, since almost no agency publishes it. That is the high band above, which is why it scored Strong.

On the record — “Condit publishes a detailed treatment of the pass-through cost layer, including union jurisdiction at Las Vegas venues and McCormick Place (Teamsters, IBEW electricians, riggers), overtime and weekend double-time triggers, Exhibitor Appointed Contractor registration requiring insurance documentation and safety compliance paperwork, tightening structural review for hanging signs and multi-story exhibits, drayage, and a stated 20-50 percent or greater penalty for missing advance-order deadlines.” condit.com ↗

Evidence: verified — checked against a named source you can open; the links under Sources below are where to check it yourself.

Weak — 2 of 5 on this rubric’s scale, from Poor (1) to Excellent (5). This dimension carries 5% of the total score.

Benchmark — across the 23 other agencies evaluated in this discipline, this dimension runs Adequate 7 · Weak 16. The typical agency here scores Weak, and 7 of them score higher than this one.

What this dimension measures: Volume and recency of independent, verified reviews or checkable client references. Low weight deliberately — large exhibit houses run on multi-year contracts and RFP references rather than public review profiles, so a thin footprint here is weak evidence and the delivered work matters far more.

Scores low — A substantial verified base scores 4-5; a handful scores 2-3; none located scores 2.

What we found — No independent client review base was located and readable first-hand, so no rating or count is cited. Clutch returned 403 to a profile fetch and no Condit profile surfaced in search; BBB and Yelp listings exist but both returned 403 and could not be read, so nothing from them is scored. Indeed carries employee reviews, which are not client evidence. What the site itself carries is eleven testimonials attributed with full name, job title and employer (Western Union, PopSockets, Smartwool, Numi Organic Tea, Justin's Nut Butters, WhiteWave, Wowza Media Systems, Tendril, UCAR, Vail Valley Foundation), which are checkable in principle but self-published. Scored 2 per the rubric's 'none located' guidance, and this is weak evidence by the rubric's own design, since exhibit houses of this size run on RFPs and multi-year contracts rather than public review profiles. The independent signal that does exist is editorial and awards-based rather than review-based.

Evidence: inferred — our reading of indirect evidence, not a documented fact.