7 Red Flags to Avoid in Event Tech

When evaluating event tech vendors, watch for key warning signs. Minor red flags during evaluation can signal major post-implementation problems. Understanding these signs helps planners avoid costly mistakes, implementation failures, and unproductive vendor relationships.

This article is based on the Event Tech Almanac 2025.

Download your copy of the Event Tech Almanac 2025, the most complete guide to event tech today.

1. Control Over Event Data

A key consideration for event planners procuring event tech is the data ownership model. The big question is who owns the event-generated data and how it’s handled.

Event Tech Evangelist Dahlia El Gazzar outlines key warning signs in vendor presentations. She suggests that "All your data lives with us" implies limited data ownership for clients, and is worth clarifying up front.

Most event tech vendors act as data processors, keeping clients as the sole data controllers. This means clients have full ownership and control of attendee data. However, some vendors use a shared data ownership model, requiring attendees to become platform users to access an event, making them also data controllers.

The latter option offers convenience for attendees. When they attend multiple events on the same platform, their profile is saved and they can jump straight into a new event with a full profile. The drawback is that organizations with stringent data policies are unlikely to consider event tech platforms that share control of data.

2. “All-In-One” Platforms

The term “all-in-one” can mean different things to different people. For some vendors, it indicates an event tech platform that can handle in-person, hybrid, and virtual events. For others, it’s a platform that offers features that support the whole event journey, all the way from the marketing and registration to post-event surveys. For others, it helps planners source venues, book travel, and manage attendees.

While “all-in-one” alludes to a complete offering and is used in marketing by many vendors, it isn’t helpful for planners with different needs. “We know that the ‘all-in-one’ term is a myth. A misleading holy grail that gets event profs in trouble and causes disappointment,” said El Gazzar.

In the Event Tech Almanac 2025 report, we removed this event tech tool category, referring to many platforms using this terminology as “event management tools,” if they offer a minimum set of features. But that didn’t stop six vendors from using this term in their platform descriptions.

The challenge persists, so the term is a red flag and requires clarification. As registration specialist Leanne Velky puts it, "Be wary of anyone who says they can do it all for you. They can't."

3. Tech Under Development

The tech world moves fast, and event tech is no exception. Vendors regularly implement new features based on planner feedback. Some even share their development roadmap publicly.

As planners explore features and functionality, experts encourage them to watch for phrases like "We'll build that later," that El Gazzar said indicates nonexistent features.

Brandon Wernli, CEO of BW Events, warns against vendors doing demos with wireframes without live examples. He said, “This may suggest they are selling while the build is in flight.” He encourages planners to seek references of satisfied customers to verify claims.

4. Lack of Flexibility

Templates are a useful feature of event tech. In the Skift Meetings Event Tech Almanac 2025, 33 of the 40 (83%) event management tools offer them. But planners need adaptable solutions, not rigid systems with narrow constraints.

In an ideal world, event tech would adapt to every client's needs. However, platforms must balance flexibility with functionality. Developing it involves making choices about features and customization options.

Event tech experts recommend watching out for vendors offering solutions that can only be used as envisioned by developers. Kazia Ekelund, event strategist at Spark Event Collective, recommends avoiding those that restrict clients from deviating from their template or offer limited customization. She calls these vendors "highly proprietary."

5. Integration Challenges

Integrating different event tech tools can catch organizations off guard. Solutions marketed as "integrated" may still require significant manual coordination. Learning curves may be steeper than anticipated, causing deployment delays and process changes that disrupt workflows.

"Scoping out the true integration needs is a task that is often under-resourced in itself, let alone finding the resources and the budget to actually deliver integrations," said Vanessa Lovatt, Founder of Event Tech World.

Doug Muller, vice president of technology and innovation at George P. Johnson, recommends finding "open and collaborative teams willing to show their progress and identify where their solutions end and manual processes begin."

6. Inadequate Support

A deal breaker for event tech is insufficient support. Live events require live support, but not all vendors can provide it.

Experts recommend verifying direct phone access to support teams, their location, and committed response times. Pay attention to guaranteed response times in service level agreements (SLAs) and watch for vague language that could leave you without help.

"Be sure to truly understand a platform or provider's support structure. Ensure you have a provider where you can pick up the phone and talk to someone," said Aaron Dorsey, vice president of product management, information security and privacy at Maritz.

7. Excessive Focus on Flashy Features

AI is undoubtedly today’s “shiny object.” However, flashy doesn’t guarantee quality or a good fit for events and clients. El Gazzar calls this "Shiny Object Syndrome," and it’s rampant among AI-focused startups.

But experts warn against choosing technology based on trends rather than needs. Brandt Krueger, senior production manager, EideCom, said, "New and shiny is almost never the answer. I prefer to see old technology used well than new technology used simply because it's new." 

Of the 85 event tech vendors in the Event Tech Almanac 2025, over three-quarters (76%) use AI. Among event management platforms, that jumps to 82%. It is used across multiple functions, with data analytics and reporting the most common (56%) followed by matchmaking (48%), session or content suggestions (44%), writing assistance (44%), and captioning and transcription (41%).

The challenge of separating AI reality from hype illustrates a broader truth in event tech evaluation: Vendors often oversell capabilities while understating limitations. Understanding common red flags helps planners cut through marketing promises to find solutions that truly deliver value.

Pricing structures and contract terms can also reveal vendor misalignment. Experts recommend watching for aggressive multi-year commitments, unclear usage limits, or pricing that scales unpredictably with event size.

Red flags may reveal everything from platform flaws to simple communication issues. But identifying red flags is only one part of the challenge. Planners should use this information to verify vendor capabilities and start constructive conversations that help drive better results.