FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
57 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

Fenoy Gerald
Dear Conference Committee,
I would like to ask you to review and comment the following proposal: [1].

Waiting for your answers,
Best regards,

[1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4GDiscount


Gérald Fenoy
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

signature.asc (211 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

David William Bitner-3
Gerald,

From the beginning of the foundation, one of the main tenants of membership was that the only additional benefit to Charter Membership was the ability to vote for Board Members and new Charter Members. Other than that Charter Members should (as things exist currently) not receive any other perks not available to the general membership. 

I am not opposed to trying to find ways to make it easier for active OSGeo members to receive discounts to FOSS4G, but unless we really change the nature of what a Charter Member is supposed to be, I don't think this is the right avenue. One place to start that is common in almost every conference is discounts for presenters.

David


On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Fenoy Gerald <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Conference Committee,
I would like to ask you to review and comment the following proposal: [1].

Waiting for your answers,
Best regards,

[1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4GDiscount


Gérald Fenoy
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



--
************************************
David William Bitner
dbSpatial LLC
612-424-9932

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

jmckenna
Administrator
Hi David, Gérald, all,

I am in support of this (if you view 'history' on the page you can see
my edits).  When Gérald approached me with this, I was impressed with
his vision, and that he is willing to champion such a change.

Times have changed, since the foundation has formed in 2006 until now;
we now have a huge strong base of Charter members located across the
globe, and we really aren't leveraging them, or giving them any benefit
to being a Charter Member.

To me, this is more about the first paragraph in Gérald's proposal, that
FOSS4G is more about the 'meeting of the tribes', and the 'tribe' is in
fact Charter Members, so let us make sure that we help the tribe to
attend the main FOSS4G event.

Of course this really depends on what the OSGeo Conference Committee
thinks, if they agree to this or not, or agree to some form of this, or
not.  And then it must be brought to the new Board likely, in September.

But I agree with Gérald, helping Charter Members attend our FOSS4G event
should be a priority (and it is worth it, in my mind, in terms of any
issues with any 'bottom line').

-jeff



On 2014-08-13 10:50 AM, David William Bitner wrote:

> Gerald,
>
>  From the beginning of the foundation, one of the main tenants of
> membership was that the only additional benefit to Charter Membership
> was the ability to vote for Board Members and new Charter Members. Other
> than that Charter Members should (as things exist currently) not receive
> any other perks not available to the general membership.
>
> I am not opposed to trying to find ways to make it easier for active
> OSGeo members to receive discounts to FOSS4G, but unless we really
> change the nature of what a Charter Member is supposed to be, I don't
> think this is the right avenue. One place to start that is common in
> almost every conference is discounts for presenters.
>
> David
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Fenoy Gerald <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Dear Conference Committee,
>     I would like to ask you to review and comment the following
>     proposal: [1].
>
>     Waiting for your answers,
>     Best regards,
>
>     [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4GDiscount
>
>
>     Gérald Fenoy
>     http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay
>
>
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

dkastl
I like the model of the international SotM:
Get the "community ticket" when you attend as a mapper, pay for the "business ticket" when your company/university pays you to attend the conference.

The difference in the price for SotM is huge, so business tickets support the conference, and community tickets make sure that the costs/attendant are covered.

All you need to become a mapper is to have an OSM ID, so what's the point to pay for the business ticket?
Well, with the community ticket your conference badge will show only your name and OSGeo username. Only with a business ticket the company name is visible on the badge.

I think this is smart and for SotM it works very well and financially allows every mapper to attend the conference.

Daniel





On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Jeff McKenna <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi David, Gérald, all,

I am in support of this (if you view 'history' on the page you can see my edits).  When Gérald approached me with this, I was impressed with his vision, and that he is willing to champion such a change.

Times have changed, since the foundation has formed in 2006 until now; we now have a huge strong base of Charter members located across the globe, and we really aren't leveraging them, or giving them any benefit to being a Charter Member.

To me, this is more about the first paragraph in Gérald's proposal, that FOSS4G is more about the 'meeting of the tribes', and the 'tribe' is in fact Charter Members, so let us make sure that we help the tribe to attend the main FOSS4G event.

Of course this really depends on what the OSGeo Conference Committee thinks, if they agree to this or not, or agree to some form of this, or not.  And then it must be brought to the new Board likely, in September.

But I agree with Gérald, helping Charter Members attend our FOSS4G event should be a priority (and it is worth it, in my mind, in terms of any issues with any 'bottom line').

-jeff




On 2014-08-13 10:50 AM, David William Bitner wrote:
Gerald,

 From the beginning of the foundation, one of the main tenants of
membership was that the only additional benefit to Charter Membership
was the ability to vote for Board Members and new Charter Members. Other
than that Charter Members should (as things exist currently) not receive
any other perks not available to the general membership.

I am not opposed to trying to find ways to make it easier for active
OSGeo members to receive discounts to FOSS4G, but unless we really
change the nature of what a Charter Member is supposed to be, I don't
think this is the right avenue. One place to start that is common in
almost every conference is discounts for presenters.

David


On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Fenoy Gerald <[hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

    Dear Conference Committee,
    I would like to ask you to review and comment the following
    proposal: [1].

    Waiting for your answers,
    Best regards,

    [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4GDiscount


    Gérald Fenoy
    http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



--
Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
eMail: [hidden email]
Web: http://georepublic.info

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

stevenfeldman
I think that being a Charter Member is a privilege and a recognition from your peers of your contribution to the community. I am not sure that financial benefits should be attached to Charter Membership.

SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt they make much money from the business tickets. 

Currently FOSS4G is the main source of revenue for OSGeo, we should model the impact of extra discounts very carefully before deciding, whether they be for Charter Members, people from low income countries, presenters, students or any other category. Once we create the expectation of these discounts it could prove difficult to reverse.

My 2 pence (which is approx 3.3 cents)
______
Steven


On 13 Aug 2014, at 16:59, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email]> wrote:

I like the model of the international SotM:
Get the "community ticket" when you attend as a mapper, pay for the "business ticket" when your company/university pays you to attend the conference.

The difference in the price for SotM is huge, so business tickets support the conference, and community tickets make sure that the costs/attendant are covered.

All you need to become a mapper is to have an OSM ID, so what's the point to pay for the business ticket?
Well, with the community ticket your conference badge will show only your name and OSGeo username. Only with a business ticket the company name is visible on the badge.

I think this is smart and for SotM it works very well and financially allows every mapper to attend the conference.

Daniel





On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Jeff McKenna <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi David, Gérald, all,

I am in support of this (if you view 'history' on the page you can see my edits).  When Gérald approached me with this, I was impressed with his vision, and that he is willing to champion such a change.

Times have changed, since the foundation has formed in 2006 until now; we now have a huge strong base of Charter members located across the globe, and we really aren't leveraging them, or giving them any benefit to being a Charter Member.

To me, this is more about the first paragraph in Gérald's proposal, that FOSS4G is more about the 'meeting of the tribes', and the 'tribe' is in fact Charter Members, so let us make sure that we help the tribe to attend the main FOSS4G event.

Of course this really depends on what the OSGeo Conference Committee thinks, if they agree to this or not, or agree to some form of this, or not.  And then it must be brought to the new Board likely, in September.

But I agree with Gérald, helping Charter Members attend our FOSS4G event should be a priority (and it is worth it, in my mind, in terms of any issues with any 'bottom line').

-jeff




On 2014-08-13 10:50 AM, David William Bitner wrote:
Gerald,

 From the beginning of the foundation, one of the main tenants of
membership was that the only additional benefit to Charter Membership
was the ability to vote for Board Members and new Charter Members. Other
than that Charter Members should (as things exist currently) not receive
any other perks not available to the general membership.

I am not opposed to trying to find ways to make it easier for active
OSGeo members to receive discounts to FOSS4G, but unless we really
change the nature of what a Charter Member is supposed to be, I don't
think this is the right avenue. One place to start that is common in
almost every conference is discounts for presenters.

David


On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Fenoy Gerald <[hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

    Dear Conference Committee,
    I would like to ask you to review and comment the following
    proposal: [1].

    Waiting for your answers,
    Best regards,

    [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4GDiscount


    Gérald Fenoy
    http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



--
Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
eMail: [hidden email]
Web: http://georepublic.info
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

dkastl

SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt they make much money from the business tickets. 


Hi Steven,

I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It doesn't need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo, where I was involved, and there were more business tickets sold than I expected and they made up a large share of the total revenue through ticket sales.

My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference by their employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter (it's just a fraction of the total cost anyway), because they just pass the costs to the employer. For the employer it has a value, if one can see the company name on the badge.
But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel costs low and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted community ticket makes a difference, whether the person is a charter member or not. 
I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the "club" of charter members. ;-)

Daniel
 
--
Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
eMail: [hidden email]
Web: http://georepublic.info

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

Kate Chapman
Hi All,

I think the comparison between the SotM model and the FOSS4G model is interesting, but it is important to think about the financial objectives of each conference. My understanding was that FOSS4G provides most of the funding for OSGEO over the year, this isn't the case for SotM. Though successful sponsorship programs could possibly make up the difference between the discounted tickets. 

One note, I've worked for a few organizations that have paid my ticket for SotM. I've also paid the mapper price myself previously as well. I would have not been able to get them to pay for FOSS4G though. Some of you may have noticed I have given a workshop every year I've attended FOSS4G. I would not be able to attend otherwise. Not that it is conceivable for everyone to give a workshop to be able to attend. 

Best,

-Kate


On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email]> wrote:

SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt they make much money from the business tickets. 


Hi Steven,

I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It doesn't need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo, where I was involved, and there were more business tickets sold than I expected and they made up a large share of the total revenue through ticket sales.

My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference by their employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter (it's just a fraction of the total cost anyway), because they just pass the costs to the employer. For the employer it has a value, if one can see the company name on the badge.
But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel costs low and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted community ticket makes a difference, whether the person is a charter member or not. 
I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the "club" of charter members. ;-)

Daniel
 
--
Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
eMail: [hidden email]
Web: http://georepublic.info

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

Cameron Shorter
I'm open to the idea of providing benefits to osgeo charter members, but suggest having an early bird discount apply to all ticket categories. I'd suggest something like a 5% discount for charter member tickets instead.

Note: conferences organisors need to decide whether they will also give such a discount to professional bodies as well (such as professional institute of surveyors). Such organisations often aggressively request a discount for their members in return for publicising foss4g to their membership.

There is a very important reason conferences have a early bird discount. It means that conference organisors get an early indication of the number of attendees coming to the conference. This helps significantly with regards to making financial decisions about the conference. In particular, it enables organisors to decide to cancel the conference before having to lock into key financial commitments and potentially sending OSGeo bankrupt. This was very important for us in FOSS4G 2009, the year of the global financial crisis, when registrations were much lower than expected. At the early bird deadline, we were aware that we had enough people  attending that we would loose less money by going ahead than if we cancelled, so we went ahead. Without that confidence, we likely would have decided to cancel the conference. (In the end more people did register, and we were just able to make a modest profit.)

On 14/08/2014 4:56 am, Kate Chapman wrote:
Hi All,

I think the comparison between the SotM model and the FOSS4G model is interesting, but it is important to think about the financial objectives of each conference. My understanding was that FOSS4G provides most of the funding for OSGEO over the year, this isn't the case for SotM. Though successful sponsorship programs could possibly make up the difference between the discounted tickets. 

One note, I've worked for a few organizations that have paid my ticket for SotM. I've also paid the mapper price myself previously as well. I would have not been able to get them to pay for FOSS4G though. Some of you may have noticed I have given a workshop every year I've attended FOSS4G. I would not be able to attend otherwise. Not that it is conceivable for everyone to give a workshop to be able to attend. 

Best,

-Kate


On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email]> wrote:

SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt they make much money from the business tickets. 


Hi Steven,

I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It doesn't need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo, where I was involved, and there were more business tickets sold than I expected and they made up a large share of the total revenue through ticket sales.

My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference by their employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter (it's just a fraction of the total cost anyway), because they just pass the costs to the employer. For the employer it has a value, if one can see the company name on the badge.
But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel costs low and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted community ticket makes a difference, whether the person is a charter member or not. 
I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the "club" of charter members. ;-)

Daniel
 
--
Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
eMail: [hidden email]
Web: http://georepublic.info

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

-- 
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

Venkatesh Raghavan-2
In reply to this post by jmckenna
+1 for Gerald's suggestion for discount plan for
Charter Members (CMs) who are contributing their time
and effort to promote FOSS4G. I concur with the views
that Jeff has put in a lucid way.

Maybe we could have group plan for CMs so that we can see
more and more of them participating in the Annual FOSS4G
Conference and having an easier opportunity to participate
in the Foundation's AGM held during the conference.

Best

Venka

P.S. Whether my employee pays or I pay through my pocket, it
is difficult to justify (for me) to attend a conference
where my international air-ticket would be cheaper or
cost the same as the registration fee.

On 2014/08/14 0:42, Jeff McKenna wrote:

> Hi David, Gérald, all,
>
> I am in support of this (if you view 'history' on the page you can see
> my edits).  When Gérald approached me with this, I was impressed with
> his vision, and that he is willing to champion such a change.
>
> Times have changed, since the foundation has formed in 2006 until now;
> we now have a huge strong base of Charter members located across the
> globe, and we really aren't leveraging them, or giving them any benefit
> to being a Charter Member.
>
> To me, this is more about the first paragraph in Gérald's proposal, that
> FOSS4G is more about the 'meeting of the tribes', and the 'tribe' is in
> fact Charter Members, so let us make sure that we help the tribe to
> attend the main FOSS4G event.
>
> Of course this really depends on what the OSGeo Conference Committee
> thinks, if they agree to this or not, or agree to some form of this, or
> not.  And then it must be brought to the new Board likely, in September.
>
> But I agree with Gérald, helping Charter Members attend our FOSS4G event
> should be a priority (and it is worth it, in my mind, in terms of any
> issues with any 'bottom line').
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
> On 2014-08-13 10:50 AM, David William Bitner wrote:
>> Gerald,
>>
>>  From the beginning of the foundation, one of the main tenants of
>> membership was that the only additional benefit to Charter Membership
>> was the ability to vote for Board Members and new Charter Members. Other
>> than that Charter Members should (as things exist currently) not receive
>> any other perks not available to the general membership.
>>
>> I am not opposed to trying to find ways to make it easier for active
>> OSGeo members to receive discounts to FOSS4G, but unless we really
>> change the nature of what a Charter Member is supposed to be, I don't
>> think this is the right avenue. One place to start that is common in
>> almost every conference is discounts for presenters.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Fenoy Gerald <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>>     Dear Conference Committee,
>>     I would like to ask you to review and comment the following
>>     proposal: [1].
>>
>>     Waiting for your answers,
>>     Best regards,
>>
>>     [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4GDiscount
>>
>>
>>     Gérald Fenoy
>>     http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

Darrell Fuhriman
In reply to this post by Cameron Shorter
I’m trying to formulate a response to this, but it ties into an e-mail that I owe this list, but haven’t had time to send because I’ve been busy finalizing the conference preparations.  Also, I’m well into my third pint this evening, so it’s probably not the best time. :)

While I agree the early bird discount is important for the reasons you state, there actually aren’t that many commitments that can be avoided after the deadline. Frankly, the only significant contracts unsigned by our early bird deadline of June 15th were the catering contracts. Though admittedly, that’s a substantial portion of the budget – if we were on that red line, we’d be jettisoning coffee breaks like ballast in a sinking ship.

I think right now the quickest thing I can say is that OSGeo has so far shown minimal interest in actually taking responsibility for FOSS4G. If OSGeo is going to increase the demands made on the committee, OSGeo needs to be stepping up and taking a more hands-on approach to conference organization. 

For the record, I believe OSGeo needs to step up and take such a more hands on approach. I’d love a chance to talk about in person at the board meeting.

SotM.us runs very different, and I know from talking with the organizers that it was a challenge to break-even this year. The difficulty is that as conferences get bigger, they get more expensive to put on (primarily because the supply of possible venues shrinks very rapidly, and the per attendee costs go up substantially). They also get logistically more challenging, and having dedicated resources, either employee or outsourced, can vastly decrease the workload on the LOC. Frankly, unless something changes on this front, it’s just a matter of time until there’s another 2012.  To be honest, I’m not sure SotM.us would have been a success if Mapbox hadn’t devoted significant employee resources to making sure it was (as they have for the past three SotM.us conferences). Conferences take huge numbers of hours to organize. The inefficiency introduced by having someone re-learn the job every year is substantial, wasteful, and incredibly risky.

Anyway, I’m supposed to be on vacation.

Greetings from Yellowstone,

Darrell


On Aug 13, 2014, at 13:41, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]> wrote:

I'm open to the idea of providing benefits to osgeo charter members, but suggest having an early bird discount apply to all ticket categories. I'd suggest something like a 5% discount for charter member tickets instead.

Note: conferences organisors need to decide whether they will also give such a discount to professional bodies as well (such as professional institute of surveyors). Such organisations often aggressively request a discount for their members in return for publicising foss4g to their membership.

There is a very important reason conferences have a early bird discount. It means that conference organisors get an early indication of the number of attendees coming to the conference. This helps significantly with regards to making financial decisions about the conference. In particular, it enables organisors to decide to cancel the conference before having to lock into key financial commitments and potentially sending OSGeo bankrupt. This was very important for us in FOSS4G 2009, the year of the global financial crisis, when registrations were much lower than expected. At the early bird deadline, we were aware that we had enough people  attending that we would loose less money by going ahead than if we cancelled, so we went ahead. Without that confidence, we likely would have decided to cancel the conference. (In the end more people did register, and we were just able to make a modest profit.)

On 14/08/2014 4:56 am, Kate Chapman wrote:
Hi All,

I think the comparison between the SotM model and the FOSS4G model is interesting, but it is important to think about the financial objectives of each conference. My understanding was that FOSS4G provides most of the funding for OSGEO over the year, this isn't the case for SotM. Though successful sponsorship programs could possibly make up the difference between the discounted tickets. 

One note, I've worked for a few organizations that have paid my ticket for SotM. I've also paid the mapper price myself previously as well. I would have not been able to get them to pay for FOSS4G though. Some of you may have noticed I have given a workshop every year I've attended FOSS4G. I would not be able to attend otherwise. Not that it is conceivable for everyone to give a workshop to be able to attend. 

Best,

-Kate


On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email]> wrote:

SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt they make much money from the business tickets. 


Hi Steven,

I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It doesn't need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo, where I was involved, and there were more business tickets sold than I expected and they made up a large share of the total revenue through ticket sales.

My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference by their employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter (it's just a fraction of the total cost anyway), because they just pass the costs to the employer. For the employer it has a value, if one can see the company name on the badge.
But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel costs low and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted community ticket makes a difference, whether the person is a charter member or not. 
I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the "club" of charter members. ;-)

Daniel
 
--
Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
eMail: [hidden email]
Web: http://georepublic.info

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

-- 
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

Jachym Cepicky
Hi,

the idea sounds agoood to me. I would support it.

Jachym

2014-08-14 5:10 GMT+02:00 Darrell Fuhriman <[hidden email]>:

> I'm trying to formulate a response to this, but it ties into an e-mail that
> I owe this list, but haven't had time to send because I've been busy
> finalizing the conference preparations.  Also, I'm well into my third pint
> this evening, so it's probably not the best time. :)
>
> While I agree the early bird discount is important for the reasons you
> state, there actually aren't that many commitments that can be avoided after
> the deadline. Frankly, the only significant contracts unsigned by our early
> bird deadline of June 15th were the catering contracts. Though admittedly,
> that's a substantial portion of the budget - if we were on that red line,
> we'd be jettisoning coffee breaks like ballast in a sinking ship.
>
> I think right now the quickest thing I can say is that OSGeo has so far
> shown minimal interest in actually taking responsibility for FOSS4G. If
> OSGeo is going to increase the demands made on the committee, OSGeo needs to
> be stepping up and taking a more hands-on approach to conference
> organization.
>
> For the record, I believe OSGeo needs to step up and take such a more hands
> on approach. I'd love a chance to talk about in person at the board meeting.
>
> SotM.us runs very different, and I know from talking with the organizers
> that it was a challenge to break-even this year. The difficulty is that as
> conferences get bigger, they get more expensive to put on (primarily because
> the supply of possible venues shrinks very rapidly, and the per attendee
> costs go up substantially). They also get logistically more challenging, and
> having dedicated resources, either employee or outsourced, can vastly
> decrease the workload on the LOC. Frankly, unless something changes on this
> front, it's just a matter of time until there's another 2012.  To be honest,
> I'm not sure SotM.us would have been a success if Mapbox hadn't devoted
> significant employee resources to making sure it was (as they have for the
> past three SotM.us conferences). Conferences take huge numbers of hours to
> organize. The inefficiency introduced by having someone re-learn the job
> every year is substantial, wasteful, and incredibly risky.
>
> Anyway, I'm supposed to be on vacation.
>
> Greetings from Yellowstone,
>
> Darrell
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2014, at 13:41, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> I'm open to the idea of providing benefits to osgeo charter members, but
> suggest having an early bird discount apply to all ticket categories. I'd
> suggest something like a 5% discount for charter member tickets instead.
>
> Note: conferences organisors need to decide whether they will also give such
> a discount to professional bodies as well (such as professional institute of
> surveyors). Such organisations often aggressively request a discount for
> their members in return for publicising foss4g to their membership.
>
> There is a very important reason conferences have a early bird discount. It
> means that conference organisors get an early indication of the number of
> attendees coming to the conference. This helps significantly with regards to
> making financial decisions about the conference. In particular, it enables
> organisors to decide to cancel the conference before having to lock into key
> financial commitments and potentially sending OSGeo bankrupt. This was very
> important for us in FOSS4G 2009, the year of the global financial crisis,
> when registrations were much lower than expected. At the early bird
> deadline, we were aware that we had enough people  attending that we would
> loose less money by going ahead than if we cancelled, so we went ahead.
> Without that confidence, we likely would have decided to cancel the
> conference. (In the end more people did register, and we were just able to
> make a modest profit.)
>
> On 14/08/2014 4:56 am, Kate Chapman wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I think the comparison between the SotM model and the FOSS4G model is
> interesting, but it is important to think about the financial objectives of
> each conference. My understanding was that FOSS4G provides most of the
> funding for OSGEO over the year, this isn't the case for SotM. Though
> successful sponsorship programs could possibly make up the difference
> between the discounted tickets.
>
> One note, I've worked for a few organizations that have paid my ticket for
> SotM. I've also paid the mapper price myself previously as well. I would
> have not been able to get them to pay for FOSS4G though. Some of you may
> have noticed I have given a workshop every year I've attended FOSS4G. I
> would not be able to attend otherwise. Not that it is conceivable for
> everyone to give a workshop to be able to attend.
>
> Best,
>
> -Kate
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people attending
>>> will be 'mappers' who pay the lower rate, I doubt they make much money from
>>> the business tickets.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Steven,
>>
>> I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It doesn't
>> need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo, where I was involved,
>> and there were more business tickets sold than I expected and they made up a
>> large share of the total revenue through ticket sales.
>>
>> My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference by their
>> employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter (it's just a
>> fraction of the total cost anyway), because they just pass the costs to the
>> employer. For the employer it has a value, if one can see the company name
>> on the badge.
>> But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel costs low
>> and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted community ticket
>> makes a difference, whether the person is a charter member or not.
>> I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the "club" of
>> charter members. ;-)
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>> --
>> Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
>> eMail: [hidden email]
>> Web: http://georepublic.info
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
> --
> Cameron Shorter,
> Software and Data Solutions Manager
> LISAsoft
> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>
> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



--
Jachym Cepicky
e-mail: jachym.cepicky gmail com
URL: http://les-ejk.cz
GPG: http://les-ejk.cz/pgp/JachymCepicky.pgp

Give your code freedom with PyWPS - http://pywps.wald.intevation.org
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

jmckenna
Administrator
In reply to this post by Darrell Fuhriman
Hi Darrell,

I can say that in 2011 I did bring this issue strongly, and very
publicly, to the OSGeo Board.  I even proposed a part-time position to
manage the main FOSS4G conference (google 'foss4g advisor' for some
history and fun reading, all there outlined in a public wiki page forever).

Well, that didn't happen.  And as you just mentioned, it's still needed.

Or, if that cannot happen, we need to realize this, and change our
mindset, back to the origins of FOSS4G: a meeting of the tribe, cheap
admission, affordable university venues, bare-bones (essentially what
our FOSS4G regional events are doing now).

Because yes I agree, to assume a bunch of volunteers can run a ~1,000
attendee event in the best conference venue in the city and still make
it affordable for the tribe to attend, will not work.

-jeff




On 2014-08-14 12:10 AM, Darrell Fuhriman wrote:

> I’m trying to formulate a response to this, but it ties into an e-mail
> that I owe this list, but haven’t had time to send because I’ve been
> busy finalizing the conference preparations.  Also, I’m well into my
> third pint this evening, so it’s probably not the best time. :)
>
> While I agree the early bird discount is important for the reasons you
> state, there actually aren’t that many commitments that can be avoided
> after the deadline. Frankly, the only significant contracts unsigned by
> our early bird deadline of June 15th were the catering contracts. Though
> admittedly, that’s a substantial portion of the budget – if we were on
> that red line, we’d be jettisoning coffee breaks like ballast in a
> sinking ship.
>
> I think right now the quickest thing I can say is that OSGeo has so far
> shown minimal interest in actually taking responsibility for FOSS4G. If
> OSGeo is going to increase the demands made on the committee, OSGeo
> needs to be stepping up and taking a more hands-on approach to
> conference organization.
>
> For the record, I believe OSGeo needs to step up and take such a more
> hands on approach. I’d love a chance to talk about in person at the
> board meeting.
>
> SotM.us <http://SotM.us> runs very different, and I know from talking
> with the organizers that it was a challenge to break-even this year. The
> difficulty is that as conferences get bigger, they get more expensive to
> put on (primarily because the supply of possible venues shrinks very
> rapidly, and the per attendee costs go up substantially). They also get
> logistically more challenging, and having dedicated resources, either
> employee or outsourced, can vastly decrease the workload on the LOC.
> Frankly, unless something changes on this front, it’s just a matter of
> time until there’s another 2012.  To be honest, I’m not sure SotM.us
> <http://SotM.us> would have been a success if Mapbox hadn’t devoted
> significant employee resources to making sure it was (as they have for
> the past three SotM.us <http://SotM.us> conferences). Conferences take
> huge numbers of hours to organize. The inefficiency introduced by having
> someone re-learn the job every year is substantial, wasteful, and
> incredibly risky.
>
> Anyway, I’m supposed to be on vacation.
>
> Greetings from Yellowstone,
>
> Darrell
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2014, at 13:41, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>> I'm open to the idea of providing benefits to osgeo charter members,
>> but suggest having an early bird discount apply to all ticket
>> categories. I'd suggest something like a 5% discount for charter
>> member tickets instead.
>>
>> Note: conferences organisors need to decide whether they will also
>> give such a discount to professional bodies as well (such as
>> professional institute of surveyors). Such organisations often
>> aggressively request a discount for their members in return for
>> publicising foss4g to their membership.
>>
>> There is a very important reason conferences have a early bird
>> discount. It means that conference organisors get an early indication
>> of the number of attendees coming to the conference. This helps
>> significantly with regards to making financial decisions about the
>> conference. In particular, it enables organisors to decide to cancel
>> the conference before having to lock into key financial commitments
>> and potentially sending OSGeo bankrupt. This was very important for us
>> in FOSS4G 2009, the year of the global financial crisis, when
>> registrations were much lower than expected. At the early bird
>> deadline, we were aware that we had enough people attending that we
>> would loose less money by going ahead than if we cancelled, so we went
>> ahead. Without that confidence, we likely would have decided to cancel
>> the conference. (In the end more people did register, and we were just
>> able to make a modest profit.)
>>
>> On 14/08/2014 4:56 am, Kate Chapman wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I think the comparison between the SotM model and the FOSS4G model is
>>> interesting, but it is important to think about the financial
>>> objectives of each conference. My understanding was that FOSS4G
>>> provides most of the funding for OSGEO over the year, this isn't the
>>> case for SotM. Though successful sponsorship programs could possibly
>>> make up the difference between the discounted tickets.
>>>
>>> One note, I've worked for a few organizations that have paid my
>>> ticket for SotM. I've also paid the mapper price myself previously as
>>> well. I would have not been able to get them to pay for FOSS4G
>>> though. Some of you may have noticed I have given a workshop every
>>> year I've attended FOSS4G. I would not be able to attend otherwise.
>>> Not that it is conceivable for everyone to give a workshop to be able
>>> to attend.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> -Kate
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people
>>>         attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt
>>>         they make much money from the business tickets.
>>>
>>>
>>>     Hi Steven,
>>>
>>>     I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It
>>>     doesn't need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo,
>>>     where I was involved, and there were more business tickets sold
>>>     than I expected and they made up a large share of the total
>>>     revenue through ticket sales.
>>>
>>>     My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference
>>>     by their employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter
>>>     (it's just a fraction of the total cost anyway), because they
>>>     just pass the costs to the employer. For the employer it has a
>>>     value, if one can see the company name on the badge.
>>>     But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel
>>>     costs low and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted
>>>     community ticket makes a difference, whether the person is a
>>>     charter member or not.
>>>     I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the
>>>     "club" of charter members. ;-)
>>>
>>>     Daniel
>>>     --
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

aross
Hey Jeff, Everyone

I'd like to comment briefly.

I feel a 800+ person conference is of a sufficient size that it's not a good idea to burn out volunteers organizing. To throw a new team to the wolves each year is extremely risky.

The obvious options are to not have such a large event, or choose a different model to organize.

I feel that a conference of such size is very important. It's what draws the ecosystem together and helps it grow. Not having the large event would be a loss.

It is simply too big to hold at most Universities, and especially in the fall.

For what it's worth, I also feel smaller regional and plenty of local events are important too. That's orthogonal to the global event though.

I've been open about what the Eclipse Foundation & LocationTech can do. It has full time staff with experience to run a consistently great technology conferences with lots of camaraderie.

Let's work together. FOSS4G NA 2015 will be a nice opportunity, test, and display. For those who are highly motivated, feel free to go back to the D.C. bid and provide feedback. I feel it was a great bid, credible, and a good indication of the kind of event we'd hold in the future. Maybe this is a good option to address many of the issues? Worth exploring a bit in any case.

Andrew


On August 14, 2014 9:54:49 AM EDT, Jeff McKenna <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Darrell,

I can say that in 2011 I did bring this issue strongly, and very
publicly, to the OSGeo Board. I even proposed a part-time position to
manage the main FOSS4G conference (google 'foss4g advisor' for some
history and fun reading, all there outlined in a public wiki page forever).

Well, that didn't happen. And as you just mentioned, it's still needed.

Or, if that cannot happen, we need to realize this, and change our
mindset, back to the origins of FOSS4G: a meeting of the tribe, cheap
admission, affordable university venues, bare-bones (essentially what
our FOSS4G regional events are doing now).

Because yes I agree, to assume a bunch of volunteers can run a ~1,000
attendee event in the best conference venue in the city and still make
it affordable for the tribe to attend, will not work.

-jeff




On 2014-08-14 12:10 AM, Darrell Fuhriman wrote:
I’m trying to formulate a response to this, but it ties into an e-mail
that I owe this list, but haven’t had time to send because I’ve been
busy finalizing the conference preparations. Also, I’m well into my
third pint this evening, so it’s probably not the best time. :)

While I agree the early bird discount is important for the reasons you
state, there actually aren’t that many commitments that can be avoided
after the deadline. Frankly, the only significant contracts unsigned by
our early bird deadline of June 15th were the catering contracts. Though
admittedly, that’s a substantial portion of the budget – if we were on
that red line, we’d be jettisoning coffee breaks like ballast in a
sinking ship.

I think right now the quickest thing I can say is that OSGeo has so far
shown minimal interest in actually taking responsibility for FOSS4G. If
OSGeo is going to increase the demands made on the committee, OSGeo
needs to be stepping up and taking a more hands-on approach to
conference organization.

For the record, I believe OSGeo needs to step up and take such a more
hands on approach. I’d love a chance to talk about in person at the
board meeting.

SotM.us <http://SotM.us> runs very different, and I know from talking
with the organizers that it was a challenge to break-even this year. The
difficulty is that as conferences get bigger, they get more expensive to
put on (primarily because the supply of possible venues shrinks very
rapidly, and the per attendee costs go up substantially). They also get
logistically more challenging, and having dedicated resources, either
employee or outsourced, can vastly decrease the workload on the LOC.
Frankly, unless something changes on this front, it’s just a matter of
time until there’s another 2012. To be honest, I’m not sure SotM.us
<http://SotM.us> would have been a success if Mapbox hadn’t devoted
significant employee resources to making sure it was (as they have for
the past three SotM.us <http://SotM.us> conferences). Conferences take
huge numbers of hours to organize. The inefficiency introduced by having
someone re-learn the job every year is substantial, wasteful, and
incredibly risky.

Anyway, I’m supposed to be on vacation.

Greetings from Yellowstone,

Darrell


On Aug 13, 2014, at 13:41, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

I'm open to the idea of providing benefits to osgeo charter members,
but suggest having an early bird discount apply to all ticket
categories. I'd suggest something like a 5% discount for charter
member tickets instead.

Note: conferences organisors need to decide whether they will also
give such a discount to professional bodies as well (such as
professional institute of surveyors). Such organisations often
aggressively request a discount for their members in return for
publicising foss4g to their membership.

There is a very important reason conferences have a early bird
discount. It means that conference organisors get an early indication
of the number of attendees coming to the conference. This helps
significantly with regards to making financial decisions about the
conference. In particular, it enables organisors to decide to cancel
the conference before having to lock into key financial commitments
and potentially sending OSGeo bankrupt. This was very important for us
in FOSS4G 2009, the year of the global financial crisis, when
registrations were much lower than expected. At the early bird
deadline, we were aware that we had enough people attending that we
would loose less money by going ahead than if we cancelled, so we went
ahead. Without that confidence, we likely would have decided to cancel
the conference. (In the end more people did register, and we were just
able to make a modest profit.)

On 14/08/2014 4:56 am, Kate Chapman wrote:
Hi All,

I think the comparison between the SotM model and the FOSS4G model is
interesting, but it is important to think about the financial
objectives of each conference. My understanding was that FOSS4G
provides most of the funding for OSGEO over the year, this isn't the
case for SotM. Though successful sponsorship programs could possibly
make up the difference between the discounted tickets.

One note, I've worked for a few organizations that have paid my
ticket for SotM. I've also paid the mapper price myself previously as
well. I would have not been able to get them to pay for FOSS4G
though. Some of you may have noticed I have given a workshop every
year I've attended FOSS4G. I would not be able to attend otherwise.
Not that it is conceivable for everyone to give a workshop to be able
to attend.

Best,

-Kate


On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:


SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people
attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt
they make much money from the business tickets.


Hi Steven,

I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It
doesn't need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo,
where I was involved, and there were more business tickets sold
than I expected and they made up a large share of the total
revenue through ticket sales.

My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference
by their employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter
(it's just a fraction of the total cost anyway), because they
just pass the costs to the employer. For the employer it has a
value, if one can see the company name on the badge.
But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel
costs low and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted
community ticket makes a difference, whether the person is a
charter member or not.
I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the
"club" of charter members. ;-)

Daniel
--


Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

Cameron Shorter
Hi Darrell,
You have made some excellent points, and I'm hoping that at some point you will expand upon your initial email. It sounds like you have some well thought through and practical ideas about how FOSS4G and its relationship with OSGeo should grow.

And I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on Andrew's suggestions too.

On 15/08/2014 1:51 pm, Andrew Ross wrote:
Hey Jeff, Everyone

I'd like to comment briefly.

I feel a 800+ person conference is of a sufficient size that it's not a good idea to burn out volunteers organizing. To throw a new team to the wolves each year is extremely risky.

The obvious options are to not have such a large event, or choose a different model to organize.

I feel that a conference of such size is very important. It's what draws the ecosystem together and helps it grow. Not having the large event would be a loss.

It is simply too big to hold at most Universities, and especially in the fall.

For what it's worth, I also feel smaller regional and plenty of local events are important too. That's orthogonal to the global event though.

I've been open about what the Eclipse Foundation & LocationTech can do. It has full time staff with experience to run a consistently great technology conferences with lots of camaraderie.

Let's work together. FOSS4G NA 2015 will be a nice opportunity, test, and display. For those who are highly motivated, feel free to go back to the D.C. bid and provide feedback. I feel it was a great bid, credible, and a good indication of the kind of event we'd hold in the future. Maybe this is a good option to address many of the issues? Worth exploring a bit in any case.

Andrew


On August 14, 2014 9:54:49 AM EDT, Jeff McKenna [hidden email] wrote:
Hi Darrell,

I can say that in 2011 I did bring this issue strongly, and very 
publicly, to the OSGeo Board.  I even proposed a part-time position to 
manage the main FOSS4G conference (google 'foss4g advisor' for some 
history and fun reading, all there outlined in a public wiki page forever).

Well, that didn't happen.  And as you just mentioned, it's still needed.

Or, if that cannot happen, we need to realize this, and change our 
mindset, back to the origins of FOSS4G: a meeting of the tribe, cheap 
admission, affordable university venues, bare-bones (essentially what 
our FOSS4G regional events are doing now).

Because yes I agree, to assume a bunch of volunteers can run a ~1,000 
attendee event in the best conference venue in the city and still make 
it affordable for the tribe to attend, will not work.

-jeff




On 2014-08-14 12:10 AM,
Darrell Fuhriman wrote:
I’m trying to formulate a response to this, but it ties into an e-mail that I owe this list, but haven’t had time to send because I’ve been busy finalizing the conference preparations. Also, I’m well into my third pint this evening, so it’s probably not the best time. :) While I agree the early bird discount is important for the reasons you state, there actually aren’t that many commitments that can be avoided after the deadline. Frankly, the only significant contracts unsigned by our early bird deadline of June 15th were the catering contracts. Though admittedly, that’s a substantial portion of the budget – if we were on that red line, we’d be jettisoning coffee breaks like ballast in a sinking ship. I think right now the quickest thing I can say is that OSGeo has so far shown minimal interest in actually taking responsibility for FOSS4G. If OSGeo is going to increase the demands made on the committee, OSGeo needs to be stepping up and taking a more hands-on approach to conference organization. For the record, I believe OSGeo needs to step up and take such a more hands on approach. I’d love a chance to talk about in person at the board meeting. SotM.us <http://SotM.us> runs very different, and I know from talking with the organizers that it was a challenge to break-even this year. The difficulty is that as conferences get bigger, they get more expensive to put on (primarily because the supply of possible venues shrinks very rapidly, and the per attendee costs go up substantially). They also get logistically more challenging, and having dedicated resources, either employee or outsourced, can vastly decrease the workload on the LOC. Frankly, unless something changes on this front, it’s just a matter of time until there’s another 2012. To be honest, I’m not sure SotM.us <http://SotM.us> would have been a success if Mapbox hadn’t devoted significant employee resources to making sure it was (as they have for the past three SotM.us <http://SotM.us> conferences). Conferences take huge numbers of hours to organize. The inefficiency introduced by having someone re-learn the job every year is substantial, wasteful, and incredibly risky. Anyway, I’m supposed to be on vacation. Greetings from Yellowstone, Darrell On Aug 13, 2014, at 13:41, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email] [hidden email]> wrote:
I'm open to the idea of providing benefits to osgeo charter members, but suggest having an early bird discount apply to all ticket categories. I'd suggest something like a 5% discount for charter member tickets instead. Note: conferences organisors need to decide whether they will also give such a discount to professional bodies as well (such as professional institute of surveyors). Such organisations often aggressively request a discount for their members in return for publicising foss4g to their membership. There is a very important reason conferences have a early bird discount. It means that conference organisors get an early indication of the number of attendees coming to the conference. This helps significantly with regards to making financial decisions about the conference. In particular, it enables organisors to decide to cancel the conference before having to lock into key financial commitments and potentially sending OSGeo bankrupt. This was very important for us in FOSS4G 2009, the year of the global financial crisis, when registrations were much lower than expected. At the early bird deadline, we were aware that we had enough people attending that we would loose less money by going ahead than if we cancelled, so we went ahead. Without that confidence, we likely would have decided to cancel the conference. (In the end more people did register, and we were just able to make a modest profit.) On 14/08/2014 4:56 am, Kate Chapman wrote:
Hi All, I think the comparison between the SotM model and the FOSS4G model is interesting, but it is important to think about the financial objectives of each conference. My understanding was that FOSS4G provides most of the funding for OSGEO over the year, this isn't the case for SotM. Though successful sponsorship programs could possibly make up the difference between the discounted tickets. One note, I've worked for a few organizations that have paid my ticket for SotM. I've also paid the mapper price myself previously as well. I would have not been able to get them to pay for FOSS4G though. Some of you may have noticed I have given a workshop every year I've attended FOSS4G. I would not be able to attend otherwise. Not that it is conceivable for everyone to give a workshop to be able to attend. Best, -Kate On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email] [hidden email]> wrote: SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt they make much money from the business tickets. Hi Steven, I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It doesn't need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo, where I was involved, and there were more business tickets sold than I expected and they made up a large share of the total revenue through ticket sales. My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference by their employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter (it's just a fraction of the total cost anyway), because they just pass the costs to the employer. For the employer it has a value, if one can see the company name on the badge. But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel costs low and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted community ticket makes a difference, whether the person is a charter member or not. I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the "club" of charter members. ;-) Daniel --

Conference_dev mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

-- 
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

Eli Adam
This is a great conversation and I'd like to participate but timing is not great (there are a few things going on now).  This could be supplemented with a FOSS4G BOF or after FOSS4G might be a better time for the 2014 LOC to put effort into this.  Please continue the great conversation, just an FYI that the current LOC might be focused elsewhere currently. 

Eli

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 5:50 AM, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Darrell,
You have made some excellent points, and I'm hoping that at some point you will expand upon your initial email. It sounds like you have some well thought through and practical ideas about how FOSS4G and its relationship with OSGeo should grow.

And I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on Andrew's suggestions too.


On 15/08/2014 1:51 pm, Andrew Ross wrote:
Hey Jeff, Everyone

I'd like to comment briefly.

I feel a 800+ person conference is of a sufficient size that it's not a good idea to burn out volunteers organizing. To throw a new team to the wolves each year is extremely risky.

The obvious options are to not have such a large event, or choose a different model to organize.

I feel that a conference of such size is very important. It's what draws the ecosystem together and helps it grow. Not having the large event would be a loss.

It is simply too big to hold at most Universities, and especially in the fall.

For what it's worth, I also feel smaller regional and plenty of local events are important too. That's orthogonal to the global event though.

I've been open about what the Eclipse Foundation & LocationTech can do. It has full time staff with experience to run a consistently great technology conferences with lots of camaraderie.

Let's work together. FOSS4G NA 2015 will be a nice opportunity, test, and display. For those who are highly motivated, feel free to go back to the D.C. bid and provide feedback. I feel it was a great bid, credible, and a good indication of the kind of event we'd hold in the future. Maybe this is a good option to address many of the issues? Worth exploring a bit in any case.

Andrew


On August 14, 2014 9:54:49 AM EDT, Jeff McKenna [hidden email] wrote:
Hi Darrell,

I can say that in 2011 I did bring this issue strongly, and very 
publicly, to the OSGeo Board.  I even proposed a part-time position to 
manage the main FOSS4G conference (google 'foss4g advisor' for some 
history and fun reading, all there outlined in a public wiki page forever).

Well, that didn't happen.  And as you just mentioned, it's still needed.

Or, if that cannot happen, we need to realize this, and change our 
mindset, back to the origins of FOSS4G: a meeting of the tribe, cheap 
admission, affordable university venues, bare-bones (essentially what 
our FOSS4G regional events are doing now).

Because yes I agree, to assume a bunch of volunteers can run a ~1,000 
attendee event in the best conference venue in the city and still make 
it affordable for the tribe to attend, will not work.

-jeff




On 2014-08-14 12:10 AM,
Darrell Fuhriman wrote:
I’m trying to formulate a response to this, but it ties into an e-mail that I owe this list, but haven’t had time to send because I’ve been busy finalizing the conference preparations. Also, I’m well into my third pint this evening, so it’s probably not the best time. :) While I agree the early bird discount is important for the reasons you state, there actually aren’t that many commitments that can be avoided after the deadline. Frankly, the only significant contracts unsigned by our early bird deadline of June 15th were the catering contracts. Though admittedly, that’s a substantial portion of the budget – if we were on that red line, we’d be jettisoning coffee breaks like ballast in a sinking ship. I think right now the quickest thing I can say is that OSGeo has so far shown minimal interest in actually taking responsibility for FOSS4G. If OSGeo is going to increase the demands made on the committee, OSGeo needs to be stepping up and taking a more hands-on approach to conference organization. For the record, I believe OSGeo needs to step up and take such a more hands on approach. I’d love a chance to talk about in person at the board meeting. SotM.us <http://SotM.us> runs very different, and I know from talking with the organizers that it was a challenge to break-even this year. The difficulty is that as conferences get bigger, they get more expensive to put on (primarily because the supply of possible venues shrinks very rapidly, and the per attendee costs go up substantially). They also get logistically more challenging, and having dedicated resources, either employee or outsourced, can vastly decrease the workload on the LOC. Frankly, unless something changes on this front, it’s just a matter of time until there’s another 2012. To be honest, I’m not sure SotM.us <http://SotM.us> would have been a success if Mapbox hadn’t devoted significant employee resources to making sure it was (as they have for the past three SotM.us <http://SotM.us> conferences). Conferences take huge numbers of hours to organize. The inefficiency introduced by having someone re-learn the job every year is substantial, wasteful, and incredibly risky. Anyway, I’m supposed to be on vacation. Greetings from Yellowstone, Darrell On Aug 13, 2014, at 13:41, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email] [hidden email]> wrote:
I'm open to the idea of providing benefits to osgeo charter members, but suggest having an early bird discount apply to all ticket categories. I'd suggest something like a 5% discount for charter member tickets instead. Note: conferences organisors need to decide whether they will also give such a discount to professional bodies as well (such as professional institute of surveyors). Such organisations often aggressively request a discount for their members in return for publicising foss4g to their membership. There is a very important reason conferences have a early bird discount. It means that conference organisors get an early indication of the number of attendees coming to the conference. This helps significantly with regards to making financial decisions about the conference. In particular, it enables organisors to decide to cancel the conference before having to lock into key financial commitments and potentially sending OSGeo bankrupt. This was very important for us in FOSS4G 2009, the year of the global financial crisis, when registrations were much lower than expected. At the early bird deadline, we were aware that we had enough people attending that we would loose less money by going ahead than if we cancelled, so we went ahead. Without that confidence, we likely would have decided to cancel the conference. (In the end more people did register, and we were just able to make a modest profit.) On 14/08/2014 4:56 am, Kate Chapman wrote:
Hi All, I think the comparison between the SotM model and the FOSS4G model is interesting, but it is important to think about the financial objectives of each conference. My understanding was that FOSS4G provides most of the funding for OSGEO over the year, this isn't the case for SotM. Though successful sponsorship programs could possibly make up the difference between the discounted tickets. One note, I've worked for a few organizations that have paid my ticket for SotM. I've also paid the mapper price myself previously as well. I would have not been able to get them to pay for FOSS4G though. Some of you may have noticed I have given a workshop every year I've attended FOSS4G. I would not be able to attend otherwise. Not that it is conceivable for everyone to give a workshop to be able to attend. Best, -Kate On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email] [hidden email]> wrote: SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt they make much money from the business tickets. Hi Steven, I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It doesn't need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo, where I was involved, and there were more business tickets sold than I expected and they made up a large share of the total revenue through ticket sales. My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference by their employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter (it's just a fraction of the total cost anyway), because they just pass the costs to the employer. For the employer it has a value, if one can see the company name on the badge. But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel costs low and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted community ticket makes a difference, whether the person is a charter member or not. I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the "club" of charter members. ;-) Daniel --

Conference_dev mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

-- 
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

Bart van den Eijnden (OSGIS)-2
In reply to this post by aross
Hey Andrew,

(my response is a personal response, not a board response).

First off I’d like to thank you for the kind offer of working together. I want to make sure we discuss this at the board level and hopefully come to some consensus on this.

Personally I am very interested to see what this collaboration could bring both parties.

Best regards,
Bart

On 15 Aug 2014, at 05:51, Andrew Ross <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hey Jeff, Everyone

I'd like to comment briefly.

I feel a 800+ person conference is of a sufficient size that it's not a good idea to burn out volunteers organizing. To throw a new team to the wolves each year is extremely risky.

The obvious options are to not have such a large event, or choose a different model to organize.

I feel that a conference of such size is very important. It's what draws the ecosystem together and helps it grow. Not having the large event would be a loss.

It is simply too big to hold at most Universities, and especially in the fall.

For what it's worth, I also feel smaller regional and plenty of local events are important too. That's orthogonal to the global event though.

I've been open about what the Eclipse Foundation & LocationTech can do. It has full time staff with experience to run a consistently great technology conferences with lots of camaraderie.

Let's work together. FOSS4G NA 2015 will be a nice opportunity, test, and display. For those who are highly motivated, feel free to go back to the D.C. bid and provide feedback. I feel it was a great bid, credible, and a good indication of the kind of event we'd hold in the future. Maybe this is a good option to address many of the issues? Worth exploring a bit in any case.

Andrew


On August 14, 2014 9:54:49 AM EDT, Jeff McKenna <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Darrell,

I can say that in 2011 I did bring this issue strongly, and very
publicly, to the OSGeo Board. I even proposed a part-time position to
manage the main FOSS4G conference (google 'foss4g advisor' for some
history and fun reading, all there outlined in a public wiki page forever).

Well, that didn't happen. And as you just mentioned, it's still needed.

Or, if that cannot happen, we need to realize this, and change our
mindset, back to the origins of FOSS4G: a meeting of the tribe, cheap
admission, affordable university venues, bare-bones (essentially what
our FOSS4G regional events are doing now).

Because yes I agree, to assume a bunch of volunteers can run a ~1,000
attendee event in the best conference venue in the city and still make
it affordable for the tribe to attend, will not work.

-jeff




On 2014-08-14 12:10 AM, Darrell Fuhriman wrote:
I’m trying to formulate a response to this, but it ties into an e-mail
that I owe this list, but haven’t had time to send because I’ve been
busy finalizing the conference preparations. Also, I’m well into my
third pint this evening, so it’s probably not the best time. :)

While I agree the early bird discount is important for the reasons you
state, there actually aren’t that many commitments that can be avoided
after the deadline. Frankly, the only significant contracts unsigned by
our early bird deadline of June 15th were the catering contracts. Though
admittedly, that’s a substantial portion of the budget – if we were on
that red line, we’d be jettisoning coffee breaks like ballast in a
sinking ship.

I think right now the quickest thing I can say is that OSGeo has so far
shown minimal interest in actually taking responsibility for FOSS4G. If
OSGeo is going to increase the demands made on the committee, OSGeo
needs to be stepping up and taking a more hands-on approach to
conference organization.

For the record, I believe OSGeo needs to step up and take such a more
hands on approach. I’d love a chance to talk about in person at the
board meeting.

SotM.us <http://SotM.us> runs very different, and I know from talking
with the organizers that it was a challenge to break-even this year. The
difficulty is that as conferences get bigger, they get more expensive to
put on (primarily because the supply of possible venues shrinks very
rapidly, and the per attendee costs go up substantially). They also get
logistically more challenging, and having dedicated resources, either
employee or outsourced, can vastly decrease the workload on the LOC.
Frankly, unless something changes on this front, it’s just a matter of
time until there’s another 2012. To be honest, I’m not sure SotM.us
<http://SotM.us> would have been a success if Mapbox hadn’t devoted
significant employee resources to making sure it was (as they have for
the past three SotM.us <http://SotM.us> conferences). Conferences take
huge numbers of hours to organize. The inefficiency introduced by having
someone re-learn the job every year is substantial, wasteful, and
incredibly risky.

Anyway, I’m supposed to be on vacation.

Greetings from Yellowstone,

Darrell


On Aug 13, 2014, at 13:41, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]
<[hidden email]>> wrote:

I'm open to the idea of providing benefits to osgeo charter members,
but suggest having an early bird discount apply to all ticket
categories. I'd suggest something like a 5% discount for charter
member tickets instead.

Note: conferences organisors need to decide whether they will also
give such a discount to professional bodies as well (such as
professional institute of surveyors). Such organisations often
aggressively request a discount for their members in return for
publicising foss4g to their membership.

There is a very important reason conferences have a early bird
discount. It means that conference organisors get an early indication
of the number of attendees coming to the conference. This helps
significantly with regards to making financial decisions about the
conference. In particular, it enables organisors to decide to cancel
the conference before having to lock into key financial commitments
and potentially sending OSGeo bankrupt. This was very important for us
in FOSS4G 2009, the year of the global financial crisis, when
registrations were much lower than expected. At the early bird
deadline, we were aware that we had enough people attending that we
would loose less money by going ahead than if we cancelled, so we went
ahead. Without that confidence, we likely would have decided to cancel
the conference. (In the end more people did register, and we were just
able to make a modest profit.)

On 14/08/2014 4:56 am, Kate Chapman wrote:
Hi All,

I think the comparison between the SotM model and the FOSS4G model is
interesting, but it is important to think about the financial
objectives of each conference. My understanding was that FOSS4G
provides most of the funding for OSGEO over the year, this isn't the
case for SotM. Though successful sponsorship programs could possibly
make up the difference between the discounted tickets.

One note, I've worked for a few organizations that have paid my
ticket for SotM. I've also paid the mapper price myself previously as
well. I would have not been able to get them to pay for FOSS4G
though. Some of you may have noticed I have given a workshop every
year I've attended FOSS4G. I would not be able to attend otherwise.
Not that it is conceivable for everyone to give a workshop to be able
to attend.

Best,

-Kate


On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email]
<[hidden email]>> wrote:


SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people
attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt
they make much money from the business tickets.


Hi Steven,

I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It
doesn't need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo,
where I was involved, and there were more business tickets sold
than I expected and they made up a large share of the total
revenue through ticket sales.

My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference
by their employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter
(it's just a fraction of the total cost anyway), because they
just pass the costs to the employer. For the employer it has a
value, if one can see the company name on the badge.
But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel
costs low and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted
community ticket makes a difference, whether the person is a
charter member or not.
I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the
"club" of charter members. ;-)

Daniel
--


Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev


_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

aross
Thank you for the email Bart. I feel this is definitely worth exploring and I'm glad to participate.

What makes sense for the next steps?

On 26/08/14 07:46, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
Hey Andrew,

(my response is a personal response, not a board response).

First off I’d like to thank you for the kind offer of working together. I want to make sure we discuss this at the board level and hopefully come to some consensus on this.

Personally I am very interested to see what this collaboration could bring both parties.

Best regards,
Bart

On 15 Aug 2014, at 05:51, Andrew Ross <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hey Jeff, Everyone

I'd like to comment briefly.

I feel a 800+ person conference is of a sufficient size that it's not a good idea to burn out volunteers organizing. To throw a new team to the wolves each year is extremely risky.

The obvious options are to not have such a large event, or choose a different model to organize.

I feel that a conference of such size is very important. It's what draws the ecosystem together and helps it grow. Not having the large event would be a loss.

It is simply too big to hold at most Universities, and especially in the fall.

For what it's worth, I also feel smaller regional and plenty of local events are important too. That's orthogonal to the global event though.

I've been open about what the Eclipse Foundation & LocationTech can do. It has full time staff with experience to run a consistently great technology conferences with lots of camaraderie.

Let's work together. FOSS4G NA 2015 will be a nice opportunity, test, and display. For those who are highly motivated, feel free to go back to the D.C. bid and provide feedback. I feel it was a great bid, credible, and a good indication of the kind of event we'd hold in the future. Maybe this is a good option to address many of the issues? Worth exploring a bit in any case.

Andrew


On August 14, 2014 9:54:49 AM EDT, Jeff McKenna <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Darrell,

I can say that in 2011 I did bring this issue strongly, and very 
publicly, to the OSGeo Board.  I even proposed a part-time position to 
manage the main FOSS4G conference (google 'foss4g advisor' for some 
history and fun reading, all there outlined in a public wiki page forever).

Well, that didn't happen.  And as you just mentioned, it's still needed.

Or, if that cannot happen, we need to realize this, and change our 
mindset, back to the origins of FOSS4G: a meeting of the tribe, cheap 
admission, affordable university venues, bare-bones (essentially what 
our FOSS4G regional events are doing now).

Because yes I agree, to assume a bunch of volunteers can run a ~1,000 
attendee event in the best conference venue in the city and still make 
it affordable for the tribe to attend, will not work.

-jeff




On 2014-08-14 12:10 AM,
Darrell Fuhriman wrote:
I’m trying to formulate a response to this, but it ties into an e-mail that I owe this list, but haven’t had time to send because I’ve been busy finalizing the conference preparations. Also, I’m well into my third pint this evening, so it’s probably not the best time. :) While I agree the early bird discount is important for the reasons you state, there actually aren’t that many commitments that can be avoided after the deadline. Frankly, the only significant contracts unsigned by our early bird deadline of June 15th were the catering contracts. Though admittedly, that’s a substantial portion of the budget – if we were on that red line, we’d be jettisoning coffee breaks like ballast in a sinking ship. I think right now the quickest thing I can say is that OSGeo has so far shown minimal interest in actually taking responsibility for FOSS4G. If OSGeo is going to increase the demands made on the committee, OSGeo needs to be stepping up and taking a more hands-on approach to conference organization. For the record, I believe OSGeo needs to step up and take such a more hands on approach. I’d love a chance to talk about in person at the board meeting. SotM.us <http://SotM.us> runs very different, and I know from talking with the organizers that it was a challenge to break-even this year. The difficulty is that as conferences get bigger, they get more expensive to put on (primarily because the supply of possible venues shrinks very rapidly, and the per attendee costs go up substantially). They also get logistically more challenging, and having dedicated resources, either employee or outsourced, can vastly decrease the workload on the LOC. Frankly, unless something changes on this front, it’s just a matter of time until there’s another 2012. To be honest, I’m not sure SotM.us <http://SotM.us> would have been a success if Mapbox hadn’t devoted significant employee resources to making sure it was (as they have for the past three SotM.us <http://SotM.us> conferences). Conferences take huge numbers of hours to organize. The inefficiency introduced by having someone re-learn the job every year is substantial, wasteful, and incredibly risky. Anyway, I’m supposed to be on vacation. Greetings from Yellowstone, Darrell On Aug 13, 2014, at 13:41, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email] <[hidden email]>> wrote:
I'm open to the idea of providing benefits to osgeo charter members, but suggest having an early bird discount apply to all ticket categories. I'd suggest something like a 5% discount for charter member tickets instead. Note: conferences organisors need to decide whether they will also give such a discount to professional bodies as well (such as professional institute of surveyors). Such organisations often aggressively request a discount for their members in return for publicising foss4g to their membership. There is a very important reason conferences have a early bird discount. It means that conference organisors get an early indication of the number of attendees coming to the conference. This helps significantly with regards to making financial decisions about the conference. In particular, it enables organisors to decide to cancel the conference before having to lock into key financial commitments and potentially sending OSGeo bankrupt. This was very important for us in FOSS4G 2009, the year of the global financial crisis, when registrations were much lower than expected. At the early bird deadline, we were aware that we had enough people attending that we would loose less money by going ahead than if we cancelled, so we went ahead. Without that confidence, we likely would have decided to cancel the conference. (In the end more people did register, and we were just able to make a modest profit.) On 14/08/2014 4:56 am, Kate Chapman wrote:
Hi All, I think the comparison between the SotM model and the FOSS4G model is interesting, but it is important to think about the financial objectives of each conference. My understanding was that FOSS4G provides most of the funding for OSGEO over the year, this isn't the case for SotM. Though successful sponsorship programs could possibly make up the difference between the discounted tickets. One note, I've worked for a few organizations that have paid my ticket for SotM. I've also paid the mapper price myself previously as well. I would have not been able to get them to pay for FOSS4G though. Some of you may have noticed I have given a workshop every year I've attended FOSS4G. I would not be able to attend otherwise. Not that it is conceivable for everyone to give a workshop to be able to attend. Best, -Kate On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email] <[hidden email]>> wrote: SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt they make much money from the business tickets. Hi Steven, I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It doesn't need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo, where I was involved, and there were more business tickets sold than I expected and they made up a large share of the total revenue through ticket sales. My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference by their employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter (it's just a fraction of the total cost anyway), because they just pass the costs to the employer. For the employer it has a value, if one can see the company name on the badge. But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel costs low and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted community ticket makes a difference, whether the person is a charter member or not. I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the "club" of charter members. ;-) Daniel --

Conference_dev mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

Bart van den Eijnden (OSGIS)-2
Hey Andrew,

I think the first step is putting this on the agenda for one of the next board meetings and discussing it at the board level. This will probably need to wait until the current board elections are finished.

Once that has happened, it would be helpful if you would be available to answer questions. I’ll notify you as soon as I’ve added it to the board meeting’s agenda.

Personally I feel we need to finalise this discussion before we put out the 2016 RFP (ideally).

Maybe this is even a topic we can use to consult our charter members, if they see any issues with OSGeo and Eclipse running the main FOSS4G conference together in the future?

One of the things I’ve heard in the past is that some people are afraid that running a more professional conference will take away the grass roots / community feeling of FOSS4G. As I said, I myself have no issues with this, but it’s a common theme that comes up.

Best regards,
Bart

On 26 Aug 2014, at 15:31, Andrew Ross <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thank you for the email Bart. I feel this is definitely worth exploring and I'm glad to participate.

What makes sense for the next steps?

On 26/08/14 07:46, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
Hey Andrew,

(my response is a personal response, not a board response).

First off I’d like to thank you for the kind offer of working together. I want to make sure we discuss this at the board level and hopefully come to some consensus on this.

Personally I am very interested to see what this collaboration could bring both parties.

Best regards,
Bart

On 15 Aug 2014, at 05:51, Andrew Ross <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hey Jeff, Everyone

I'd like to comment briefly.

I feel a 800+ person conference is of a sufficient size that it's not a good idea to burn out volunteers organizing. To throw a new team to the wolves each year is extremely risky.

The obvious options are to not have such a large event, or choose a different model to organize.

I feel that a conference of such size is very important. It's what draws the ecosystem together and helps it grow. Not having the large event would be a loss.

It is simply too big to hold at most Universities, and especially in the fall.

For what it's worth, I also feel smaller regional and plenty of local events are important too. That's orthogonal to the global event though.

I've been open about what the Eclipse Foundation & LocationTech can do. It has full time staff with experience to run a consistently great technology conferences with lots of camaraderie.

Let's work together. FOSS4G NA 2015 will be a nice opportunity, test, and display. For those who are highly motivated, feel free to go back to the D.C. bid and provide feedback. I feel it was a great bid, credible, and a good indication of the kind of event we'd hold in the future. Maybe this is a good option to address many of the issues? Worth exploring a bit in any case.

Andrew


On August 14, 2014 9:54:49 AM EDT, Jeff McKenna <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Darrell,

I can say that in 2011 I did bring this issue strongly, and very 
publicly, to the OSGeo Board.  I even proposed a part-time position to 
manage the main FOSS4G conference (google 'foss4g advisor' for some 
history and fun reading, all there outlined in a public wiki page forever).

Well, that didn't happen.  And as you just mentioned, it's still needed.

Or, if that cannot happen, we need to realize this, and change our 
mindset, back to the origins of FOSS4G: a meeting of the tribe, cheap 
admission, affordable university venues, bare-bones (essentially what 
our FOSS4G regional events are doing now).

Because yes I agree, to assume a bunch of volunteers can run a ~1,000 
attendee event in the best conference venue in the city and still make 
it affordable for the tribe to attend, will not work.

-jeff




On 2014-08-14 12:10 AM,
Darrell Fuhriman wrote:
I’m trying to formulate a response to this, but it ties into an e-mail that I owe this list, but haven’t had time to send because I’ve been busy finalizing the conference preparations. Also, I’m well into my third pint this evening, so it’s probably not the best time. :) While I agree the early bird discount is important for the reasons you state, there actually aren’t that many commitments that can be avoided after the deadline. Frankly, the only significant contracts unsigned by our early bird deadline of June 15th were the catering contracts. Though admittedly, that’s a substantial portion of the budget – if we were on that red line, we’d be jettisoning coffee breaks like ballast in a sinking ship. I think right now the quickest thing I can say is that OSGeo has so far shown minimal interest in actually taking responsibility for FOSS4G. If OSGeo is going to increase the demands made on the committee, OSGeo needs to be stepping up and taking a more hands-on approach to conference organization. For the record, I believe OSGeo needs to step up and take such a more hands on approach. I’d love a chance to talk about in person at the board meeting. SotM.us <http://SotM.us> runs very different, and I know from talking with the organizers that it was a challenge to break-even this year. The difficulty is that as conferences get bigger, they get more expensive to put on (primarily because the supply of possible venues shrinks very rapidly, and the per attendee costs go up substantially). They also get logistically more challenging, and having dedicated resources, either employee or outsourced, can vastly decrease the workload on the LOC. Frankly, unless something changes on this front, it’s just a matter of time until there’s another 2012. To be honest, I’m not sure SotM.us <http://SotM.us> would have been a success if Mapbox hadn’t devoted significant employee resources to making sure it was (as they have for the past three SotM.us <http://SotM.us> conferences). Conferences take huge numbers of hours to organize. The inefficiency introduced by having someone re-learn the job every year is substantial, wasteful, and incredibly risky. Anyway, I’m supposed to be on vacation. Greetings from Yellowstone, Darrell On Aug 13, 2014, at 13:41, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email] <[hidden email]>> wrote:
I'm open to the idea of providing benefits to osgeo charter members, but suggest having an early bird discount apply to all ticket categories. I'd suggest something like a 5% discount for charter member tickets instead. Note: conferences organisors need to decide whether they will also give such a discount to professional bodies as well (such as professional institute of surveyors). Such organisations often aggressively request a discount for their members in return for publicising foss4g to their membership. There is a very important reason conferences have a early bird discount. It means that conference organisors get an early indication of the number of attendees coming to the conference. This helps significantly with regards to making financial decisions about the conference. In particular, it enables organisors to decide to cancel the conference before having to lock into key financial commitments and potentially sending OSGeo bankrupt. This was very important for us in FOSS4G 2009, the year of the global financial crisis, when registrations were much lower than expected. At the early bird deadline, we were aware that we had enough people attending that we would loose less money by going ahead than if we cancelled, so we went ahead. Without that confidence, we likely would have decided to cancel the conference. (In the end more people did register, and we were just able to make a modest profit.) On 14/08/2014 4:56 am, Kate Chapman wrote:
Hi All, I think the comparison between the SotM model and the FOSS4G model is interesting, but it is important to think about the financial objectives of each conference. My understanding was that FOSS4G provides most of the funding for OSGEO over the year, this isn't the case for SotM. Though successful sponsorship programs could possibly make up the difference between the discounted tickets. One note, I've worked for a few organizations that have paid my ticket for SotM. I've also paid the mapper price myself previously as well. I would have not been able to get them to pay for FOSS4G though. Some of you may have noticed I have given a workshop every year I've attended FOSS4G. I would not be able to attend otherwise. Not that it is conceivable for everyone to give a workshop to be able to attend. Best, -Kate On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Kastl <[hidden email] <[hidden email]>> wrote: SotM finances are based on the expectation that most people attending will be ‘mappers’ who pay the lower rate, I doubt they make much money from the business tickets. Hi Steven, I agree that SotM is a bit extreme in the price difference. It doesn't need to be that much. But I can speak for SotM Tokyo, where I was involved, and there were more business tickets sold than I expected and they made up a large share of the total revenue through ticket sales. My main point is, that for delegates, who get paid the conference by their employer, a slightly higher price doesn't really matter (it's just a fraction of the total cost anyway), because they just pass the costs to the employer. For the employer it has a value, if one can see the company name on the badge. But someone from nearby for example or tries to keep the travel costs low and takes a holiday to attend FOSS4G, such a discounted community ticket makes a difference, whether the person is a charter member or not. I think we should strengthen the value of the community, not the "club" of charter members. ;-) Daniel --

Conference_dev mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev




_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

Darrell Fuhriman
> One of the things I’ve heard in the past is that some people are afraid that running a more professional conference will take away the grass roots / community feeling of FOSS4G. As I said, I myself have no issues with this, but it’s a common theme that comes up.

Actually, I think it could be *more* grass roots if there were a dedicated staff to handle the day-to-day stuff. The LOC could focus on conference issues, without having to learn the ins-and-outs of running a conference.

There’s an enormous number of things that need to be done that have nothing at all to do with a grass roots/community feel, but that burn a huge amount of time, especially if you’ve never done it before.

There’s a big difference in time spent between:

A) Hi, LOC, here’s the signage you need. Make it fit your theme, it’s due on….

and

B) Hey, what signage do we need? Where does it go? What size should it be? Who’s printing it?  Oh crap, we forgot about signs for X, shit someone throw something together…

Substitute a million little things for “signage” and repeat.

Darrell

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FOSS4G Discount for Charter Members proposal

David William Bitner-3
+1 to everything Darrell just said! 


On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Darrell Fuhriman <[hidden email]> wrote:
> One of the things I’ve heard in the past is that some people are afraid that running a more professional conference will take away the grass roots / community feeling of FOSS4G. As I said, I myself have no issues with this, but it’s a common theme that comes up.

Actually, I think it could be *more* grass roots if there were a dedicated staff to handle the day-to-day stuff. The LOC could focus on conference issues, without having to learn the ins-and-outs of running a conference.

There’s an enormous number of things that need to be done that have nothing at all to do with a grass roots/community feel, but that burn a huge amount of time, especially if you’ve never done it before.

There’s a big difference in time spent between:

A) Hi, LOC, here’s the signage you need. Make it fit your theme, it’s due on….

and

B) Hey, what signage do we need? Where does it go? What size should it be? Who’s printing it?  Oh crap, we forgot about signs for X, shit someone throw something together…

Substitute a million little things for “signage” and repeat.

Darrell

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



--
************************************
David William Bitner
dbSpatial LLC
612-424-9932

_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
123