<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Chris,<div><br><div>Good point, but I'd expect that we could rubber stamp the Denver conference and match or exceed this year's number. Colorado is a geospatial center for the US. I think the break even target for this year was somewhere around 500, so it would be prudent to target that or slightly higher. As government budgets get whacked I'm expecting a lot more interest from government agencies. In any case, it was a very successful conference and this years attendees will help spread the word.</div><div><br></div><div>Mark</div><div><br></div><div><div><div>On Sep 23, 2011, at 7:13 AM, <a href="mailto:christopher.schmidt@nokia.com">christopher.schmidt@nokia.com</a> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>On Sep 22, 2011, at 10:37 PM, ext Mark Lucas wrote:<br><br><blockquote type="cite">Yep, and that is just returning attendees. 67% were new attendees for 2011. So it would seem we could easily duplicate the 900 attendees at this years conference.<br></blockquote><br>I don't think it works like that.<br><br>FOSS4G was in the US for the first time in a long time; the space itself has changed<br>drastically since 2004 (or even 2007) when it was last practical to attend<br>the conf. for a lot of people.<br><br>I think that the new market for attendees was huge this year, but I don't<br>think it's fair to extrapolate that it will *always* be that big;<br>I think that imagining the market/space will grow by as much between <br>2011->2012 as it did between 2007 and 2011 is a pretty big <br>expectation.<br><br>I would start with mpg's numbers and go up slightly, unless you believe there<br>is somehow a very large untapped potential that Denver did not address; <br>I think that imagining a 25% growth of new attendees is reasonable, but<br>expecting *two thirds* new attendees again would be excessive.<br><br>-- Chris<br><br><blockquote type="cite">Mark<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">On Sep 22, 2011, at 9:34 PM, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">For “likely to attend a FOSS4G in NorAmer next year” (#19), the responses were<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">1: 10%<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">2: 10%<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">3: 25%<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">4: 20%<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">5: 35%<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Let us assign probabilities to the 1-5 scale like this:<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">1: 0% (will not attend)<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">2: 20% chance of attending<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">3: 40%<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">4: 60%<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">5: 80%<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Assume 900 attendees at this conference. Then, we can project the attendance at the postulated local NorAmer conference to be<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">.10(900) * 0 + .10(900) * .20 + .25(900) * .40 + .20(900) * .60 + .35(900) * .80<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">= 0 + 18 + 90 + 108 + 252<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">= 468<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Check my math, but we could be looking at a ~500 person gig.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">-mpg<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">From: <a href="mailto:board-bounces@lists.osgeo.org">board-bounces@lists.osgeo.org</a> [mailto:board-bounces@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Peter Batty<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 6:02 PM<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">To: foss4g2011-private; <a href="mailto:board@lists.osgeo.org">board@lists.osgeo.org</a>; conference<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Subject: [Board] Fwd: Preliminary Survey Results<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hi all,<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Thought I would share a few preliminary results from the post-FOSS4G survey. As James says below, we'll get the data in a better form for analysis once we close the survey. But we got responses from 1/3 of attendees within 24 hours, which is great!<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">A few things I'd highlight:<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">67% of attendees were at their first FOSS4G<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">46% answered 5 to the question how heavily do you currently use geospatial open source, remainder split fairly evenly between 1-4.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">61% were software developers as main job function, 18% end users, 20% managers<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Overall rating of FOSS4G was 4.31 on a scale of 1-5, which is impressive!<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Highest ranked function was the Wynkoop reception at 4.55.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Quality of presentations was ranked at 4.07.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">72% answered 1 or 2 on how likely they are to be in Beijing, 14% answered 4 or 5.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">57% answered 4 or 5 on attending a "local FOSS4G" if there was one in North America next year.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Of various possible options proposed for future FOSS4Gs, the one involving an annual local conference in North America was the highest rated by some margin (though obviously a sample skewed towards North Americans).<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">We need the more detailed spreadsheet to get scores and comments for individual workshops, I think that will be another important thing to look at in planning for next year.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Lots of interesting stuff in the comments too that we can use to make future events better.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Cheers,<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> Peter.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">From: James Sakamoto <<a href="mailto:jsakamoto@gita.org">jsakamoto@gita.org</a>><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Date: Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 3:36 PM<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Subject: Preliminary Survey Results<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">To: Peter Batty <<a href="mailto:peter@ebatty.com">peter@ebatty.com</a>><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Cc: Bob Samborski <<a href="mailto:bsamborski@gita.org">bsamborski@gita.org</a>>, Libby Hanna <<a href="mailto:lhanna@gita.org">lhanna@gita.org</a>>, Patricia Essex <<a href="mailto:pessex@gita.org">pessex@gita.org</a>><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Hi Pete,<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Thought we would share the preliminary survey results. It is still very early but, so far, you almost have 300 (285) responses which would be nearly 33%!!! That is a tremendous response. Generally we get about 10-15%.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">This is just the summarized PDF synopsis. When the survey closes we should be able to provide you with an Excel formatted report that you can manipulate as you please.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Thanks,<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">James<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">James Sakamoto<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Senior Education Coordinator<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">GITA<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">14456 East Evans Ave<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Aurora, CO 80014<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">(720) 496-0484<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:jsakamoto@gita.org">jsakamoto@gita.org</a><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">October 24-26, GIS for Oil & Gas Pipeline Conference, Houston, TX <a href="http://www.gita.org/oilgas">www.gita.org/oilgas</a><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><image001.jpg><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">Board mailing list<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Board mailing list<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a><br></blockquote><br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>