<html dir="ltr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style id="owaParaStyle" type="text/css">P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}</style>
</head>
<body ocsi="0" fpstyle="1" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color: #000000;font-size: 10pt;"><font size="2">Although I like the idea of having a different regional conference
<font size="2">promoted to the "main" one each<font size="2"> year<font size="2">, this would imply that regional one ch<font size="2">an</font>ges in that year from local<font size="2">-</font>language to english-language<font size="2">. This would diminish
the <font size="2">attractiveness for "locals"</font></font><font size="2"> in some cases (specifically Japan<font size="2"> and</font> South Am<font size="2">erica)...<br>
<br>
<font size="2">B<font size="2">a</font>rend </font><br>
</font></font></font></font></font><b><br>
on </b></font><font color="#000000" face="Tahoma" size="2">Friday, April 19, 2013 23:00,
</font>Cameron Shorter [cameron.shorter@gmail.com] wrote:<br>
<br>
<div style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #000000; font-size: 16px">
<div></div>
<div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">From my assessment:<br>
<br>
We know from FOSS4G metrics that:<br>
* There are ~ 200 to 300 people who will travel to a global foss4g event, anywhere in the world.<br>
* However, the majority of foss4g delegates are local or regional, in the case of North America, in the order of 500+, and these 500 won't travel to Europe, or Australia, or ... to see FOSS4G. Metrics are similar for the rest of the world.<br>
* There is a proven demand for annual regional FOSS4G events. A global FOSS4G event would reach 1/3 or less of potential FOSS4G attendees which multiple regional conferences could reach.
<br>
* So if our primary goal is outreach to as many people as possible, then we are best served by multiple regional FOSS4G events.<br>
* The price we pay for this increased OSGeo market, is increased marketing costs (in that vendors and delegates need to consider travelling to multiple events).<br>
* The Open Source business model favours local businesses who can provide local, personalised services. As such, I think that it is in the interests of most OSGeo vendors to focus on regional events, where they can reach more targeted customers.<br>
* And for the 300 odd people wishing to par-take in the "annual gathering of the tribes", we will delegate one of the regional conferences to be the global foss4g conference for the year.<br>
<br>
Hence, my vote is that we continue to have regional conferences every year, with one of these regional conferences being given the extra honour of being called the global conference.<br>
<br>
On 19/04/2013 12:54 PM, Daniel Kastl wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 3:01 AM, Steven Feldman <span dir="ltr">
<<a href="mailto:shfeldman@gmail.com" target="_blank">shfeldman@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex; border-left:1px #ccc solid; padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">When we bid we were concerned about regional events impacting attendance at the big one inn Nottingham this year.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>this year we have a NA and CEE event as well as FOSS4G. Everyone has reassured us that they have little or no impact, I am not so confident in a time of economic pressure but only time will tell. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It is difficult to be precise about cannibalisation by regional events unless we survey the delegates at these two regional events and ask them whether they plan to also attend Nottingham and if not whether they would have considered Nottingham if there
had not been a regional event. Is that worth doing?<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div style=""><br>
</div>
<div style="">Regarding regional events I would make a difference between events that are mainly in English language or some other language.</div>
<div style="">For example the German FOSSGIS or the Japanese FOSS4G wouldn't really attract an audience, that doesn't speak German or Japanese. Same for regional events in Spanish or French. These local events are important, because lot of people prefer to
hear (or give) presentations in their native language.</div>
<div style="">A big regional event such as FOSS4G NA though might have an impact though. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div style="">Daniel</div>
<div style=""><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex; border-left:1px #ccc solid; padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
<div>
<div>On 17 Apr 2013, at 00:06, Cameron Shorter <<a href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com" target="_blank">cameron.shorter@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div>I'd like to hear thoughts from people who organise FOSS4G regional events about the two year global / regional / global rotation.<br>
<br>
In particular, would large regional conferences such as FOSS4G-NA or FOSS4G-EU or FOSS4G-CEE be interested in only holding events every second year?<br>
<br>
<br>
On 16/04/2013 9:46 PM, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">I think Barend's suggestion of a two year scheme (regional in year X, global in year Y) deserves some more discussion / attention.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Personally I can see the benefits of this scheme (no big competition from large regional conferences in the global year).<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Also, does OsGeo currently get money out of the big regional conferences (such as FOSS4G-CEE and FOSS4G-NA)?<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best regards,</div>
<div>Bart</div>
<div><br>
<div><span style="border-collapse:separate; font-family:Helvetica; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; line-height:normal; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; word-spacing:0px; border-spacing:0px; font-size:medium">-- <br>
Bart van den Eijnden<br>
OSGIS - <a href="http://osgis.nl/" target="_blank">http://osgis.nl</a></span> </div>
<br>
<div>
<div>On Apr 15, 2013, at 11:34 AM, <a href="mailto:b.j.kobben@utwente.nl" target="_blank">
b.j.kobben@utwente.nl</a> wrote:</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Hia ll,<br>
<br>
I am not a board member nor a conference committee member, but I feel an<br>
urgent need to give my opinion here.<br>
<br>
I grow uncomfortable by some of the trends that seem to "logically follow"<br>
(note the quotes, and yes I am exaggerating on purpose) from this<br>
discussion:<br>
1)- FOSS4G events are there to make money<br>
2)- non NA/Europe events don't make (enough) money<br>
3)- non NA/Europe events get badly organized (see Beijng)<br>
<br>
Proposition 1 already makes me feel itchy. How can you 'charge' FOSS4G<br>
main event organizers with being a cash cow ("expecting a $50K profit") if<br>
at the same time encouraging (allowing?) other events to be organised that<br>
almost certainly will cannabilise the main event (Foss4G-NA, FOSS4g CEE)<br>
on which events you put no obligation to make money? I think we need a<br>
two-year cycle: one year the main conference and other years regional ones<br>
(i.e. ones actively supported by OSGEO "central", what the regional<br>
chapters do on their own is their own responsibility).<br>
<br>
Proposition 2 is touching a nerve because I work at an institute that is<br>
about capacity building for lesser developed countries. I think part of<br>
OSGEO is promoting the use of FOSS, and bringing knowledge and experience<br>
and enthousiasm about that to the places in the world that would profit<br>
most from it is a good cause that is worth doing even if it brings you<br>
less or no money. By all means subsidize the LDC meetings with profits<br>
from the Europe/NA ones. Call me a specialist, but I prefer some<br>
solidarity in this...<br>
<br>
Proposition 3 is plain not true. The South Africa FOSS4G was excellent in<br>
my opinion, the Beijng one failed because of insufficient control<br>
mechanisms (either in place or just not followed up on) to check on a<br>
local organisation that chooses to do its own thing completely independent<br>
of 'OSGEO central'. Could have happened with self-centered stubborn Dutch<br>
organizers just as well, and certainly at least part of the blame should<br>
be on the 'OSGEO central' shoulders...<br>
<br>
Yours truly,<br>
<br>
--<br>
Barend Köbben <br>
Senior Lecturer, ITC - University of Twente,<br>
Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation<br>
PO Box 217, 7500AE Enschede (The Netherlands)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 13-04-13 14:30, "Cameron Shorter" <<a href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com" target="_blank">cameron.shorter@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Frank,<br>
I agree that a compelling proposal should include meeting foss4g<br>
financial expectations.<br>
<br>
For the record, the last board meeting discussed changing guidelines for<br>
foss4g budgets from expecting a $20K profit under conservative estimates,<br>
to a $50K profit. (This would typically result in a $100K+ profit under<br>
expected conditions).<br>
<br>
David Bitner, pointed out that a $100K profit spread across 1000<br>
attendees equates to $100 extra per delegate, which is a good point, but<br>
should be tempered against the variability of FOSS4G attendees, and the<br>
high impact on profits this has. Looking back at<br>
an old foss4g budget, I extrapolated some profit figures:<br>
<br>
Attendees: Profit<br>
1000: $58K<br>
900: $35K<br>
800: $11K<br>
700: -$11K<br>
600: -$35K<br>
500: -$58K<br>
<br>
While I made some gross generalisations in my extrapolation, the take<br>
home message is that fixed costs of a large conference such as FOSS4G are<br>
very high, and consequently, a small percentage increase or decrease in<br>
attendance has high impact on profitability.<br>
So if we want to ensure a worst case scenario of 500 delegates will break<br>
even, then we should expect to make a $110K profit for an expected<br>
attendance of 1000.<br>
<br>
On 13/04/13 08:10, Frank Warmerdam wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
Cameron,<br>
<br>
<br>
I feel this question ties into the expected revenue to some degree. I'm<br>
personally fine with your suggestion with the caveat that we should<br>
expect a "compelling proposal" to meet our revenue generation guidelines<br>
which is (IMHO) going to be hard<br>
to do if aim for $50K revenue in the conservative case.<br>
<br>
<br>
I'm also fairly flexible on this who issue, but I *feel* like every time<br>
we have a revenue discussion we come up with one set of conclusions, but<br>
somehow we fail to actually apply those conclusion when setting<br>
requirements for the conference.<br>
<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Frank<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Cameron Shorter<br>
<<a href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com" target="_blank">cameron.shorter@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
In the last board meeting, the question was raised about global FOSS4G<br>
rotation.<br>
<br>
we currently have a 3 way rotation policy: Europe 2013 / North America<br>
2014 / Rest of world 2015<br>
<br>
It has been suggested that we should revisit this rotation policy, and<br>
consider:<br>
<br>
Europe / North America / Europe / North America<br>
<br>
Reasons:<br>
* Previous global FOSS4G events have attracted more people and been more<br>
lucrative in Europe / North America<br>
* Europe/North America could be argued to be less financially risky. Our<br>
one cancelled FOSS4G was in China in 2012.<br>
* FOSS4G (global and regional) events traditionally draw half their<br>
attendance from the local region. Europe and North America both have<br>
large populations with established OSGeo communities.<br>
<br>
I'm in favour of continuing our current 3 way rotation, on the proviso<br>
that there are proven OSGeo communities outside of NA/Europe. By proven,<br>
I'd suggest that we would consider regions which have already<br>
successfully staged a FOSS4G regional event (or similar)<br>
and who can put together a compelling justification that they can<br>
attract comparable attendees and sponsors to Europe/North America.<br>
<br>
Looking at: <br>
<a href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_History" target="_blank">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_History</a><br>
<a href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_History" target="_blank"><http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_History></a><br>
I see that there have previously been regional FOSS4G events in:<br>
Argentina<br>
India<br>
Korea<br>
Malaysia<br>
Japan<br>
<br>
So for 2015, I'd suggest that our FOSS4G pre qualification should invite<br>
responses from "rest of the world" and Europe, but we should give a<br>
preference to "rest of world" assuming they can provide a compelling<br>
proposal which is likely to attract similar success<br>
to past European and North American conferences.<br>
<br>
Generalising the rule. Our rotation policy should be:<br>
<br>
* We give a strong preference to a region which hasn't had FOSS4G for 2<br>
years<br>
* We next consider the region which had FOSS4G 2 years ago<br>
* Only as a last resort would we consider a region which had FOSS4G last<br>
year<br>
<br>
Regions are considered as: Europe / North America / Other locations<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Cameron Shorter<br>
Geospatial Solutions Manager<br>
Tel: <br>
<a href="tel:%2B61%20%280%292%208570%205050" value="+61285705050" target="_blank">+61 (0)2 8570 5050</a> <tel:%2B61%20%280%292%208570%205050><br>
Mob: <br>
<a href="tel:%2B61%20%280%29419%20142%20254" value="+61419142254" target="_blank">+61 (0)419 142 254</a> <tel:%2B61%20%280%29419%20142%20254><br>
<br>
Think Globally, Fix Locally<br>
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source<br>
<a href="http://www.lisasoft.com/" target="_blank">http://www.lisasoft.com</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Board mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
---------------------------------------+----------------------------------<br>
----<br>
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam,<br>
<a href="mailto:warmerdam@pobox.com" target="_blank">warmerdam@pobox.com</a> <a href="mailto:warmerdam@pobox.com" target="_blank">
<mailto:warmerdam@pobox.com></a><br>
light and sound - activate the windows |<br>
<a href="http://pobox.com/%7Ewarmerdam" target="_blank">http://pobox.com/~warmerdam</a>
<a href="http://pobox.com/%7Ewarmerdam" target="_blank"><http://pobox.com/%7Ewarmerdam></a><br>
and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Software Developer<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Cameron Shorter<br>
Geospatial Solutions Manager<br>
Tel: <a href="tel:%2B61%20%280%292%208570%205050" value="+61285705050" target="_blank">
+61 (0)2 8570 5050</a><br>
Mob: <a href="tel:%2B61%20%280%29419%20142%20254" value="+61419142254" target="_blank">
+61 (0)419 142 254</a><br>
<br>
Think Globally, Fix Locally<br>
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source<br>
<a href="http://www.lisasoft.com/" target="_blank">http://www.lisasoft.com</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Conference_dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset target="_blank"></fieldset> <br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Conference_dev mailing list
<a href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Solutions Manager
Tel: <a href="tel:%2B61%20%280%292%208570%205050" value="+61285705050" target="_blank">+61 (0)2 8570 5050</a>
Mob: <a href="tel:%2B61%20%280%29419%20142%20254" value="+61419142254" target="_blank">+61 (0)419 142 254</a>
Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
<a href="http://www.lisasoft.com/" target="_blank">http://www.lisasoft.com</a>
</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Conference_dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Board mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif; font-size:13px; border-collapse:collapse">Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan<br>
eMail: <a href="mailto:daniel.kastl@georepublic.de" style="color:rgb(66,99,171)" target="_blank">daniel.kastl@georepublic.de</a><br>
Web: <a href="http://georepublic.de/" style="color:rgb(66,99,171)" target="_blank">http://georepublic.de</a></span>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Solutions Manager
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254
Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.lisasoft.com" target="_blank">http://www.lisasoft.com</a>
</pre>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>