[OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G Handbook - Financial expectations

Venka venka.osgeo at gmail.com
Tue Sep 13 00:01:23 PDT 2016


Hi All,

On 2016/09/13 12:26, Venkatesh Raghavan wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> After 10 years of successfully organization of FOSS4G International
> conferences (Big thanks to conference chairs and LoC for that),
> I think that we are more than ready to explore new model
> that will not only sacrifice the comfort level of participants and

that should read *not sacrifice*

Venka

> LoC but also be able to reduce cost for our participants.
>
> Having started out in 2006 when the conference was organized in an
> academic institute, we should explore and try out new ways and means
> for at least the 2018 and 2019 conferences. This will gives us a chance
> to compare and get reactions from a broad membership on cost performance.
>
> I also think that we should seek feedback form our charter members about
> the way we choose to organize our global conferences. I have a
> feeling that many of the participants (including our Charter Members)
> will be quite happy with attending conferences with offer reasonable
> comfort at lower costs. I have also heard privately from many charter
> about exploring ways to lowering registration costs.
>
> Best
>
> Venka
>
>
>
> On 9/13/2016 6:33 AM, Maria Antonia Brovelli wrote:
>> Thanks for being more detailed.  So ICC 550 dollars for 5 days. Is
>> there every year?
>> Maria
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my Samsung device
>>
>>
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: b.j.kobben at utwente.nl
>> Date: 12/09/2016 23:25 (GMT+01:00)
>> To: Maria Antonia Brovelli <maria.brovelli at polimi.it>,
>> guido at guidostein.com, till.adams at fossgis.de,
>> conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G Handbook - Financial expectations
>>
>> But for both ICC and EGU its also true they have much longer history
>> plus these are organisations payed for by institutional members
>> (paying pretty hefty member fees), therefore have a much more solid
>> funding mechanism...
>>
>> Plus ICC is not 8 days for that fee, that is for the "technical
>> sessions" only (5 days); the workshops in the programme are
>> independent of the main conference and have their own fees.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Barend Köbben
>>
>>
>> On 12/09/16 22:52, "Conference_dev on behalf of Maria Antonia
>> Brovelli" <conference_dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org on behalf of
>> maria.brovelli at polimi.it> wrote:
>>
>>     Anyway,
>>
>>
>>     Cartographic Association --> Washinghton 2-9 July 2017 ,
>> http://icc2017.org/registration-fees-and-deadlines/  (8 days) at most
>> $550
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     EGU --> European Geosciences Union
>>     General Assembly 2016
>>     Vienna | Austria | 17–22 April 2016 (6 days) at most 550 euro
>>
>>
>>     As you can see ISPRS is not the only example. And if you dig you
>> can find more.
>>
>>
>>     Again, the problem is the model you have in mind.
>>     Best.
>>     Maria
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     ----------------------------------------------------
>>     Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
>>     Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
>>     Politecnico di Milano
>>
>>     ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping
>> (C3M)";OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa
>> Challenge;
>>     SIFET
>>     Sol KatzAward 2015
>>
>>
>>     Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY)
>>     Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob. +39-328-0023867 -
>>     fax. +39-031-3327321
>>     e-mail1:  <mailto:maria.brovelli at polimi.it>maria.brovelli at polimi.it
>>     e-mail2:prorettrice at como.polimi.it
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     ________________________________________
>>     Da: Guido Stein <guido at guidostein.com>
>>     Inviato: lunedì 12 settembre 2016 19.29
>>     A: Maria Antonia Brovelli; till.adams at fossgis.de; conference
>>     Oggetto: Re: [OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G Handbook - Financial expectations
>>
>>     Maria,
>>
>>     I was excited to hear about a event that holds 1,500 and keeps its
>> costs down, I don't think that this is a comparable event for many
>> reasons.
>>
>>
>>     1. The ISPRS conference is run only once every four years. This
>> means that they can spend more time raising money.
>>
>>     2. The ISPRS conference is run by a foundation with multiple
>> sustaining members. This gives the organization a  lot of potential
>> money to subsidize the entrance fee. Some sustaining members pay 3,000
>> a year, that is 12,000 per sustaining member that could
>>      help support the cost of the conference.
>>
>>     3. The top three sponsorship tiers are much higher than our
>> current tiers at:
>>
>>     * €100,000
>>     * €75,000
>>     * €50,000
>>
>>
>>     4. The ISPRS has been around since 1910. They have been building
>> resources a lot longer than OSGeo.
>>
>>     5. Costs for a basic ticket start at 600 then goes up to 890, and
>> costs with food starts at 790 and goes up to 1080. While you may get
>> more days out of this, I don't think the costs are really all that far
>> off from what we are charging.
>>
>>
>>
>>     The ISPRS conference and foundation have many resources that make
>> it possible for them to lower the entrance fee. Because of this I
>> don't feel that this conference is comparable to the FOSS4G.
>>
>>
>>     As stated by others in this list, running a conference for 800-900
>> is complicated due to the type of venue that you need to hold it. I
>> believe that all the people involved in the many LOC's have done their
>> best to bring the cost down.
>>
>>
>>     I appreciate you sharing this event with the group. I am always
>> happy and interested in hearing about other events and learning how
>> they kept their costs down.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     Thanks for your time and input,
>>
>>
>>     Guido Stein
>>
>>     Co-Chair
>>     FOSS4G Boston 2017
>>
>>
>>
>>     On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 10:45 AM Maria Antonia Brovelli
>> <maria.brovelli at polimi.it> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     The ISPRS Conference I mentioned hosted 1500 attendees.
>>
>>
>>     Maria
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     ----------------------------------------------------
>>     Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
>>     Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
>>     Politecnico di Milano
>>
>>     ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping
>> (C3M)";OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa
>> Challenge;
>>     SIFET
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     Sol KatzAward 2015
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY)
>>     Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob. +39-328-0023867 -
>>     fax. +39-031-3327321
>>     e-mail1: maria.brovelli at polimi.it
>>     e-mail2:prorettrice at como.polimi.it
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     ________________________________________
>>     Da:till.adams at fossgis.de <till.adams at fossgis.de>
>>     Inviato: lunedì 12 settembre 2016 16.42
>>     A: Maria Antonia Brovelli; conference
>>     Oggetto: Re: [OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G Handbook - Financial expectations
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     Hi,
>>
>>     Gert-Jan brings it to the point in my eyes.
>>
>>     Beside what he said we know that it is very difficult to separate
>>     attendees within a venue between "eaters" and "non-eaters".
>>     Many people liked the way we did with almost no controls. There was
>>     only one at the main entrance, after that you could be anywhere.
>>     So, do we want somebody to control every badge before someone takes a
>>     plate of food or a drink?
>>
>>     Again, in my eyes the point is to differentiate between smaller (and
>>     cheaper with less comfort) regional events and a global FOSS4G -
>> where
>>     total costs of attendance ("TCA") are higher simply because of
>> travel,
>>     accommodation and higher costs. One important point to aim on
>> (there was
>>     a discussion in that direction few weeks ago) in my eyes is to bridge
>>     our community together with neighboured communities, business and
>> large
>>     public administrations - which requires a "professional"
>> conference with
>>     the potential to host up to 1000 attendees.
>>
>>     And hey, do we really want to replace the cost-barrier (which is only
>>     to a minor part due to the TCA) with a restricted-places barrier?
>>     Come on, keep being realistic!
>>
>>     I am convinced that success of past FOSS4G global events speaks for
>>     itself (++800 attendees on all events in NA and Europe since
>> 2010), so
>>     why change such a success story, going back to Universities and loose
>>     contact to institutions that are really important for the growth of
>>     FOSS4G-Community as a whole?
>>
>>     Please don't do that!
>>
>>     Till
>>
>>
>>
>>     Am 2016-09-12 10:13, schrieb Gert-Jan van der Weijden (OSGeo.nl):
>>     > Maria, others,
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > First of all: I hope this thread is not meant to discuss the
>>     > Boston-2017 setup, but the financial aspect of 2018 and onward.
>>     > Boston
>>     > 2017 is on it's way, based upon the bid they presented.
>>     >
>>     > As a member of the Bonn-2016 LOC, and as visitor of FOSS4G-2015
>> Como,
>>     > and 2 local German speaking events (FOSSGIS) in 2015 (Münster) and
>>     > 2013 (Rapperswil) I note that there is a main difference between a
>>     > less than 500 attendees event (at an university: Como, Münster,
>>     > Rapperswill), and more than 500 attendees event, which due to it's
>>     > size almost by definition have to take place at a commercial
>> congress
>>     > center. The latter brings more luxury (whether you like it or not)
>>     > since that's congress centers focus.
>>     > Standard package deals with congress centers' preferred
>> suppliers for
>>     > catering, technique etc. almost can't be avoided, unless you pay a
>>     > sort of penalty fee.
>>     >
>>     > Other expenses, including recorded and/or live-streaming video
>> are a
>>     > relative small part of the total expenses. Availability of cheap
>>     > flights and/or cheap hotel accommodation has a far greater
>> impact on
>>     > the TCA (total costs of attending).
>>     >
>>     > Organizing a FOSS4G in the Como/Münster/Rapperswil way; at a
>> relative
>>     > low cost venue such a university keeps the costs low, but almost
>>     > certainly will face you with the fact that demand (number of
>>     > potential
>>     > attendees) will be higher than supply (the number of available
>>     > seats).
>>     > That's a serious consideration to be made. And if so: would one
>>     > reserve a certain amount of ticket for each continent/local
>>     > chapter/OS
>>     > Geo project?
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > Kind regards,
>>     >
>>     > Gert-Jan
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > Maria Antonia Brovelli schreef op 12-09-2016 0:23:
>>     >> One possibility is to consider different fees. As an example
>> you can
>>     >> see the fees for last ISPRS Conference in Prague (8 days of
>>     >> conference):
>>     >> http://www.isprs2016-prague.com/fees/
>>     >> Personally I prefer to eat simply a sandwich and be able to pay
>> the
>>     >> registration for a PhD student of mine ;-)
>>     >> Why not consider a basic fee of 100 dollar/day and a full one with
>>     >> lunches and gala dinner?
>>     >> Maria
>>     >> Maria
>>     >> ISPRS 2016 - Fees & Registration [3]
>>     >>  www.isprs2016-prague.com<http://www.isprs2016-prague.com>
>> <http://www.isprs2016-prague.com>
>>     >>  Registration for Financial Assistance for the XXIII ISPRS
>> Congress.
>>     >> Deadline for Financial Assistance applications 20 March 12 p.m.
>> CET.
>>     >> ----------------------------------------------------
>>     >> Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
>>     >> Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
>>     >> Politecnico di Milano
>>     >> ISPRS WG IV/4"Collaborative crowdsourced cloud mapping (C3M)";
>>     >> OSGeo;
>>     >> ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS Advisory Board; NASA WorldWind Europa Challenge;
>>     >> SIFET
>>     >>
>>     >> SOL KATZ AWARD 2015
>>     >> Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY)
>>     >> Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob. +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321
>>     >> e-mail1: maria.brovelli at polimi.it
>>     >> e-mail2: prorettrice at como.polimi.it
>>     >> -------------------------
>>     >> DA: Steven Feldman <shfeldman at gmail.com>
>>     >> INVIATO: domenica 11 settembre 2016 23.39
>>     >> A: Maria Antonia Brovelli
>>     >> CC: Michael Terner; Venkatesh Raghavan; Guido Stein; conference
>>     >> OGGETTO: Re: [OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G Handbook - Financial expectations
>>     >> Maria
>>     >> Could you share some of the numbers from your conference:
>>     >> Venue fees
>>     >> Number of delegates
>>     >> Number of streams
>>     >> Cost for video
>>     >> Catering cost per head
>>     >> Icebreaker
>>     >> Gala night
>>     >> Other major costs
>>     >> Do you think you would have been able to accommodate 800-900
>> people
>>     >> at
>>     >> those rates in that venue? If so we should look at Como for 2019.
>>     >> I think the economics will vary for each city and venue.
>> Perhaps we
>>     >> should make it clear that we would welcome alternative venue and
>>     >> cost
>>     >> proposals that potentially make the event cheaper to attend
>> without
>>     >> excluding the possibility of a higher priced venue. If we get
>>     >> options
>>     >> running between say $200 for the 3 days and $650 then the
>> conference
>>     >> committee will have an interesting choice to make.
>>     >> For 2018 we could also express our desire to make the event as
>>     >> accessible as possible and see what options are submitted?
>>     >> ______
>>     >> Steven
>>     >>
>>     >>> On 11 Sep 2016, at 22:28, Maria Antonia Brovelli
>>     >>> <maria.brovelli at polimi.it> wrote:
>>     >>> Dear Michael, I wonder how it was possible for me to organize a
>>     >>> conference with a fee of 100 euro for 3 days ( 50 euro for
>>     >>> students). I understand that Boston is more expensive than Como.
>>     >>> But
>>     >>> more than three times? Is it not possible to organize the
>>     >>> conference
>>     >>> at one university? Keeping the costs low means giving more
>>     >>> possibility of participation to the people of our community.
>>     >>> Many thanks!
>>     >>> Maria
>>     >>> Sent from my Samsung device
>>     >>> -------- Original message --------
>>     >>> From: Michael Terner <mgt at appgeo.com>
>>     >>> Date: 11/09/2016 18:49 (GMT+01:00)
>>     >>> To: Venkatesh Raghavan <venka.osgeo at gmail.com>, Michael Terner
>>     >>> <mgt at appgeo.com>, Guido Stein <gstein at appgeo.com>
>>     >>> Cc: conference <conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>>     >>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G Handbook - Financial
>> expectations
>>     >>> As the group in the "on deck circle", this has been a very
>>     >>> interesting and important thread to read. I hope that sharing the
>>     >>> Boston team's outlook and perspective is useful to this
>>     >>> conversation. Indeed, many of the things we believe and are
>>     >>> pursuing
>>     >>> are already reflected:
>>     >>> * As Venka observes, we are not pursuing a "budget venue"
>>     >>> approach. We are in a large, urban city and as Steven wrote the
>>     >>> economics for finding this kind of space make $100/day really,
>>     >>> really difficult (if not impossible). But, we also believe we are
>>     >>> in
>>     >>> a desirable location with a dynamic tech city and an incredible
>>     >>> academic community that will help draw interest. We also want to
>>     >>> create a local, regional and USA buzz so that Boston is The Place
>>     >>> to
>>     >>> Be for understanding some of the international trends in geo open
>>     >>> source, and even the _ geo industry_ more broadly. As Eddie
>> Pickle
>>     >>> has observed, why shouldn't FOSS4G be the #2 "geo event" on the
>>     >>> planet? In other words, one of our goals is to attract _more_
>>     >>> people
>>     >>> who will be able to pay the full costs of the conference. From
>> our
>>     >>> vantage, this shouldn't be a "low budget affair", it should be an
>>     >>> important "international happening."
>>     >>> * That said, we fully understand the reality and necessity to
>> keep
>>     >>> the show as affordable as possible, and that there are very
>>     >>> important communities that we would like to have attend where the
>>     >>> published costs will be a challenge. We have plans for student
>>     >>> volunteers and other kinds of discounts already. But, the way
>> that
>>     >>> some of the conference economics work, there is a tipping point
>>     >>> where a larger conference actually can be a lower of the core
>>     >>> conference costs (i.e., the venue, wifi, video, etc.) are
>> prorated
>>     >>> across more people. We want to be the first FOSS4G to draw >1,000
>>     >>> people and we think we have a good shot at it. We also are
>> going to
>>     >>> be very aggressive in pursuing sponsorship, both from the
>>     >>> established sponsor community, but also from first time sponsors,
>>     >>> and tech companies in Boston. This too will help generate revenue
>>     >>> and control costs. If we meet our attendance and sponsorship
>> goals,
>>     >>> we will return a significant profit to OSGeo and we hope that
>> those
>>     >>> profits can be used for the kinds of programs that Eli mentioned,
>>     >>> i.e., committees that distribute travel grants; or provide
>> support
>>     >>> to events in the developing world; etc. Indeed, we have already
>>     >>> proposed to follow Cameron's suggestion and expressed our
>> return of
>>     >>> profit to OSGeo as a percentage. Our proposal states returning
>> 80%
>>     >>> of profits up to $100K, and 100% of profits that are above $100k
>>     >>> should we be lucky enough to be that successful.
>>     >>> Having just returned from Bonn, we are more excited and more
>>     >>> committed than ever (I just posted a blog on my impressions and
>>     >>> experiences [1]). And, we believe we can follow Till's and the
>> Bonn
>>     >>> LOC's example in making this an exciting and dynamic event in a
>>     >>> unique part of the world. Bonn's World Conference Center venue
>> was
>>     >>> worth its cost and added greatly to the event. We believe people
>>     >>> will come to this kind of event; and we are equally committed in
>>     >>> using the paying audience as a means of controlling costs and/or
>>     >>> providing discounts to those who need them.
>>     >>> All the best...
>>     >>> MT
>>     >>> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan
>>     >>> <venka.osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>     >>> I do not think we need to select a "budget venue".
>>     >>> Wonderful venues (perhaps, better than what we have seen thus
>> far)
>>     >>> are available at a lower price in low-income countries.
>>     >>> I do not talk of any compromise on "core items" expected in
>>     >>> FOSS4G conferences. Is video streaming a "core item" which
>>     >>> was only recently possible in FOSS4G conferences?
>>     >>> If we say that this is a "core item", that is as good as
>>     >>> saying that FOSS4G conferences will be organized only in
>>     >>> OECD countries.
>>     >>> Venka
>>     >>> On 9/10/2016 5:29 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>     >>> Hi Venka,
>>     >>> I think that you are on the right track discussing "lower budget"
>>     >>> foss4g
>>     >>> conference in "lower income" countries.
>>     >>> While the Global FOSS4G is firstly an international "gathering of
>>     >>> the
>>     >>> tribes" and should prioritise needs of the international
>> attendees,
>>     >>> we
>>     >>> should recognise that historically over half the attendees come
>>     >>> from
>>     >>> the
>>     >>> local region. I agree that it makes sense to see what can be done
>>     >>> to
>>     >>> help attract local attendees. If that means minimising costs,
>> maybe
>>     >>> by
>>     >>> selecting budget venues etc, then a LOC should have the
>> flexibility
>>     >>> to
>>     >>> suggest such options. However, selection budget options,
>> should not
>>     >>> translate to reducing the core items which are expected in FOSS4G
>>     >>> conferences.
>>     >>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>     >>> On 10/09/2016 1:47 PM, Venkatesh Raghavan wrote:
>>     >>> Hi Cameron,
>>     >>> My comments inline.
>>     >>> On 9/9/2016 9:05 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>     >>> Hi Venka,
>>     >>> Thanks for suggesting specific ideas to implement.
>>     >>> For this email thread, I'd like to focus on your suggestions
>>     >>> related
>>     >>> to
>>     >>> financial expectations, so we can take it through to resolution.
>>     >>> Namely,
>>     >>> your item 5. Defining how profit should be returned to OSGeo.
>>     >>> I suggest it is safer to define budget returned to OSGeo as a
>>     >>> percentage
>>     >>> of profit. As profit closely aligns with number of attendees,
>>     >>> profit
>>     >>> will be larger for larger events. Europe and US have historically
>>     >>> attracted larger attendance than "Rest of World" and hence will
>>     >>> return
>>     >>> larger profit. As such, OSGeo should expect to earn less in "Rest
>>     >>> of
>>     >>> World" years.
>>     >>> Yes, I agree with above. However "Rest of the World" include only
>>     >>> low-income countries and not high-income countries like
>> Australia,
>>     >>> Japan, Korea etc. FOSS4G Conferences in low-income countries may
>>     >>> spend
>>     >>> less (lower venue and food costs) and also earn less compared to
>>     >>> events
>>     >>> in Europe and North America.
>>     >>> I thought the RFP defined an expected budget to be returned to
>>     >>> OSGeo
>>     >>> under conservative estimates, but I can't find reference to it.
>>     >>> (Maybe
>>     >>> someone else can point to it).
>>     >>> For management of special interest programs and sponsorship, I
>>     >>> suggest
>>     >>> refer to the email thread "FOSS4G Simplicity" started by Eli
>> Adam,
>>     >>> suggesting the be coordinated outside of the FOSS4G LOC (Like the
>>     >>> academic track).
>>     >>> I agree to making thinks easier and simpler coordinating Academic
>>     >>> Track,
>>     >>> Awards, Travel Grants outside the LoC.
>>     >>> Best
>>     >>> Venka
>>     >>> On 9/09/2016 10:03 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan wrote:
>>     >>> My Comments inline.
>>     >>> On 9/9/2016 7:40 AM, Steven Feldman wrote:
>>     >>> Maria
>>     >>> Nice image, what are you suggesting in terms of the RfP? ______
>>     >>> Steven
>>     >>> On 8 Sep 2016, at 22:03, Maria Antonia Brovelli
>>     >>> <maria.brovelli at polimi.it> wrote:
>>     >>> <equity.jpg>
>>     >>> Dear Cameron I prefer to take into account the differences among
>>     >>> countries. We want to elicit people developing and using open
>>     >>> source and we want to walk all together toward this result.
>>     >>> Equality often is not the best choice. Best regards Maria
>>     >> +1 for Maria's suggestion.
>>     >> I would suggest the following;
>>     >> 1) There was some comment on issue of too many people
>>     >> requesting for free conference passes.
>>     >> We need to clearly decide a guideline for offering free passes.
>>     >> Free passes only offered to main Workshop Trainer, Keynote
>> speakers
>>     >> and
>>     >> student volunteers? Apart from that *no one* gets a free pass.
>>     >> 2) continue the discounted conference fee model for
>>     >> low-income countries. This model has been successfully
>>     >> used in FOSS4G-2015
>>     >> 3) Offer Travel support only for participants who are
>>     >> have their presentation accepted at the FOSS4G conference.
>>     >> 4) Are we considering live streaming in future FOSS4G events?
>>     >> In that case, request local chapters to organize local
>> "FOSS4GFest"
>>     >> during the duration of the main FOSS4G Conference and
>>     >> take advantage of watching the live-streaming along with
>>     >> the local community members who are unable to physically make it
>>     >> to the FOSS4G event.
>>     >> 5) Consider recommending LoC to return a minimum fixed amount
>>     >> of profit to OSGeo. Taking into account, that OSGeo annual
>>     >> budget for 2015 is $75,000, we could consider having $50K-$60K
>>     >> returned from the profit to OSGeo foundation when FOSS4G is
>>     >> organized in high-income countries and $25K-$30K when FOSS4G
>>     >> is organized in low-income countries (they can retain part of
>>     >> the profit for organizing events to grow local communities, but
>>     >> should submit a budget report in subsequent FOSS4G conferences
>>     >> as to how the profits were used). This will help the foundation to
>>     >> sustain the "Travel Grant", "Student Award" and "Code Sprint" at
>>     >> FOSS4G events.
>>     >> 6) If the LoC of FOSS4G event is able to generate more profit
>>     >> that stated in item 5 above, let them have a say in planning
>>     >> how such "extra" profit will be used in future.
>>     >> 7) Consider a upper cap on the conference registration fee.
>>     >> I would suggest $100/day of conference event when organized
>>     >> in high-income countries. This would be much lower when FOSS4G
>>     >> is organized in a low-income country
>>     >> Best
>>     >> Venka
>>     >>
>>     >>> Sent from my Samsung device
>>     >>> -------- Original message -------- From: Cameron Shorter
>>     >>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> Date: 08/09/2016 22:53 (GMT+01:00)
>> To:
>>     >>> conference <conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org> Subject: Re:
>>     >>> [OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G Handbook - Financial expectations
>>     >>> Ok, lets start working through Steven's list one item at a time,
>>     >>> starting a new email thread for each.
>>     >>> Once we have resolution (probably concluding with a vote) we can
>>     >>> finalise it in the foss4g handbook.
>>     >>> On 8/09/2016 9:12 PM, Steven Feldman wrote:
>>     >>> 1) Overall financial expectations re surplus and sharing of
>>     >>> surplus with OSGeo - possibly setting slightly different
>>     >>> expectations for RoW to NA & EU
>>     >> We have draft principles on Finances in the handbook here:
>>     >>
>>     https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook#Finances
>> <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook#Finances> [4]
>>     >> <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook#Finances [4]>
>>     >> I suggest using this existing text as the basis for guidance. I
>>     >> personally think it has the right principles in place. In
>>     >> particular, it is recommending each conference aim to hand over a
>>     >> fixed percentage of profits as surplus to OSGeo. 85% is suggested.
>>     >> I prefer this advise over the suggestion that low income countries
>>     >>  retain more profit.
>>     >> -- Cameron Shorter M +61 419 142 254 [5]
>>     >> _______________________________________________ Conference_dev
>>     >> mailing list Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>     >>
>>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev> [2]
>>     >> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>     >> [2]>_______________________________________________
>>     >> Conference_dev mailing list
>>     >>
>>     >>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>     >>>>
>>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev> [2]
>>     >>> _______________________________________________ Conference_dev
>>     >>> mailing list
>>     Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> <mailto:Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org>
>>     >>>
>>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev> [2]
>>     >> _______________________________________________
>>     >> Conference_dev mailing list
>>     >> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>     >>
>>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev> [2]
>>     >> _______________________________________________
>>     >> Conference_dev mailing list
>>     >> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>     >>
>>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev> [2]
>>     >> _______________________________________________
>>     >> Conference_dev mailing list
>>     >> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>     >>
>>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev> [2]
>>     >> --
>>     >> MICHAEL TERNER
>>     >> _Executive Vice President_
>>     >> 617-447-2468 Direct | 617-447-2400 Main
>>     >> Applied Geographics, Inc.
>>     >> 24 School Street, Suite 500
>>     >> Boston, MA 02108
>>     >> www.AppGeo.com<http://www.AppGeo.com> <http://www.AppGeo.com> [6]
>>     >> _CELEBRATING OUR 25TH ANNIVERSARY _
>>     >> This e-mail message and any attachments may contain
>> confidential or
>>     >> legally privileged information. If you are not an intended
>> recipient
>>     >> or otherwise authorized to receive this message, you should not
>> use,
>>     >> copy, distribute, disclose or take any action based on the
>>     >> information
>>     >> contained in this e-mail or any attachments. If you have received
>>     >> this
>>     >> message and material in error, please advise the sender
>> immediately
>>     >> by
>>     >> reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you on behalf of
>> Applied
>>     >> Geographics, Inc. (AppGeo).
>>     >> _______________________________________________
>>     >> Conference_dev mailing list
>>     >> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>     >>
>>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev>
>>     >>
>>     >> Links:
>>     >> ------
>>     >> [1]
>>     >>
>>     >>
>>
>> http://www.appgeo.com/blog/picked-pieces-global-2017-foss4g-conference-bonn-germany/
>> <http://www.appgeo.com/blog/picked-pieces-global-2017-foss4g-conference-bonn-germany/>
>>
>>     >> [2]
>>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev>
>>     >> [3] http://www.isprs2016-prague.com/fees/
>>     >> [4]
>>     https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook#Finances
>> <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook#Finances>
>>     >> [5] tel:%2B61%20419%20142%20254
>>     >> [6] http://www.appgeo.com/
>>     >> _______________________________________________
>>     >> Conference_dev mailing list
>>     >> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>     >>
>>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev>
>>     > _______________________________________________
>>     > Conference_dev mailing list
>>     > Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>     >
>>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Conference_dev mailing list
>>     Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>



More information about the Conference_dev mailing list