[OSGeo-Conf] Firenze Full Proposal

Mon May 3 12:00:25 PDT 2021

Hi Mark,

On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 11:03 AM Mark Iliffe <markiliffe at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Luca,
>
> Thanks for your answers. I have no further questions - but I wish to urge
> that special attention is paid to ensure that all those that wish to
> participate in FOSS4G are given the opportunity to do so. Appreciate that
> there is a perceptible driver to be cost-efficient - however, for many
> delegates, a few euros here or there doesn't make much of a difference, but
> for those with not a lot, it is those euros that can transform everything.
> I would strongly urge that FOSS4G ticket prices are not a race to the
> bottom, instead are considered as a mechanism that can bring value to the
> entire OSGeo ecosystem. Your approach of leaning into the OSGeo to
> underwrite your FOSS4G is IMHO the correct one given our circumstances -
> but unless there is a necessity to raise money for OSGeo (which I don't
> think there is... at least not more than 'usual'), my counsel would be to
> reduce the potential profit back into OSGeo's coffers to invest within the
> community.
>

As you can see here,
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Finance_Operational_Notes#Annual_proportions_2007-2017,
from 2010-2017* OSGeo has been funded almost exclusively from FOSS4G.  The
cancelation of 2020 Calgary not only did not raise money in a "North
American" year, it also lost substantial money.  2021 Buenos Aires as an
"Other Regions" and virtual is a bit of a wildcard which we won't know the
financial results of until later.  FOSS4G LOCs often ask for ~$100,000
advances and sometimes there is more than one advance out at a time.

Steven's suggestion that the Conference Committee should seek guidance from
the OSGeo Treasurer and Board on the level of surplus that they are seeking
in 2022 is a good idea.  Are there other aspects of guidance that we're
looking for in those realms?

*Tracking OSGeo/FOSS4G finances 2018-present might be useful too.

Best regards, Eli

>
> May the FOSS be with you!! Even if the members of this committee aren't in
> your FLOC meetings, know that we're behind you every step of the way :-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark
>
> On Sat, 1 May 2021 at 15:02, Steven Feldman <shfeldman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Luca
>>
>> Thanks for your detailed and clear proposal
>>
>> I have 3 questions for you:
>>
>>    1. Can you provide a schedule of how the costs of a cancellation of a
>>    physical event (forced by government covid restrictions) increase month by
>>    month as you get closer to the event?
>>    2. You have asked for seed funding of €60,000 plus a further
>>    guarantee of €25,000. Are you certain that €85,000 is the maximum possible
>>    loss?
>>    3. What organisation will OSGeo be contacting with?
>>
>>
>> Matt the FOSS be with you
>>
>> Steven
>>
>>
>> +44 (0) 7958 924101
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 1 May 2021, at 17:33, Luca Delucchi <lucadeluge at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 at 00:51, Paul Ramsey <pramsey at cleverelephant.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Luca, thanks so much for this proposal. I have only a couple questions /
>> clarifications:
>>
>>
>> Dear Paul,
>>
>> our answer are inline
>>
>> - The Gala is pencilled in as a 0EUR price (ie, it is included in the
>> registration).
>>
>>  - Will you include a price for delegates bringing a guest?
>>
>>
>> Yes, Gala dinner is included in the registration fees.  Regarding
>> guests, we estimate the price for Gala dinner ticket around 75 € for
>> each person.
>>
>>  - Those who choose not to attend will end up cross-subsidizing those who
>> do, are you OK with that?
>>
>>
>>
>> If you are still talking about the gala dinner, the costs of the
>> people who will not attend will still have to be covered. We might
>> even think about putting the gala dinner as an external cost to the
>> registration. In the last few years we have seen that the gala dinner
>> has always been included in the registration and we have followed this
>> route.
>>
>> - The "OSGeo % Seed Funding" number at the bottom of the budget is quite
>> sensitive to the number of projected attendees, which I find odd. I'd
>> expect it to be pretty fixed, and largely keyed to expense items that are
>> quite fixed and require large deposits up front (convention space, A/V
>> suppliers). What does that number come from?
>>
>>
>>
>> There has been a misunderstanding the line "OSGeo % Seed Funding" is
>> actually "OSGeo % for Seed Funding" and represents the percentage of
>> surplus OSGeo should obtain. The seed funding required is 60000 € in
>> three tranches as written in the proposal, beyond an additional
>> guarantee against losses of 25.000 Euro making a total exposure of up
>> to 85.000 Euro for OSGeo.  In the budget the seed funding has not been
>> considered.
>>
>> - The food prices are ... very reasonable? Are those numbers (25EUR
>> lunch, etc) validated with the organizers, do they really represent the
>> cost of catering in the venue? Venues sometimes have quite expensive and
>> exclusive catering arrangements.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, all the prices are coming from quotations and validated by
>> venue’s people and PCO.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>> P
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> regards
>> Luca
>>
>> www.lucadelu.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Conference_dev mailing list
>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20210503/809d4142/attachment.html>