<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Cameron,<br>
<br>
A few comments in-line.<br>
<br>
On 07/05/2013 08:40 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:51D7676A.1070406@gmail.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Thank you Eddie for the explanation.<br>
<br>
I confess that my prior comments were based on email discussion
before I'd had a chance to read your proposal, and as such, my
comments need not have been worded as strongly as I phrased
them.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Good stuff. We're really glad you had a chance to read it. Thanks.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:51D7676A.1070406@gmail.com" type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"> <br>
So now that I have read the proposal, here are further financial
comments/questions:<br>
<br>
* At the moment, the budget has a fixed amounts of money
allocated to OSGeo based upon attendance. I suggest that a
fairer allocation of profit would be to have OSGeo's earnings
directly linked to total profit (probably as a percentage). This
reduces potential for future animosity which may arise if the
conference is especially successful (eg by attracting more
sponsors), where the Eclipse foundation receives a much greater
share of profits than OSGeo.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
This is a simple misunderstanding. It is linked to profit. The
number of attendees is a convenient handle for referring to a given
budget scenario.<br>
<br>
We strived to use the same or similar mechanism for calculating
payment to OSGeo as past events. Unfortunately there is precious
little transparency as to what this actually was. Perhaps this will
be a very helpful discussion to bring more clarity here?<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:51D7676A.1070406@gmail.com" type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"> <br>
* The offer of protecting OSGeo from financial risk is valuable
to OSGeo, though not essential.<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
OK, great. We didn't think it was essential, but hoped it would be
viewed positively and seen as a sign of considerable good faith.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:51D7676A.1070406@gmail.com" type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"> * The budget only estimates up to
900 attendees. What happens if you attract 1000+ attendees
(which I suggest is reasonably likely)<br>
<br>
* In a likely scenario of 900+ delegates, there will be ~
$100,000 profit. In previous years, OSGeo has been the recipient
of such profit. As it stands, the Eclipse foundation is "humbly
requesting" that OSGeo donate ~ half OSGeo's projected annual
income to the Eclipse foundation.<br>
<br>
I still find this of substantial concern to OSGeo, and request
that a conversation be opened up to find an alternative where
the OSGeo Foundation is not stripped of income. (I note that the
Eclipse foundation has budgeted for staff time to act as a
Professional Conference Organiser, so is not dependant upon
profit in order to recover staff costs).<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I think this is likely a misunderstanding as well. To illustrate,
what happened to the profit in excess of what was paid to OSGeo by
FOSS4G in Denver? This is what I meant by any modest profit.<br>
<br>
Eddie outlined that at 1K attendees, we anticipate a payment of
around $75K. So far as we can see, this is comparable to the best
returns OSGeo has ever received but without risk this time and doing
our best to keep registration and other costs as low as they
possibly can be.<br>
<br>
We've got a very experienced team, strong and diverse support, the
ideal location, and a detailed and credible plan... all the pieces
for FOSS4G to be a huge success in Washington D.C. in 2014. We hope
the selection committee agrees and we really appreciate the time
taken to review our proposal.<br>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
<br>
Andrew<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:51D7676A.1070406@gmail.com" type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"> <br>
On 06/07/13 02:19, Eddie Pickle wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CADR4=YZqCRQwE4HpPYaGv+sq56gN8NYJYsX=PrUeArO8eDnL1A@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div>Dear Cameron,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This may be a misunderstanding. What we are proposing for
proceeds going to OSGeo is, so far as we can determine, the
same mechanism used for past events including Denver. Our
intent in our proposal is to offer OSGeo the very highest
proceeds possible, and to minimize any downside. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Our proposal holds registration, workshop, and sponsorship
prices pretty much the same as from Denver even though it will
be 3 years previous by 2014. In our budget, we have included
increasing contributions to OSGeo as the conference is more
successful. You’ll note at the 900 attendee mark, the payment
to OSGeo is $50K. For 1,000 attendees, we anticipate a payment
of approximately $75K.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We already have Platinum sponsorship commitments from two
organizations (OpenGeo and Radiant Blue) with a demonstrated
track record of FOSS4G sponsorship. Plus, we believe the
accessibility of our Washington, DC location for
international, regional and local attendees will maximize
attendance and outreach opportunities.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Our proposal insulates OSGeo from financial risk from a
loss. At the same time it offers a return to OSGeo comparable
to past events. This is no small thing in today's economic
uncertainty. </div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>This proposal is backed by a professional team who organize
events like FOSS4G for a living. For an event as important as
FOSS4G, we believe such a team dramatically decreases risk.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> As evident from our many letters of support, FOSS4G 2014
in Washington D.C. will attract diverse participants,
sponsors, and speakers. That should lead to the kind of high
quality program that will be, of course, the main assurance of
solid financial success.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Let me know if I can provide any further clarification.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sincerely,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Eddie</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>J. Edward Pickle
<div>Chief Executive Officer</div>
<div> OpenGeo</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://opengeo.org"
target="_blank">http://opengeo.org</a></div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:epickle@opengeo.org" target="_blank">epickle@opengeo.org</a></div>
<div>703-608-0200 - Mobile</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Cameron
Shorter <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com" target="_blank">cameron.shorter@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On
3/07/2013 10:37 AM, Andrew Ross wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> -
What happens with the net profit or loss beyond the
OSGeo contribution?<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
The Eclipse Foundation is prepared to cover the loss.
OSGeo would not be expected to do so.<br>
<br>
Should the event be more successful than the budget
predicts, there will be some balancing of re-investing to
enhance priority areas as determined by the committee.<br>
<br>
Should there be modest profit beyond that, the Foundation
humbly requests it.<br>
<br>
For what it's worth, I don't think they'll mind me sharing
that we did ask advice from Daniel Morissette & Peter
Batty about the best way to approach this. The advice was
to keep it simple & clear which I hope we've
accomplished. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Speaking as an OSGeo Board member, I'm seriously concerned
that proposed profit from our global FOSS4G is not being
retained by OSGeo. OSGeo runs on a shoestring budget, and
the FOSS4G conference is OSGeo's primary income source.
Passing this income source across to the Eclipse foundation
is likely to have a substantial impact on OSGeo's viability
(Eg: we would have to reduce sponsoring code sprints and the
like).<br>
<br>
I request that sharing of the budget be re-considered. I
consider it an issue at show-stopper status.<br>
<br>
More details about board priorities here:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2013-02-26#Board_Priorities"
target="_blank">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2013-02-26#Board_Priorities</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Conference_dev mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org"
target="_blank">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev"
target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</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 moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.lisasoft.com">http://www.lisasoft.com</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>