<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Thank you Steven,<br>
This is valuable information about FOSS4G 2013, which helps frame
expectations for FOSS4G 2014, and also a FOSS4G Cookbook.<br>
<br>
While our FOSS4G proposal guideline stipulates an expectation that
$30K should be made under conservative estimates, we have not
explained expectations if a greater profit is obtained.<br>
<br>
I think we have reached a stage where US and EU global FOSS4G
conferences are likely to earn $100K or more under likely
scenarios (if estimating $30K for conservative scenarios). <br>
I believe the expectation should be that OSGeo should retain ~
$100K (probably calculated as a percentage of profit). Giving back
to delegates (in value, rather than a refund) is a valuable
option. Re-investing in the LOC is worth considering, but I'm wary
as to how to word that into Cookbook guidelines.<br>
<br>
Note: My comments here are relating to future FOSS4G events. I'm
not suggesting retrospectively applying guidelines upon previous
events.<br>
<br>
On 09/07/13 02:38, Steven Feldman wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BD13A265-9BE4-4EFA-A250-4179BF856795@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
I don't want to comment on what "should" happen with regard to the
current bids but I thought it might help to provide some
transparency about what "will" happen with this year's FOSS4G
conference
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We published our budget in our proposal and in that we
committed to a minimum $23-63k contribution to OSGeo based upon
a cautious forecast of attendance levels. I have re-uploaded our
proposal to <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2wShPAd7pU4R2tYNWlqWS1hUFk/edit?usp=sharing">https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2wShPAd7pU4R2tYNWlqWS1hUFk/edit?usp=sharing</a>
because the old site is no longer live.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We are paying our event organising partner, the Association
for Geographic Information, a very low 5% fee. Given fees quoted
elsewhere I think we may be under rewarding them.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We asked in our proposal for a share of the profit from the
event to be allocated to the local FOSS4G chapter but did not
stipulate an amount </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>"<span style="font-family: ArialMT; "><i>Subject to exchange
rates, total sponsorship income, and additional clarity on
some costs closer to the
event, we hope to achieve a contribution to OSGeo of
approximately $30,000. However should we find
during the run up to conference that a larger surplus is
likely, we will aim to share these additional
financial benefits with OSGeo, the OSGeo UK Chapter, and/or
by giving FOSS4G delegates additional
value at the conference."</i></span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: ArialMT; "><i><br>
</i></span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: ArialMT; ">Today, thanks to
fantastic sponsorship from all of these guys </span><a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://2013.foss4g.org/sponsors/">http://2013.foss4g.org/sponsors/</a> and
very encouraging bookings we should be expecting a much larger
surplus (I am not going to speculate in public as to the level).
Our costs in general are likely to be a little lower than
forecast.</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We will be offering sponsor exhibition booths to OSGeo and
to AGI</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We thought we would need seed funding from OSGeo but in
practice our first sponsors paid us before we had any outgoings
so we have been completely self funded (although in theory OSGeo
are on the hook if we made a loss - not going to happen). We
have insured against all the usual risks (except delegates not
booking) for ca. $3000</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I hope that helps</div>
<div>
<div>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse:
separate; border-spacing: 0px; ">______<br>
Steven<br>
<br>
</span>
</div>
<br>
<div>
<div>On 6 Jul 2013, at 23:13, Cameron Shorter <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com">cameron.shorter@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">On 07/07/13 04:55, Paul Ramsey wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 6:15 AM,
Andrew Ross <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:andrew.ross@eclipse.org">andrew.ross@eclipse.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">I've always wondered how this
worked for past events as it seemed quite<br>
secretive. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in the
community in this regard.<br>
</blockquote>
With the exception of South Africa, in which a joint
agreement was<br>
arranged ahead to time to share with GISSA, all the other
"OSGeo era"<br>
(2007+) FOSS4G events have returned all profits to OSGeo.
The profit<br>
"targets" in the RFP are to make explicit that we don't
necessarily<br>
want to-the-bone break-even budgets, we want budgets that
will, under<br>
reasonable assumptions, return revenue to the
organization. They are<br>
not the maximum or average profit we want, they are the
minimum<br>
planning threshold. The organization still expects to
receive the full<br>
profits of the event, RFP numbers notwithstanding.<br>
<br>
Though a familiar industry group (GITA) helped organize
FOSS4G 2011,<br>
they did so as a standard conference organizing
organization: their<br>
fee structure was known ahead of time and was in the
budget from the<br>
start. That they also knew our industry as well as event
organizing<br>
was a handy bonus, but not germane to the financial
arrangements.<br>
<br>
I would expect that if the Eclipse foundation is looking
for a profit<br>
sharing arrangement like GISSA, it should be included in
the proposal<br>
with some precision (X%), and if they are going to act,
like GITA, as<br>
an organizer, their fee schedule should be in the budget.<br>
<br>
P.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Conference_dev mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Thanks Paul, that is great background. So bridging between
Paul's background and Eclipse's involvement in the
Washington proposal.<br>
<br>
1. Eclipse is acting as a PCO, and have factored staff costs
into the budget (as GITA). Fee for service. All good, but no
justification for profit sharing.<br>
<br>
2. Eclipse is offering a depth of experience with Open
Source conferences, including attracting sponsors. Profit
sharing could be a form of payment in this regard, but I
would expect an offset reduction in fixed price labour
costs.<br>
<br>
3. Of note, FOSS4G will offer significant marketing value to
the Eclipse Foundation. I assume the Eclipse Foundation
intending to include logos in the program, have a
presentation, have signage at the event? What would that
equate to as a sponsor of the event?<br>
<br>
4. The Eclipse Foundation is offering OSGeo insurance
against loss at the FOSS4G event, where key risk items are
loss of key personnel, poor management, low attendance, and
low sponsorship.<br>
* Loss of key personnel, and risk of poor management has
been mitigated in both proposals through the identification
of strong teams.<br>
* Risk of low attendance under normal circumstances is
relatively low, as we already know the US region can attract
~ 900 delegates.<br>
* Risk of low attendance due to unforeseen events (such as
the GFC, or 9/11) is unlikely but can have a large impact.
Is insurance being taken out for these sort of
eventualities?<br>
* Risk of low sponsorship is a definite possibility,
mitigated by Eclipse's experience attracting such
sponsorship in the past.<br>
<br>
What is the risk mitigation worth? I'd love to see metrics
for the items above applied to justify a percentage.<br>
My gut feeling is it is worth 10% of the profit. I'd
entertain 20% of the profit. I feel that 50% of the profit
is ripping OSGeo off.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Cameron Shorter<br>
Geospatial Solutions Manager<br>
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050<br>
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254<br>
<br>
Think Globally, Fix Locally<br>
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open
Source<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.lisasoft.com">http://www.lisasoft.com</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Conference_dev mailing list<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org">Conference_dev@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</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">http://www.lisasoft.com</a>
</pre>
</body>
</html>