[OSGeo-Conf] Fwd: Minutes from today's meeting

[Andrew Ross]

Meant to note both events have signed contracts & down the road with 
what they need.

On 09/21/2012 03:53 PM, Andrew Ross wrote:
> Thank you David & Steve.
>
> Cameron, it seems clear that the teams in Nottingham *& Minneapolis* 
> are well down the path of arranging what they need so perhaps our 
> discussion is more forward looking. Please confirm you feel the same way?
>
> If so, perhaps we might take a look at the services and the lessons 
> learned from past events and tailor it to what might be preferred for 
> future events. For example, perhaps in the scope, section B, items 6 & 
> 7 (prospectus & solicitation), and 8 (website) might make sense to 
> include?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andrew
>
> On 09/21/2012 03:18 PM, David William Bitner wrote:
>> Please find the following information that Steve had indicated he 
>> would provide.
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: *Steve Swazee* <sdswazee at sharedgeo.org 
>> <mailto:sdswazee at sharedgeo.org>>
>> Date: Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 2:02 PM
>> Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Conf] Minutes from today's meeting
>> To: bitner at dbspatial.com <mailto:bitner at dbspatial.com>
>>
>>
>> David,
>>
>> Find attached copies of the contracts  I promised to provide during 
>> yesterday's meeting.  I hope those considering options for management 
>> support of future FOSS4G events find these two very different 
>> approaches helpful to their deliberations.
>>
>> As you are probably aware, for the International event in Denver, 
>> GITA and OSGeo agreed to a fixed cost contract for all services 
>> provided.  I believe the effective percentage charge was in the 
>> ballpark of 30% of profit.  For the upcoming North American event, 
>> SharedGeo and OSGeo agreed to a highly flexible contract which allows 
>> for tailoring of services as determined by the Local Organizing 
>> Committee. Consequently, the payment concept is cost plus 3%. Both 
>> approaches have pluses and minuses.  I think the GITA model probably 
>> makes sense for the international event, whereas the flexible 
>> approach is probably a better model for regional events.
>>
>> Anyway, since I was sitting in on your behalf, thought best that you 
>> pass along with any comments you might want to add.
>>
>> Let me know if there is anything else folks might need or want to 
>> look at.
>>
>> All My Best,
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> *Stephen D. Swazee, Sr.*
>>
>> Executive Director
>>
>> SharedGeo - Collaborative Mapping Services
>>
>> Website: www.sharedgeo.org <http://www.sharedgeo.org/>
>>
>> Blog: www.epcupdates.org <http://www.epcupdates.org>
>>
>> sdswazee at sharedgeo.org <mailto:sdswazee at sharedgeo.org>
>>
>> 1360 University Ave. West, Suite 455
>>
>> St. Paul, MN 55104-4086
>>
>> Direct: (612) 239-6981 <tel:%28612%29%20239-6981>
>>
>> Main: (651) 285-5015 <tel:%28651%29%20285-5015>
>>
>> Toll Free: 888-877-7GEO (436)
>>
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20120921/312662d3/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 15602 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20120921/312662d3/attachment-0001.png>