[OSGeo-Conf] FOSS4G 2014 Budget Sharing

[Cameron Shorter]

On 07/07/13 04:55, Paul Ramsey wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 6:15 AM, Andrew Ross <andrew.ross at eclipse.org> wrote:
>> I've always wondered how this worked for past events as it seemed quite
>> secretive. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in the community in this regard.
> With the exception of South Africa, in which a joint agreement was
> arranged ahead to time to share with GISSA, all the other "OSGeo era"
> (2007+) FOSS4G events have returned all profits to OSGeo. The profit
> "targets" in the RFP are to make explicit that we don't necessarily
> want to-the-bone break-even budgets, we want budgets that will, under
> reasonable assumptions, return revenue to the organization. They are
> not the maximum or average profit we want, they are the minimum
> planning threshold. The organization still expects to receive the full
> profits of the event, RFP numbers notwithstanding.
>
> Though a familiar industry group (GITA) helped organize FOSS4G 2011,
> they did so as a standard conference organizing organization: their
> fee structure was known ahead of time and was in the budget from the
> start. That they also knew our industry as well as event organizing
> was a handy bonus, but not germane to the financial arrangements.
>
> I would expect that if the Eclipse foundation is looking for a profit
> sharing arrangement like GISSA, it should be included in the proposal
> with some precision (X%), and if they are going to act, like GITA, as
> an organizer, their fee schedule should be in the budget.
>
> P.
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

Thanks Paul, that is great background. So bridging between Paul's 
background and Eclipse's involvement in the Washington proposal.

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.

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.

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?

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.
* Loss of key personnel, and risk of poor management has been mitigated 
in both proposals through the identification of strong teams.
* Risk of low attendance under normal circumstances is relatively low, 
as we already know the US region can attract ~ 900 delegates.
* 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?
* Risk  of low sponsorship is a definite possibility, mitigated by 
Eclipse's experience attracting such sponsorship in the past.

What is the risk mitigation worth? I'd love to see metrics for the items 
above applied to justify a percentage.
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.

-- 
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
http://www.lisasoft.com