[OSGeo-Conf] Motion: 2017 Boston seed funding (was: Re: [Board] FOSS4G 2017 contracting & funding)

Steven Feldman shfeldman at gmail.com
Tue Mar 8 02:19:49 PST 2016 

Apologies just realised that it was 5 +1’s as David and Helena also voted in favour. Will still leave open to the rest of the members for today.
______
Steven


> On 8 Mar 2016, at 10:09, Steven Feldman <shfeldman at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I have only received 3 +1’s (Eli, Cameron and me) for this motion and no -1’s. That is a little disappointing as this is an important topic for the CC.
> 
> I would encourage the remaining members of the CC to express approval or otherwise - I am going to leave the vote open till the end of today to give people a further chance to vote.
> ______
> Steven
> 
> 
>> On 4 Mar 2016, at 19:57, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>> 
>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Cameron Shorter
>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> +1 Cameron
>>> 
>> 
>> + 1 Eli
>> 
>>> 
>>> On 4/03/2016 10:20 am, Steven Feldman wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I propose a motion:
>>>> 
>>>> The conference committee approves the request from the Boston LOC for an
>>>> advance of up to $70,000 to be phased $20,000 by end March 2016 and up to
>>>> $50,000 during Q4 2016 and recommends to the OSGeo Board accordingly.
>>>> This approval is subject to the BLOC and/or their PCO signing an agreement
>>>> with OSGeo
>>>> 
>>>> Voting should close at 18.00 GMT on Monday 7th March
>>>> 
>>>> +1 from me
>>>> ______
>>>> Steven
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 3 Mar 2016, at 23:15, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Michael and the BLOC,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I haven't yet reviewed the documents in detail.  Other comments in line
>>>>> below.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Steven Feldman <shfeldman at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Conference Committee colleagues
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Can we agree that we will give Michael the ‘green light’ if there have
>>>>>> been
>>>>>> no objections raised by close of business on Monday 7th? We will then
>>>>>> need
>>>>>> to make a recommendation to the Board, I can do this on behalf of the CC
>>>>>> if
>>>>>> you are agreeable.
>>>>> 
>>>>> This sounds good to me, also note the Board meeting schedule and agenda.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>> ______
>>>>>> Steven
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 3 Mar 2016, at 20:33, Michael Terner <mgt at appgeo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Steven, Cameron, Peter & the rest of the Conference Dev:
>>>>>> Thank you for the prompt reply to my queries from this morning. Glad to
>>>>>> see
>>>>>> that we're on track, and the link to the template doc is very helpful
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> we'll get that in front of our PCO today.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Also, to Steven's question on the advance. As per an earlier thread, we
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> thinking we'd ask for two advances. This initial one - for $20k US - to
>>>>>> get
>>>>>> us up and rolling in "quiet mode" through the completion of the 2016
>>>>>> North
>>>>>> American (Raleigh) and Global (Bonn) events; and then a second advance
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> September, 2016 that will help us pay necessary deposits and keep the
>>>>>> cash
>>>>>> flow until registrations and sponsorship revenues hit their stride,
>>>>>> likely
>>>>>> in the Feb/March timeframe of 2017. We expect the second advance to be
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> the order of $40-50k US.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I suggest only asking the Board for one advance.  In past years this
>>>>> has been $50k US or 50k Euros.  If the Board asks to space it out over
>>>>> time, that is up to them but I see no reason for you to do that.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> We'll await any further input from Conference Dev through tomorrow (as
>>>>>> per
>>>>>> my proposed timeline), and then we'll move to complete the agreement and
>>>>>> initiate approvals with the Board early next week.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Coordination with the Board meeting schedule can be important, as well
>>>>> as getting on their agenda,
>>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_of_Directors#Meetings.  You can work
>>>>> with Steven to coordinate that.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In past years, the Board portion has been done by the president and/or
>>>>> treasurer.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks again, as you can likely tell we are eager to continue momentum
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> build speed...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> MT & the BLOC
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> PS: If you're interested, our logo competition is in full swing and
>>>>>> there
>>>>>> are some great submittals that you can check out here.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Peter Batty <peter at ebatty.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I am +1 also, with similar caveats to Cameron - haven't had a chance to
>>>>>>> review the contracts, but am fine with the general principles outlined
>>>>>>> here.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Cameron Shorter
>>>>>>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I back Steven's statement.
>>>>>>>> It sounds reasonable and I trust his experience and judgement.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I won't have time to do any more than the very precursory review I've
>>>>>>>> done, so +1 from me based on Steven's feedback.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Cameron
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 4/03/2016 2:29 am, Steven Feldman wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Apologies for the delay, I have been away.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> This all looks in order to me. Do you anticipate that you will need
>>>>>>>> further funds from OSGeo before your sponsorship income starts to come
>>>>>>>> in?
>>>>>>>> If so how much and when?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hopefully several others on the CC will chip in and agree.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Next steps (as  see them) after ratification by CC are:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Complete an agreement between OSGeo and your PCO - the template doc is
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> https://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/2016/financial_stuff/agreement_with_osgeo/
>>>>>>>> Recommend to board
>>>>>>>> board signs off and transfers funds
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>> ______
>>>>>>>> Steven
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 28 Feb 2016, at 18:46, Michael Terner <mgt at appgeo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Apologies that this took more time than the 2 weeks that was estimated
>>>>>>>> earlier, but I believe the BLOC is now in a position to fully follow
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> Conference Dev Committee's recommendations on next steps (as
>>>>>>>> documented
>>>>>>>> earlier in this thread). Attached you will find two documents:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Draft contract from Delaney Meeting and Management (DMM) to be our PCO
>>>>>>>> and under contract to OSGeo on behalf of the BLOC
>>>>>>>> Draft "financial plan" that shows the anticipated scheduling of
>>>>>>>> spending
>>>>>>>> across the 6+ quarters that remain before Aug, 2017
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Please confirm that this provides the information that you need to
>>>>>>>> assess
>>>>>>>> our planning and move forward towards providing a signed PCO contract
>>>>>>>> and an
>>>>>>>> advance. As per earlier advice, and a review of the spending plan, we
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> like to recalibrate and ask that our initial advance be in the sum of
>>>>>>>> $20,000 US (instead of the $10,000 figure we used earlier in this
>>>>>>>> thread).
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> A quick note on the nature of the DMM contract. This contract is
>>>>>>>> consciously structured as a time and materials (T&M) engagement with a
>>>>>>>> "not
>>>>>>>> to exceed" figure. The DMM contract provides an extremely detailed
>>>>>>>> list of
>>>>>>>> the tasks that are anticipated and their estimated costs, and this
>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>> serve as the "menu" for services. We believe that a T&M structure
>>>>>>>> preserves
>>>>>>>> maximum flexibility so that un-needed tasks (or tasks our BLOC can
>>>>>>>> complete)
>>>>>>>> may be removed, and so that new, or altered tasks can be added as
>>>>>>>> needed.
>>>>>>>> Also, please note that the PCO figure used in the spending plan
>>>>>>>> includes
>>>>>>>> approximately $6,000 of direct expenses incurred by the PCO.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> We would respectfully ask for a quick review as we have a significant,
>>>>>>>> near-term milestone, to sign an agreement with our chosen venue, the
>>>>>>>> Boston
>>>>>>>> World Trade Center conference facility and the Seaport hotel. To
>>>>>>>> secure our
>>>>>>>> dates, we really need to lock this down in March; hopefully by the
>>>>>>>> middle of
>>>>>>>> the month. Having an OSGeo contract with our PCO is a precursor to the
>>>>>>>> venue
>>>>>>>> agreement.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Here's the potential timeline we foresee:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> February 29: Conference Dev now has our draft PCO contract w/ DMM and
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> draft spending plan for review
>>>>>>>> March 4: Receive feedback on contract and spending plan
>>>>>>>> March 8: Iterate with Conference Dev on contract and spending plan and
>>>>>>>> bring all issues (if any) to mutually agreeable closure
>>>>>>>> March 15: Receive appropriate approvals so that OSGeo can sign the
>>>>>>>> contract with DMM which will enable them to act as our financial agent
>>>>>>>> March 18: Have DMM enter into agreement with the World Trade
>>>>>>>> Center/Seaport Hotel on behalf of OSGeo/BLOC
>>>>>>>> March 31: Once the agreements are in place, the BLOC will work with
>>>>>>>> Conference Dev and the Board to secure an initial advance in the sum
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> $20,000 US.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Does this make sense? If not, please advise with any questions so that
>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>> can keep this moving.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Many thanks and all the best...
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> MT
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> +1 to things that Steven and Cameron have said.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On the 10k advance, make sure it is enough, you don't want to have to
>>>>>>>>> ask for more before the planned larger advance.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:59 AM, Steven Feldman <shfeldman at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Spot on Michael
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Look forward to reviewing the PCO contract and your financial plan
>>>>>>>>>> when you
>>>>>>>>>> are ready.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Personally I like the idea of splitting the financial request in 2
>>>>>>>>>> tranches
>>>>>>>>>> as you have outlined. Good idea
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>>> ______
>>>>>>>>>> Steven
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On 27 Jan 2016, at 03:08, Michael Terner <mgt at appgeo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Cameron & Steven:
>>>>>>>>>> Once again thanks for the good advice and careful guidance. Here's
>>>>>>>>>> where we
>>>>>>>>>> stand:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> We have a proposal from our POC that outlines their scope/duties and
>>>>>>>>>> we are
>>>>>>>>>> completing our review. I have asked them for their "contract"
>>>>>>>>>> language
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> wraps the scope. We anticipate completing our review and providing
>>>>>>>>>> those to
>>>>>>>>>> you (i.e., Conf Comm) early next week.
>>>>>>>>>> We have now reviewed, and understand the Wiki postings on the
>>>>>>>>>> guarantees,
>>>>>>>>>> and we will commence with a more detailed financial plan.
>>>>>>>>>> We anticipate potentially seeking two advances:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> In the short term, something on the order of $10k (US) for:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Startup activities with our PCO
>>>>>>>>>> Development of promotional materials (e.g., video, logo, sponsor
>>>>>>>>>> prospectus,
>>>>>>>>>> etc.) so we are ready to go once Bonn completes
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> In the medium term, likely just after Bonn, when OSGeo finances are
>>>>>>>>>> clearer;
>>>>>>>>>> something on the order of what was provided to Bonn, i.e., $50k (US)
>>>>>>>>>> for:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Payment of deposits
>>>>>>>>>> Further support from our PCO
>>>>>>>>>> Cashflow pending sponsorship and registration revenues
>>>>>>>>>> Marketing and messaging
>>>>>>>>>> Sponsorship recruitment
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> I hope this gives you a better sense of where we're coming from and
>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>>> move aggressively this week and next to have contract materials to
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> Conf
>>>>>>>>>> Comm for review.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks again...
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> MT
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Cameron Shorter
>>>>>>>>>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm dropping the OSGeo-Board off the CC list.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to all Steven said.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> You will often find that if someone gives you good advise from an
>>>>>>>>>>> email
>>>>>>>>>>> list, then others on the list won't feel a need to chime in. In
>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>> case,
>>>>>>>>>>> if you don't get someone extending or contradicting Steven's advice
>>>>>>>>>>> within
>>>>>>>>>>> 48 hours, then it is probably worth following.
>>>>>>>>>>> For major decision points which the list members will help
>>>>>>>>>>> identify,
>>>>>>>>>>> such
>>>>>>>>>>> as committing to spending, we will put a motion to the vote, and
>>>>>>>>>>> likely
>>>>>>>>>>> escalate to the board to confirm.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, Cameron
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 26/01/2016 12:29 am, Steven Feldman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> My answers (just one member of the ConfCttee though)
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I suggest you obtain a draft agreement between your PCO and OSGeo,
>>>>>>>>>>> send it
>>>>>>>>>>> to the CC and we will review it and then either suggest changes or
>>>>>>>>>>> forward
>>>>>>>>>>> to the board with a recommendation.
>>>>>>>>>>> With regard to an advance please note the type of guarantees from
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> LOC
>>>>>>>>>>> or PCO to that are outlined in the wiki at
>>>>>>>>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook#Guarantees. The actual
>>>>>>>>>>> agreement
>>>>>>>>>>> with 2016 is at
>>>>>>>>>>> https://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/2016/budget_planning/ .
>>>>>>>>>>> Could you give an indication of what the advance is required for?
>>>>>>>>>>> I would suggest that you send requests to the ConfCttee and we can
>>>>>>>>>>> decide
>>>>>>>>>>> if the matter needs board consideration
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Great to see you guys getting stuck in so early
>>>>>>>>>>> ______
>>>>>>>>>>> Steven
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 25 Jan 2016, at 12:33, Michael Terner <mgt at appgeo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Cameron et al:
>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you very much for the careful guidance and the lesson on how
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> communicate going forward. Obviously, we're feeling our way into
>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>> realm
>>>>>>>>>>> but you will find us eager students and quick learners. Please keep
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> guidance coming. As such, see below for our re-factored "concise
>>>>>>>>>>> questions",
>>>>>>>>>>> and a request for clarification on one ambiguity:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Immediate questions from the BLOC on needs/next steps:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Since our LOC is not incorporated, we would like to proceed with
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>>>>> model that Cameron described he followed in 2009 with "OSGeo
>>>>>>>>>>> (being)
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> legal body which engaged with the PCO." What should we do, and with
>>>>>>>>>>> whom, to
>>>>>>>>>>> initiate this process?
>>>>>>>>>>> Can the BLOC obtain a $10,000(US) advance to fund startup costs,
>>>>>>>>>>> including
>>>>>>>>>>> with our PCO, to cover the period from February - August? What
>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>> we do,
>>>>>>>>>>> and with whom, to initiate this process?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Request for clarification:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Heard, understood and acknowledged regarding aiming messages at the
>>>>>>>>>>> Conference Dev mailing list. Should we do this exclusively on
>>>>>>>>>>> opening
>>>>>>>>>>> salvos
>>>>>>>>>>> of requests? Or, should we also CC the Board? In other words, is it
>>>>>>>>>>> up to
>>>>>>>>>>> the Conference Dev list to decide when something needs to be
>>>>>>>>>>> elevated
>>>>>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>>>>> board?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks again...We're looking forward to moving into the activation
>>>>>>>>>>> phase
>>>>>>>>>>> of this odyssey.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> MT
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 3:36 PM, Cameron Shorter
>>>>>>>>>>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>>>>>>>>> For conference related questions, I suggest your first point of
>>>>>>>>>>>> call
>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>> the conference email list (CCed), which contains past foss4g
>>>>>>>>>>>> leaders.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> (This is how OSGeo was set up to work when things are working
>>>>>>>>>>>> smoothly.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Committees are where most decisions are made, and the board is
>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>> called
>>>>>>>>>>>> in to validate important decisions.)
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> For this email thread, I suggest being more specific in your
>>>>>>>>>>>> question. If
>>>>>>>>>>>> you know what you want, suggest it.
>>>>>>>>>>>> "I'm thinking we should do XXX, can you please confirm this is
>>>>>>>>>>>> ok."
>>>>>>>>>>>> "We have selected our PCO, and we now need to set up a contract.
>>>>>>>>>>>> We
>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>>> a contract needing reviewing / We need to draft a contract / Are
>>>>>>>>>>>> there any
>>>>>>>>>>>> prior contracts we can look at to use as a basis of our contract /
>>>>>>>>>>>> ..."
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> You will find concise questions are much easier to answer, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> hence
>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>> are more likely to get a response.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> In part answer to your question, there have been a number of
>>>>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>>>> engagement models for FOSS4G over the years.
>>>>>>>>>>>> In 2009, which I was involved in, the LOC was not incorporated,
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> OSGeo
>>>>>>>>>>>> was the legal body which engaged with the PCO.
>>>>>>>>>>>> In other years I think the LOC directly engaged the PCO.
>>>>>>>>>>>> How would the LOC like to proceed?
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22/01/2016 4:47 am, Michael Terner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> While entirely respecting the ongoing efforts and precedence for
>>>>>>>>>>>> both the
>>>>>>>>>>>> FOSS4G 2016 even in Bonn and the FOSS4GNA 2016 in Raleigh, NC, the
>>>>>>>>>>>> Boston
>>>>>>>>>>>> Location Organizing Committee (BLOC) has begun our planning in
>>>>>>>>>>>> earnest.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Toward that end it is time for us to formally engage with our
>>>>>>>>>>>> Professional
>>>>>>>>>>>> Conference Organizer (PCO) and to think about contracts. Our
>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding
>>>>>>>>>>>> is that this generally happens with contracts between OSGeo and
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> PCO, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> then the PCO acting as a financial agent on behalf of OSGeo vis a
>>>>>>>>>>>> vis
>>>>>>>>>>>> entering into contracts with the venue and other suppliers.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> At this stage we are looking for guidance/confirmation on the
>>>>>>>>>>>> process and
>>>>>>>>>>>> with whom we should engage to get details and start the ball
>>>>>>>>>>>> rolling? We
>>>>>>>>>>>> also understand that it may be possible to obtain some early
>>>>>>>>>>>> advance
>>>>>>>>>>>> funding
>>>>>>>>>>>> that could support our startup until the Bonn event concludes and
>>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>>>>>> accelerate the planning process.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you in advance for your support and guidance...
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> MT & the BLOC
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Terner
>>>>>>>>>>>> Executive Vice President
>>>>>>>>>>>> 617-447-2468 Direct | 617-447-2400 Main
>>>>>>>>>>>> Applied Geographics, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 24 School Street, Suite 500
>>>>>>>>>>>> Boston, MA 02108
>>>>>>>>>>>> www.AppGeo.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>

More information about the Conference_dev mailing list