<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">Thanks Andrew for answering my
questions over skype a few hours ago, and also for summarising our
discussion here.<br>
<br>
My previous concerns were based upon my (incorrect) assumption
that contingency should be considered as part of the profit. Based
upon your summary below, I'm much more comfortable with the
Washington budget as it stands.<br>
<br>
On 9/07/2013 8:50 AM, Andrew Ross wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:51DB4231.6000802@eclipse.org" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Cameron,<br>
<br>
Eddie was on the road so called me to ask me to help address
your question. And thanks for taking the time to speak with me
to clear up the confusion here.<br>
<br>
Quoting myself:<br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<div>"Some numbers from the budget approved for our bid:</div>
For 900 attendees, a payment of<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><b>$50K</b><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>to OSGeo leaves<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><b>$16.6K.</b><br>
For 1K attendees, a payment of<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><b>$75K</b><span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>to OSGeo leaves<span
class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><b>$11K</b>."<br>
<br>
As per my other email referencing OSGeo's budget over the years,
you can see these payments to OSGeo compare very favorably with
past payments OSGeo has received from FOSS4G.<br>
<br>
You may have been looking at the profit without contingency. It
would be a misleading to quote that as profit and a mistake to
spend it at this point. It is far too early.<br>
<br>
I also mentioned earlier in the thread:<br>
<div>"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>
</div>
<div><br>
The committee will be deciding between things like lowering
registration, enhancing elements like the reception(s) or code
sprint, payment to OSGeo, and deciding on the various things
that inevitably crop up. Our committee includes people who
have been involved with past FOSS4G's, past successful
conferences, many have long been strong supporters of OSGeo,
and Mark Lucas is a current board member.<br>
</div>
<br>
I hope this helps clear this up and settles this concern?<br>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
<br>
Andrew<br>
<br>
On 08/07/13 17:23, Cameron Shorter wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:51DB2DC5.407@gmail.com" type="cite">On
08/07/13 12:48, Eddie Pickle wrote: <br>
<blockquote type="cite">Speaking on behalf of the Washington, DC
LOC, I believe we've answered all of the questions regarding
our bid for FOSS4G 2014. Please let me know if there are other
questions we can still address. </blockquote>
<br>
Eddie, <br>
I'm still waiting on a response to questions from me and Jeroen
about percentage of profit shared between OSGeo and Eclipse. As
it stands, I understand that the Washington proposal is still
requesting ~ 50% of expected profit to be provided to the
Eclipse Foundation. As an OSGeo board member I'm not comfortable
with this split. <br>
<br>
If the Washington proposal is not wishing to move from this
split, I'd wish to raise the issue with the OSGeo board before
going to final vote. <br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Cameron Shorter
Software and Data Solutions Manager
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254
Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial & Data 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>