--On Monday, March 18, 2002 12:25 -0800 Bonney Kooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > --- Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> Bonney - >> >> 1) the meeting fee is USD 425. You pay an USD 150 >> penalty for forcing us to >> staff the registration desk with people authorized >> to handle credit card >> transactions and so forth; I don't have numbers on >> whether the penalty is >> enough to pay for the overhead. > > For a fee of $425, a late fee of $150 doesn't seem > reasonable to me at all in the percentage term. All > they do at the counter is charge to the credit card > and print the tag. No more than five minutes to > process. And those people cost money. And so does the credit card machine. And so do the desks they're working behind. And irrespective of I suspect the hotels might even charge some premium for "extra heads" being added to the catering requirements. > I can still do most this stuff on line a day > before - if you would let me do it with no or small > late fee. But by then the badges have already been pre-printed and shipped to the hotel I believe. So you'd still have to pay the premium for someone to handle your badge and registration in a different way, most likely printing the badge when you arrive. > Only argument may be that it lets you plan in advance > for sponsor hand bags - but I for one don't care if i > get those conference bags and tee shirts if the > counter runs out them. Big deal. That's irrelevant since the sponsor bags/t-shirts (if any) are not included in the registration cost (so far as I understood it). >> The average fee paid in 2001 was USD 431 - most >> people preregister. >> >> 2) Of the USD 2.7 million taken in on meeting fees >> last year, USD 1.38 >> million shows up as direct meeting costs - the >> largest single item is "food >> and beverages" - breakfast and cookies. > > I think that can be reduced substantially. As most > people stay in Hotels any way, and some of them > include breakfast as part of the room stay. It is > pretty much a duplication, and only beneficiaries are > near by Hotels!. And many hotels *don't* include a free breakfast, especially not for conference block bookings (in my experience of attending conference hotels). Irrespective of that, I'd rather not have to get up even earlier in order to stand in line in an overcroweded (read: full beyond capacity if this were to happen) hotel restaurant before the 9am start. Informal nibbles and coffee (or soda) makes it a *lot* easier to hold ad-hoc meetings before the sessions start. > Funds can definitely be better used to fund > secretariat activities or building reserve funds for > the IETF. All we need is to offer plain english tea > and coffee during breaks, And water, and soda of a variety of types... > and simple crackers and of > course, people are free to order any thing from coffee > shop if they are into eating sandwitches or gourmet > cakes and pastries etc. But then it is me - others may > feel the need of more sugar calories after each > sessions. I don't eat cookies so couldn't care. And a couple of thousand of people searching for "empty" calories (or the better sort in fruit or ice cream) in an area around the event hotel during a half hour break ... is not going to work. >> 3) The rest of the meeting fee covers the cost of >> keeping us with a >> secretariat. We have people working full time on >> running the IETF - a lot >> of those people behind the desk are working for you >> full time, all year. >> Internet-drafts don't publish themselves. > > I think it will be a good idea to have a fresh look at > how to fund IETF activities in a way that increase the > individual/ Graduate student/ University researchers > participation. I think corporations can bear more of > the cost after all they do make billions in profit > thanks to IETF standards, and can afford mega million > packages for CEOs. If there is a need to sponsor > individual sessions so be it as long as that only gets > them (sponsors) a mention, and perhaps a display board > (this sesion sponsored by....xyz.) and doesn't affect > independance of technical discussions. Just Say No.
