On Thu, 25 Aug 2011, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > I didn't say that. I said that IETF meeting hotel prices have > risen more than 20% above inflation. I have no idea if average > hotel prices for setups like ours have done that, or if the > IETF attendees are really getting a bad deal. I think the > latter though to be honest. Have you evidence that I'm right > or wrong?
I'll let the people who crunch the numbers answer that one. > > > and that isn't limited to the venues under consideration by the > > IETF. NANOG and APRICOT hotel rates have gone up as have other > > meeting hotel rates, > > Do you/the iaoc have solid information on that or just anecdotes? Do > the iaoc communicate with other conference organisers to get such > information? Have those other rates gone up more or less than IETF > HQ rates? Well, *I* attend all of those events and *I* have experienced significant increases in hotel rates over the last decade. You can call that an anecdote I suppose. Based on my experience, the increases are across the board. > > Fine. But not very relevant. Hotel prices in, for example, > Ireland, have fallen thanks to our local financial incompetence. > I don't know the trends in hotel prices where we meet, but would > hope that the iaoc does. Do you? Again, I don't have comprehensive data, but will note (again) that we are severely limited by venue availability for an event our size, based on the "one-roof" desire, and (often) inclusion of meeting rooms. > > > I think the only way to get HQ hotel rates down > > Have the iaoc actually tried to achieve this specific goal? > Personally, I don't believe you've been doing that, but I > could be wrong. It's been said already that there is a tradeoff between "big city" venues (that have meeting space) and remote resorts like CityWest: in both cases the HQ hotel is often expensive, but the community clearly wants us to go places where they have alternatives. Hotel rates are certainly high on our list of factors when choosing a venue, but it isn't the only factor. > > Go for it and we'll see. Maybe it'll be crap (but to be honest > how much can it differ from Disney;-) but its worth trying so > long as the meeting facilities work for the meeting. We can certainly look into it. > > > The University Campus, or maybe "University Conference Center" idea > > is worth exploring, such places do exist (in Atlanta for example), > > but, as others have pointed out, we need to clearly define what the > > goal is here and recognize that there are some incompatible > > requirements. > > I think this is *very* much worth doing. (Full disclosure: I tried > to get IETF-72 in Trinity College Dublin but that fell over thanks > in part to our local fascist sysadmins who hopefully don't read this > list;-) > > Bottom line - the HQ hotel is a big cost for those who stay there > and getting to the unaffordable state for various folks for various > reasons. *Please* make it a specific goal to reduce that. Or > produce some model of overall costs that you aim to reduce if you > prefer. Anything so long as its measurable and starts going down. > > S. > > PS: Just in case. Yes we can stay at alternative hotels. But > nonetheless, aiming to reduce the HQ hotel rate is still a > good thing. > > > > > > Ole > > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
