Re: On future conferences

From: Robert Bernier
Subject: Re: On future conferences
Date: ,
Msg-id: 200609290939.14545.robert.bernier5@sympatico.ca
(view: Whole thread, Raw)
In response to: Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan)
Responses: Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan)
List: pgsql-advocacy

Tree view

On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
 Re: On future conferences  ("Jim C. Nasby", )
  Re: On future conferences  (Josh Berkus, )
   Re: On future conferences  ("Joshua D. Drake", )
    Re: On future conferences  (mdean, )
     Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
  Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
 Re: On future conferences  (Christopher Browne, )
 Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
  Re: On future conferences  (Josh Berkus, )
 Re: On future conferences  (Tatsuo Ishii, )
  Re: On future conferences  (Oleg Bartunov, )
   Re: On future conferences  (David Fetter, )
 Re: On future conferences  (Christopher Browne, )
  Re: On future conferences  ("Joshua D. Drake", )
   Re: On future conferences  (Josh Berkus, )
    Re: On future conferences  ("Joshua D. Drake", )
    Re: On future conferences  ("Satoshi Nagayasu", )
     Re: On future conferences  (Josh Berkus, )
      Re: On future conferences  (Tatsuo Ishii, )
  Re: On future conferences  (Gavin Sherry, )
  Re: On future conferences  ("Satoshi Nagayasu", )
  Re: On future conferences  (Jim Nasby, )
   Re: On future conferences  (Robert Bernier, )
    Re: On future conferences  (Jim Nasby, )
     Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
  Re: On future conferences  (Robert Bernier, )
 Re: On future conferences  (Chris Browne, )
  Re: On future conferences  (Josh Berkus, )
  Re: On future conferences  ("Joshua D. Drake", )
   Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
    Re: On future conferences  ("Joshua D. Drake", )
    Re: On future conferences  ("Josh Berkus", )
     Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
      Re: On future conferences  (Robert Bernier, )
       Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
        Re: On future conferences  (mdean, )
         Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
          Re: On future conferences  (Josh Berkus, )
           Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
         Re: On future conferences  ("Joshua D. Drake", )
          Re: On future conferences  ("Andy Astor", )
           Re: On future conferences  (Bruce Momjian, )
            Re: On future conferences  (mdean, )
             Re: On future conferences  ("Joshua D. Drake", )
             Re: On future conferences  (David Fetter, )
             Re: On future conferences  (elein, )
             Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
             Re: On future conferences  (Chander Ganesan, )
              Re: On future conferences  (Andrew Sullivan, )
          Re: On future conferences  (Robert Bernier, )
           Re: On future conferences  (mdean, )
 Re: On future conferences  (Chris Browne, )
  Re: On future conferences  (Robert Treat, )
   Re: On future conferences  ("Jim C. Nasby", )

Increasing the number of conference goers makes it possible to defray costs directly from conference itself thus
relyingless upon the sponsors. 

Were you able to cover these issues from those other people who've run their own conferences?

On Friday 29 September 2006 09:29, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 09:26:48AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > As I posted earlier, travel sponsorships were $12,000 out of a $29,500
> > budget.
>
> You don't seem to have noticed that I was saying we seem to have (at
> least, on any spreadsheet I saw) accounted the accommodation we
> sponsored differently from the travel we sponsored.  Looking at the
> last spreadsheet I have, which was from May, it looks like the
> combination of the two scrapes about $12,000; but I can't be sure
> because it looks to me like some people I know were sponsored aren't
> listed there.
>
> In any case, according to the docs I have, the travel sponsorships
> including rooms were just under double the facitilies cost, and even
> rather more expensive than the cost of the facilities plus the
> remarkably expensive insurance.  So it's undoubtedly true that a
> conference that relied mostly on donated travel sponsorship could
> run at a significantly lower cost.
>
> Of course, this brings us back to Chris's point.  What we actually
> did in this case was get, for example, EnterpriseDB's sponsorship
> twice: they not only paid for their own employees to come, but they
> also gave us some money that allowed us to bring people who otherwise
> would not have had travel sponsorship.
>
> A


pgsql-advocacy by date:

From: Andrew Sullivan
Date:
Subject: Re: On future conferences
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Calling all Regional Contacts