While I agree with the idea of keeping costs down so as to not rely on sponsors as much I am not sure how realistic this is without looking at the numbers. Comparing the first one or two conferences with lower attendance at university facilities to what we had the last few years is probably not that applicable unless we are proposing making a smaller conference (which means restricting attendance to a much smaller number).
Outside of knowing the numbers, if the question is can Organization X (be it a commercial vendor, non-profit vendor, university, foundation, etc.) spend Y dollars to host something outside of the core Code4Lib conference (be it a dinner, reception, trip to a hockey game, pre-conference, or whatever) my answer would be as long as the org fully covered all the expenses with hopefully a bit left over to cover other conference expenses, I am fine with it. Where I would most likely not be fine with is if that organization was provided some level of editorial control of the content of the conference because of a direct economic incentive they provided.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 14, 2011, at 18:17, Jonathan Rochkind <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> When sponsors have sponsored pre-conf activities, that 'sponsoring' of pre-confs was just that their staff were the presenters/facilitators/instructors at those pre-confs. So that is more exposure, but it was formally unconnected with their sponsorship donation -- in the sense that _anyone_ can propose and host a pre-conf (and thus get the exposure), if there's space and interest in their topic -- you don't need to donate sponsor $$ to do this.
> I don't think anyone who's wanted to do a pre-conf has ever been denied the chance to do it -- although there's certainly the possibility there wouldn't be enough space for all proposed pre-confs at some conf. Would it be okay to say sponsors get guaranteed space (effectively bumping non-sponsors?). I dunno, it's pushing it, but probably okay. Only an issue if there isnt' enough space for all pre-confs, which hasn't happened before.
> In the past, sponsors have also had their own advert-inserts in the program material given to each attendee, which everyone has thought was fine. And sponsors of course get on the t-shirt, and I think have had placards in the registration area too (i forget if those placards existed, but I think so, and I think they're fine).
> Last year, people were a bit more iffy on a sponsor getting their name on a dinner/banquet, and even more so on the sponsor getting to present to a captive audience at that dinner/banquet. People generally didn't like that idea. People definitely woudln't like the sponsor getting a 'keynote' during conf program.
> Basically, we just want to make sure the conference remains a DIY sort of thing where we present and discuss with each other on things we're interested in that we decide ourselves as peers, not a program who's content is controlled (even in part) by those vendors paying for it.
> In the past, we've gotten sponsors to donate with only this. Do we need more? Maybe potential sponsors have tighter purse strings then in the past. Or maybe the conf has gotten more expensive such that we need more money and thus more incentive to sponsor. (First priority -- try to keep the conf from getting more expensive so this doesn't happen). But basically, I'd personally suggest trying to get sponsors without giving them more than they've gotten in the past -- but if it becomes clear to you that more incentives are needed (perhaps becuase potentials sponsors say so) -- I'd just run your ideas for incentives/exposure by the listserv (either here or the conf-specific listserv at [log in to unmask]), and see what the community reaction is. In the end, the decision is yours.
> On 6/14/2011 11:50 AM, Anjanette Young wrote:
>> I've been kicking around ideas with Kyle about sponsorship. I noticed in the
>> past that OCLC and DLF had sponsored pre-conference activities. I'd
>> appreciate more thoughts on walking the line between maximum exposure for
>> sponsors and intrusiveness on conference attendees.
>> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Andrew Nagy<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> Hi Anj - I just wanted to let you know that Serials Solutions is working
>>> a plan to better support the conference. We'd possibly like to sponsor an
>>> evening event, we will have more information for you later in the summer.
>>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Anjanette Young<[log in to unmask]
>>>> Code4Lib Seattle 2012 update. Thanks to Elizabeth Duell of Orbis Cascade
>>>> Alliance and Cary Gordon of chillco.com, we finally have a venue with
>>>> adequate (hopefully) bandwidth and wireless access points, a reasonable
>>>> & beverage minimum, and chairs! The Renaissance Hotel (515 Madison St.,
>>>> Seattle, WA 98104) is located in the chilly heart of downtown Seattle,
>>>> close to the University district, but even closer to the restaurants,
>>>> breweries and distilleries in the Belltown, Downtown, Pioneer Square, and
>>>> Capitol Hill neighborhoods.
>>>> We could use lots of help, please consider volunteering for a committee:
>>>> Anjanette Young | Systems Librarian
>>>> University of Washington Libraries
>>>> Box 352900 | Seattle, WA 98195
>>>> Phone: 206.616.2867