conference financial policy

[denzil meyers]

hello colleagues, although the folks in Portland etc. are already making decisions regarding the 2009 conference in that area, the AIN does not have a *policy* on how to structure the financial arrangement of future conferences. as Alain has noted, there are 3 main options.... as AIN Treasurer, I'd recommend we CHOOSE ONE option for future conferences. pls respond, ask questions, etc.

here are the three possible models for finances —

1) the one we have used up until now is that Creative Advantage (Alain's private company) has provided the credit line/credit card for e.g. booking hotel, food services, etc. We should move away from this model, both as a service to Alain (thanks so far!) and to ourselves as a professional org;

2) the second option is that the AIN org itself does this. We should have around $10K in the bank (we are still determining final hotel bill for chicago), which is plenty to absorb any possible shortfall if the conference loses money (has never happened so far);

3) the third option — one used for years by NASAGA — is to have the local conference host(s) organization(s) (e.g. OYF, SparkNW) * contract* to do the conference. The local planning group would sign financial docs, contract for all services, and earn 60% of any profits, but also be liable for any loss. The local group would handle all the finances for the conference. Most years, the conference makes about $5k, so the local group would take $3k and give the AIN org $2k.

Your thoughts?

[Ed Reggi]

I think #2 is best for overall growing AIN. Resting on local organizations can work in some cases but it all depends on strengths of local leadership. I am not sure a local organization would want that risk if the conference has major loses.

[denzil meyers]

hello.. so I hear two suggestions: first, via Alan & Jodi, to have a way to capture & share best practices for in-coming conference organizers...

second (Paul) to allocate some funds for promotion of the community & conference.

both seem good ideas. the first would depend on the Program committee also getting onboard. I imagine the larger community will still want to be involved in Programming, and let the local folks deal with logistical stuff.

re: a promotion fund, I will allocate $ as the board decides. btw, I'm still waiting & wondering about a budget/bank balance... what is it? what do we have to spend?

[Alan Montague]

Hey all
Technically it was the AIN who signed the agreement last year (Me in my capacity as Secretary and Conference Co-Chair) and it was the AIN that might have faced the financial problems had we made a big loss.
And as such it is the AIN that will get the profit from the conference.
We still are finalizing some things with the hotel for things they tried to charge us for that they shouldn't have but it looks like we are going to be up by a bit.

I have passed on a 'brain dump' to Brad and the PNW gang who are I'm hoping will 'Yes And' it into a living document to help them and future conference builders do things with a bit more ease than we had this year.

Regards
Alan

[Jodi Cohen]

denzil: thank you darling for thinking about this and making some proposals. i agree we should take alain's tush off the line and not let him be responsible. in thinking about options 2 & 3, this is where my mind goes: planning a conference is a big deal. i know that everyone in AIN has many plates spinning on the end of many sticks (ala ed sullivan...) and as we rotate where the conference is and who plans it/runs it, it seems like we're building from the ground up every year. sure the previous group can weigh in on lessons learned, but so much learning takes place on the job, as it were. then the next year it's a new group of people planning and executing a conference--most people doing so for the first time--and it's overwhelming, with much to keep track of and learn and manage, etc... I'm wondering if there might be a way to hire people to do the planning? this is another cost, yes, but it might alleviate the tumult every time. also, it might make it more feasible for option 3--for local folks to be responsible because of working with folks who know how to negotiate/plan/manage/track a successful conference. so i'm thinking of what's possible, how to be efficient, least amount of stress on AIN, how to use our collective knowledge and experience, etc.... I know we're a volunteer organization, it just seems like there are so many pieces to keep track of when putting a conference together. i used to do it years ago and it's gotten to be a much bigger beast. those are my two cents from the icy cold midwest.

[Paul Z Jackson]

Thanks Denzil
I'd be happy to keep options 2 and 3 open, to give us max flexibility.

We might also start thinking about spending something on Promoting the AIN - both to potential members and (of more value, perhaps) to potential clients of our members. Some budget (for Google Adwords, for example) might supplement our current voluntary efforts to raise the profile of the field.

Cheers, Paul Z

[denzil meyers]

p.s. personally, I'd prefer # 2 for ease on the org.

an advantage — local group has extra incentive to manage well, so they'll make some $. we can change to 60/40 profit split in favor of org, or any other.

a disadvantage — local groups may be disinclined to take on this extra responsibility/risk, and so limit our choices of people/places.

another issue — with option 2, does this increase the risk that some group will really drop the ball on the conference and we won't know until we arrive?