[MR] Event fees for WOW

[Steve Lackey]

ROTFLMAO! absolutely beautiful!

Oh wait, you were kidding, right?

~Estienne

On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Chris Harrop <chrshrrp at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Actually, the more profits the hosting group gets the better.  Profits serve
> as a marker of quality and excellence in service.  The more you make the
> better your service to your quest and the more valuable your contribution to
> the Society.  There is no obscene profit, unless it is too small or limited
> by benighted souls who can't stand the thought of someone else having a
> dollar more than they.
>
> We know what the populace wants by the financial success of those who serve
> the populace.  Those who make the most in a free market are the ones who
> best serve the needs and desires of their fellow man.  The rich should be
> celebrated. The one who makes the most profit should have all his taxes
> refunded by a grateful nation on rich person's day.  We should take one day
> out of the year, just as we do for mothers and fathers, to acknowledge the
> special contributions our rich capitalist make.  Every village, town, city,
> county, state and nation should hold parades to honor those who make the
> most money, the most profit and create the most wealth.
>
> And by God and by damn that goes for every canton, shire, barony and Kingdom
> in the SCA.  Do
> you want good events that will draw more people into the society and keep
> the ones here coming to events?   Pay for them, and be glad to do so.
>
> Christopher Hare
>
> ________________________________
> From: Steve Lackey <edeconde at gmail.com>
> To: Merry Rose <atlantia at atlantia.sca.org>
> Sent: Wed, June 30, 2010 6:53:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [MR] Event fees for WOW
>
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Michael Houghton <herveus at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Howdy!
>
> Well Hey there!
>
>> [snip]
>>> --
>>>
>>> My philosophy is that any event that nets a group more than $500.00 in
>>> "profit" (defined simply as moneys left over after all event related
>>> expenses have been paid) for a group is obscene in todays economy, and
>>> is not providing a service to the membership at large. ...[snip]
>>
>> That's awfully strong language. You are, of course, free to attend or not
>> attend events as you see fit. It's not helpful, however, to use term such
>> as
>> "obscene" or the like to characterize the profit from an event, especially
>> when you are almost certainly not considering the particular financial
>> details of the event and the group hosting it.
>
> Yes, I suppose the language is strong. So are my feelings in relation
> to avoidable expenses in this economy. When the good times are
> rolling, and everybody is rolling in dough, things may change. I don't
> really care about the hosting groups financial details. They are not
> any of my business in truth. It's my personal opinion that anybody
> (SCA Group, Major Corporation, Government - anybody) that wants to
> socialize losses and privatize gains is in the wrong. I understand
> expenses, and I have no problem with making some money beyond expenses
> for things that come out of the general fund, such as Storage,
> Maintenance, or what have you. I maintain that anybody that puts an
> event on (again, SCA, Corporation, Government - anybody) does so at
> their own risk. Asking me to pay for insurance on it for the next year
> is wrong *at this time, and in this economy*. I don't think it does
> the populous at large any favors, although it is certainly great for
> the hosting group. Again - Profit is not BAD. Large profits at the
> expense of the populous is bad.
>
> Again - should I jack the price up for everybody coming to Assessment
> to make up for the loss we had at Ice Castles? If anybody does, then
> by all means, I'll set up a jar at troll there at Assessments, and
> anybody coming can feel free to kick 3-4 bucks into it so that the
> group can make up that loss. I'm certainly not going to require it
> though. It will be labeled "Ice Castles Snow Fund". =)
>
>
> [Snip]
>
>>> The $5.00 penalty for paying at the gate is to my mind, excessive. I
>>> understand the desire to get as many pre-registrations as possible. As
>>> an autocrat, it is one of the issues that weighs on my mind when I'm
>>> running an event such as the upcoming Kings Assessment (Shameless plug
>>> - $7.00 site fee for the weekend, on a nicer site). On the other hand
>>> at this event, pre-registration is required for land allotment as
>>> well. So if I don't pre-register, I get penalized twice - once at the
>>> gate, and once more in camp if there is not enough room to fit me in
>>> somewhere in their allotment. I could be overly sensitive to it, but
>>> it feels a little bit like getting my arm twisted, and I don't like
>>> that one bit. It's not as if land is at a premium on this site after
>>> all.
>>
>> Consider that people who pay in advance provide event revenues to
>> the hosts before the event. This helps with the cash flow as well as the
>> planning for head count. People who pay at the door cost more in a
>> "time value of money" sense. $5 is the number that the WoW team
>> settled on. Pre-registration for camping space also allows them to
>> better lay out the land. A camp that suddenly want to expand by 20%
>> to accommodate non-preregistered folks can't do that unless there
>> is room reserved for growth. Close neighbors preclude that.
>
> I don't see how paying at the door costs more time/value/money, unless
> you are talking about the minute or two it takes to record the
> name/number along with the collected fee. Lets extend that out. At
> troll, assume they do 20 people an hour at peak. That is $100 an hour.
> Pretty good money for whatever group is doing it at peak, which is the
> only time it really matters. It's still a penalty on those that can't
> or don't want to pre-reg for whatever reason. There are some groups
> that I will never pre-reg with. Be that as it may, adding the land
> issue to it makes it worse.
>
> The land there is plentiful. Groups that want to camp as a group and
> know they are going can easily send an email to whoever is running the
> land and let them know what to expect. A group's "land agent" can take
> some of the load off the event staff and simply send a list of tents
> that are expected to be there with their sizes, where the event staff
> could say ok, your going to need X space, we'll set aside that much,
> plus Y space for a fudge/late arrival/whatever factor.
>
> I really do understand the desire for pre-registrations, and I even
> agree with it. I don't like the strong arm feeling though from the
> double penalty for failing to do so for whatever reason.
>
> I'm sitting here, with a smile on my face in case somebody takes the
> opinion that I'm getting all riled up. I'm not. I have strong feelings
> about certain things, and money is one of them. That doesn't mean I'm
> getting angry or upset by this exchange. Healthy debate is what makes
> us as a people strong =)
>
> And if truth = snark, then so be it. ;-)
>
> --
> In Service,
>
> Estienne de Condé
> Argent, three falcons vert
> Supremus totus, Muneris
> ---------------
> MKA Steve Lackey
>
> The truth is that there is nothing noble in being superior to somebody
> else. The only real nobility is in being superior to your former self.
> -  Whitney Young (1921 - 1971)
> ========================================================================
>                   The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
>     List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>   Submissions: Atlantia at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org
> Subscriptions:
> http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/listinfo.cgi/atlantia-atlantia.sca.org
>



-- 
In Service,

Estienne de Condé
Argent, three falcons vert
Supremus totus, Muneris
---------------
MKA Steve Lackey

The truth is that there is nothing noble in being superior to somebody
else. The only real nobility is in being superior to your former self.
-  Whitney Young (1921 - 1971)