I promised I would post something before the end of the (West coast US) week about sponsorship for ApacheCons EU and NA, so here it is. Unfortunately it isn't the draft I'd anticipated due to a report after the EU site survey that the basis of sponsorship was changing.
I don't know where this new direction has come from, but I gather the proposal now is that we have €1,500 partial track sponsorships (potentially many per track), €6,000 exclusive track sponsorships (with no explanation as to how conflict between exclusives and partials are resolved) and €8,000 events. If there's a real possibility of getting events sponsored then it would relieve the conference budget of a major burden, so it seems sensible to add them, but the track sponsorships may not fly as they are. The reason for this is that the different tracks are of different lengths and with different average attendances, so charging the same to sponsor a 100-person 1-day track as a 200-person 2-day seems illogical. To remove that stigma (or at least to minimize the perceived iniquities it imposes) I would therefore propose that we offer sponsorships as follows: 1. Conference sponsorship: €1,500 Exposure throughout the public spaces, and signage outside sessions. 2. Track sponsorship: €500 Exposure inside the session rooms for a particular audience. An organization can increase its exposure by sponsoring multiple tracks. It is permitted to sponsor all tracks. Small companies with specialist audiences can sponsor a track without taking out a wasteful conference sponsorship, meaning a targeted audience at an economically efficient cost. Big track, small track, no difference. 3. Event sponsorship: €4,000 and up Allows a sponsor to promote awareness through social events, which will by default be receptions, but if we can find a volunteer with flair they might be much more. I'd like some feedback. Remember, if you aren't from the commercial world, the need to present things *simply*. The ASF knows a large number of well-disposed organizations with adequate budget for sponsorship, but being able to communicate how the scheme works in an "elevator pitch" is important. Make it simple to understand, make it simple to order, and be friendly and helpful in dealing with sponsors. Oh, and make them comfortable at the event! One further point: In investigating the relative "sponsorship weights" of the tracks I made the following calculations: Sponsorship Weighting People Days Person-Days ApachEE 11% 200 1 200 Modular Java Applications 6% 100 1 100 Open Office (1) 11% 100 2 200 Open Office (2) 11% 100 2 200 Web infrastructure 17% 100 3 300 Camel in Action, Common problems, solutions and best practices 6% 100 1 100 Cloud 11% 100 2 200 Linked Data 1% 25 1 25 Big Data 22% 200 2 400 Encore! The best bits, revisited 3% 100 0.5 50 Apache Daily 0% 0 NoSQL Database (1) 0% 100 0 NoSQL Database (2) 0% 100 0 Lucene, SOLR and Friends (1) 11% 100 2 200 Lucene, SOLR and Friends (2) 11% 100 2 200 OFBiz - The not so obvious Apache project 0% 100 0 600 * 3 days 1800 2175 I believe that in round terms we have space for 600 people that can be split into modules of 100-, 200- or 300-delegate chunks. Even assuming that room reconfiguration offered no logistical problems (these operations usually take time, and must occur during breaks). Even before new tracks are added, and without some tracks yet providing input about space requirements (who have therefore been allocated zero in this scheme) it is obvious that we would be overcommitted in the space we have available. I would be very interested in hearing from the track chairs how they feel this issue might amicably be resolved. But even more urgent is agreeing on a sponsorship scheme. So please give that priority in discussions. regards Steve -- Steve Holden st...@holdenweb.com, Holden Web, LLC http://holdenweb.com/ Python classes (and much more) through the web http://oreillyschool.com/ Conferences and technical event management at http://theopenbastion.com/ Next: DjangoCon US Sep 6-8, Washington DC http://djangocon.us/
