----- Original Message -----
From: "Stan Sieler" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>; <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] HP WORLD 2000: $20K to $25K for a speaker?!?!?!?!


> Greg writes:
>
> > > That's 20 *THOUSAND* to 25 *THOUSAND* dollars.
> > >
> > > Why in the hell is Interex spending our money this way?
> >
> > Stan, you obviously haven't tried to book a large conference keynote
> > speaker lately. It is the GOING RATE.
>
> Irrelevant: the point is: that's too much money to be spending
> for a speaker.  You shouldn't be spending that unless and until
> you can show it more than pays for itself in increased sales
> of conference memberships.  (Or provides other adequate recompense,
> see below.)

You forgot the IMHO in that paragraph.

> > > Who's having a power-trip ("I/we must be important, we've got
> > > a big name speaker)?
> >
> > HP World is an industry-leading conference. This is par for the
> > course. No power trip involved, just competitive reality. Perhaps
> > you remember Scott Adams, one of our previous keynotes. Why don't
> > you go check HIS rates and then get back to us.
>
> Uh, I realize you're somewhat of a newcomer to the HP 3000
> community ... but I did complain about Scott Adams, too.

I do not claim to be a member of the 3000 community. I am a member
of the HP community, and of the Interex community.

> I enjoy Adams' work, and was on his mailing list since the early
> days.  I've gone to free talks that he's done.  But...that doesn't
> mean that I did (or do) condone Interex paying him a lot of
> money to speak to us!

One person's opinion.

> > > Does Interex *really* think that hundreds of extra *paying* attendees
> > > will show up because of him?
> >
> > No, no one is going to make a decision to attend based on the keynote
> > alone. Nor are they going to make that decision based on the party,
> > or the lunches, or the material of the t-shirts. But if you miss the
> > mark on any one of those things (and thousands of others), the overall
> > conference experience is less than it might have been, which translates
> > directly to repeat business.
>
> If you can't quantify it, then that leaves the question: why?
> There are only a few possible reasons for spending $20K on a speaker:
>
>    1) the speaker has a hold over you (I doubt this one)
>
>    2) you think it will increase the value of the conference for
>       the attendees *by an appropriate amount*.  (I.e., add enough
>       value to justify the cost.)
>
>    3) you think it will increase sales of membership (again,
>       by at least an appropriate amount).  (Or a combination of #2 and #3)
>
>    4) you get ego-boo from holding a conference with a "big name speaker".

You apparently missed my point. I'm not going to restate it.

> Interex has been asked in the past ... repeatedly ... to justify
> a paid speaker, and has never done so.  Hey...if a group of people
> spending my money can't explain something, there are only a few
> reasons to account for it ... and that's not good!
>
> Personally, I'd drop the paid speaker and cut the conference rate
> proportionately.  I don't care if that's $20/person or $5/person ...
> the principle is important (and, it opens the door to look for
> other possible examples of waste).

Stan, with all due respect, Interex is a multimillion dollar business.
I suggest you leave the management of it to the people the Board
has hired to do it and quit trying to micromanage something you
clearly don't understand.

- Greg
--
Greg Cagle
Tigard, OR
gregc at gregcagle dot com