Mr. Cagle,
    The only quality that you posses that exceeds your arrogance is your
ability to express it.

                          Eric Sand
                          [log in to unmask]

> > 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