As noted in the current thread, early site selection permits attendee
budgeting. From the IETF side, it permits serious negotiating for site
terms and operational efficiencies when a previous site is re-used.
Minneapolis has been a useful demonstration of this latter point, I think.
Since nobody but Foretec has seen the Minneapolis contracts, we have no
idea whether that's true or not.
I've had it argued at me that a hotel that believes it "owns" the event is
actually harder to negotiate with than one that believes that there are
alternatives.
1. When the negotiation is done at what is effectively the last minute, the one
thing that is certain is that the customer has really lousy negotiating
position.
2. When the negotiation is done early enough to afford a legitimate ability to
choose a different site, then the customer's leverage is retained. The venue
managers have an incentive to encourage return by giving good terms, rather than
by pretending they have monopolistic control over the negotiation.
d/
---
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker a t ...
WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf