Hi all, I've gotten to this as quickly as I could. I understand everyone is keen to get cracking. I'll keep this as brief as I can while providing the oversight I think required.

The annual conference is essentially our sole source of income, so it's our only opportunity to cover our costs and hopefully have a surplus for future community investment. The 2023 conference projected a surplus of $35k but will realise more like $10k. I think it's our job to turn this around and make sure the conference delivers the income levels we need to continue to invest in our community.

I have a few questions about the budget, focusing on the 150 attendee scenario for simplicity and direct comparison to 2023.

• Do budget amounts include or exclude GST?

• What is "Marketing - TGP support from sponsorship - $5500"?

• Is the venue cost of $10k a fixed price? Do we have a quote? (In 2023, the venue cost was $26k more than expected.)

• Is the catering budget of $30k adequate? (In 2023, catering for a ~150 person event was $38k)

• In 2023, projected ticket income was $70k but actual was $43k. This budget anticipates $67k for a similar number of registrations. How do we ensure we don't repeat the same pattern?

• There are 10 registrations reserved for sponsors, is this sufficient if we meet our sponsorship targets? (Note that 2019 had 33 sponsor regos for a 200 person conference)

• Would it be possible to mark some expenditure items as "nice to have", ie. they only happen if we meet certain revenue targets? One example might be video recording.

I would also like to check in with the board on overseeing this. I think one particular risk is that of unbudgeted spending. Does our Finance Policy provide adequate guidance (I'm specifically looking at spending authority)?

Hi @John Bryant

Good questions.

Budget figures are inclusive of GST.

Marketing TGP Support from Sponsorship is an idea I had to set aside sponsorship funding and put it towards the TGP. This is more an accounting thing, as the net result to OO is zero. And after talking to Ed and Greg, sponsors probably won't be persuaded by seeing their funds go to TGP, whereas knowing OO puts money into OSM, QGIS and so on is a bigger draw card.

The $10 k price, catering and so on is as quoted by C3. They quoted us $20 k for everything, the venue, AV and catering and that's before their 30% discount. I think we will probably spend a little more on AV, but the catering will be about right.

Regarding ticket income, we achieve our numbers by selling tickets! I have a few ideas to maximise the draw of the event, including inviting a prominent keynote from overseas. I think we'll more easily get Australian registrations, obviously. Other than that, we really just need to hold on tight and hope for the best.

Regarding sponsor registrations, maybe the higher attended scenarios should have more regos. Don't think this makes a material impact on the budget.

On video recording, I don't think it's optional.

My preference for "how do we make sure it's a success" is encouraging more sponsorship, and bringing people along. The whole Board can help in both those areas.

Thanks @Alex Leith, that's very helpful! Good to know and that resolves most of my questions.

Glad to hear the venue & catering figures are good, that's one of the biggest expenses, so if we're confident with those numbers that makes a big difference.

Understood that strength of ticket sales is a strong factor in rego revenue. My remaining concern about the budget is around another factor, which is about the number of free regos (each of which incurs a significant cost). I think the AKL paid:free ratio was something like 100:50 free, this budget is 113:37, just wondering if we have the balance right. It could significantly affect the bottom line, but I don't think it's a showstopper and I hope we can mitigate it. Noted that the sponsor regos might go a bit higher.

Including a TGP contribution is great, I like it a lot. One question though: is it tied to sponsors explicitly making that contribution, or could we just include it as a line item (perhaps subject to hitting a certain sponsorship target)? It would be good for OO to use that number when planning TGP (rather than waiting to see if any sponsors choose it).

@John Bryant

On free:paid ratio, the Auckland conference made an explicit choice to invite local AUT students for free, as our numbers were low. I don't anticipate doing that for the Hobart event. And if sponsor regos are higher, they're really paid, so it's a win!

On the TPG, with my Board hat on, I think we allocate $20 k to TGP as a Board. This extra funding could either offset that, like the OSGeo TGP funding would, or could open more places. I think either way is fine.

@Alex Leith

Let's discuss OO TGP contribution separately as part of the annual budget discussion.

But my question about the conference budget line item still stands. Can we take it as a given or is it dependent on a sponsor saying "yes we want to give you $5500 for TGP"?

@John Bryant

The conference committee haven't decided on the sponsorship model completely yet. This $5,500 is 20% of the sponsorship, which I'd like to write into the prospectus. I'd also like to write in "added extras" where sponsors put money directly towards sponsoring someone.

If we decide not to do this, then the conference will be $5,500 better off, and the Board can still allocate more money to the TGP.

I think this level of detail is not really helpful for us agreeing with this budget. The budget is a plan, a goal, it's not going to be completely accurate.

@Alex Leith

The reason I ask is because I want to understand if the board can count on that $5500 for TGP budgeting (which is coming up). If you don't think it's helpful that's OK, I think it is.

But if the answer is "we don't know yet", no problem.