On 2012-10-25 01:21, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Thinking this a bit over... I am with Gaudenz here. If we are going towork in x venue, and have already the prices, and x venue agrees to reduce y% to have us decide to stay with them — They qualify as sponsors for the corresponding bracket. Even if we never see the money, it's just money we won't have to pay - Just as UCA and the national government in DC12, the Srpska government in DC11, Junta de Extremadura in DC9.
Yes, except that benefits-in-kind should generally be assigned a sponsorship value below the list price. This sponsorship value needs to be negotiated in each case.
Imagine a company can manufacture an unlimited supply of items at a cost to itself of €1 each and that it advertises them to customers for €10 each. If it donates 1000 items to Debian, it is spending €1000 on its donation, not €10000. If we don't need the items at all, the fair sponsorship value might even be lower than that. If we really need the items, and would otherwise have to buy them, we should be willing to assign a higher sponsorship value, but the highest possible agreed value should be what we would pay in the cheapest alternative non-sponsored arrangement, not what this particular supplier gives as the headline list price.
-- Moray