Re: [Debconf-team] Proposal for sponsorship levels (and registration fees) for DC14
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Moray Allan <moray@sermisy.org> wrote:
> On 2013-10-24 00:43, Brian Gupta wrote:
>>
>> Supporter <2000 USD
>> - Logo on sponsor web page
>
>
> ^^
> This should presumably read "supporter web page". The intention has
> previously been that these aren't formally included as "sponsors" -- with no
> minimum, it's a different option rather than being another level. (And I
> think it's better kept that way; in the past we seemed to confuse some
> potential sponsors by having too many different levels.)
I don't know if there was confusion about what last year's benefits
should have been, but for DC13, they were listed on the sponsor web
page [1] at the support tier, with no link back to their company. (But
only on that one page, and not on the debconf14/debconf homepages.)
We did raise 6000 CHF from supporter companies, with an average
contribution of 750 CHF.
In light of this do you still feel we should move these to a separate
"supporter web page"?
> By the same argument, this option probably shouldn't be explicitly in the
> sponsorship brochure, but rather raised with organisations as another option
> if they decline to become sponsors.
I wonder if we don't list the option, would most companies that can't
justify a $2000 donation write back and ask if we have any other less
expensive contribution option that aren't listed? I'll also add that
even if they did write back, the extra work for the sponsors-team, to
write back to every lead that declines and say that there are other
undocumented but cheaper ways to contribute, would likely be overly
burdensome, and add to the already huge workload for sponsors-team.
Do you still feel this shouldn't be listed in the brochure?
Thanks,
Brian
[1] - http://debconf13.debconf.org/sponsors.xhtml
> --
> Moray
> _______________________________________________
> Debconf-team mailing list
> Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
> http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Reply to: