> > 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@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf