On 8/24/2011 3:33 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 11:29:34AM -0700, David Morris wrote: > >> For this to be a meaningful disccusion re. the success or lack there of, >> we need to compare what we have vs. similar sized groups in the same >> season, etc. at the same venue. > > _And_ having negotiated at the same time, as Ray pointed out already > in this thread. Every time one of these discussions comes up, people > seem to forget that the negotiations are happening several years in > advance of the actual event. Agreements about the future almost > always require the party buying to take some risk that they will be > paying more than the going rate at the time the actual sale date > arrives. This can be minimized, though, right? Maybe the conference room rate could be set at a percentage of the rack rate, for example. > In the case of hotel agreements, the block negotiator takes > some risk that there will be a lower price or otherwise better terms > actually available at the time of the block being used. The hotel > takes some risk that the block negotiator is unable to deliver the > actual room occupancy negotiated. Each is making a bet. Yes, but the total risk on the part of the hotel is that it will be in the normal state of having empty rooms that need to be filled... > > If you don't like the cancellation terms (or other terms of the bet), > don't participate in it: don't make a reservation in the IETF block. And I do, and have for some time now (since I have no corporate expense account); this has the added benefit (from my POV, YMMV) of actually _visiting_ Prague, Maastricht, etc. (as opposed to essentially shipping myself air freight to a facility that could as easily be in Dallas or (cringe) Minneapolis except that the people might look different or talk funny, then shipping myself back again). _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf