On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ray, > > I can understand why you didn't have contractual arrangements > with other hotels, but the web site doesn't even identify a few > nearby hotels - it doesn't even mention the fact that we will > be in Waikiki, which consists mainly of hotels. Naturally people It has an address for the hotel, right? <http://www.ietf.org/meeting/91/hotel.html> "Hilton Hawaiian Village 2005 Kaila Road Honolulu, HI, 96815 USA" in your browser of choice (for one example): www.google.com/hotels put in the name of the hotel: Hilton Hawaiian Village Fill in the start/end dates.... click the "go" button (whatever the button is called) Look, lots of options... with a map you can click and poke around on even. Oh look: www.bing.com/hotels fill in hotel name and date range ... (no clicking of 'go' required here) lookie! a map with options and pricing and ... is it reasonable to hand-hold professional travelers in their path to 'get a hotel near where the conference is' ? -chris > have all tried to get into the main hotel, which breaks your normal > statistical assumption of 600 beds. > > Regards > Brian Carpenter > > On 04/09/2014 01:03, Ray Pelletier wrote: >> On Sep 3, 2014, at 8:32 AM, Stewart Bryant <stbryant@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> Ray >>> >>> This looks like we only got 600 rooms in the block at a meeting >>> that we would expect to get over 1000 people at and where pretty >>> much everyone needs to travel to. >>> >>> Is that the normal ratio we assume for planning and why were >>> there no backups listed this time? >> >> For the Hilton Hawaiian Village we contracted for (“booked”) 600 rooms on a peak night, >> 3,459 room nights all together. >> >> We book nights over a 12 day period which provides room availability for staff and >> contractors to arrive the Wednesday before, through the Sunday after the meeting. >> >> Our contracts provide that the Hotels will make our rates available up to 3 days before and >> after the meeting, if there is space available. >> >> The HiltonHV has about 3,000 rooms, but other groups have room blocks and the Hilton >> needs to check with the other groups to see if they are prepared to give up some rooms >> in response to our request for more rooms. >> >> We did look into overflow hotels (backups) but we chose not to enter into a contract >> because the hotels wanted Attrition clauses whereby we (ISOC) would be liable for making >> up the difference in sales if we didn’t meet at least 80% of the room block. Their reason >> for the Attrition clause: they are concerned that there are so many hotels in the area where >> our attendees could elect to book that without the Attrition, they will not agree to contract. >> And they are right. There are many hotels in the area at various price points that signing a >> contract with an attrition clause would be to assume unacceptable risk. We (ISOC) have never >> paid for not meeting our contracted block for an IETF meeting. >> >> As a matter of practice I like to book 600 on a peak night, about 50% of the expected attendance. >> Often we can get that at the HQ hotel, but not always. Sometimes it’s only 400. Yokohama is >> about 300, Buenos Aires is much less also. >> >> I will then do Overflow Hotels to get us up to the 600, and beyond if there is no Attrition clause >> in the contracts AND if we can get a better deal for the community than they can get for themselves. >> But this is an art not a science. In Anaheim we were surrounded by lots of hotels at different price >> points providing all kinds of competition for the HQ hotel. We typically don’t do overflows in that >> scenario and our HQ room block will likely be lower than 600. In Paris we did a HQ hotel and the >> hotel across the street. We were negotiating with others but they wanted $300 a night. We didn’t >> contract with them. >> >> I hope this provides some context. >> >> Ray >> >> >> >>> - Stewart >>> >>> >>> On 03/09/2014 13:15, Ray Pelletier wrote: >>>> All, >>>> >>>> I want to update you on the numbers for what has been reserved by attendees as of >>>> Tuesday 2 September compared to what was blocked. >>>> >>>> Block Reservations >>>> Mon 0 1 >>>> Tues 0 8 >>>> Wed 10 19 >>>> Thur 15 32 >>>> Fri 60 127 >>>> Sat 270 375 >>>> Sun 552 558 >>>> Mon 600 563 >>>> Tues 600 560 >>>> Wed 582 557 >>>> Thur 528 551 >>>> Fri 183 386 >>>> Sat 54 95 >>>> Sun 5 2 >>>> 3,459 3,844 >>>> >>>> Of course we have asked for more to accommodate the demand, but >>>> I am not optimistic. I will report back when we have heard about >>>> our request. >>>> >>>> Ray >>>> >>>> On Sep 3, 2014, at 7:19 AM, Eggert, Lars <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 2014-8-27, at 16:56, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> For your information, Ray and the secretariat are looking into the room block situation. Stay tuned. >>>>> Is there any new information? Co-workers are not succeeding in booking rooms. >>>>> >>>>> Lars >>> >>> -- >>> For corporate legal information go to: >>> >>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html >>> >> >> >