Michael and all,
1) You want to put on a good event. You are to be commended.
2) You are concerned about costs. As you should be.
3) You don't have a need for RAG to use its web cams to show those unable to attend what is going on.
So far, we agree!
This is an indication that the minimal cost of RAG's assistance transulates into you not supporting future MACNA's.
Many folks (not able to attend) would see what is going at your MACNA, only if RAG brought its web cameras. Online viewing folks would most likely attend a future MACNA if it was in their area or they had the ability to visit.
Future MACNA events are related to past and present shows, their reputation and ability to support the organization's future efforts.
I think that you are trying to say that RAG’s webcam will generate attendance at future MACNA’s. Maybe you are correct, but just like any other advertising, we have to consider the value of that investment. We decided that what RAG had to offer was not a good value at the cost of what RAG was asking for. We are strongly committed to helping future MACNA’s. That is why we agree to open our books when the show is over. It is also why we want to have a financially successful (at least breaking even) show. If we don’t, we severely jeopardize the future of MACNA because no one will want to do it if they expect to lose money.
What leaves me scratching my head and wondering what you guys are thiniking is.... How can you expect RAG (and its well established support for various consumer events) or anyone to pay to support your profitable effort?
No one asked you to pay to support our event. We came up with the fairest system we could… a dollar for dollar exchange of services. We felt that what RAG was asking for was more than what we were asking for, so we asked RAG to pay the difference.
Why should MACNA pay to support RAG? If we give you more than we feel we are getting in return, that is what we would be doing.
Your MACNA 2007 would benefit far more than RAG, regardless what amount, if any RAG would pay you.
We respectfully disagree. Every registration, every booth, every dollar we give away or spend on advertising and promotion has to generate at least a registration, booth or dollar for MACNA or we lose money. That is how we define a good value. In our opinion, RAG was not offering a good value.
You are still hinting for RAG's free online support in the form of promoting your 2007 event via use of threads and posts.
From what has been posted thus far, this is very one sided on your part.
We aren’t asking for anything special. We are only asking that you don’t censor your own member’s discussion if it so happens that they want to talk about MACNA. Do you interfere with the discussion of any other product or event just because their manufacturers or hosts aren’t RAG sponsors?
I made a comment earlier that Pro Street was one way. Since Steven is simply one cog in the wheel, it becomes obvious that the MACNA 2007 event coordinators are operating from a One Way Street address.
I have no idea what this means. If you are suggesting that we aren’t offering any give-take, then I respectfully disagree. I reiterate my argument that if we can’t agree on an exchange that represents a mutually good value, then the discussion should be over.
As business advisor for RAG and a business person I find it unbelievable that 200K +/- will be generated and a low profit would be gained. This is either very poor business practice or mismanagement of funds.
Mismanagement of funds does not mean stealing or cheating. My defination means someone(s) should not be in control of money.
Our objective is to keep the costs of attendance within the reach of the most possible people while still operating in the black. That is why we have the lowest registration and hotel rates for any MACNA in four years. We will consider ourselves far more successful if we have record attendance than we would if we made a record profit.
Virtually every post from your camp has been defensive vs. what "civilian" posts indicate as researched information.
Thus suspision has been raised regarding the basic integrity and true intentions of your 2007 MACNA. Especially with your effort to secure a tax shelter to intended profits.
Of course we have been defensive. This thread is full of mis-information designed to make us look bad because MACNA and RAG couldn’t reach a business agreement. The suggestion that we are somehow trying to avoid taxes is a perfect example. We are seeking the tax designation that is recommended by our accountant.
Information posted in this thread will ultimately allow potential attendees to support or boycott your 2007 event.
Agreed. As I stated in my first post, I hope that each individual will see past this petty bickering and simply consider whether attending MACNA is a good value for their dollar. Sadly, I believe that this ridiculous argument will have poisoned so many of your staff and members against MACNA that they won’t even consider coming.
MACNA 2007 came up with the most fair and equitable way to exchange services with online message boards. RAG asked for more, and we did not feel that it would be good value. I really believe the only place we went wrong was allowing ourselves to be dragged into this ugly discussion, creating an opportunity for our intentions and integrity to be called into question.
As I stated in my earlier post, when our MACNA is over, our records will be made public, including gross receipts, net profit and any tax liability. Why would we publicly agree to do this if we have something to hide?
I really doubt I will post here again until I have the promised information from our MACNA. I have said it over and over…. MACNA and RAG couldn’t reach a mutual agreement on an exchange of services. There is nothing wrong with that. There really was no need for all of this discussion and continuing it only serves to make us all look petty.
Adam
|