Wouldn't it be possible to have higher fees, say 1.75 times normal,
since vendors are getting two for the price of one, and they wouldn't
have to spend the bucks to put on two different shows in two
different locales?
> From: Laura Orr <lorr@willamette.edu>
> But isn't it at all conceivable (I am the eternal optimist :-) that
> the number of exhibitors could double, possibly increasing revenues
> for both organizations, and that both organizations could negotiate,
> WOULD negotiate, an equitable distribution? And couldn't it put us
> in a slightly stronger bargaining position, or at least a more equal
> one, when negotiating with the vendors over fees?
>
> These are questions that perhaps only the conference planners can
> answer, but I do believe that they are happy to hear new ideas and
> opinions from the general membership. With enough support, maybe the
> leadership of both organizations could MAKE it work.
>
> Laura
>
> On Tue, 27 Oct 1998, Lamar Woodard wrote:
>
> > On first blush, it is a great idea but the ship would wreck on the shoal of
> > money. Each organization collects a large amount of revenue to help cover
> > the costs of the meeting from exhibitors fees. Negotiating an equitable
> > distribution of those fees would be as difficult as achieving true peace in
> > the Middle East.
> > Lamar
> >
>
Robert Jacoby (speaking only for myself)
Reference Librarian/Webmaster
Coleman Karesh Law Library
University of South Carolina
803-777-1666 jacoby@law.law.sc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:49:59 PST