IAGSDC Convention Drama

[bjarvis]

I'm a little surprised there hasn't been more of a reaction to the Times Squares' withdrawal of their 2015 convention bid.

When they presented their bid earlier this year for consideration at the Atlanta convention in July, I thought their proposed registration rates and hotel room rates were astronomical. At the delegates meeting, I argued as a non-voting delegate for the GCA against the bid since I was certain the high costs would effectively kill our caller school traditionally held in the three days prior to the convention. The bid did pass: there was no competing bid and when talking to other delegates, I heard frequently they felt they had no choice but to agree to it.

Despite the heated discussion at the time, I hoped some aggressive negotiations with the hotel or perhaps a move from the Central Park area of Manhattan to cheaper non-central location in the greater New York City area might happen. From the statements I've read from the convention team, they looked at all their options and decided they couldn't pull it off. They did the honorable and proper thing by withdrawing their bid as soon as they came to their realization, and I applaud their good judgment as well as thank them for their hard work and diligence getting this far in the process.

Since there were no competing bid for 2015, the IAGSDC has many options. Perhaps they will re-open up the bidding process anew or maybe nudge clubs who were making preparations for 2016 bids to work a little faster to fill in the 2015 gap. They could either chose to appoint a club for 2015 or delay until the Vancouver convention in 2012 to let the delegates vote on a package. I'm sure the executive officers have been burning up the Internet and telephone lines to examine all options and make the best informed decision.

Comments

[omero-hassan.livejournal.com]

I hadn't heard this. I was prepared to go to the NYC convention, notwithstanding the price, because a) it's convention and b) it's NYC. Having scouted Albuquerque locations for a possible convention, the feeling among the group of us who were contemplating an Albuquerque convention is that there's no space big enough to house the entire convention under one roof, and I think that's what people have come to expect. In any event, it's what I would want, especially if I were going to be organizing it.

[bjarvis.livejournal.com]

It's great to have everything under a single roof, but I think the IAGSDC membership has painted itself into a corner with criteria necessitating high registration and room rates in most cities. It's become a vicious cycle: only the relatively wealthy can afford afford to attend a convention so only the relatively wealthy write requirements and vote on bids the rest can't begin to afford.

If my club were bidding again, I'd submit a redux bid using a suburban hotel, dropping the grand march and registration gifts, keep the meals to less than $40/plate for the banquet (usually $60+) and $20 for the brunch (usually $50+) and no refreshments for the delegate meetings (usually $25+), and doing anything else I could to hammer the registration price down to a target of only $150. It wouldn't meet the bid requirements, but I'd like the delegates to voice their rationalization for increasingly expensive events.

[omero-hassan.livejournal.com]

I like the idea of everyone staying in the same hotel (at least most everyone) -- I like the sense of community it provides, which is one of the things I like most about convention. We could have done that here; indeed, we would have taken over the area's biggest hotel (turns out the Indian casino hotels are nowhere near as big as I thought they were). But we'd've been dancing in another location -- which is what was done for the '92 convention, and successfully from what I hear, but I'd be nervous about the cost of renting that much space in the convention center and, just from my own perspective, I think it is probably more desirable to be able to go to one's room and back to dancing quickly, without trekking the equivalent of a couple city blocks. I mean, it wouldn't be the end of the world, and you raise an important point about what this event is.

[bendoutdoors.livejournal.com]

This is the first I've heard of it. I balked at the predicted prices, but most likely would have attended anyway. It IS NYC after all. I need a theater fix (and more bj's -- for you South Park fans :-) ).

[bjarvis.livejournal.com]

We were toying with going up for a day, just so we can say we attended. With the hotel rates advertised, we couldn't afford much more than a single day; since they were targeting Pride Week, getting a room in a less expensive hotel would have been a challenge too.

[allanh.livejournal.com]

I take a two month break from square dancing and all hell breaks loose. :) I hadn't heard anything about this until your post. I don't recall anything coming in about this from the LGCWSD list, even.

I think most convention committees turn their noses up at simpler venues such as college dorms in the summer, which would also be cheaper...and (with the hindsight of a historian) have seemed to work just fine in the past.

I'm also perfectly OK with using a suburban or airport hotel. People have forgotten that we didn't even HAVE a hotel in Las Vegas in 1997 - it was torn down months before the convention - and still people managed to have a good time staying at different hotels and going to the conference center for dancing.

One of the suggestions I made to a Times Squares member last year--which brought a look of sheer horror to their face--was that they grab a hotel near both an airport and a train line that runs into Manhattan. You would have thought I was suggesting they buy child pornography. "NOT have the CONVENTION in MANHATTAN!?" they wailed incredulously...

Speaking of suburban hotels...I seem to recall the 2005 convention in Santa Clara, California--a suburb of San Jose, of all places--went just fine.

We've had a major economic meltdown. I think it's time for all clubs to consider resetting their expectations lower than a luxury hotel, to something more in keeping with tough economic times.

[bjarvis.livejournal.com]

I take a two month break from square dancing and all hell breaks loose. :)

Yes, it's all your fault. :-)

People have forgotten that we didn't even HAVE a hotel in Las Vegas in 1997 - it was torn down months before the convention - and still people managed to have a good time staying at different hotels and going to the conference center for dancing.

I wasn't there, but I have heard people recollect unfondly the death march in the heat to get to the dance venues from some hotels. Having just been to Las Vegas for the first time this past April for the CALLERLAB convention, I can only imagine how ugly it might have been in July.

I seem to recall the 2005 convention in Santa Clara, California--a suburb of San Jose, of all places--went just fine.

It was enormous fun, and the use of an outdoor tent was a brilliant improvisation.

[otterpop58.livejournal.com]

I had not heard this news either... where did you see it?

I have fond (though fading) memories of '93 in Seattle on the UW campus. We stayed in dorms, ate campus food, and danced in a variety of spaces. It was fun, different, and I think comparatively less expensive. I wish we could explore other non-hotel options once in a great while, even it it would mean not offering 7, 8 or more halls of simultaneous dancing.

[bjarvis.livejournal.com]

I heard about it via an email from the bid committee chair Craig Lemley to the Times Squares membership this past weekend.

[trulygrateful.livejournal.com]

I cannot and will not speak on behalf of the club, but I can assure people of this: alternative venue and paradigm suggestions were made to deaf ears. This, really, is for the best. IMNSHO, it seems a general sense of hubris took over during the pre-bid stage which led to this eventual downfall.

I think the combination of:
(1) a smaller hotel
(2) a cap on registrants
(3) more reasonable room rates and banquet charges

Would have proven successful; however, I am but only one person.

What about Phoenix or Los Angeles - don't they have in perpetuity bids? Maybe it would be a good lesson to the IAGSDC if we were forced to skip a year because of this whole debacle.

As a side note: when it comes to voting on convention bids, abstaining should not be allowed; take a stand one way or the other.

[billeyler.livejournal.com]

I had heard rumors to that effect when I called for Peel the Pumpkin last month. Glad they made this decision now rather than in 2014.

[abqdan.livejournal.com]

Since there were no competing bid for 2015, the IAGSDC has many options. Perhaps they will re-open up the bidding process anew

As a purely technical point, the general meeting succeeded in removing the options that had been proposed in by-law changes to allow some flexibility in this situation. The current by-laws are unhelpful in their vagueness, preventing the re-opening of the bid process, and leaving it to the officers to select from a mythical 'list of alternative bids'. However, I'm sure we'll just ignore the rules and do whatever seems appropriate to keep the activity going!

I agree completely on the venue comments. We have to move to a different type of event if we want to continue, otherwise we repeatedly price many members out of convention.

Vegas was miserable because of the heat and last minute disorganization; but Baltimore was wonderful, with the dancing being held in the nearby convention center rather than the hotel. True, it didn't have quite the feel of the big hotels we've been using since, but I don't think it detracted too much; the event was very successful. Of course, if we don't need the hotel dance space, we can probably cut some other kind of deal for the banquet too.

There are various other areas that can be trimmed to keep costs down. For example, we don't have to have so many 'renowned' staff callers. A couple of headliners should do it. The straight nationals manage very well with volunteer callers, and we could expand the volunteer GCA slots to make up for a reduced caller staff.

And frankly, whatever we do, I doubt that the attendance numbers will increase in future years; so small venues will become more viable.